Under canopy lighting is new. Some would say it is untested especially compared to the wide variety of top lighting that has been subjected to experiments for years. It might surprise you to find out that we are not trying to rid the cultivation world of UCL critiques. In fact, they are the basis for a lot of our in-house testing.
With that in mind, we decided to tackle the criticisms and critiques we hear in person or in the various online corners of the cultivation world. Let’s jump into it.
Common UCL Criticisms and Faven's Responses
The cost of implementing under canopy lighting is too high, and the ROI is questionable and difficult to quantify.
Faven Response: The best way to gauge ROI with Faven UCLs is to try them on one bench. This limits the investment while also allowing you to try the technology in your setup with your genetics and SOPs. 9 of 10 first-time Faven UCL users experience a one-run return on investment with an average yield increase of 22%.
Commercial cultivation is already complicated. Under canopy LED lighting further complicates an already complicated set-up. Adding more lights requires more controllers and timers and wiring. Plus the lights themselves need to be maintained. And don’t even get me started on the set-up and breakdown labor costs.
Faven Response: This is correct. UCLs do add another layer of complexity to facilities. However, Favens were designed by commercial growers who know firsthand how important maintaining facility workflow is. Favens integrate seamlessly into most lighting control boards and off-the-shelf controllers. Another feature that allows Favens to fit into day-to-day facility flow is its robust design to handle IPM sprays, rough handling from workers, and any other typical abuse experienced in commercial cultivation. As for the labor, additional time is needed during harvest to remove and clean UCLs properly. The first few harvests will be a learning curve, but once a facility experiences a few harvests, they streamline the process.. Additionally, there are massive labor savings during pre-harvest. The need to “underclear” or “lollipop” is dramatically reduced, saving hundreds of man-hours annually.
More lights mean more heat. This will disrupt the grow’s current controlled and balanced temperature and humidity micro-climate, which will cause all kinds of annoying mold and pathogen problems. It will also alter transpiration rates.
Faven Response: Whenever we add something new to a grow room, side effects will occur. UCLs are no different. Due to increased photosynthesis, facilities can expect to experience 10-15% additional dehumidification capacity. HVACs will also experience an increase in demand. However, Favens operate at the lowest temperature of any UCL on the market, which reduces the number of extra BTUs of cooling that need to be added. Our support team is experienced with what to expect when you add Faven UCLs to a grow room. Reach them at support@favenlighting.com
Under canopy lighting only
Faven Response: Small grows have just as much upside as large grows regarding under canopy lighting.
UCL will stress out my plants! The added lights will introduce an excessive amount of stress on my plants that will result in leaf curl, bleaching and herming.
Faven Response: Faven UCLs have dimming capabilities, which allow growers to ease their plants into receiving light from the bottom. We recommend a slow ramp-up period to ensure no light stress occurs. Reducing top light intensity when adding UCLs is another way to ensure plants don't have an adverse reaction.
It ain't natural! Cannabis plants did not evolve with any sort of under canopy lighting. This artificial shift in lighting methods will result in a disruption of natural growth patterns.
Faven Response: In the five years of testing under canopy lighting, we have never documented a growth disruption detrimental to the plant due to the fixture's orientation. While UCL may not be natural, neither are other forms of indoor lighting, and they are widely accepted.
Under canopy lighting will reduce light penetration from top lighting. I will have to reduce top lighting intensity to manage PPFD properly. This will result in a degradation of upper canopy bud size and quality.
Faven Response: Evenly lighting a plant with top lights and UCLs positively impacts yield and quality more than just top lighting. Managing the intensity between the two light sources is essential, but it will not negatively impact the upper canopy.
Grows are wet environments. The water will lead to high UCL replacement costs.
Faven Response: Faven’s were designed with harsh grow environments in mind. Our fixtures are IP66 certified and boast the industry's only fully enclosed design. Our one-piece housing eliminates the potential for water ingress from IPM sprays or irrigation water.
The manufacturers of under canopy lights are full of it! I know the numbers are overhyped. There is no way the size and quality gains they claim are consistently achievable across all setups and strains.
Faven Response: First time Faven uses average 22% yield increase, and 9 out of 10 experience a return on their investment after one run. Numbers like this are achievable because of the additional canopy depth that under canopy lights unlock. Traditionally, the bottom third of the plant was cleared of all budsites. Now that area is being activated by lights and producing top quality product.
Under canopy lighting is only beneficial for high-density grow rooms. My plants have lots of space, so top lighting is sufficient.
Faven Response: Under canopy lighting benefits both high- and low-density planting. We recommend lowering planting density to some customers because it can reduce the need for additional dehumidification and promote greater airflow to the plants. Lower planting densities also help improve product uniformity, color, and density from top to bottom.
Leave a comment
This site is protected by hCaptcha and the hCaptcha Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.