Blog List

Login






Forgot login?
Register

LED_Lights

As we all know, this hobby is always changing and evolving.  New technologies and trends seem to always play a big part.  Over the last couple of years one of the biggest trends seems to be the use of LED lighting.  With that in mind I thought I would share the some what suprizing results of a survey completed by Coral Magazine.  According to a recent article by Coral Magazine 9,000 readers were asked to take a basic survey about aquarium lighting.  The first question was the most obvious: "Which of the following types of lighting are you currently using on your marine aquarium(s)?"  The reader was given a list that included the standard lights (T-5, Metal Halide, Power Compact, LED, etc) and were giving the opportunity to pick as many off of the list that they had in use.  The results were a little unexpected.  Most of the tanks that I have seen use metal halide and or T-5 fluorescent:

LEDs 32.2%

T-5 Fluorescent  26.6%

Metal Halide / HQI / HID  24.2%

Power Compacts  8.1%

T-12 VHO Fluorescent  3.6%

T-8 Fluorescent  2.3%

Natural Sunlight  1.4%

Plasma Lighting  0.2%

T-12 Standard Fluorescent  0.2%

The second question though had an expected result.  The question was "Which of the following types of lighting do you expect to be using on your marine aquarium(s) in five years?"  As you would expect the majority of the people surveyed picked LED lighting:

LEDs  54.3%

T-5 Fluorescent  15.4%

Metal Halide / HQI / HID  14.1%

Plasma Lighting  6.2%

Natural Sunlight  3.6%

T-12 VHO Fluorescent  1.5%

Power Compacts  1.3%

T-8 Fluorescent  0.3%

T-12 Standard Fluorescent  0.1%

CORAL-SO-400px_optIf anything I found the survey results to be interesting and I look forward to the September / October 2011 issue of Coral Magazine.  For the rest of the survey click on the Coral Magazine.

So what do you think?  Are LED's the "light of the future?"  What are your lighting plans for the next five years?

[photo: Fridaynightswings]

 

 

 


Posted: 1 year 9 months ago by fridaynightswings #8430
fridaynightswings's Avatar
IME, the 8 months I've had LEDs, the growth and color has been superior. I have had the same corals under both LEDs, and 800w of radiums. The equipment in my 120 was far superior than the equipment in my biocube. I had a reeflo orca vs my tunze 9002, and 2 mp40's vs my mp10. I also ran a calcium reactor on the 120, and an RDSB. I dripped kalk once or twice in my biocube, and have no rdsb for nitrate removal. A good example of good coral growth would be my German Blue Digi. It grew out of nowhere, and is a pretty good size now, and very blue. Under my radiums, it barely grew, and was more of a German brown. The distance form the light was about equal since I had the Digi's on a frag rack. My green ricordias arent even visible in the 1st picture, and look how much theyve multiplied. I have had those since my 1st tank in 2006. They split maybe once. Now I can count upwards of 20+ mouths. Same with that frilly mushroom in the back left. It split about 4 times since December. At what year mark would people say LED's successfully grow coral? They are a little pricey, but well worth it IME. I love how much the save on electricity, and how well my corals respond to them. Who knows, if its the LEDs, but I don't really do much different in my husbandry.

Here is a picture of my coral when I first put it in under LEDs from the 800w of radium. Notice there isn't a blue digi on the upper right hand side of the tank.


Here is the tank after being under LEDs for about 7 months. Look at that Digi grow! haha



JMO
Posted: 1 year 9 months ago by Kona boy #8429
Kona boy's Avatar
Zoafreak wrote:
jb61264 wrote:
I haven't researched into this yet but I'm also going to be interested to see the spectral output of the LEDs that people are using now...I think the term "PAR" is used pretty loosely at this point as more important than actual PAR is the PUR (photosynthetically useable radiation) put out by lights. Bandwidths between 400-550nm and 620-700nm are those that are absorbed by the photopigments in zooxanthellae to stimulate photosynthesis. LEDs could be putting out significant light between 580-600nm which would boost PAR but would be pretty useless as far as coral growth is concerned. It just seems to me like people are using 50/50 ratios of white/blue LEDs because they "look" good versus what is really good for the corals and this is where I think more work needs to be done before I'll be making the switch.

I like the idea of not using so much energy on lights but till some real proof comes out i will stick with the 216w T5 and 500w MH light i'm running on my 75 gallon. I also have a 75gal with 324w T5 that has corals growing well. These have already been proven in the hobby so i'm not telling you anything you didn't already know. I also am running 432w T5 on my 40gal breeder tank i'm using for a frag tank and everything is growing fast. I have no tanks with led's so maybe when they are proven to be better light i will jump on the wagon... Yee ha!! I would love for my electric bill to go down $$$ and thats not going to happen with MH and T5 even though the T5's use less than MH. That is why for my second 75gal i went with only T5 and no MH.

It is hard to gauge the growth when some people have better water qualitys than others. How do you know it is the lighting? I'm just saying you would almost have to have two tanks connected to each other with one having MH and T5. And the other with led. Then grow the same size corals for the same amount of time to find out which lighting is better.

Amen! There is nothing in the way we report findings that is scientific. It is all anecdotal and based on obervation with little or ususlly no controls. Even if I get twice the growth rate using my LEDs than a controlled tank using MH, I cannot say I achieved proper, healthy skeletal structures unless I do the studies. I went with LED for cost savings, and reduced maintenance. The corals will do alright. Will they thrive? I hope, and we'll see, but then if that were my only concern, I would have left them in the oean. ;)
Posted: 1 year 9 months ago by Zoafreak #8426
Zoafreak's Avatar
jb61264 wrote:
I haven't researched into this yet but I'm also going to be interested to see the spectral output of the LEDs that people are using now...I think the term "PAR" is used pretty loosely at this point as more important than actual PAR is the PUR (photosynthetically useable radiation) put out by lights. Bandwidths between 400-550nm and 620-700nm are those that are absorbed by the photopigments in zooxanthellae to stimulate photosynthesis. LEDs could be putting out significant light between 580-600nm which would boost PAR but would be pretty useless as far as coral growth is concerned. It just seems to me like people are using 50/50 ratios of white/blue LEDs because they "look" good versus what is really good for the corals and this is where I think more work needs to be done before I'll be making the switch.

I like the idea of not using so much energy on lights but till some real proof comes out i will stick with the 216w T5 and 500w MH light i'm running on my 75 gallon. I also have a 75gal with 324w T5 that has corals growing well. These have already been proven in the hobby so i'm not telling you anything you didn't already know. I also am running 432w T5 on my 40gal breeder tank i'm using for a frag tank and everything is growing fast. I have no tanks with led's so maybe when they are proven to be better light i will jump on the wagon... Yee ha!! I would love for my electric bill to go down $$$ and thats not going to happen with MH and T5 even though the T5's use less than MH. That is why for my second 75gal i went with only T5 and no MH.

It is hard to gauge the growth when some people have better water qualitys than others. How do you know it is the lighting? I'm just saying you would almost have to have two tanks connected to each other with one having MH and T5. And the other with led. Then grow the same size corals for the same amount of time to find out which lighting is better.
Posted: 1 year 9 months ago by maxst2 #8424
maxst2's Avatar
Well, we have quite a group of LED bandwagoneers. We'll have to keep posts up to show the awesomeness in the months.
Posted: 1 year 9 months ago by Kona boy #8422
Kona boy's Avatar
Skipper wrote:
I agree with a lot of your observations. It wouldn't be the first time the "cool factor" caused a lot of sales :lol: . I think the potential is there but I would also like to see some longer usage results and studies.

[File Attachment: wagonwithfamilies-2801.jpg]

Happy to blaze the trail... B)



Other Blogs: