Another One Bites the Dust?
- Thread starter LCGoldman
- Start date
Matrajeous
Member
where are these LED lights available? where can i find more information on them??? are they good for corals? or for fish only??? i am very curious
shyland83
New member
http://www.solarisled.com/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx
They can be used for coral, use little energy and produce almost no heat. are prohibitively expensive and fairly new. they have one set up at suffolk fish and reef in ronkonkoma if you want to check it out.
They can be used for coral, use little energy and produce almost no heat. are prohibitively expensive and fairly new. they have one set up at suffolk fish and reef in ronkonkoma if you want to check it out.
Reef Junkie
Premium Member
The Solaris looks great and is a great idea, but I do not see any great benefit or incentive to switching.
I currently use one 250 watt MH setup and with my tank I would need a Solaris-G-36-20K or Solaris-H4-36-20K.
Current costs over a 12 year period using a 250 watt MH.
Ballast: $102.00
Bulb: $54.00
Reflector: $119.00
Electricity over 12 years: $438.00
(.10 cents a day for 12 years)
Replacement bulbs (6): $324.00
Total: $1037.00
Solaris Lighting System costs.
Solaris G-36: $1,878.00
Solaris H4-36: $2,253.00
Electricity over 12 years: $262.80
(Solaris uses 40% less electricity then the above mentioned 250 watt MH, this number goes up for the H4)
G-36 Total: $2,140.80
H4-36 Total: $2,515.80
This isn't even a break even number. It's two to two and a half times more money to use the Solaris.
They need to come way down in price just to break even with MH.
I currently use one 250 watt MH setup and with my tank I would need a Solaris-G-36-20K or Solaris-H4-36-20K.
Current costs over a 12 year period using a 250 watt MH.
Ballast: $102.00
Bulb: $54.00
Reflector: $119.00
Electricity over 12 years: $438.00
(.10 cents a day for 12 years)
Replacement bulbs (6): $324.00
Total: $1037.00
Solaris Lighting System costs.
Solaris G-36: $1,878.00
Solaris H4-36: $2,253.00
Electricity over 12 years: $262.80
(Solaris uses 40% less electricity then the above mentioned 250 watt MH, this number goes up for the H4)
G-36 Total: $2,140.80
H4-36 Total: $2,515.80
This isn't even a break even number. It's two to two and a half times more money to use the Solaris.
They need to come way down in price just to break even with MH.
Spracklcat
Disaster Expert
Bill,
How did you calculate electricity usage? And what are we using as our price per kW/hr?
How did you calculate electricity usage? And what are we using as our price per kW/hr?
Reef Junkie
Premium Member
Most people do use 2 MH bulbs, that means they also have a larger tank that requires a larger Solaris. Which means more money. Like I mentioned in the beginning of my post, I only use one MH bulb.
Solaris-G-48-20K $2,325.00
Solaris-H4-48-20K $2,789.00
Don't be fooled into thinking you can save money because you're not using a chiller. How are you going to keep the room cool?
Thankfully not in the direction of the tank, but it has to go somewhere. Also, if you're not home, that heat will build up and start to heat the room, then the tank.
One way or another you'l have to deal with the heat.
My math was off on the electric.
Here is what it should really read...
.10 * 250 * 360 = $9.00 * 12 = $108 * 12 = $1,296
Cost per hour X Wattage of Bulb X hours per month = Monthly cost X Yearly cost = 12 year cost.
My apologies, I was off with the electric, but that still puts the Solaris close to twice as much in overall cost.
I don't dispute that it's a great idea, again, it's just way overpriced.
Solaris-G-48-20K $2,325.00
Solaris-H4-48-20K $2,789.00
Don't be fooled into thinking you can save money because you're not using a chiller. How are you going to keep the room cool?
Thankfully not in the direction of the tank, but it has to go somewhere. Also, if you're not home, that heat will build up and start to heat the room, then the tank.
One way or another you'l have to deal with the heat.
My math was off on the electric.
Here is what it should really read...
.10 * 250 * 360 = $9.00 * 12 = $108 * 12 = $1,296
Cost per hour X Wattage of Bulb X hours per month = Monthly cost X Yearly cost = 12 year cost.
My apologies, I was off with the electric, but that still puts the Solaris close to twice as much in overall cost.
I don't dispute that it's a great idea, again, it's just way overpriced.
I noticed many of the people complaining of elec. cost have 3 250 halides or more 400 watt etc.
Maybe with some careful planning using one 250 halide in conjuction with PC or T5 and position light loving organisms under the halide you could save on elec. cost, bulb cost chiller etc.
Maybe with some careful planning using one 250 halide in conjuction with PC or T5 and position light loving organisms under the halide you could save on elec. cost, bulb cost chiller etc.
Spracklcat
Disaster Expert
Thanks for clearing that up, I thought I was going crazy.
Reef Junkie
Premium Member
qy, I think you're right too.
I had my kwh priced too low.
Which means that with the lowest priced G series I'd break even.
But for anything over that, there would be a slight increase.
There is no ROI (return on investment) when purchasing a Solaris and a huge cash outlay.
Again, they'll have to really come way down in price to show any significant incentive to buy.
Sorry about the confusion.
I had my kwh priced too low.
Which means that with the lowest priced G series I'd break even.
But for anything over that, there would be a slight increase.
There is no ROI (return on investment) when purchasing a Solaris and a huge cash outlay.
Again, they'll have to really come way down in price to show any significant incentive to buy.
Sorry about the confusion.
Bill,
I put a Killowatt meter on my 250 watt setup and it actually draws closer to 350 watts, there is loss in the ballast (which makes sense because there is heat coming off it). Also, your calculation shows replacing the bulb 6 times over 12 years. I think most people replace there bulbs more often, closer to 10 months to a yr. That will add $350 to the cost of running halides.
But with that, it still makes it close to break even. Unless our rates end up going to the rates of Germany (32.5 cents per KWH), I don't see enough of a savings to warrant the outlay of that amount of upfront cash.
I put a Killowatt meter on my 250 watt setup and it actually draws closer to 350 watts, there is loss in the ballast (which makes sense because there is heat coming off it). Also, your calculation shows replacing the bulb 6 times over 12 years. I think most people replace there bulbs more often, closer to 10 months to a yr. That will add $350 to the cost of running halides.
But with that, it still makes it close to break even. Unless our rates end up going to the rates of Germany (32.5 cents per KWH), I don't see enough of a savings to warrant the outlay of that amount of upfront cash.
Spracklcat
Disaster Expert
Devil's advocate 
(Before anyone starts any conspiracies, I have no vested interest in any lighting system and am not affiliated with PFO. I run t-5's and NO fluorescents and am happy)
from PFO's website, regarding heat created:
"The new H4 series produces PAR light output levels equal to a 400W MH 20k. It uses 40% less energy than the 400W MH 20k fixtures it replaces. The life of the LEDs is approximately 50,000 hours, so it almost eliminates metal halide and fluorescent bulb replacements. All heat is radiated up and away from the tank; therefore, it does not heat the water like Metal Halides or Fluorescents. This eliminates the need for Chillers. The room air conditioner needs to work ½ as much since the light fixture produces only ½ the heat of Metal Halides which saves even more energy over traditional lighting methods. "
So it appears that yes, it will heat the room like any other light fixture would, but 40% less than the equivalent MH, so your air conditioner will have to work 40% less. And since the heat isn't going into the tank, if the room is air conditioned, a chiller may be unnecessary (pumps/powerheads etc in your tank may still cause a lot of heat).
There is a really nice comparison of MH to the Solaris at
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/8/review2
In it, they measure the above temp claim, and find it to be true (or even better): the fixture temp close to the tank remained at their room temperature, while the fixture away from the tank rose only by 1 degree C.
Also, at this page
http://www.solarisled.com/FAQTechnical/SolarisCostSavings/tabid/65/Default.aspx
They have a cost calculator which figures how long it will take the Solaris to pay for itself. Some of their default estimates are off, but you can plug in your own and do the math.
(Before anyone starts any conspiracies, I have no vested interest in any lighting system and am not affiliated with PFO. I run t-5's and NO fluorescents and am happy)from PFO's website, regarding heat created:
"The new H4 series produces PAR light output levels equal to a 400W MH 20k. It uses 40% less energy than the 400W MH 20k fixtures it replaces. The life of the LEDs is approximately 50,000 hours, so it almost eliminates metal halide and fluorescent bulb replacements. All heat is radiated up and away from the tank; therefore, it does not heat the water like Metal Halides or Fluorescents. This eliminates the need for Chillers. The room air conditioner needs to work ½ as much since the light fixture produces only ½ the heat of Metal Halides which saves even more energy over traditional lighting methods. "
So it appears that yes, it will heat the room like any other light fixture would, but 40% less than the equivalent MH, so your air conditioner will have to work 40% less. And since the heat isn't going into the tank, if the room is air conditioned, a chiller may be unnecessary (pumps/powerheads etc in your tank may still cause a lot of heat).
There is a really nice comparison of MH to the Solaris at
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/8/review2
In it, they measure the above temp claim, and find it to be true (or even better): the fixture temp close to the tank remained at their room temperature, while the fixture away from the tank rose only by 1 degree C.
Also, at this page
http://www.solarisled.com/FAQTechnical/SolarisCostSavings/tabid/65/Default.aspx
They have a cost calculator which figures how long it will take the Solaris to pay for itself. Some of their default estimates are off, but you can plug in your own and do the math.
Last edited:
Similar threads
