[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Fluorescent vs. Incandescent

Deansliger worte:

>Incandescent bulbs have a higher lumen output (watt per watt) and are higher
>in the red range of the spectrum compared to cool whites.  

While it is true that incandecent bulbs have a much more limited spectral
range than fluorescents, and that it is mainly in the red area, it is _not_
true that they have a higher lumen output than fluorescents.  Incandecent
lighting is extremely inefficient, and puts out more heat than light.  The
lumens per watt are _much_ lower, and operating costs are much higher.

>In general, from my own experience, I'll use the standard trade groupings:
>sword plants, "bunch" plants (Hygrophila, Cabomba, Ludwigia, Hydrocotyle,
>etc.), and the floating plants for the most part all grow naturally out in
>open in bogs, backwaters and flooded meadows.  They all prefer the highest
>light output possible, 

That's true, and they won't get it from incandecent lighting.

>I've gotten blooms from Cabomba, Hygrophila, Hydrocotyle, Ludwigia and
>Limnophila all -- and only -- under incandescent bulbs.  

I have bloomed most of the above under fluorescent lights.  You can get
most any color temperature fluorescent bulbs that you want... but I haven't
seen that it makes much difference as long as you use enough.  There _are_
some terrestrial plants that will only bloom with exposure to _far_ red
light.  It's certainly possible that this is true for some aquatics too,
but I don't know that any have been specifically identified.

Karen Randall
Aquatic Gardeners Association