> I'm concerned about the (even theoretical) end to end efficiency compared to something like a solar panel + led setup. The maximum theoretical efficiency of

> I'm concerned about the (even theoretical) end to end efficiency compared to something like a solar panel + led setup. The maximum theoretical efficiency of chlorophyll-based photosynthesis with sunlight is 11%. That's already less than what solar panels can provide, and no plant achieves that. Then they store this energy in biomass, with a global efficiency of typically less than 1%. Then, they will likely also use a very inefficient process to convert matter back into light, I'd assume less than 1% efficiency given the complicated pathways used. We're already at something like 0.01% efficiency from sunlight to artificial light at this point. It's actually logical, since instead of converting light to readily-usable electricity, plants convert light into energy that they use to live, matter that they use to build themselves, and matter used for storage. Only the latest fraction is usable to create light, and most of it is already intended for the plant to live during the night. A solar panel has none of this overhead. There is absolutely no way that plants will ever come close to competing with artificial lighting. They won't glow, at most they will be able to be faintly seen in the dark.