My reasoning for creating this thread was simple... more people are realizing that CFL grows are more cost-saving in the long run
CFLs yield poor quality buds. Gram for gram and watt for watt, you will get more bud for less dough with proper HPS lighting.
and the aerogarden offers a medium for the convenience grower.
The Aerogarden is an easily available, overpriced device that yields poor quality cannabis because it is simply unsuitable for the plant. It is absolutely no more convenient to do it wrong as right.
I can't understand the closed-minded rejection of this Aerogarden some impose on others without asking for their opinion -
I've stated the facts several times. If you can't understand my objection to the use of this thing to grow cannabis, you're now being deliberately and wantonly ignorant.
I mean, respectfully Al, you probably have years on me in actual growing experience,
Try 'decades.'
HOWEVER... this thread wasn't created to query anyone's feelings about the aerogarden.
Oh, so you don't care about the facts. It's all my 'feelings.'
You always treat newcomers like this?
You bet! New growers and hence new users of RIU often bring with them myth, misconception and generally bad information.
What I do here is point folks to the methods that work and help keep them from wasting time and money on equipment that will never yield satisfactory results.
My friend has grown 3 4ft plants with extra cfls and adjusted the ag light when needed.
If your friend is growing 4ft tall plants with artificial lighting, s/he's not discovered that even HID lighting only penetrates foliage so deeply. Tall plants are not the indoor grower's friend. CFLs have little to no foliar penetration capability. A 4ft plant with CFLs would produce hopelessly thin and weedy buds.
Using the proper cfl will help with denser buds along with the right nutrients.
You get density from high light intensity. CFLs are low intensity light sources. You could use Jesus' own piss as fertiliser and density will not improve if you are using CFLs to flower.
Also that 400 watt hps will add to my energy bill it's high enough as it is.
There's a such thing as false economy. If your per kWh rate is 15c, a 400 used for flowering 12h/day will cost $21.60/mo. For that $21.60, you can easily produce 2oz/mo of dense, solid nugs.
Swap that 400 for a 250HPS (which costs $117 @ HTG as opposed to $119 for the 400) and the power cost goes down to $13.50/mo, yield will be about 1-1.5z/mo.
and growing is completely different than flying not a good analogy.
My point, which I hope you're conveniently ignoring instead of not being able to understand, is that one can use empirical knowledge to make estimates. I don't have wings, I'm not lighter than air; I thus have no cause to believe that I can fly. Should I still jump off a cliff to prove that?
In the same vein, Aerogardens are too small to grow cannabis plants and use CFLs, which produce thin, weedy buds.
I don't want a bubbleponic system or diy dwc.
So, you'd rather spend several times more for an Aerogarden? BTW, DWC & bubbleponics are the same thing. A DWC with a low water level is an aeroponic system.
ALL an Aerogarden does is water plants. You can do this same task with $50 (or less) and a trip the hdwe store.
I'm growing for personal consumption. Money really isn't an option, my wife bitches about bills cause she sees them she has no idea of what I spend cause I manage the bills. As long as I get an oz
Do you have
any clue whatsoever as to how long and how many crops it's going to take to make an oz with an Aerogarden? Doesn't seem so. I'd be very surprised if an AG could make an oz in 6 mos.
