(Lermer) P.M. didn't specify at what distance from the tubes he got the 4000-5000fc reading, or if he was measuring near the center or at the edges. A 20% gain from his homemade mylar reflector is not that impressive. Almost half the light goes upward, so with a reflector you should be able to almost double the intensity. Mylar is only about 88% reflective. It is made of plastic coated with aluminum, and could disintegrate if exposed to excessive heat. You're better off with the German-made aluminum sheet metal, the best is 98% reflective (far better than anything made in the US or the UK). In fact it's possible to buy the fluorescent fixtures with reflective aluminum. I don't recommend putting anything in between the bulbs, that would lessen the array gain (technically called "constructive interference"). Allow me to talk about point vs. line sources of light. HID lights are more like points than lines, and a 4' fluorescent tube is more like an infinite line than a point. Actually, all light comes from point sources. A line is really an infinite series of points. Let us compare a 40 watt 4' fluorescent tube to a series of 4 MH lights of 10 watts each (1' apart). The two would have similar light patterns. The pattern of the 4 MH lights would be a little bumpier or less uniform than the fluorescent tube. Each 10 watt MH light would be a point, but the points combine because their patterns overlap (if all were within 1' of each other). Now increase the wattage of the MH lights to 40 watts each; obviously then the vertical penetration would be greater. Then take away 3 of the 4 lights; the single 40 watt light would have greater vertical penetration than the 40 watt fluorescent tube; the tube would have greater horizontal coverage because of overlapping light footprints (from the infinite number of points in the line). The initial intensity of the 40w MH would be greater because it is more concentrated. So, fluorescent tubes sacrifice vertical penetration for greater horizontal coverage. However, if you put a 400w CMH on a light mover, you still have the greater vertical penetration, but now you also have the horizontal coverage. The 8 fluorescent tubes might have more array gain than a single 400w CMH, but you could put four of the 400w CMH on a spinner to get comparable array gain, and with coverage of about a 8.5' circle. About 54 sq ft, and you can turn the circle into a square by placing taller plants in the corners. Imagine a 400w CMH, stationary, vs. 8 t-4 high output fluorescent tubes. 400 watt CMH 3'x4'=15 sq ft area of coverage (minimum 1000 fc) with 6' track, area covered 3'x10'=30 sq ft total lumens = 34,800 or 87 lumens per watt 85 or 95 CRI (depending on brand) suggested retail price = $265 or $450 (depending on type and brand). 432 watt t-5, 8 tubes 4' each 2'x4'= 8 sq ft area of coverage not practical to track total lumens = 40,000 or 92.5 lumens per watt 85 CRI suggested retail price = $450 Because of the greater intensity of the 400w CMH, vertical penetration is greater. Mainly because of tracking, the 400w CMH also covers at least 3x the horizontal area of coverage.

Lermer is correct. Even a quick google search will reveal hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on blue light's effect on plants. It's no myth at all. Here's a random example. They took Scots pine seedlings and put them in plexiglass containers, one designed to remove blue light and the other completely clear. I.e., the ones missing blue light got less total light to them; however, they grew *longer* than the ones in the fully transparent plexiglass. I could point to countless more examples of this phenomenon. Blue = stocky and leafy. Red = spindly, encourages fruiting. Right now Southern California Edison is subsidizing the cost of a plain jane looking four foot fluorescent light fixtures so they sell for $1.99 each. Purchase cost isn't the only consideration. Power is generally a bigger cost than upfront costs. Think about drawing 450W for a HID on an 18/6 day/night cycle year-round -- that's 3,000kWh, or $325 a year at average electricity rates. That's no chump change. :P so I decided to try some 225 mixed LED's for some seedlings as I have read about some success with this 14 watt setup, unfortunately the results were less than spectacular, albeit the plants did grow, and did not stretch I still got 2x the growth from the Fluoro in half the time. I cannot comment to the scientific explanation, but It appears that 14 watt LED over 1sq foot is not enough power to really drive growth, Well, obviously ;) LEDs are nice, but they're not magical. The sun on a clear day puts down about 93 watts per square foot (times the sine of the angle to the sun -- if it's straight overhead, times 1.0). Even if your LEDs were 100% efficient, which they're not (for blue, probably a quantum efficiency in the 40%s) that'd still be 15% of the energy of sun shining directly overhead. In practice, factoring into account inefficiencies and light straying from where you intended to illuminate, you're probably getting under 5% of the light of the sun. Now, you get to pick your ideal frequencies, (the graph at the bottom is what you want to look at). But that isn't nearly enough of a boost to compensate for how little light you're putting out. If you want to drive growth, you don't need to double your light; you should at least 4x it. And be sure to minimize any stray light that you can :) Also, as the plants get bigger, penetration will become an issue. LEDs are effectively point light sources; there's nearly no penumbra. The more reflections you can get and the deeper the LEDs are into the canopy (and the more they move, if that's an option), the better your results will be. I'm about to try an experiment with dangling LED christmas lights through my planters to see how they like that.

Have you checked on the appliances forum? We are mixing brands--We are going with good quality consumer grade, nothing professional. KA fridge, bosch DW, electrolux double ovens and GE 36" induction cooktop and telescopic downdraft. We chose each based on a lot of research and certain requirements that we had. I don't think you have to worry so much about the stainless matching (I'd worry more if you were going faux-stainless or satina, because those finishes vary a lot). Everything came to 9-10K. I bet if you went with a single oven it would bring you within your price range. Re: ge induction cooktop, I've read a lot of great reviews on the appliances forum. Also, there are very few brands that don't have the stainless strips. I just wanted black, since our counters will be dark, and I wanted it to blend in with the counter. Re: microwave, lots of people here will tell you they are throw away appliances and not to spend a lot. So, we decided to build a little nook that the micro can slide into. The trim kits are often as much as the microwave.

I think Ikea cabs with lots of lower drawers are MUCH better, storage wise, than builder grade cabs. I have built-in-place builder grade with fixed shelves, and lots of wasted space from huge filler areas in the face frame. I only have 2 normal size drawers, and 5 little ones that are, literally, 3.5" wide inside. The drawer glides are low end, and not super smooth. Interiors are beat-up low-grade melamine particleboard, not looking too good. But if I were moving in 5 years, I would only paint (the doors AND the interiors that are beat up). Because, when I organized my kitchen, getting rid of everything I don't use, and adding a few organizer shelves from Container Store, it became very easy to find & access what I do use, even in my tiny low-end kitchen. If I were to retrofit 2 pullouts in the lowest shelves of 2 36"-wide cabinets, I'd be close enough, functionally, without the expense and hassle of replacing the cabinets.