Dutch PlantLab Revolutionizes Farming: No Sunlight, No Windows, Less Water, Better Food

I like how the 'bis is always called a distraction.


*hint*
Everyone talks about it because it is obviously more important than naming every next president the antichrist and speculating about flying saucers. The world is a real place with real issues one of them being the prohibition of harmless yet powerful herb...that also just so happens to cures cancer......

reply to post by PapaEmeritus

Very true PE, it is just unfortunate that on a public board, the discussion cannot seem to unfold without TC or other violations of, that are less than educational.
Still, this tech is cool and innovative, for all beneficial plants and herbs for humans. I am glad this tech has spilled over into the fruits/vegetable industry. For this thread though, we are discussing food, and I hope you understand.

Peace,
spec

Better than American's "innovation" of GM seeds.

I've been reading up about these lights and I think its a scam !, or at least they're trying to baffle the reader with science.

From what I have read one of the claims is that a 120 or 180 watt LED is comparable to a 600 watt hps !

However, reading around the scenes it seems achieving 1gram per watt of produce is classed as efficient.....So a 600 watt hps can produce 600 grams of produce, BUT NOWHERE can you find evidence that a 120 or 180 watt LED can produce anything like as much.... as these LED's would need to throw almost 4 grams per watt to be comparable.

And further the only substantiated claim I can find is of a 380 watt led producing 1lb of produce, which equates to a little over 1gram per watt.

So no, I'm not convinced by the claims.

Other factors have to be considered for the efficiency qualifications though, such as, electrical consumption, heat output, bulb life and replacement costs, no ballasts, etc... Also, these LEDs and computer system don't put put the full spectrum of light as other bulbs do, but rather only utilize the most effective hues.
Another thing that makes this system good is volume of space management with vertical beds stacked from floor to ceiling, and wall to wall, making the most use of cubic ft, minus a perimeter space for maintenance. You cannot do this with any other bulbs. Water consumption is 1/3 that of normal systems too. So it is not necessarily the yield per watt alone, but all of these factors combined that makes it a great advancement.

Peace,
spec

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist
reply to post by RevelationGeneration

 

LED's are not the best lights for yield's

True, per plant, but in a sea of green, where one could have 9-16 plants per sq foot, the overall yield of smaller fruits and vegetables would be good me thinks.

edit on 14-8-2011 by speculativeoptimist because: (no reason given)

Do you guys still think that LEDs can't produce valid yields (compared to HID?). There are some new lights on the market that claim to produce similar to 1000W HID's

For the first time EVER there is a high power LED grow light available that delivers results comparable to a 1000w HID!

www.357magled.com...

I've seen a lot of talk on different forums. Some people swear by these new age LEDS, others claim its all marketing and a waste of $1,000. I'm trying to do my research before buying.

reply to post by stack

I think it is not just the lights, but related to the topic here, it is a complete system that produces these results. We have addressed the specifics throughout the thread, and yes, this system is superior in terms of yield, power consumption, location and resources. So, imo the whole thing has to be considered for comparisons.
Thanks for the comment,
spec

Don't buy the hype !!!


Research thoroughly.