220V MH system saves money?

[Untamed12]

Planning out the electrical for my 360 gal....I'll be using 6 MH lights.

Someone told me that it would cost me less in electricity if I ran the MH off 220V. Is that true?

 

[Entropy]

No... Well not anything you will see anyway. 220v pumps are supposedly more efficient, but IME they are simply more powerful since they can draw just as much amperage as a normal 110v pump, but have two hot lines to do it, so in theory they can draw twice as much power from your electrical box. A watt is a watt though, so as long as you are using electricty, half the amperage at twice the voltage is still the same as half the voltage at twice the amperage. voltsxamperage=watts.


Most pumps/ballasts/motors/etc. will tell you how much power they draw in watts, regardless of amperage or voltage rating.

 

[clsanchez77]

seems to me it would only apply in commercial/industrial applications where you pay for your current draw (amps) and not you energy usage (watts).

So I dont see the immediate savings at home, but then maybe the 220v pumps and ballasts are more efficient?

I am curious too...

 

[clsanchez77]

voltsxamperage=watts

I seem to remember somewhere that in AC current, there is apower factor that plays a significant role in the above equation when dealing with coiled wire equipment (such as pumps and ballasts). That is my reason for thinking the 220v may be more energy efficient by means of a better power factor.

Just a thought.

Chris

 

[clsanchez77]

Now you got me curious and I cant move on...so I found this in the search button...

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6428373#post6428373 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ASH
From IceCap:
We have many happy overseas customers using them.
In this country, when a large tank is in the planing stages I sometimes get an opportunity to suggest running a 220V line to their aquarium so they can; run more on each circuit, have their pumps and ballasts run much cooler and last longer and maybe even save a little on electrical costs when you figure you don't need to compensate for as much waste heat being generated around your tank.

I've never had anyone regret the move to 220V but do get lots of thank you e-mails from those that do.

Andy

 

[clsanchez77]

Also found this, confusing but funny once you catch it:

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6346128#post6346128 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by BruiseAndy
no more efficent, you half your amp draw for the same wattage though. But in the end you still get billed by the watt not the amp.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6346294#post6346294 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by smcnally
That makes no sense. Ohm's law says that amperage is Watts divided by voltage. You can't draw less amperage while using the same wattage unless you double the voltage...which is what you just said...so you did make sense.

Okay, Ill quit now

 

[Untamed12]

Thanks very much....I think. Sounds like there is mostly only good that can come of running 220V, if I have the chance.

 

[BeanAnimal]

You may want to look at the CEC and determine if you are allowed to run 220V lights.

Bean

 

[BeanAnimal]

Ohh and your not going to save anything by running 220v ballasts.

 

[Entropy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6517166#post6517166 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by clsanchez77
I seem to remember somewhere that in AC current, there is apower factor that plays a significant role in the above equation when dealing with coiled wire equipment (such as pumps and ballasts). That is my reason for thinking the 220v may be more energy efficient by means of a better power factor.

Just a thought.

Chris

That is true which is why you always look at INPUT amperage and voltage to figure power draw. It doesn't matter what the pump/ballast/motor does with the power after it draws it. The best way to get a reading is to use a power meter to see how much power your item is drawing.

Now where the power factor might come into play (efficientcy) is that one ballast might provide 250 watts of power to your bulb for 260 watts of input, while another gets you 240 watts to the bulb for 260 watts of power. As far as your electricity bill goes, there is no difference, but the bulb sees more power and should therefore have more output out of the first ballast. So you get more for your money.

So I guess in the end you have to look at how much is going in (to save as much power as you can), and what you are getting with the power (to maximize what you are drawing).

 

[hahnmeister]

220v? Depends. Halides can have a high amp draw, and easily overload a 15A/120v circuit. A 220 will allow you to put more ballasts on a single circuit. Can it save money? Yes. Two reasons. First, by making some headroom for your ballasts, your electrical lines will run cooler, and even though watts are watts, the 220 line will have less resistance due to heat, which means less watts at the meter. Also, something that has been overlooked is that most 220v ballasts are able to operate with less draw as well...simply by the way that the ballast can be designed...so they often do draw less watts.

Something else to keep in mind is the kinds of ballasts you can get. I am using a 1000wattHQI ballast on my next reef...and that only comes in 220v. The 400watters that come in 220 also are said to perform better than their 110v cousins...but we will have to wait for Sanjay to confirm this.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I think if you look on the internet, you will find dozens of sites and forums where the actual resistance and cost calculations have been done. The savings are not there. Yes pushing a #14 wire to 15 Amps and a #6 wire to 2 AMPS shows a fair amount of resistance. However we are talking #12 wire vs #10 wire. You also have to understand how a residential power meter measures power. It not as simple as 120 vs 220. The reactance of the load and the other devices in the house all comprise part of the signal that the power meter reads. But in a nutshell 220v ballasts don't save you anything.

hahnmeister, what part of the 220v ballast construction do you feel saves energy? 220V electric motors run cooler due to the torque generated per cycle. I don't see why a 220V ballast would run cooler, as it is doing the same amount of electrical work, the voltage is being stepped up to the HID or FLUO line voltage. The temp differential may be a few degrees, but not enough to measure in electrical usage. If you have any data from the ballast vendors (or another source) I would love to see it (not being a smartass).

 

[WY_REEFER]

240V= less amps on the wire. You can run higher wattage devices with smaller wire (#12). than you can with 120V.

You also have a greater chance of getting the @#$ shocked out of you.

 

[Therbligs]

Another benefit for 220 vs. 110 is in load balancing. By running high load devices on 220 reduces the load in-balance issue for your electrical service, which in the long run reduces $.

IMHO

 

[Entropy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6522028#post6522028 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WY_REEFER
You also have a greater chance of getting the @#$ shocked out of you.

Not sure I understand that statement. A 120v circuit would carry more amperage than a 220v circuit for the same load, so in theory the 120v is deadlier. And as Gregory Hines once said, "It's not the volts. It's the amps."

 

[Therbligs]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6522814#post6522814 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Entropy
Not sure I understand that statement. A 120v circuit would carry more amperage than a 220v circuit for the same load, so in theory the 120v is deadlier. And as Gregory Hines once said, "It's not the volts. It's the amps."

Yes. The current across your heart is what kills you. The Voltage is the potential to drive that current. The higher the voltage, the higher potential, but only ac voltages below 40V are considered "Low Voltage".

That's like saying 55mph doesnââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t kill, but driving 110mph will kill you. If you hit an overpass head on, youââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢re dead at either speed.

Under the right conditions, you can die from a 9v battery. That's why the old hand in the pocket method came about. This reduces the chance of the current flowing through the heart. The shortest path to ground is past the heart and not through it.

 

[cali_reef]

Rich, 220V can "jump" further than 110V so you are few mm(okay maybe few .001 mm) closer being a conductor to ground :lol:.

Electric motors uses less watts to start rotation when on 220V, the higher voltage coil turns easier and start time is shorter. This doesnââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t help us since most large motors are on constantly, not cycling on and off.

 

[mwood]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6518915#post6518915 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
220v? Depends. Halides can have a high amp draw, and easily overload a 15A/120v circuit. A 220 will allow you to put more ballasts on a single circuit. Can it save money? Yes. Two reasons. First, by making some headroom for your ballasts, your electrical lines will run cooler, and even though watts are watts, the 220 line will have less resistance due to heat, which means less watts at the meter. Also, something that has been overlooked is that most 220v ballasts are able to operate with less draw as well...simply by the way that the ballast can be designed...so they often do draw less watts.

Something else to keep in mind is the kinds of ballasts you can get. I am using a 1000wattHQI ballast on my next reef...and that only comes in 220v. The 400watters that come in 220 also are said to perform better than their 110v cousins...but we will have to wait for Sanjay to confirm this.

Off topic, but I've gotta ask. Why would you need 1000w hqi's on a reef tank, unless it is 4' deep? I'd hate to stand two minutes in that tank room.

 

[grigsy]

At 220 volt, you will get a pretty significant.

 

[clsanchez77]

That is true which is why you always look at INPUT amperage and voltage to figure power draw. It doesn't matter what the pump/ballast/motor does with the power after it draws it. The best way to get a reading is to use a power meter to see how much power your item is drawing.

That is what I am getting at. The power factor should be reduced on 220v items as the voltage potential is twice that of 120v. An example of this was provided already, someone mentioning it takes less work (kw-h, what we pay for) to start a motor.

I am not saying these savings will actually amount to any $$$, just that there may be something to benifit.

I certainly like the idea of less amp draw for twice the voltage, even if the savings work out to be zero.

Chris