Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board > General > Product Review and Equipment Forum > Lighting Specific

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01-17-2011, 04:21 PM
Delphinus's Avatar
Delphinus Delphinus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Posts: 12,896
Delphinus has a spectacular aura aboutDelphinus has a spectacular aura aboutDelphinus has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via MSN to Delphinus
Default

Great review, although something occured to me this morning. What about watts? I was looking up the unit online and note that it is rated at 42w.

This might put an interesting spin on things.

The PAR results showed as approximately half that of the 250w halide, but if you could run two of these units, tilted slightly so that the distribution of light roughly overlaps the same area, you'd still be only at 30% energy used. The problem of course comes in that this is "two units" compared to "one unit" so there is the additional up front cost there. With a 166w advantage the two units have over the halide, assuming a billed rate of $0.10 per kWh and a 12 hour photoperiod and a 30 day month, it's about $6 per month cheaper to run the two units. Now, assuming upfront purchase costs of LED and halides at say $400 each (ignoring potential cost-cutting measures such as purchasing second-hand, or DIY, or even factoring in potential resale value of either down the road), this works out to roughly about a 5 year/60 month period before your reach financial equivalency. Except that it's not 60 months if you factor in the cost of replacement halides at 12 month intervals. So in actual fact the "TCO" may in fact be not all that hugely different.

But then additional factors may also come into play such as using a combination of light sources. If these could be shoehorned into a light rack between halides it could well be a fantastic early morning/late afternoon photoperiod thus allowing a shortening of the photoperiod for the main halides.

If the cost of LEDs continue to become less prohibitive over time I could well see that they will gain more market share.

For now though I still love my Radiums!
__________________
-- Tony
My next hobby will be flooding my basement while repeatedly banging my head against a brick wall and tearing up $100 bills. Whee!

Last edited by Delphinus; 01-17-2011 at 04:23 PM. Reason: forgot to proofread
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-17-2011, 04:26 PM
lastlight's Avatar
lastlight lastlight is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,997
lastlight has a spectacular aura aboutlastlight has a spectacular aura aboutlastlight has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delphinus View Post
Now, assuming upfront purchase costs of LED and halides at say $400 each
Yeah $400 will get you one of the units but certainly not two which you'd have to do to try and have equivalent output. I do like the no replacing bulbs idea though that sure sounds nice. We both know radiums aren't all that cheap.
__________________
Brett
My 67 392 225 101 94 34 97 404 28 93 209 gallon reef.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-17-2011, 04:36 PM
Delphinus's Avatar
Delphinus Delphinus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
Posts: 12,896
Delphinus has a spectacular aura aboutDelphinus has a spectacular aura aboutDelphinus has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via MSN to Delphinus
Default

Well, I meant it as $400 for one halide, and two times $400 for two Ecoxotics, so the uplift is only the difference $400 and it's only the uplift that you want to look at when comparing that against the energy savings over time.

It's hard to do a completely fair comparison because you can get considerable savings by buying used in either case, except that there will be more halides available second hand right now (over time surely there will be more options for the LEDS as people shift hardware around or shutdown tanks, etc., but for now, there probably aren't many available second hand); and then you can also take into play that DIY options for LED and halides tend to yield lower costs up front (but then we're comparing two completely different things altogether).

One can reasonably expect to replace halides on a 12 month interval but I'm curious as to the true longevity of the LED units, is it reasonable to expect 0% replacement of LEDS over 60 months? And if there is the occasional dud LED out of a fixture, how easy will that be? I think only time can tell for sure but at least the theory is that the effective lifespan is closer to 5 years.
__________________
-- Tony
My next hobby will be flooding my basement while repeatedly banging my head against a brick wall and tearing up $100 bills. Whee!

Last edited by Delphinus; 01-17-2011 at 04:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-17-2011, 04:39 PM
lastlight's Avatar
lastlight lastlight is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,997
lastlight has a spectacular aura aboutlastlight has a spectacular aura aboutlastlight has a spectacular aura about
Default

I sure like the simplicity with halides or even T5s for that matter. Either the ballast goes or the bulb does. Well...or the cat eats into the power cord. Somedays that would solve a problem before it made one but I didn' say that. I'll stop derailing a review thread now.
__________________
Brett
My 67 392 225 101 94 34 97 404 28 93 209 gallon reef.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.