Well, innovation seldom makes money-sense. Not right away, anyways.
If your bottom line is cost, then LEDs are not the way to go. Fluorescent is cheaper. LEDs can be dimmed, the heatsink can vent the heat away from the water (not really a significant issue with fluorescent anyways). But mostly they can be something "cool". I mean the whole fish tank thing- who said it made financial sense in the first place? Cost hundreds over the years and never brought in a dime. All it ever did was look cool. LEDs could make it cooler... or tacky, depending on your presentation.
LEDs could- in theory- provide a lot of PAR (photoactive radiation, no units exist, I'd propose "grow-mens") with less power used and less heat created. We have the PAR charts but are still a bit unclear on exactly what wavelengths might be needed for specific plants and unfortunately this is a bit difficult to study with acceptable precision.
Actually, given that a significant portion of generated light is reflected off the water's surface as well as the light not being focused on the plant area, I believe there could be a significant gain in submersion or some sort of light guide- but, as these things go, not cheap or easy.