thatreedocta
Active Member
Might be a dumb question but will a 125 watt fluorescent save more energy than a 125 watt HID?
Do fluorescents save more energy than HID?
- Thread starter thatreedocta
- Start date
hsfkush
Well-Known Member
The light its self will produce the same amount of watts but with a Ballast added, you will be spending more on electricity. CFL's do not require a ballast or they have an inbuilt one or something.
I'm not entirely clued up on it though, so someone else will surely be able to correct/add to my statement.
I'm not entirely clued up on it though, so someone else will surely be able to correct/add to my statement.
thatreedocta
Active Member
actually it was a dumb question but not really. Went to local gardening store and they had a shitload of fluorescents. Basically a 125 watt fluorescent is the equivalent of a 80 incandescent light bulb as far as energy cost. Dont know about HID's but its probably similar. But yeah I know a watt is a watt but I wanted to know if one was more efficient.
stonerville420
Member
HID is going to be more efficient regardless of how you spin it. HID lighting puts off a higher watt/ usable light ratio, and provides a MUCH deeper penetration/ footprint as far as I understand. Any more experienced growers wanna chime in, I'd hate to spew incorrect information here, as I have no first-hand experience with HID besides checking out a buddies grow.
Nullis
Moderator
The simple answer is that the HID is more efficient than the fluorescent. There are a couple things to consider here, actually. One is luminous efficacy or the lumens produced per watt; the other is PAR or the photosynthetically active radiation- which includes only lumens within the spectral range which plants can utilize for photosynthesis.
This isn't a stupid question, only because it is an interesting concept related to horticulture indoors...and there are individuals who grow with banks of fluorescent or even CFL bulbs at least in part because they think it is saving them money. A CFL is going to get you 50-70 lumens per watt; a high output T5 might get you 70-100 lumens per watt.
But, a 600 watt high pressure sodium (DigiPlus) will give you up to 95,000 lumens which is 158 lumens per watt. Let's say HPS might give you 130-160 lumens per watt (a lower wattage bulb will output less per watt).
This Grow Bright 600 watt high output metal halide conversion lamp puts out up to 72,000 lumens, or 120 lumens per watt. Metal halides in general put out 90-125 lumens per watt. However, the other thing to consider about metal halides is that more of the light they emits is photosynthetically active.
Let's say you had three 125 watt fluorescent bulbs (actually drawing 125 watts each, not equivalent to) or an even larger # of lower wattage CFLs: you would probably be better off getting a 400 watt HID and would definitely save money on the electric bill with a 250 watt HPS while likely at least maintaining yield (if not improving it slightly).
This isn't a stupid question, only because it is an interesting concept related to horticulture indoors...and there are individuals who grow with banks of fluorescent or even CFL bulbs at least in part because they think it is saving them money. A CFL is going to get you 50-70 lumens per watt; a high output T5 might get you 70-100 lumens per watt.
But, a 600 watt high pressure sodium (DigiPlus) will give you up to 95,000 lumens which is 158 lumens per watt. Let's say HPS might give you 130-160 lumens per watt (a lower wattage bulb will output less per watt).
This Grow Bright 600 watt high output metal halide conversion lamp puts out up to 72,000 lumens, or 120 lumens per watt. Metal halides in general put out 90-125 lumens per watt. However, the other thing to consider about metal halides is that more of the light they emits is photosynthetically active.
Let's say you had three 125 watt fluorescent bulbs (actually drawing 125 watts each, not equivalent to) or an even larger # of lower wattage CFLs: you would probably be better off getting a 400 watt HID and would definitely save money on the electric bill with a 250 watt HPS while likely at least maintaining yield (if not improving it slightly).
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
I did a few fluoro grows; and it's not the lights that save you money, it's the lack of needed accessories. If you're growing fairly small scale, it's got upsides. You can run a ~1000w T5 setup with a box fan, mid summer, in a house with no AC, on days when it's over 100F outside; I know, I did it. You have to grow SOG or scrog to make it work though. Really, it's biggest upside is that it doesn't require a lot of cooling. I ran mine with a passive intake and a 30w exhaust fan, temps stayed below 80F at the canopy.
Nullis
Moderator
Obviously if the wattage is the same, the wattage is the same: the usage is the same. E.g. A 250 watt lighting fixture actually draws 275 watts and I think the same goes for fluorescent as well, but either way real world usage is roughly the same and 275 watts = 275 watts no matter whether being drawn for a fluoro or an HID.
The point I was trying to make is that the real difference is in the output and quality of the light, and there can be a substantial increase in lm\watt with HID. In the real world, people may start out with several of the highest wattage CFL bulbs they can find and continue to add more bulbs as the plants grow. Now, one could use 250 watts of HID as opposed to 420 watts of CFLs and the light output should be roughly equal.
The point I was trying to make is that the real difference is in the output and quality of the light, and there can be a substantial increase in lm\watt with HID. In the real world, people may start out with several of the highest wattage CFL bulbs they can find and continue to add more bulbs as the plants grow. Now, one could use 250 watts of HID as opposed to 420 watts of CFLs and the light output should be roughly equal.
Herb Man
Well-Known Member
No, I think you are wrong.
One of the advantages of High Output Fluorescents is that they give more than they take.
So for example a 54 watt T5 HO tube does not consume 54 watts to give 54 watts of light.
So If I use my 8 tube four foot T5 for 12hours then use my 400Watt HPS the next day for 12 hours, the 400watt HPS will cost more to run because it will draw those 400watts plus with the ballast also requiring juice.
Whereas in the meantime, my 425watt T5 will draw considerably less than 400watts.
That's one of the advantages of High Output Fluorescents.
T5 baby.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
My 8 bulb HOT5 actually draws 432 watts at the bulbs; with the ballasts, it's 488w total draw. T5's are just a lot cheaper to cool, and you can play with spectrums; that's their chief upsides. They aren't much more efficient electrically.