Heat question.

JorgeGonzales

Well-Known Member
300W of dissipation will produce 300W of heat.
Minus what the plant uses. It's a fraction of the fraction of energy emitted as light, but hey, plants don't materialize out of thin air without some energy input.

And I still think infrared pounding on the canopy is worse than heat rising from led heatsinks and sucked out by exhaust.
 

SPLFreak808

Well-Known Member
Try it, if you "add" more light then the temps will definetly rise.


Lol @1kw of gas bulb running cooler then cobs
 

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
Why not just make a good DIY light that puts out minimal heat? Or at the very least a Photon Light over at Norther Grow Lights. thats better anyways
 

SPLFreak808

Well-Known Member
Unless you have your cobs in a water or air cooled fixture your talking out your ass :lol:
Talk out my ass eh? I laughed because there is no such thing as "hid runs cooler then cobs"... Its HIGHLY subjective to how you have it set-up which makes me think its YOU who talks out his ass.

Both lights will require completly different ambient temps, the hid will need lower ambient temps to offset the foliage temp through radiant transfer, its reversed with an efficient cob setup which is why you see people run ambient a little higher with led's that dont radiate the room like an hid.

Btw, i still run sealed 1kw SE/DE's so i know how simple it is to keep it cool even without a/c..

To say hid runs cooler then cobs is like saying a mustang in cruise control will eat more gas then a civic with the pedal to the floor 24/7... Once again its subjective to how its being driven and what model chip used.
 

OneHitDone

Well-Known Member
Talk out my ass eh? I laughed because there is no such thing as "hid runs cooler then cobs"... Its HIGHLY subjective to how you have it set-up which makes me think its YOU who talks out his ass.

Both lights will require completly different ambient temps, the hid will need lower ambient temps to offset the foliage temp through radiant transfer, its reversed with an efficient cob setup which is why you see people run ambient a little higher with led's that dont radiate the room like an hid.

Btw, i still run sealed 1kw SE/DE's so i know how simple it is to keep it cool even without a/c...

To say hid runs cooler then cobs is like saying a mustang in cruise control will eat more gas then a civic with the pedal to the floor 24/7... Once again its subjective to how its being used and what model chip used.
It's just important that peeps unfamiliar don't fall for the bs of LED=NO Heat.
My point was, an air cooled 1000W hps is going contribute no more and probably less heat to a tent than 500W of passively cooled cobs
 

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
It's just important that peeps unfamiliar don't fall for the bs of LED=NO Heat.
My point was, an air cooled 1000W hps is going contribute no more and probably less heat to a tent than 500W of passively cooled cobs
Exactly. But without it theres no contest.
 

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
Minus what the plant uses. It's a fraction of the fraction of energy emitted as light, but hey, plants don't materialize out of thin air without some energy input.

And I still think infrared pounding on the canopy is worse than heat rising from led heatsinks and sucked out by exhaust.
Don't confuse the noobs. Almost all of the energy absorbed the by plant goes directly to heat, and the small percentage that does go to carbon assimilation is mostly burned in respiration. Only a small portion of the energy absorbed in photosynthesis will end up as bonds in structural carbon.

Your point on infrared being worse than conductive heat misses the point imo, and could even be seen as misleading to a noob trying to figure out how much cooling he's going to need, or how much heat his cooling/ventilation can handle.
 
Last edited:

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
I'm running 3, 68 watt cfl's. So thats 204 watts. If my cfl's get my closet up to 80 degrees than it seems like the led would put out less heat.
Plus you have to put it around 12 inches above the plants. Do you think this will decrease my temperature if I switch to cfl, because that would be great.

Thanks for the reply.
If you use a lamp that dissipates 300W, it will produce 94W more heat than a lamp that dissipates 204W. Temperature has more to do with, surface area, air flow and ventilation.
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
Don't confuse the noobs. Almost all of the energy absorbed the by plant goes directly to heat, and the small percentage that does go to carbon assimilation is mostly burned in respiration. Only a small portion of the energy absorbed in photosynthesis will end up as bonds in structural carbon.
"Don't confuse the noobs" with your pseudo botany thermal dynamics. You're assuming full spectrum sunlight (good for half the loss), a for horticulture inefficient and too high blue spectrum (lol... good for at least 10-20% of the loss) and some average crop with inefficient structure, which cannabis is not. Respiration also takes place during the dark period...

Your point on infrared being worse than conductive heat misses the point imo,
Strawman :lol: :clap: He was obviously talking about the effect on the plants and not the cooling requirements. It's your neverending ignorance about light is heat and biased interpretation of photosynthetic efficiency that is misleading.

One obviously won't need the same amount of watts with led to get the same amount of light as hps... thought you would have figured that out by now, yet you're still blindly comparing watts to watts to insist on not being so awfully wrong. Try comparing led to hps btu/umol instead of pretending led and hps are both synonymous with watts.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
"Don't confuse the noobs" with your pseudo botany thermal dynamics. You're assuming full spectrum sunlight (good for half the loss), a for horticulture inefficient and too high blue spectrum (lol... good for at least 10-20% of the loss) and some average crop with inefficient structure, which cannabis is not. Respiration also takes place during the dark period...


Strawman :lol: :clap: He was obviously talking about the effect on the plants and not the cooling requirements. It's your neverending ignorance about light is heat and biased interpretation of photosynthetic efficiency that is misleading.

One obviously won't need the same amount of watts with led to get the same amount of light as hps... thought you would have figured that out by now, yet you're still blindly comparing watts to watts to insist on not being so awfully wrong. Try comparing led to hps btu/umol instead of pretending led and hps are both synonymous with watts.
You sound like a really smart guy. You have a very good vocabulary. Anyway I'm growing in a closet and an hps would make the temp go over 100 degrees most likely.

I know about watts and I know the amount of watts I use with the cfl's. I have 4, 68 watt cfl's. I don't know how you can compare that to having a real light, like an hps or led.
Like I said your very smart but my main concern is if I purchase an led, will it be able to grow an autoflower in 8 weeks. My autoflower takes 8 to 9 weeks to harvest.

I think if I only use cfl's it will take around 12 or 13 weeks. So if I get an led can I shorten the amount of time the plant gets done. I know if I use an hps it will grow the plant way faster but like I said I can't. Thats what I am trying to get at. Thank you so much for the detailed info, I really appreciate someone who takes their time and really helps.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
Don't confuse the noobs. Almost all of the energy absorbed the by plant goes directly to heat, and the small percentage that does go to carbon assimilation is mostly burned in respiration. Only a small portion of the energy absorbed in photosynthesis will end up as bonds in structural carbon.

Your point on infrared being worse than conductive heat misses the point imo, and could even be seen as misleading to a noob trying to figure out how much cooling he's going to need, or how much heat his cooling/ventilation can handle.
Thank you for your reply, I think heat won't be a problem. At this point I just want to know how much faster a good led can grow a plant. When I use cfl's they grow so slow, so I think if I get an led it could take a couple weeks off the time for harvest.
 

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
"Don't confuse the noobs" with your pseudo botany thermal dynamics. You're assuming full spectrum sunlight (good for half the loss), a for horticulture inefficient and too high blue spectrum (lol... good for at least 10-20% of the loss) and some average crop with inefficient structure, which cannabis is not. Respiration also takes place during the dark period...


Strawman :lol: :clap: He was obviously talking about the effect on the plants and not the cooling requirements. It's your neverending ignorance about light is heat and biased interpretation of photosynthetic efficiency that is misleading.

One obviously won't need the same amount of watts with led to get the same amount of light as hps... thought you would have figured that out by now, yet you're still blindly comparing watts to watts to insist on not being so awfully wrong. Try comparing led to hps btu/umol instead of pretending led and hps are both synonymous with watts.
Wow... language gap... I've made it pretty clear in the past that you need fewer watts with modern leds than with HPS. That doesn't change the fact that a watt is a watt. The OP asked if 300W would produce less heat than 204W and the answer is no... 300W will produce 94W more heat than a lamp that dissipates 204W.

You're pretty good at English for someone who isn't a native speaker, but your reading comprehension is poor. You're known to get angry for someone agreeing with you. Maybe you should attack the guy who is poopooing your precious infrared. Judging by your hatred of using too much blue, maybe you should go after RM3, not me.. I agree with you. You're only attacking me because you have a problem with me personally, not because you disagree with the things I say. (that's giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually understand this stuff yourself)
 
Last edited:

sixstring2112

Well-Known Member
who the hell brought up carbon assimilation in a heat question lol.you fuckin led nerds get way too techy with your answers sometimes.and if you dont understand something,please dont use it as part of your long winded answer on why a 1000w toaster is as hot as 1000w subwoofer lol,by the way its not lol.

Carbon fixation or сarbon assimilation refers to the conversion process of inorganiccarbon (carbon dioxide) to organic compounds by living organisms. The most prominent example is photosynthesis, although chemosynthesis is another form of carbon fixation that can take place in the absence of sunlight.

this ^^ last line is why you dont use it in a heat or light discussion,unless you want to completely side track the convo .

evh,any 300w light is going to be similar in heat,hps lamps with have more ir and uv which will end up on the leaf surface and with most led that heat will rise up instead.so if you know how to cool them or deal with the heat it comes down to personal pref.

but alot of us are annoyed you start a new thread every time you have a brain fart.theres at least 10 threads on this led heat subject already .you could have asked this in the thread you made the day before,or the one the day before that lol
 
Top