Alternative Energy to Power Tank

[ceemonkey]

Has anyone explored or had success with setting up an alternate energy source to power their tanks and equipment? With the recent hike in electricity rates, I can't afford a $700 bill every month. I was thinking of researching a small solar panel setup to power just my reef tank and equipment.

I appreciate everyone's input.

 

[gcarroll]

it will cost you much less to revamp your reef using energy efficient pumps, and your home with enrgy efficient lighting. That is unless you have another power hungry energy draw like a pool or spa.

 

[hypernesia]

I have looked into it for the whole house, most tanks use 1kw or more with pumps and lights, but not all of these are on for 24/7. Solar panel installation is typically $7-8000 per 1kw. If you calculate your total wattage and time running / month and multiply by what your energy company charges. You will get a better feel for what your tank really consumes. In Wisconsin we are typically charged about 0.12/Kw. Not sure about Cali. If you don't have one already I would invest in a Kill-A-Watt. You can get them on Ebay and other online retailers. Just plug the equipment into it and then into the wall and it tells you what wattage you are really pulling. Checking out the rest of your home is also good. Dehumidifiers are nasty energy consumers

 

[GSMguy]

dude you can switch that 900w of electricity you use just to light your tank out for t5s and use 300W, not sure what your other equipment is but im sure it could all be improved.

 

[justinm0424]

Unfortunately solar power and other alternative energy's aren't cost effieient yet. It will cost more in panels then you will be saving. Plus if you wanted your system only on an alternative circuit without being on the grid at all then you would need means to store the energy with batteries which would also add bulkiness and expense to the system. You can use alternative energy like solar and plug it into the grid which will lower your bills but will still not be cost effective. Some people do use solar power for their home inwhich they are still plugged in to the grid and actually have negative electric bills on certain months because you sell your extra energy back to the power companies but this still isn't cost effective yet. How many houses/office buildings do you see with solar panels or alternative forms of energy? people don't use them yet because they're too much and provide little energy.

You should invest in energy saving lightbulbs throughout your home and remove any light fixtures that cannot use energy saving bulbs. Also use T5 bulbs for your tank instead of your MH's as they consume less energy.

 

[ceemonkey]

what about switching out the MH lights for 96W Power Compacts? My tank is about 36" deep and the lights mount under a canopy which adds another 12". I have SPS as well as soft corals.

 

[ceemonkey]

are T5's as good as MH?

 

[Doahh]

He currently uses 800 watts of MH light.
What is the footprint of the tank? That will tell us the esitmated wattage for T5's

 

[herozero]

california has one of the most expensive $ per kw/h at 13 cents. The other thing some people might not take into account is that in southern California (especially Camarillo and the valley) solar is available just about year round. The other quirk, the electric companies (through their friends the state legislature) don't buy electricity from customers with solar after their bill hits $0. On the other side, there are a fair number of federal and state subsidies to look into for buying solar panels.

Even after all that, it is still most likely cost prohibitive. Give it a few years, prices will continue to drop.

 

[Macimage]

Originally posted by herozero
california has one of the most expensive $ per kw/h at 13 cents.

I think that is the lowest Tier 1 rate, which will barely run anything.

The majority of our bill is in the Tier 5 rating, which is $.31!

Joyce

 

[herozero]

tier 5, wow! tanks plus summer a/c use i'm sure are the main culprits right?

 

[mkareef]

I switched from MH lighting to T5 and my electric bill went way down, I then changed out my pump for a snapper and saved even more!

 

[addicted2reefin]

800 watt metal halide will honestly runs at about over 1kw
pumps are big energy drawers. chillers too.

if u go t5s u wont need a chiller, probably. and reeflo makes some of the best energy effecient pumps.

ucould always build a snatch box to jump the meter, but if u get caught ur looking at fed time.

 

[luther1200]

I would get a quality T5 fixture.

But what kind of coral are you keeping, I would assume SPS with 800w of MH.

 

[bawla47]

at 36" i dont think you have much options. you could switch to t5s but your not going to get not much ligfht towards the 2nd half of the tank.

 

[The0wn4g3]

Switching from metal halide to T5HO's should help a lot. They are definitely "as good" as metal halides. Bulbs last longer, maintain proper spectrum longer, and are cooler.
You could go with
8x 54W fixture for 432W total
10x 54W fixture for 540W total
12x 54W fixture for 648W total

I would think 8x to 10x would be plenty, but I'm no pro at recommending lighting for such large tanks. You may need to move the SPS to the upper 2' of the tank.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Actually there is very little difference in the heat output of Metal Halides and Fluorescents

The metal halide puts out more visible light per watt consumed. The fluorescent puts out over DOUBLE the IR radiation!

Notice that they both have about the same radiant energy. Assuming a good reflector, they have a 4% difference in radiated energy, but the fluorescent has much more IR. So by direct radiation, the fluorescent will actually impart MORE heat to the water.. that is if we want to get techincal.

Of course different bulbs of different spectra and phospors (or halide salts and gasses) will swing slight one direction or the other.

In any case, it is a toss up, with bith MH and FL imparting about the same amount of heat to the water.

 

[The0wn4g3]

Yes, I have a basic understanding of FL vs MH heat output, and wasn't aiming to get technical as that's not the point of this thread.
I just know that when I switched from 350W of MH to 156W of T5HO the temperature in my tank dropped about 2 degrees in summer.
The bulbs themselves do burn at a lower temperature, and it is therefore easier to cool the air inside the enclosure.

 

[BeanAnimal]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15622352#post15622352 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by The0wn4g3
350W of MH to 156W of T5HO the temperature in my tank dropped about 2 degrees in summer.

Your tank dropped 2 degrees because you switched from 350W of lighting to 156W of lighting. That is a 50% reduction in radiated energy into the tank. Again, both MH and FL have very similar heat characteristics per Watt

The bulbs themselves do burn at a lower temperature, and it is therefore easier to cool the air inside the enclosure.

Most of the heat imparted to the water comes from the radiation (Visible, IR, UV).

If you look at the chart again, you will see that both the FL and MH both have the same basic radiant and conductive/convective energy, meaning the both put the same basic amount of heat into the hood (and water). Again, from a technical standpoint, the FL imparts more heat directly into the hood than the same wattage of MH. Notice the CONDUCTIVE/CONVECTIVE output is HIGHER for the FL.

While you may not have been looking for a technical discussion, your comments may have been confusing to those reading along. I offered the information with some factual background in an effort to correct the information in context to the discussion in the thread.

 

[sjm817]

I think this thread is about lower energy use to cut down the electricity bill, not FL Vs MH heat. Yes, heat is related to energy use if cooling is required, but if the OP went from 1000W of MH to a lower power use lighting such as the 540W example, that is where he is trying to get to. The other big thing to look at is the type of pumps in use for return, CL or power heads. A listing of all lighting, pumps, etc would be a good idea.