Real Cost Savings of LED vs MH/T5

[d2mini]

Anyone using AquaticLog might know that you can upload/share your Radion Graph in your profile. And it will show some interesting data, following your graph throughout the day.
So I was looking at it and it occurred to me that if the data presented is fairly accurate, then I could get a fairly accurate running cost and then compare it to my old setup which was a MH/T5 combo.

So here is the data from AquaticLog showing the wattages used throughout the day running my current graph.
Total wattage used over a 24 hour period (this number is outside the area of this screen shot) is 742 watts per Radion. I have 4 Radion Pros.
So current wattage used per day is 2968 watts. Let just say 3000 to make it easy.

Now, using my tank as an example for MH/T5, I'm figuring that using a quality reflector like a Lumen Bright, and the fact that i have two plastic supports across the top of my 84"x24"x24" tank, let's say it would take THREE 250w metal halide pendants to give me sufficient coverage. Then, let's add two 24" (24w) T5 bulbs to each MH pendant, making SIX total.

250w x 3 = 750w
24w x 6 = 144w

It's been a while since I've run MH so I'm going to be conservative and say that I'm going to run the MH bulbs for 6 hours/day. That's 4,500w per day.
Let's say I want to run the T5 by themselves for 2 hours before and two hours after the MH, plus the same 6 hours along with the MH. That's 10 hours per day using 1,440w per day.
Grand total is 5,940w, so let's just say 6,000w to make it easy.

Radion Pros = 3,000w
MH/T5 = 6,000w

That's double! Or half, depending on how you look at it.

Now, using those numbers along with my current electricity costs of $.0875 kw/h"¦

Radion Pros = $94.50/year
MH/T5 = $189




Now granted, my electricity is on the lower end for the USA.
But is anyone else a little surprised by how little a difference we are talking about? At least anyone who hasn't already obsessed over this and already figured it out? :lol:

This also doesn't take into account bulb replacement costs and any excess heat requiring more chiller use.
It also doesn't take into account the higher entry costs of off the shelf LED fixtures like the Radion Pro or GHL Mitras.

Anyway, i just thought this was interesting, especially since I could see actual power usage of my Radions.
And I'm bored at work today.

Any thoughts on the info above?
Did I miss anything or miscalculate?

 

[kikoreefer]

Nice work you could add the 10% to each for the ballast. I was surprised to see the small difference I was actually ramping up to buy leds and after running all the numbers the real saving came in dc pumps. I've lowered my electric bill by 125 bucks

 

[d2mini]

I've lowered my electric bill by 125 bucks

NICE! That's a good savings.

So the ballast itself will add 10%? Good to know.

 

[kikoreefer]

Average 10 sometime higher. Especially on metal halide ballasts if the power factor capacitor begins to fade out you can add over 50 % you just need to make sure you know what's going on I leave mines hooked up to my controller so I can see amps.

 

[clay12340]

50% seems pretty significant to me. Especially before you get into the costs of bulbs and heat issues.

I think when you factor in the cost of the higher priced LED units that you're probably not really saving any money by the time that type of user is likely to upgrade them. It's going to take a long time to recoup that initial premium, and if spectrum shift is a worry it may not happen in the life of the units. It is also probably fair to mention that cost savings is probably not a primary motivation for this set of users.

If you're talking about a lower end or more middle of the road set of lights it seems like you'd actually save a fair portion of your lighting costs, and my guess is that this is the crowd that's going to be a lot more focused on saving money.

A 50% energy savings on someone running $150 chinese LED units as compared to someone running MH in the same price range makes the lights pay for themselves probably within the first year once you factor in bulb changes.

 

[rtparty]

You're not accounting for the possibility that your heaters MAY be running more now with the LEDs than with halides.

That could easily make up half the difference.

I've known for years that LEDs don't save as much electricity as some say. My electric bill hasn't changed since switching from LEDs to T5s to my current hybrid.

Like mentioned, your real savings is in the pumps. They run 24/7/365. You can save big money by dumping inefficient old pumps for newer pumps.

 

[jrod738776]

I agree with rtparty. I find with LEDs my heaters are running almost constantly, where as with MH they will not be on at the same time. That is 500w for heaters right there.

 

[d2mini]

Like mentioned, your real savings is in the pumps. They run 24/7/365. You can save big money by dumping inefficient old pumps for newer pumps.

Yeah, my skimmer is currently being powered by a Mag 12 rated at 110w.
So over 24 hours, that's 2,640w or 2.64 kw/h or $6.93/month.
Seems insignificant, but i guess it all adds up.

 

[rtparty]

Yeah, my skimmer is currently being powered by a Mag 12 rated at 110w.
So over 24 hours, that's 2,640w or 2.64 kw/h or $6.93/month.
Seems insignificant, but i guess it all adds up.

Yeah, that's just the skimmer pump too. Then throw in a return pump and maybe a pump for all reactors. You could be talking $15-20 a month.

Then the heater comes back into play. What if your mag pump is adding just enough heat that your heaters run less? It may be a wash to get a new pump if your heaters have to run more.

IMO people worry about heat way too much in our tanks. What if we get pumps that are really efficient but our heaters work double now? What have we really saved?

It's all a balancing act. I have found that a chiller is rarely needed with halides. Of course there are exceptions to all of this.

 

[clay12340]

You're not accounting for the possibility that your heaters MAY be running more now with the LEDs than with halides.

That could easily make up half the difference.

I've known for years that LEDs don't save as much electricity as some say. My electric bill hasn't changed since switching from LEDs to T5s to my current hybrid.

Like mentioned, your real savings is in the pumps. They run 24/7/365. You can save big money by dumping inefficient old pumps for newer pumps.

I've got no doubt that a more efficient pump is a larger savings. I just don't see halving the electrical costs of your lighting to be a poor savings especially when they don't carry that much of a premium outside of the top tier priced equipment.

As for the heaters running more. It just seems to be a very case by case thing to determine, and too hard to make a general statement about. I suspect reefers in warmer areas aren't going to see much more use out of their heaters especially in the summer, and their whole room is likely to be cooler without the lights shedding all that heat.

My particular scenario involves sumps in a basement. It keeps my native tanks cool. They typically stay in the mid to upper 60s, which is perfect for them. The water in my sump is going to need to be 10+ degrees warmer, so the heaters will basically always be running. I'll likely gain less of an overall savings due to the need to heat water. That said I still suspect that a heater is considerably more energy efficient at heating water than the MH bulbs.

 

[FlyPenFly]

I don't care about $100/year in this hobby.

I care about if the $3000 in SPS are coloring up and growing as quickly as possible in large colonies without any shading. Not saying that LED can't do this but the cost saving of LED power usage is on the far bottom of my list of priorities.

 

[sahin]

I don't care about $100/year in this hobby.

I care about if the $3000 in SPS are coloring up and growing as quickly as possible in large colonies without any shading. Not saying that LED can't do this but the cost saving of LED power usage is on the far bottom of my list of priorities.

This is my view as well.

 

[Fredfish]

You're not accounting for the possibility that your heaters MAY be running more now with the LEDs than with halides.

You are also not accounting for the possibility that you MAY need to run a chiller in the summer to offset the heat generation of your metal halides not to mention the cost of hardware. Whats the cost of a chiller vs a heater?

In the world of MAY that adds up to a win for LED.

What a lot of money is in absolute dollars is in the eye of the beholder. In percentage terms, reducing your power consumption for lights by 50% is a big efficiency gain.

Besides, that $94 turns into an extra 7 or 8 trips to McDonalds a per year. Yum! :fun2:

 

[Windirmere]

im willing to bet a heater is more efficient then a MH bulb at heating a tank

 

[rtparty]

You are also not accounting for the possibility that you MAY need to run a chiller in the summer to offset the heat generation of your metal halides not to mention the cost of hardware. Whats the cost of a chiller vs a heater?

In the world of MAY that adds up to a win for LED.

What a lot of money is in absolute dollars is in the eye of the beholder. In percentage terms, reducing your power consumption for lights by 50% is a big efficiency gain.

Besides, that $94 turns into an extra 7 or 8 trips to McDonalds a per year. Yum! :fun2:

I ran metal halide in the summer with zero heat issues. If I were in Phoenix or Vegas or some super hot place, I see the big savings there.

Here in Utah we have about 2 weeks of weather over 100°. Then we have months of weather in the 90s. I found no need for a chiller.

Again, it's all case by case and every tank is different. I still think people worry too much about heat.

 

[Fredfish]

I ran metal halide in the summer with zero heat issues. If I were in Phoenix or Vegas or some super hot place, I see the big savings there.

Here in Utah we have about 2 weeks of weather over 100°. Then we have months of weather in the 90s. I found no need for a chiller.

Again, it's all case by case and every tank is different. I still think people worry too much about heat.

Here by the great lakes, I had tank temperature problems even with only 30 watts of fluorescent over my 40G breeder. I could not even contemplate a reef tank unless I either use LEDs or a chiller. Sucks to be in a climate where it gets humid when it gets hot.

If ever there was a topic where YMMV applies...

 

[moondoggy4]

I live in Ca where we are in the tier system and anybody with a half way decent size tank say 100 gallons and up knows all about the tier system. So having a way to ramp down the lights can be helpful, if you have mostly softies you don't need as much lighting, a Kill-A-Watt is a very helpful tool, my return pump only uses 30 watts it is a Laguna 900. I pay about 29 to 39 cents kwh.

 

[jgalen0025]

I don't care about $100/year in this hobby.

I care about if the $3000 in SPS are coloring up and growing as quickly as possible in large colonies without any shading. Not saying that LED can't do this but the cost saving of LED power usage is on the far bottom of my list of priorities.

Plus 1
Raw energy saving is always the first thing touted as a pro for led.

 

[James77]

im willing to bet a heater is more efficient then a MH bulb at heating a tank

Of course it is....but the heat imparted to a tank is detracting from the total cost of running halides. Running LEDs may have a heater running more often, and adds to the total cost of running them.

 

[James77]

I don't care about $100/year in this hobby.

I care about if the $3000 in SPS are coloring up and growing as quickly as possible in large colonies without any shading. Not saying that LED can't do this but the cost saving of LED power usage is on the far bottom of my list of priorities.

+1

$10/month, $20 month or even more is negligible when you consider this hobby is an excess right off the bat. There are many more effective ways to save cash in the hobby and in life than tracking light electrical usage.