Solaris Led lighting systems

Status
Not open for further replies.
So for 2000 kWh you would pay $255 (that is .1275 per kWh)

600 @ .08
300 @ .14
1100 @ .15

Not bad at all for being in Cali!

Tanya, if you can grab one of your electric bills and confirm you rate... I will try to get an idea of what you will save. It would appear that you will be replacing (2) 400W MH and (2) 39W T5 with a single 450W PFO, correct?

As I remember you do not run a chiller now? What about room temp? Does the tank cause the AC unit to run in the new house?

Bean
 
er doing some math here the current pfo light uses 25 lights per bank and 3w leds so 75w per bank. now thats 150w for two versus a single 250mh. (in PFO's testing)
for a 48 inch tank thats 300w as bean said, versus 500w. so should be right.

bean im not sure your math is right on the 400w due to the numbers being talked about wrongly (not by you the pfo lighting is supposed to replace 400w mh, not be 400w itself as i understand it)

the new leds for the 400w replacement are 4.5w and since its covering another 6 inches lets give each light 40 bulbs per strip to replace 400w mh. (i think it will be less as its 4 x5 long and so i think it'll be another 10 - 15 again very rough guesstimate)

40x 4.5 = 180w x4 = 720w so you save 60w

for safety and alot of margin lets say the banks are 50 bulbs per area, thats 225w per bank. (still think its prolly closer to 35-40 due to the size front to back but just to be safe lets assume,

so 800w mh (2x400) versus thats 900w PFO if they stick to 4 banks at 50 lights (thats the absolute almost impossibility no reason to rate them that high ever.

i still think itll be 2 banks of 50 at 550w or maybe 4 of 40 a 720w. either way your saving a bit in power. Until we know how many lights are in each array for sure (are they using 2 bigger arrays or 4 smaller etc etc, i can only guesstimate.

before this renews again into a whos and whats, im not discussing the power to your house costs at all, until ppl post their actual KWH rates.

i still agree with beans rates there as far as what it "should" cost. that being said my town uses AEP, which is now charging us an additional 25% hike, but its not updated on the maps because they hiked the rate first then are going and asking for approval. if they do not get approval they refund the extra rate, but for now im paying .12 i think atm, ill have to check the next bill to be sure.


either way, regardless of the actual power savings, there is inherently quite a bit that while not truely scientific is good enough for anyone to agree on. ill state them with numbers if anyone wants to debate them :P


the lighting doesnt heat the tank as much. people have posted less felt heat, less actual tank heat, less chiller usage and the need to plug in heaters. that last one is important.

1. the less water heat. LEDS dont put out nearly the radient heat for the same distance as MH bulbs etc, due to the way the LED is made. while there is alot of heat, the LED itself is or can be cool to the touch (not sure on the luxeons because i dont have them here to play with, so take this as a general led statement.)

2. less usage of the chiller. as many people forget, a chiller pulls heat out of the water, and dumps it into the air. now if your chiller and your tank is in the same room, the heat is literally helping to raise your tank temp, as the water in the tank naturally settles to the ambient temp if left to cool(maybe within a degree or so) one reason why good venting (like Hahn has) can severely lower your bills even with MH hen also with the chiller not using power there is savings, this carries over to your house AC as well, it works less to remove heat from the chillers and lights where there is less to remove.

3 HOWEVER, if you have to plug in a water heater that is using 200w of power to keep your tank temp stable, you are actually creating the same problem as with the chiller in the room but in reverse. the heater is raising the tank temp using power, and the room is being cooled and trying to cool the water as well. your better off lessening the tank temp, or raising your A/c to run at the same temp as the tank, or isolate the tank in a room so that you can do this. otherwise to be honest your not saving nearly the power by the numbers that you think.


also as these posts have been made, the northern hemispere has been cooling off considerably compared to the summertime when this thread was started. so a better way of analyzing power is using a killa watt meter and or comparing the bills for the same months from each year (provided you dont change the tank equip at all).

I think the PFO setup is a great idea, I was at IMAC 06, i got to play with it, and talk to PFO as well as some of the larger names in the biz. I went as part of the WWM group , so dont take this as saying the PFO isnt a good idea or anything, im only analyzing "real" power usage as roughly as we can estimate.
 
They are 54w T5s and yes I have a 1/2 pacific coast chiller. As for the AC yes in the summer it does run alot allong with the chiller. I have my chiller plumbed outside the house and it is plumbed throught the wall to keep that heat outside. As of now my temp causes my chiller to run about an hour from what I can see.
 
I have an emergencey server replacement to handle this morning...(as usual the clienet has not backed up sufficiently). As soon as this nightmare is unfolded and put to rest, I will see what I can come up woth tanya. For now I will give you the quick version.

So lets say worst case:
1/2HP for 4 hours a day (350 Watts for 4 hours)
(2) 400W MH for 10 hours
(2) 39W T5 for 10 hours

That is 11 kWh a day. At your rate of .35 per kWh (i still don't trust that number :D) you pay $3.85 per day in lighting and cooling. That comes out to $115 a month.

It Will be replaced by:
450W of LED lighting for 10 hours a day
No T5s
The LEDs re so COOL that the chiller never runs.
So you have 4.5 kWh a month "best case" with the LEDS. You would pay $1.58 per day or $47.25 per month.

So comparing:

MH, T5 and CHILLER in its WORST possible operating scenario with the chiller running 4 times more than you have observed.

-=TO=-

PFO LED setup in it best possible operating scenerio that eliminates the need for a chiller altogether and negates the need for any other lighting.

And using the electric rate you have provided....

The net savings would be $67.75 per month.

Now remember you are going from 960W of lighting to 450W of lighting. So there is going to be a significant reduction in PAR (even if you take PFO at their word of 40% leaving 350W or so difference).

In reality with nationwide AVG electric rates and a realistic chiller scenario, the savings would be closer to $15 a month and the light output at least 60% less....

But wait, you could do the same by switching out the 400W halides with 250W halides!

Let me know if you want the detailed version! As you can see this is not as cut and dry as it appears to be.

I have assumed the wattage ratings on the PFO units are thier consumption, not their appearant brightness. As jager and others have stated, this may be wrong. I will look into it and we can change the numbers accordingly.

Bean
 
I’m not sure I want to jump into this, but…

I get my electricity from FPL. I’m pretty confident their residential billing rates are the same for all their customers. The rates are as follows:

$0.10072 per kWh for the first 1000 kWh
$0.12072 per kWh for anything above 1000 kWh

Air conditioning is, by far, the biggest driver for electricity usage for residents of central and southern Florida. Late fall through the winter, temperatures are mild enough that neither significant A/C or heating is required.

My electricity usage peaks at around 2,500 kWh in the August billing period and drops to around 1,700 kWh by the November billing period. This happens every year. (Electricity usage bottoms out in January or February at less than 1,500 kWh.)

The best way to determine the relative usage of electricity for the lighting systems for our tanks with a Kill-A-Watt. If you wish to include the cost of A/C, if your lights produce a lot of heat, you should compare your total electricity usage for a particular month this year to the same month last year. Even then, you have to account for changes in weather conditions from this year to last year. I used just a little less electricity this year compared to last (about 60 kWh), due to the weather.
 
Can we start a new thread and talk about the Solaris's features, growth rate, tricks and tips as this thread started out to be. I am tired of getting e-mails saying there is a new post, and finding another person who wants their KW's calculated. Your local Utility will do that for you. Talk about beating a dead Clownfish.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8877813#post8877813 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by owsi
Can we start a new thread and talk about the Solaris's features, growth rate, tricks and tips as this thread started out to be. I am tired of getting e-mails saying there is a new post, and finding another person who wants their KW's calculated. Your local Utility will do that for you. Talk about beating a dead Clownfish.

YES!!! Thank you!!!

Please post here if you start a new thread so the interested parties can find it.
 
OWSI,

with all due respect... a lot of this thread is about the energy savings that can be gained by switching to these lighting systems. Almost every bit of that "energy savings" information is flat out incorrect. I have brought the point up and those who have touted the savings have yet to respond with anything concrete and isntead read the PFO bullet points word for word.

A lot of this thread is about the color spectrum and growth rates vs MH, but anybody who has used hard science and logic to question the "sales pitch" has been shushed with more sales pitch and bullet points.

We have a guy who shut off 900W worth of light and replaced it with 400W worth of light and suggest an $100+ monthly savings and explosive growth rates.

We have a lot of people looking at buying these lights and the only thing they have to go by is 1) the PFO sales literature and 2) the unsubstatiated opinions from a handfull of beta testers.

Some of us want the facts, not the fluff. Some of us understand that there is no way that unplugging 800W worth of light and replacing it with 450W worth of light will result in a net savings of $113 a month at any reasonable utility rate.

Some of us understand that the LEDs are more efficient in watts per lumen or watts per PPFD but also understand that you can not replace 1000W worth of MH with 400W worth of LED and call it the same thing. Both may promote growth, but so would 600W or 500W of MH. In other words the MH itself could have been reduced to a more efficient system and also SAVED money every month.

I am VERY interested in this technology and how the systems fare in the real world. I am not interested in "happy customer reviews" that do not prove anything other than happiness with a product.

As has been shown here dozens of times... there are plenty of "happy customers" that are happy with garbage or sub-par products and simply know no better. They are not stupid, nor ignorant, they are just happy from their perspective. That certainly does not prove the value of the product.

I would like to see actual energy usage numbers and growth rates between two similar systems, not anecdotal evidence. The anecdotal evidence is starting to drive the opinion of these systems (great for PFO) but I want to know the truth so I can make an informed decision.

I can not take Amphibious' opinions with much confidence, because the reported energy savings just don't add up. I am sure he loves his new setup and for good reason. I would imagine he is doing his best to let people know why he loves his setup.

You want tips tricks and features, but those who provide them also continue to provide MANY unsubstantiated claims about efficiecny, growth, light coverage, light penetration etc. SOme of us raise an eyebrow when we see stuff like that... do you expect us not to reply or question?
 
That's why I will start a new Solaris thread for those of that want to take this back to what it started out to be. You can have this thread for your agenda. I will post here one more time with a link to the new thread when my new fixture gets here. Please leave your energy calculations here on this thread. Bye
 
i will look for it - thanks


<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8878142#post8878142 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by owsi
That's why I will start a new Solaris thread for those of that want to take this back to what it started out to be. You can have this thread for your agenda. I will post here one more time with a link to the new thread when my new fixture gets here. Please leave your energy calculations here on this thread. Bye
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8878086#post8878086 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by BeanAnimal

(partial quote)

OWSI,

I am VERY interested in this technology and how the systems fare in the real world. I am not interested in "happy customer reviews" that do not prove anything other than happiness with a product.

As has been shown here dozens of times... there are plenty of "happy customers" that are happy with garbage or sub-par products and simply know no better. They are not stupid, nor ignorant, they are just happy from their perspective. That certainly does not prove the value of the product.

I would like to see actual energy usage numbers and growth rates between two similar systems, not anecdotal evidence. The anecdotal evidence is starting to drive the opinion of these systems (great for PFO) but I want to know the truth so I can make an informed decision.


You want tips tricks and features, but those who provide them also continue to provide MANY unsubstantiated claims about efficiecny, growth, light coverage, light penetration etc. SOme of us raise an eyebrow when we see stuff like that... do you expect us not to reply or question?
If you want actual energy usage numbers and growth rates between two similar systems, I suggest you buy a Solaris system and do the research necessary to satisfy your need. Then you can report back here, your findings. That's the surest way to get what you want because no one understands what you are after better than yourself.
 
But let's face it, for most of us the biggest attraction to the LED lights will be energy saving. Avoiding this subject is almost the same as avoiding talking about how much skimmate a skimmer can pull when discussing which skimmer is better.

With the Solaris LEDs out and used by many fans for so long, I am sure someone can come up with a chart to at least estimate the overall electric saving. Is it possible to compare notes on this one?

Amphibious, most of us potential buyers are not argumentative, just want some assurance, to ask us to drop a few grand just to find out how much electric cost we can save did not seem reasonable.
 
I'm not suggesting everyone drop a few grand to find out how much electricity can be saved. I suggested it to beananimal because he wants more quantitative information from a group of people that aren't equiped to give him what he wants.
 
Since installing the Solaris on my 135, I have been able to disconnect and remove a 4 ton room AC which ran 24/7 to keep up with the heat input from the MHs and the heat generated from the Chiller which ran 24/7. Now the chiller runs for short periods (3 to 4 minutes sporadicly through the day, doesn't run at night at all as far as I can tell. I'm up a lot through the night hours.

The result is my energy consumption is down substantially, in my humble opinion. I don't have any interest in metering everthing individually to pinpoint what, when, why or where that energy is saved. Yes, that makes all this anecdotal which isn't good enough for some! I think, by the number of lights I've sold without one complaint, other people are satisfied to take my word for it or to find out for themselves.

I know there are going to be improvements in LED technology in the future. If that makes me a "beta tester" that's fine because that puts me way ahead of the nay sayers in the industry.

I love my Solaris!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8878200#post8878200 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Amphibious
If you want actual energy usage numbers and growth rates between two similar systems, I suggest you buy a Solaris system and do the research necessary to satisfy your need. Then you can report back here, your findings. That's the surest way to get what you want because no one understands what you are after better than yourself.

You have contributed again to the thread and tried to paint my posts as invalid or looking for something that is unavaliable.

Your posts have touched on energy savings and growth rates here and at anotehr dozen websites, with both subjects being the basis of most of the conversations:

The conclusion seems to be "Less Energy usage and great, if not altogether better, growth rates"

You have yet to address a single point I have made other than to attempt to discredit my motives. You may not have the answers I am looking for, but you also appear to be avoiding the question.

You seemed willing to provide "qauntitative information" several times already and I have simply asked to take a harder look at the numbers. These would include your kWh rate and other energy consumption related parameters that would either sunstantiate your eneryg savings or show them to be attributed to something other than just chaning lights.

You seem to be reporting BETTER growth with MUCH LESS light, not just less electricity.

This is also without bringing in many of the points hahn tried to talk about several pages back.

Jacmyoung hit the nail on the head. The "sales pitch" is great but we need to talk about the realty of the system and see if it hold up to the sales pitch. Instead of talking reality, we just keep looping through the sales pitch :)

I look forward to your added input. I think several of us would be willing to donate a kill-a-watt to you for testing purposes. A PAR meter would also be worth looking into (we may even be able to come up with a loaner).

Bean
 
Amphibious, your anecdotal evidence is fine for me, I don't want anyone to run out and buy a meter, anecdotal evidences will do as long as other people can echo the same results.

I suspect most of us don't have a dedicated room AC to address the heat and moisture issues from the tank, so the evidence maybe a little subtle, but there should be enough months now to simply compare the before/after electric costs and draw some correlation, whether on average someone has seen consistent drop in electric bills, if so by how much.

Such information should be readily available, in fact PFO should ask its satisfied customers to volunteer such information as testimonials and publish it here if possible. I think it will be a great service to the members and also help the business.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8863265#post8863265 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by owsi
Same here, 23" lens to sand Acro's in sand bed doing great. Come summer here in Arizona this might be my first year running a heater in July. Pat always takes my call if he is there, great to talk to him, especially when you consider how busy he must be. I have a slight problem with my unit, as said before my replacement Fixture should be here Tuesday. No deposit, no hassle, he told how to fix it, sounded simple but I felt uncomfortable, so Pat said he'd send the unit out the next day. Now when it goes to watt in=watt out, yes true, but watt out is not necessarily same amount of radiated heat energy. E=MC2 allows for change of form. If I my HQI Mag ballast with 2X150wattDE's in a confined area and do the same with the PFO 60" and run for 12 hours, I feel the PFO is more efficient and gives off less heat. The lights both give off (by skin feel) about the same but the ballast gives off way more radiant heat the all 3 PFO power supplies. Not scientific, but my living room is staying cooler since switching. The most important point and the reason I purchased this unit is what can be done with the controls of this light. Today I brought up the whites after allowing an adjustment/acclimation time. When someone comes over I can adjust colors for show, when they leave, back to optimal growth lighting. I feel I made a good choice getting the Solaris for appearance, if it saves me money too, great. Our Power company is asking for a 26% rate increase in 08, so it just might save alot for us here.
Bean never addressed this post, on the issue of 300 watt MH versus the 375watt Solaris giving off less heat. Not scientific but I believe the Whole unit overall puts out less heat. I agree watt in=watt out as far as energy goes but that does not necessarily mean all the watts are going to heat energy at the same level.
 
I did address the post. I agree that a 300W MH radiates less heat directly into a fish tank than the same 300W worth of LEDs.

However both units "put out" the same amount of heat. Watts are Watts. Put em both in insulated boxes and both will cause a thermometer in that box to rise at the same rate and to the same temperature. The "insulated box" is akin to the room your tank is in for our purposes. Yes you coudl nit pick some difference in the type and wavelengths of the energy and how they are absorbed and conducted through the room... but all in all they are the same.

SO 300W MH vs 375W solaris... the 375w SOLARIS puts more energy into the room. Again this is pretty basic stuff. Now the feeling of "warmth" in the room is dependent on many things. A standard fireplace can appear to "heat" a room. But in reality the net heat can be negative because of the air drawn out of the room. You would have a hard time explaining that to somebody standing in front of the fireplace.

Bean
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top