LED and T2 Aquarium Lights

LED and T2 Aquarium Lights for Freshwater and Marine Reef Tanks
The LED and T2 as of this post are probably the best two aquarium lights in terms of output of useful light energy per watts used

Updated 6/4/11


Although the popularity of these two lights is still lagging behind many other lights used by aquarium hobbyists, hopefully the facts of these two styles will get out to many who will find these to be useful for marine reef and freshwater plant tanks in particular.

There is still a lot of misunderstanding about both of these lights (along with the other excellent light that is popular in greenhouses, but is still sadly not well known in the aquarium hobby/industry; the SHO).

In the case of the LED, many still cannot get past the watts per gallon rule of thumb that is badly outdated. As well, the other aspect that slows the popularity is cost (which is certainly more understandable). However, when one considers the 50,000 hour lifespan and the operating costs that are generally 1/3 or less of many popular CFLs, this is not truly the barrier it is often made out to be (although up front costs to acquire many of the better LED Systems such as the “Top of the Line” TMC Aqua Ray LED Aquarium Lights certainly can still be a hurdle for those on a budget).

This is where the newest generation T2 light systems shine. Although the output per energy used of the newer lights is not at the same level of an LED, it is an improvement over the still excellent but lower output per watts used T5 lights. As well, the T2 is a considerable improvement over many CFLs and even more so over standard T8 and T12 lights. The advantage of the T2 is cost of many of the fixtures priced around $30 usd. (as compared to the $150 usd plus for the better LED systems).


What sets these Lights Apart from others?

First, I would suggest that readers reference this excellent, well-researched article (as this Fish as Pets post is but an abbreviated summary):
Aquarium Lighting; Information, Facts

Here are some important points to consider rather than just the old watts per gallon “rule” only:

• Lumens per watt, PAR (often easiest determined by Kelvin output),
• Lumen focus
• PAR
• PUR/ Useful Light Energy (not wasted in yellow/green spectrum that plants and zooanthellic algae reflect)
• Output in relation to bulb length (this is where T2 and Power Compacts excel).
• Lux
• Watts per gallon; the reader might note that the watts per gallon, is still viable when comparing apples to apples.

Even with LED Lights, most of those on the market are cheap Chinese knock offs (such as the Marineland Single and Double Bright). The best of these knocks still use much older generations of Cree emitter bins that Cree is no longer obligated by contract with TMC and other high end users to provide exclusively for. Thus, an apples to apples comparison via watts per gallon cannot be made. For instance, the Marineland Double Bright 1 watt emitters do not put out the same useful light energy per watt as an AquaRay or Orphek.

*When “high end” (2nd half of 2010) TMC AquaRay LEDs are considered, only .6 watt per gallon for high light planted freshwater and .8 watt per gallon for most reef tanks is needed.
*With new generation 6500K T2 Lights, this watts per gallon for a high light planted aquarium would be about 1.5 (which would mean that two 13 Watt daylight T2 Lights would work for a 15 gallon “high light” planted aquarium)


The first five points are the most important. As well, it is noteworthy that although watts per gallon is still a consideration, it is at best ¼ of what determines a proper aquarium light for a given aquarium. With this under consideration one modern LED such as the TMC Aqua Ray LED 12 Watt Aquarium Light Fixtures can produce more useful light energy necessary for live freshwater plants or marine reefs than one older generation T8 or T12 Trichromatic Fluorescent of 20 watts by 4-5 times.
Even modern CFLs require about three times the wattage to produce the same amount of useful light energy.

When it comes to T2 Aquarium Lights, although they still fall short of an LED, these lights still have one of the highest lumens per watt outputs and still produce less yellow/green spectrum light energy than many others. As well, the purchase price is low, generally last about 10,000 compared to the 8,000 hours of most other fluorescent lights and are available in the most important Kelvin temperature for optimum PAR; 6400 K.

The only short coming of T2s is for larger aquariums. It make take too many of the T2 Fixtures. With larger aquariums, a SHO or T5 lights may be more practical.

Still, the T2 is quite adaptable and multiple fixtures can be linked together so they require only one outlet. Even for larger aquariums such as a fish only freshwater aquarium, two 13 watt T2 fixtures can easily provide enough light for a 60, 75 and even a 5 foot 100 gallon aquarium for a n excellent savings of energy over standard aquarium lights.


See the comparisons of different lights to pictorially explain these lights:
Please click on Pictures to enlarge

This picture shows the visible light of a 13 Watt T2 with two 15 Watt CFLs (both are 6400K):


This picture demonstrates one of the strengths of an new technology LED Light (Aqua Ray) using a special camera lens;

On the left is one daylight LED (12 Watts).
On the right is two daylight CFL (totaling 30 watts)

Besides the noticeable higher light output with lower watts, the filter on this camera shows the increase of yellow/green light which is useless to most green plants and zooanthellic algae.



Conclusion

Sadly I read many aquarium forums, especially Yahoo Answers (which should be avoided like the plague by those desiring factual aquarium information), which still slam LED lights as impractical and overly expensive.

As well, many have not even heard of T2 lights (or even SHO), even though the rest of the industrial lighting world has.

Yahoo Answers Hall of Shame, UV Sterilizers

Aquarium Forum/Yahoo Answers Hall of Shame #7; UV Sterilizers for Aquariums (Again) Part 2

Once again Yahoo Answers allowed a plagiarized post to stand as a best answer (even with multiple complaints).

In this answer, a person plagiarized and pasted points out of context from my UV Sterilization Article. He even contradicts his opening comments by using my material.

First I will post the Yahoo Answers so called “best answer” (with my plagiarized content in italics), followed by corrections:

UV sterilizers are good in multi-tank systems where risk of parasites and disease are great. In the average tank, it will destroy all the beneficial bacteria and tiny critters that are needed to maintain healthy life.

One on the big drawbacks of using one is that not all of the water and organisms will pass through the sterilizer, making it somewhat ineffective to control the problem.

UV sterilization will not cure infected fish of bacterial or fungal diseases. A UV can aid in cure by killing bacterial pathogens in the water column and fungal spores, also by improvement of the Redox potential and general water quality.

A UV sterilizer will not kill ich trophozoites already on the fish (but then medications don’t either), but UVC can again slow the spread of ich tomites in the water column (but usually not out right kill ich tomites).

A UV sterilizer will not kill beneficial bacteria such aerobic bacteria, as this bacterium is effective when attached to a surface of high water flow such as the sponge of a sponge filter, not when in the water column. It is best to turn off a Sterilizer unit when introducing bacteria to seed a new aquarium.

UV Sterilization will not remove or destroy algae growing on tank or pond sides, rocks, decorations, etc.

UV Sterilization will NOT make up for poor aquarium maintenance practices such as over crowding, over feeding, inadequate filtration, poor cleaning practices, improper water parameters, and more.

For me its not worth getting one not worth the cost I myself never use one...

Comments;
*First of all he contradicts the opening paragraph by pasting my content in paragraph #5, as he is dead wrong when it comes to real research.

*Second he does not even allow the asker to read the article for himself by referencing the article from which he plagiarized content (which is supposedly a rule in Yahoo Answers)

*Third, shame on Yahoo Answers for not removing clearly plagiarized content that was used to deliver incorrect information to an asker after this was called to Yahoo’s attention by several persons.
Yahoo Answers is CLEARLY not interested in providing useful information for its readers/askers by allowing this to stand after being notified of the issue.
BTW, if Yahoo were to claim that this is a matter of opinion, my response is twofold; Wrong, these are facts; Two, and more importantly this material was plagiarized and NOT cited/referenced for the readers to make up their own mind.

I will not provide a direct link, as I do not want to lend any credit to Yahoo Answers, so please paste this link into your browser if you would like to read the full thread (including comments made after the answer was awarded best answer):
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091020203346AAGk6s0

The bottom line is; a properly set up UV Sterilizer is not essential, however it is a major piece of equipment for any aquarium or pond keeper that is serious about disease prevention and water quality (UV Sterilization improves Redox too). If you do add a UV Sterilizer to your aquarium, it is important to provide regular maintenance of your UV Sterilizer as well such as changing the UV Bulbs on a regular schedule for maximum effectiveness.

Please see these articles for much more about UV Sterilization:
*UV Sterilization

*UV Sterilizer Articles/ Posts

*Aquarium Forum/Blog Hall of Shame 5; UV Sterilizers Part 1