what costs me more?

bkiba · 01/24/2006, 05:55 PM

4x65W PC and 4X96W PC combined lighting vs two 250W HQIs running off two 250W electronic ballasts.

Which costs more to power?

Obviously the MH is 500W total and the PC is 644W total so there is a difference there. Does this really translate to energy savings?

thx

garvondavis14 · 01/24/2006, 05:59 PM

u also should fin d out bulb cost and such, for when y ou have to replace the lights

Ochi · 01/24/2006, 06:28 PM

Metal halide i would say is a better choice for PAR and light penetration, but 500w is 500w and 644w is 644 watts. 500 watts of metal halide doesn't use more electricity than 500 watts of PC. A watt is a watt.

You have to replace PC's at about 6 months, and Halides at between a year and a year and a half. Factor that in as well.

javajaws · 01/24/2006, 06:33 PM

Most people replace their MH lamps every 6 months. An even better option is to get some T5 lights...you could probably get away with 12 months with them. Tthey are also pretty energy efficient and don't add as much heat as MH.

bkiba · 01/24/2006, 06:51 PM

ok I guess I should have expected this

I've had my current PC lights on for about a year now, so near changing time (for me at least) that is why I'm considering a new fixture all together, as opposed to buying 4 96W bulbs and 4 65W bulbs. I'll probably keep running some atincs with the PCS for a while.

i was just wondering about the efficiency of MH, if it is the actual light output that is 250W. Like a regular incandescant bulb say 100W puts out the same light as a 23W or so PC bulb (screw in) the rest is waste heat. So if the MH actually put out 250W light then they must use more energy that is put out as heat.... unless they use 250W and don't put out as much light.... someone must know.

thx for the advice.

javajaws · 01/24/2006, 06:58 PM

It depends on the ballast you use...electronic, HQI, etc. Here are the specs for an IceCap electronic ballast:

http://www.icecapinc.com/pdf/250mh.pdf

Compare that to the specs your your PC ballasts...or better yet find an ammeter and see what yours uses exactly.

integlikewhoa · 01/24/2006, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bkiba
Which costs more to power?

Obviously the MH is 500W total and the PC is 644W total so there is a difference there. Does this really translate to energy savings?

Dont confuse output power with input power. You need to look on the ballast to figure out which is more. And the ballast makes a difference. A electronic ballast takes about have the amps as a magnetic ballast to run.

bkiba · 01/24/2006, 07:06 PM

have any specs on 2x96w electronic ballasts for PC?

javajaws · 01/24/2006, 07:17 PM

You know, watt for watt...the difference between light watts and input watts is probably not going to be enough of a difference to offset differences in lamp replacement costs....so trying to see if one is "cheaper" than the other is in invalid comparison without taking this into consideration. Just something to think about.

ASH · 01/25/2006, 01:13 PM

From IceCap:
A few fact checks.
MH bulbs on an electronic ballast don't need to be replaced in less than 18 months for a reef application. The height, reflector and bulb used can all effect the light you get for a given amount of electricity. High frequency electronic ballasts run MH with a constant arc. 60Hz conventional ballasts literally strike an arc 60 times a second, every second, on/off .... Which would you want?

T-5 HO lamps, run on a T-5 HO ballast or overdriven by an IC VHO ballast last around 24 months if a fan is run while they're lit. (The WH is not a T-5 HO ballast.)

If wattage, even output wattage is what you measure than you are not going to get the most PAR per watt. PC lamps are usually not efficient over a reef tank do to their design. T-5 HO lamps of half the PC wattage can out-perform PCs if single lamp reflectors are used. The same magic doesn't work with a PC.

The most efficient lamp is a T-8, yet even industrial applications of MH are switching to T-5 HO lamps because the light levels where you need light are higher with less wattage consumed.

Andy

RichConley · 01/25/2006, 01:51 PM

MHs put out more light per watt, and less heat per watt than PCs. (they just seem hotter because its a much smaller package)

you're probably looking 600w total with the 2x250s on electronics, and about 900-1000 for the PCS (with ballasts)

I've got electronics, and I dont replace my bulbs more than once a year.

also, 2x $60 for the MH bulbs once a year, =120
4x $20, and 4x $30 for the PC bulbs once a year. =200

01/24/2006, 05:55 PM	#1
bkiba Premium Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bridgewater, NJ Posts: 1,410	what costs me more? 4x65W PC and 4X96W PC combined lighting vs two 250W HQIs running off two 250W electronic ballasts. Which costs more to power? Obviously the MH is 500W total and the PC is 644W total so there is a difference there. Does this really translate to energy savings? thx __________________ "...and all the fish that lay in dirtied waters dying.... have they got you hypnotized?" -Robert Plant

01/24/2006, 05:59 PM	#2
garvondavis14 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The nasty 'Nati! Posts: 539	u also should fin d out bulb cost and such, for when y ou have to replace the lights __________________ WE ARE ALL WITNESSES LBJ23 LET'S GO CAVS, BUCKS, BROWNIES, REDS AND MUSKIES Current Tank Info: marine- 65 BB reef... freshwater- 55g mbuna tank, 20g fry tank, 30g community, 5g planted, 150g red eared slider habitat

01/24/2006, 06:33 PM	#4
javajaws Premium Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Round Rock, TX Posts: 1,620	Most people replace their MH lamps every 6 months. An even better option is to get some T5 lights...you could probably get away with 12 months with them. Tthey are also pretty energy efficient and don't add as much heat as MH. __________________ Everyone has an opinion. Accept the fact now that someone isn't going to like yours sooner or later. Current Tank Info: 110g in-wall, ATI 8x54w T5, 2xMP40es, SRO XP-2000i, 2-part Ca/Alk, Apex controlled

01/24/2006, 06:51 PM	#5
bkiba Premium Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bridgewater, NJ Posts: 1,410	ok I guess I should have expected this I've had my current PC lights on for about a year now, so near changing time (for me at least) that is why I'm considering a new fixture all together, as opposed to buying 4 96W bulbs and 4 65W bulbs. I'll probably keep running some atincs with the PCS for a while. i was just wondering about the efficiency of MH, if it is the actual light output that is 250W. Like a regular incandescant bulb say 100W puts out the same light as a 23W or so PC bulb (screw in) the rest is waste heat. So if the MH actually put out 250W light then they must use more energy that is put out as heat.... unless they use 250W and don't put out as much light.... someone must know. thx for the advice. __________________ "...and all the fish that lay in dirtied waters dying.... have they got you hypnotized?" -Robert Plant

01/24/2006, 06:58 PM	#6
javajaws Premium Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Round Rock, TX Posts: 1,620	It depends on the ballast you use...electronic, HQI, etc. Here are the specs for an IceCap electronic ballast: http://www.icecapinc.com/pdf/250mh.pdf Compare that to the specs your your PC ballasts...or better yet find an ammeter and see what yours uses exactly. __________________ Everyone has an opinion. Accept the fact now that someone isn't going to like yours sooner or later. Current Tank Info: 110g in-wall, ATI 8x54w T5, 2xMP40es, SRO XP-2000i, 2-part Ca/Alk, Apex controlled

01/24/2006, 06:28 PM	#3
Ochi Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: CT Posts: 264	Metal halide i would say is a better choice for PAR and light penetration, but 500w is 500w and 644w is 644 watts. 500 watts of metal halide doesn't use more electricity than 500 watts of PC. A watt is a watt. You have to replace PC's at about 6 months, and Halides at between a year and a year and a half. Factor that in as well.

01/24/2006, 07:06 PM	#8
bkiba Premium Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bridgewater, NJ Posts: 1,410	have any specs on 2x96w electronic ballasts for PC? __________________ "...and all the fish that lay in dirtied waters dying.... have they got you hypnotized?" -Robert Plant

01/24/2006, 07:17 PM	#9
javajaws Premium Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Round Rock, TX Posts: 1,620	You know, watt for watt...the difference between light watts and input watts is probably not going to be enough of a difference to offset differences in lamp replacement costs....so trying to see if one is "cheaper" than the other is in invalid comparison without taking this into consideration. Just something to think about. __________________ Everyone has an opinion. Accept the fact now that someone isn't going to like yours sooner or later. Current Tank Info: 110g in-wall, ATI 8x54w T5, 2xMP40es, SRO XP-2000i, 2-part Ca/Alk, Apex controlled

01/25/2006, 01:13 PM	#10
ASH Sponsor Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: NJ, USA Posts: 548	From IceCap: A few fact checks. MH bulbs on an electronic ballast don't need to be replaced in less than 18 months for a reef application. The height, reflector and bulb used can all effect the light you get for a given amount of electricity. High frequency electronic ballasts run MH with a constant arc. 60Hz conventional ballasts literally strike an arc 60 times a second, every second, on/off .... Which would you want? T-5 HO lamps, run on a T-5 HO ballast or overdriven by an IC VHO ballast last around 24 months if a fan is run while they're lit. (The WH is not a T-5 HO ballast.) If wattage, even output wattage is what you measure than you are not going to get the most PAR per watt. PC lamps are usually not efficient over a reef tank do to their design. T-5 HO lamps of half the PC wattage can out-perform PCs if single lamp reflectors are used. The same magic doesn't work with a PC. The most efficient lamp is a T-8, yet even industrial applications of MH are switching to T-5 HO lamps because the light levels where you need light are higher with less wattage consumed. Andy

01/25/2006, 01:51 PM	#11
RichConley Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC Posts: 9,908	MHs put out more light per watt, and less heat per watt than PCs. (they just seem hotter because its a much smaller package) you're probably looking 600w total with the 2x250s on electronics, and about 900-1000 for the PCS (with ballasts) I've got electronics, and I dont replace my bulbs more than once a year. also, 2x $60 for the MH bulbs once a year, =120 4x $20, and 4x $30 for the PC bulbs once a year. =200 __________________ NO TANKS!!!