[SpaceProgram] Fwd: Space Farmers: LEDs As Key To NASA's Permanent Lunar Life Support - Forbes

[cole santos]

For big area lighting plasma is more efficient than leds.
http://www.plasma-i.com/index.html

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:46 AM, cole santos <cksantos85 at gmail.com> wrote:

> LED's are more expensive than florescents...and that is after order of
> magnitude reductions in cost over the last few years. I found some vendors
> in china for LED lights. Florescent technology requires bulb changes every
> 6 months to a year, this makes it unworkable for space, but good for earth
> testing. LED research on optimal spectrum for algae growth is an
> open research field. Another problem is the design for my algae reactors
> needs lights that are 360, but leds are about 130 deg. a bi directional
> light would cost a lot more due to custom nature of such a light, another
> option is to just stack 2 lights back to back... but now you've doubled you
> costs and lighting is more that 50% of the total cost.
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Jerry Isdale <isdale at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Growing in space requires light. Space stations may be able to orient
>> themselves for full time growing but Colonies on moons, etc will need some
>> power source for when their rotation takes them into night (moon night = 2
>> weeks).
>>
>> This article talks about using LEDs powered from a small nuclear power
>> source, similar to that powering the Curiosity Rover.
>>
>>
>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2012/08/31/space-farmers-leds-as-key-to-nasas-permanent-lunar-life-support/
>>
>>  Jerry Isdale
>> isdale at gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/spaceprogram/attachments/20120904/b732e975/attachment.html>