G
Guest
If I were to use 600 watts of CFL`s would it use the same amount of electricity as a 600 watt hps?? Or in other words would my electric bill be the same??
G
Guest
600 watts of electricity is 600 watts of electricity.
However, you'll get more light (and better growth) from the HPS because it puts out more lumens per watt and it's more intense light so it penetrates better.
Just my
However, you'll get more light (and better growth) from the HPS because it puts out more lumens per watt and it's more intense light so it penetrates better.
Just my
The hps ballast eats some juice too
The hps ballast eats some juice too
on top of the actual 600 watt bulb, probably say 50-60(?) watts more.
The 1000 watt H.I.D.'s actually absorbs about 1,100 watts of juice hourly.
Go with the H.P.S.,imho, you'll be glad ya did...
it has the par energy/ deep light penetration that fast growing plants love.
Any extra expense for electricity should justify itself with the much higher probable yield.
Happy Growing
The hps ballast eats some juice too
on top of the actual 600 watt bulb, probably say 50-60(?) watts more.
The 1000 watt H.I.D.'s actually absorbs about 1,100 watts of juice hourly.
Go with the H.P.S.,imho, you'll be glad ya did...
it has the par energy/ deep light penetration that fast growing plants love.
Any extra expense for electricity should justify itself with the much higher probable yield.
Happy Growing
Last edited:
G
Guest
footcandles
footcandles
par? that has more to do with the way humans perceive light no? just wondering in my own head, i know its not relevant here. thanks I.M. Boggled
footcandles
par? that has more to do with the way humans perceive light no? just wondering in my own head, i know its not relevant here. thanks I.M. Boggled
G
Guest
The reason I am asking is because I was going to use a 600 watt hps system with a conversion bulb to veg under. But if I can get away with the cfl`s then I might that route, that way I wont have to worrie about heat problems. Thanks
Sati
Sati
G
Guest
HPS IS KING, if you have a choice there is no contest watt for watt
HPS IS KING, if you have a choice there is no contest watt for watt
600 Watts of CF are going to run almost as hot if not hotter than the 600hps because of two things i can think of off the bat.
A. Surface area. instead of 1 hot spot to cool, you'll have a rack of bulbs to worry about.
B. CF's in general run warm, they are self ballasted, i keep a fan on them and still have had heat issues near the bulbs when using 400+Watts under a DIY hood/shelf in a relatively small passively vented cab.
Flouros dont last as long as HPS bulbs either and IME lose efficiency sometimes before a run is even complete and must be replaced with fresh ones.
Better off running High-lumen twin tube 4-pin compacts (expensive) or the hydro store has the 100+watt mogul based self ballasted twist in ones but they too run warm and cost an arm and a leg too. HPS is king.
hope this helps
cj
HPS IS KING, if you have a choice there is no contest watt for watt
600 Watts of CF are going to run almost as hot if not hotter than the 600hps because of two things i can think of off the bat.
A. Surface area. instead of 1 hot spot to cool, you'll have a rack of bulbs to worry about.
B. CF's in general run warm, they are self ballasted, i keep a fan on them and still have had heat issues near the bulbs when using 400+Watts under a DIY hood/shelf in a relatively small passively vented cab.
Flouros dont last as long as HPS bulbs either and IME lose efficiency sometimes before a run is even complete and must be replaced with fresh ones.
Better off running High-lumen twin tube 4-pin compacts (expensive) or the hydro store has the 100+watt mogul based self ballasted twist in ones but they too run warm and cost an arm and a leg too. HPS is king.
hope this helps
cj
G
Guest
the cfl'suse less electricty because of less heat adn more efficient ballast opertion. The cfl also generates less heat also requiring less energy to cool the effects of the lights. I and others us a combination of cfl's and hps's to achieve the best overall effect.
I use cfl's to keep the energy bill down, I have used both and I see the reduced cost of using cfl's over hps lighting.
I now only use 1 400w hps light and 3 125w cfl's for bloom and do quite nicely and save energy, not to mention the lower heat in the room.
Avid
I use cfl's to keep the energy bill down, I have used both and I see the reduced cost of using cfl's over hps lighting.
I now only use 1 400w hps light and 3 125w cfl's for bloom and do quite nicely and save energy, not to mention the lower heat in the room.
Avid
dubmantx
Member
Ive used CFL's and they dont really work in an open environment that well. If you have a small cabinet though they work real good. Id definately suggest the HPS over CFL for flowering. Might want to use CFL's in veg (dont need that many maybe 20w per plant). Thats what I do and It works pretty well and no need to go out and buy another ballast just for veg.
