magnetic vs electronic ballasts

[PbReefer]

i have been running a hamilton magnetic ballast for years now. i recently picked up a pair of icecaps to replace the magnetic. i was told that the electronic ballasts will under drive the bulbs. is this true, and if so is the energy savings worth the decreased output?

mike

 

[James77]

They will underdrive some bulbs, namely HQI bulbs. They will run most any bulb though.

This article explains more, and has a useful list of the optimal ballast-bulb combos.

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-03/sj/index.php

 

[s.reef]

The energy consumption is worth it imo

 

[James77]

The energy consumption is worth it imo

I use HQI(M80) ballasts, which draw ~330 watts each from the wall. Compared to two 250w Icecaps, the HQI ballasts draw ~160 watts more.

Assuming they are being run 8 hours, the HQIs use 38.4 more kilowatt hours per month(30 days) than the Icecaps, or about $4.60 more per month at $.12/kwh. Might be a big deal for some, but then you have to factor in reduced lamp life from being underdriven. Running radiums, you get about 30% more PAR from using the HQI ballasts, which are the correct one for those bulbs.

 

[MERCURYROCKET]

cool

cool

cool i

 

[reeflord]

theelectronic ballast will run cooler and use alot less electric

 

[PbReefer]

thanks for the replies!

according to the link im already using the correct ballast for my bulbs. saving 5 or 6 bucks a month isnt really worth the lower output. looks like i will have 2 icecaps for sale.