LED vs MH electrical usage

A

Auggie

Well-Known Member
I am real tired of paying $800 electricity bills. As in, real tired.

When I set up my room LED was just not doing the job, and very expensive. So, it was an easy choice for me to go MH. I have three 4 x 8 tables with two 600wt MH's over each one. I am thinking about getting caught up to the new century and hanging LED's over my girls. I have pretty much decided on Mars ... they get real good reviews here and everywhere - and their prices are not half bad.

I would like to find a way to compare apples to apples - so to speak. In other words: What size Mars will replace a 600wt MH? And how much will that pull in electricity?

Here's what I'm thinking: If the equivalent is the Mars 700 (and I'm not saying it is, I'm just saying ...) and it cost me $500 and it pulls 550 watts; when I compare that to the 600wt MH that pulls 600 watts and doesn't cost me anything to replace I have a hard time justifying the expense. At 16 cents per kwh it costs about $65 a month to run anything at 600wts for 24 hrs. If the LED costs $58 per month then it's not worth spending $500 on. See where I am going here?

Has anyone done an evaluation as to how much savings LED lights produce FOR THE SAME BANG?

I've been reading some of Sarah's posts ... I bet she knows. If I was smarter I could figure it out myself ... but, I'm not so, here I am.

Thanks for any help or opinions anyone can give. Swapping out 3600wts of lights is a major expenditure for me, and I just want to know how long it will take to get my money back with the savings.

~ Auggie ~
 
I think you will see big savings if use two mars2 700w over each table , each one draws 335w so for one table the watt draw would be 670w compared to 1200w or 1250w for the two 600w bulbs. Over the 3 tables it will save you 1740 watts.

I myself like the idea of using smaller panels spread out

4 mars2 400w panels per table which consume about 200w each for a total of 800w , about a 450 watt savings per table x 3 tables is a 1350w savings.

The overall savings is 1/3 or 33% using the 4 panels and 45% savings using two of the 700w panels per table.
 
OK, so, mathematically, this is what I come up with, assuming a $0.17/kwh cost for electricity.
This is per table.


2 Mars 700
-----------------
Cost ......................$561
Draw.........................670w
Mo Util LED cost.......$77
Mo Util HPS cost.......$137
....................... ------------------
Mo Svgs .................$60
....................... ==========
Break even
in months..................9


4 Mars 400
-----------------
Cost ......................$672
Draw.........................800w
Mo Util LED cost.......$91
Mo Util HPS cost.......$137
....................... ------------------
Mo Svgs .................$44
....................... ==========
Break even
in months..................15

Also, this does not take into account air conditioning savings, which could be substantial.

The main thing that I want to be sure of is that I am comparing apples to apples - in other words, both of the above setups are equal or better than two 600wt HPS. If the results are the same, it looks like there is some savings to be had here with three tables.

Thanks again,
~ Auggie ~
 
I think the four 400 are about the are better then two 600w

And the two 700 would be close to the same.

And if using the 4 400's they would grow more weed then the two 600 HPS , giving you a larger yield plus a watt savings.
As the whole table would be evenly illuminated allowing the sides to be as productive as the middle.
 
Yes, I was looking at the coverage specs ... the 900 covers a 4 x 4 area. The 400 does not ... and neither does the 700.

What do you think about two 900's? I have computed that out and my savings would be $35 per table per month and my break even is 19 months. BUT, I would be getting 200 extra watts per table. Might just be worth it. The coverage on the 400 is only 3 x 3; I fear that even staggered over the 4 x 8 table there will dimish spots.

Also, interesting to note that four of the 400's cost almost the same as two 900's.

~ Auggie ~
 
That sounds much better then the two 700's and is easier to deal with then the four 400's

19 months is a fast pay back period as well, plus you won't have to pay for HID bubs ever again.


The watt savings was the main reason I bought my panels, I also like that they are cool to the touch and don't require the bulky reflectors and external ballasts.
 
Auggie, I speak for myself, but I know others are watching and thank you for vetting this out. I'll be paying close attention to this one, thanks again.
 
IMO you need the same amount of LED watts as HPS/ MH watts to get the same results. If you want to cut you electricity bill by 50% search google for Joe Pietri and join the facebook group on advanced techniques to see what others are achieving :Namaste:
 
Does your opinion include Par numbers ?

ibaba said:
IMO you need the same amount of LED watts as HPS/ MH watts to get the same results. If you want to cut you electricity bill by 50% search google for Joe Pietri and join the facebook group on advanced techniques to see what others are achieving :Namaste:
Click to expand...
 
LEDBud said:
Does your opinion include Par numbers ?
Click to expand...

cannabis and plants have an amazing ability to adapt to the light source given, so an HPS at 140Lumens a watt, even if not specifically targeting the red and blue photosynthetic pathways precisely, is still throwing out a lot of light compared to most run of the mill LEDS at 80-100Lumens/W. Those LEDs target the pathways specifically but that benefit is nullified by being less efficient... catch my drift bro? and dont come back saying why are you talking about lumens and not PAR :) Im talkng about both.
Im talking about normal leds, not the top of the range thousands of $$ ones that might need slightly less watts compared to a normal HPS. And BTW I use LED not HPs, mainly for the lower heat.
 
ibaba said:
cannabis and plants have an amazing ability to adapt to the light source given, so an HPS at 140Lumens a watt, even if not specifically targeting the red and blue photosynthetic pathways precisely, is still throwing out a lot of light compared to most run of the mill LEDS at 80-100Lumens/W. Those LEDs target the pathways specifically but that benefit is nullified by being less efficient... catch my drift bro? and dont come back saying why are you talking about lumens and not PAR :) Im talkng about both.
Im talking about normal leds, not the top of the range thousands of $$ ones that might need slightly less watts compared to a normal HPS. And BTW I use LED not HPs, mainly for the lower heat.
Click to expand...


You have shown yourself to have little to no understanding of Grow lights , the more you type the more you prove your lack of knowledge.

HPS have more USELESS LIGHT then LED's, and they trail WAY behind LED panels in ALL of the Par values , the Values that induce growth.

The low wasted energy on useless light spectrum's and the High Par values of the LED panels is why you can use less LED watts to HPS watts.

Plants use PAR light THAT'S IT , all the other lumen's is WASTED energy.

Your understanding is flawed you should not be trying to teach when you are below student level.


The nonsense about run of the mill LED panels is hilarious

Thank You for making me smile , you have a great day.
 
It's not true that you need as much LED as HID. The same amount of PAR from LED takes roughly 2/3 as much power as HID. A 400W LED will generate roughly the same PAR as a 600W HID. (That's LED draw power).

And more smaller LEDs are better than fewer larger ones. LEDs beam, unlike HID. The effective footprint on almost all panels is about equal to the distance from the panel. So, at 24 inches away, the footprint is a 24 inch circle, at 18 inches, it's an 18 inch circle, etc. I've spent a lot of time studying and comparing PAR grids, and intensity falls off rapidly past that point. :cheesygrinsmiley: The manufacturers exaggerate.
 
and you ledbud have shown yourself to be a pompous ass troll who thinks he knows it all. I´m going to leave you to your ignorance. People who know just know, thats all. Peace bro :)
 
Sorry ibaba, but LEDBud is right on this one. The whole reason LED's are coming on strong is because of the targeted light range. The HPS, and MH lights are like a shot gun, and the LED's are like a riffle. Sure you can kill it with a shot gun, but it takes a lot of powder and shot, but with a riffle you get a good kill with one shot, a lot less powder and a lot smaller bullet. Now don't get hung on the watt to watt thing. In true watts of use LED's should be at 2/3 of HPS. So, for instance, if you have a 1000 watt HPS, then replace it with about 660 watts of LED, but in true power use, not 220 of 3 watt leds. That is not 660 watts no matter how they try to sell it like it is.:nicethread:
 
TheCropKing said:
Wow.. Every time I think I am convinced about how I'm going to setup my new room I come across a post like this and it brings me back to SQ 1. Led vs hid lol
Click to expand...

Ya know, when I first started indoor growing about ten years ago - the choice was easy. LED just did NOT have the nuts. But, technology has caught up. Electricity has gone up 20% in the last five years, and LED has helped us stay even.

I am going to try putting a poster of the sun on the ceiling of my room, with a couple of 60 watt light bulbs to see if I can fool my girls.

~ Auggie ~
 
For Me I like using the smaller true 180w LED panels as I can spread the light energy of multiple panels around evenly.
Which is why I promote using small panels over using a few high watt LED panels.

Using many panels over the plants is similar to but better then a light mover moving a HPS light.
Getting 35 to 40% more light energy per watt at the same time is the icing on the cake.


Using the 40% advantage my 3 Mars 300w panels with a 180w power draw each , consume 540w but perform more like 750 watts of HPS lighting.
 
Terp said:
I know all about PAR compared to unusable light so here is my thing. HPS and MH still have more useable light (par) because of their efficiency. HPS puts off 140 -150 lumens per watt. LEDs dont even come close to that with the colors that are used for growing. There are LEDs that have high efficiency (passing hps) but its white and turned up in lab conditions. These colored ones are still pretty low. Much below even 60% of an HPS

Here are some par footprints of some various LEDs compared to a 400w MH and HPS

As you can see the numbers are not much different. Not enough to cause a major shock to the plants.

Now here is some PAR (not lumens) readings from a 1000W HPS

HID Bulb Test Comparison Review: Hortilux, Ushio, Digilux, Baddass, SolisTek, Lumatek, Maxlume, GrowLite, Ultra Sun / Growers House Review Lab

As you can see a HPS still smokes the LEDs even in useable light. AND the LEDs numbers drop off very fast when you move off to the side. (reason I bought 2 instead of one)

So with this data, it does not make sense to me that they would experience such a shock. So Im still trying to wrap my head around this. I just know that if I cant get my LEDs down to about 12", I might as well be using t-5s

I really want them to work because I really like there ease of use and heat factor. Also it seems they grow better quality buds. Here is just one guy that had some test run in comparison.

We will see. Ill just keep lowering them down when they permit me and judge by the results. Going to mix up a batch of nutes with plenty of cal mag in a few and lower the lights 6" soon as Im done with this post.
Click to expand...

thank you terp for putting what I said so eloquently and with such nice examples. now y'all can see that even though hps is not outputting only usable light they are as good as LED because of there being much more efficient (150lm/w vs 80lm/w) therefore its better to replace 1:1 watt LED for HPS if you want the same results, unless using very high end LEDS :Namaste:
 

Similar threads

morphin
I need methods to reduce electricity bills
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
GrizzWald
GrizzWald
Buckshot
LED vs MH in veg
Replies
3
Views
7K
cgkone
cgkone
D
The Truth About LED Lights
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
133
Views
87K
Hybridway22
Hybridway22
A
CFL vs LED? Hard Decisions
2 3
Replies
40
Views
57K
akaman
A
J
LED lights and electrical?
Replies
1
Views
981
LEDBud
LEDBud
Back
Top Bottom