Using bioluminiscence to induce plants to conduct photosynthesis seems like a great idea but is it really intelligent to do so ? Plants give off CO2 at night as a result of their own metabolic cycle and tampering with the circadian cycle (as is the human habit of tampering with all of nature\'s cycles) of plants is going to create more problems.

This may be an interesting effect, but what is the point of shining ultraviolet light on trees just so they can glow. How is that any more efficient than using ultra-efficient LED\'s in the first place?

@Soumitra

We don\'t need to tamper with all trees in nature.
We can plant a few ones on the streets and make\'em to glow, there\'s no need to make the Amazonia florest to glow lol

Pandora? From the movie Avatar! What could possibly go wrong?

...of course...why da ya think we had black lights at \'60s hairy buffalo keg pAHties...we\'d always light up the trees...geez...oh, those were my tree-trunk legs in the bell-bottoms...under the black lights...you say? ooops, i digress...

Glowing trees can save energy. We don\'t have use any energy to light up our streets in the dark of night. Especially in the age of global warming today, save more energy means lessen carbon in the atmosphere. So that this discovery can save our planet just like any alternative energy. Do you guys understand?

Now all my Hip-Hop neighbors are gonna want a bling tree next to their crib.

Try this site. I love it!
Especially the comments section.

The purpose is not to plant glowing trees and make our streets pretty. Think beyond that. The vast amount of energy we could potentially save is one of the most important accomplishments of this study. The results of this discovery can enormously reduce Light Pollution, and as a result, the negative impacts of it on the environment, ecological systems, and human health (mental and physical). This is amazing.

Hmmm - why do journalists ever so frequently write in the presumptive and speculative - and when you think it through, it\'s usually about dumb things; i.e. \"We might someday be using glowing trees as streetlights thanks to a discovery by Dr. Yen-Hsun Su\"
Then you get comments from people who don\'t do the \"2 2\" link - of many trees are deciduous (annual leave droppers), although they may not be the target species, gold is expensive ($$$$$), and they have to aim high frequency Ultra Violet light at the trees (lights power) just to make the trees glow.
Sure it\'s an interesting discovery, and the relative power levels are not discussed etc., but simple issues are not raised like how many lumens of UV are put into an entire tree, and how many lumens does the tree give out.
As far as messing with the tree like that - I am doubtful that the tree is really happy about getting messed with.
Again - it\'s more of that \"Oh I have an idea\" and the journalists dream up more pie in the sky bullshit to sell the story..... \"\"One day entire cities may be lit by soaking all the trees in ultraviolet, by injecting 10,000 tons of gold into them annually, by driving the UV lights with enough electricity at double the amount and cost of regular street lighting....\"
Got the hand on more than just the pen.