Cost of lights .....Yikes!!!!!!!!

[sedate]

nd i think me electric will be paid for by someone else as well.

Um. Wow.

At a typical utility rate of 10 cents/kilowatt hour, 8x1000w HPS's would cost just over $500/month by themselves, add in the A/C and ancilliary devices, and you should be a round $600/month for that grow.

. . . so if no one is going to notice that . . .

ffof,coir, lime, guano, seaweed,
act teas,big bud, bone,feather,alfalfameal, worm castings, perilite

Oh okay. There ya go.

With all those organics, I'd absolutely seed the soil with beneficial's as well - Great White or GH's KangaRoots - would be incredible with those amendment choices.

I had two prior harvest with a single 400 of more htan 5 ounces each time. IMO i get better each run as does the quality of the herb even with the same genetics.

Well that sounds to me like your ready to step up your grow operation - but I don't think you're going to find 1000w HPS systems priced less than $300ish. This seems to be the market rate if your aren't in North Cali or Denver . . .

not sure you'll be running 8 lights off a romex line, Gonna need some 8 gauge bro! 50 amps

^^^ This is correct.

You need 6/3 range wire for that application.

Romex standards usually start at 12 or 14 gauge - no where near where you need to be for that kind of amp loading.

 

[f1ydave]

We bought boxes of 6 on ebay and paid roughly $30 each bulb for dual-arcs ($225 shipped). Get a good ballast and it makes a brighter bulb.

Magnetic ballasts cycle the bulbs on and off 50-60 times a second. Digital ballasts cycle the bulbs on 40,000 times a seconds. There is a huge difference between the two.

We use Nexgen Digital 1k ballast, they are so efficient, bulbs are 30% brighter. We paid $280 shipped off ebay.com for buying 4 at a time. Lumatek ballast will make bulbs 20% brighter. This is of course over old school magnetic ballasts.

We use sun system magnum xxxl 8" @ 180 shipped off ebay

Dual-Arc 1000w $225 for 6 rated for 110k lumens, with a good ballast add 30% = 143k lumens, 132k lumens @ 20%

Red sodium @ $97 each for flower, but you dont need to change bulbs. Dual Arcs are awesome! Upgrade next grow for slightly larger yields.

You need to decide what you want to do...planning ahead is smarter imo. With a better ballast you can always go with a better bulb later on.

If you go with a cheap ballast now and expensive bulb to get a similar output you are stuck later on.

 

[sedate]

We use Nexgen Digital 1k ballast, they are so efficient, bulbs are 30% brighter.

Lumatek ballast will make bulbs 20% brighter

^^^ Um. That's nonsense.

Digital Ballasts offer improvements in efficiency and bulb-life - and are often a bit brighter than magnetic ballasts on 120V circuits due to regulated power supplies - but they are absolutely will not make a bulb 20-30% brighter.

That's just not even close to possible.

Magnetic ballasts cycle the bulbs on and off 50-60 times a second. Digital ballasts cycle the bulbs on 40,000 times a seconds. There is a huge difference between the two.

^^^ The is technically correct - but the "huge difference" between the two is mostly those large numbers.

The increase in cycling provides efficiency and bulb-life and protection from hot starts - but the bulbs are just on longer when the bulb is only operating at 60hz or so vs. 40k hz . . . the plants aren't going to notice a difference here.

Red sodium @ $97 each for flower, but you dont need to change bulbs. Dual Arcs are awesome! Upgrade next grow for slightly larger yields

Red sodium? Are you kidding?

What's the kelvin rating of those bulbs?

Cannabis has 4 photosyntheic peaks - two in the red/yellow and two in the blues - the dual-arcs are the better choice here for all-around quality . . .

But I have to say - 225 for six dual-arcs sounds too good to be true . . .

 

[Bobby Smith]

I bought my dual-arcs from that seller on Ebay - he's legit.

 

[Valid215]

I use the same generic dual arc bulbs from ebay, IMHO I love em, and @ $40 a piece, I dont think i'll be forking the $220 for each horti super blue

 

[Lost]

Holy damn thats a great deal if even 1/2 of them work! lol!

 

[Bobby Smith]

Holy damn thats a great deal if even 1/2 of them work! lol!

Lol, they work...........they also deliver the lumens they claim, as tested by my light meter.

EDIT: and if memory serves, shipping is VERY discreet as well - I think they come from a business called "motorsports" or something? Can't quite remember, but it's pretty nondescript - it's not like "Weed Lights Inc." or anything like that.

 

[fractal]

No reason to pay $130 for a hortilux bulb. Shop around and you can find the 1000 HPS bulbs for $80 max and 600 watt for $65. No reason to pay more, when you are in business to make money that's called overhead and in growing it really adds up fast, paying extra for all the stuff you need.

5oz on a 400 = 140 grams, 1.5 pounds on 1400 watts is less than half a gram a watt you should start small until you are pulling a pound per 600 or 2 per 1000 or else you are wasting lots of money and time.

 

[f1ydave]

^^^ Um. That's nonsense.

Digital Ballasts offer improvements in efficiency and bulb-life - and are often a bit brighter than magnetic ballasts on 120V circuits due to regulated power supplies - but they are absolutely will not make a bulb 20-30% brighter.

That's just not even close to possible.


^^^ The is technically correct - but the "huge difference" between the two is mostly those large numbers.

The increase in cycling provides efficiency and bulb-life and protection from hot starts - but the bulbs are just on longer when the bulb is only operating at 60hz or so vs. 40k hz . . . the plants aren't going to notice a difference here.



Red sodium? Are you kidding?

What's the kelvin rating of those bulbs?

Cannabis has 4 photosyntheic peaks - two in the red/yellow and two in the blues - the dual-arcs are the better choice here for all-around quality . . .

But I have to say - 225 for six dual-arcs sounds too good to be true . . .

Please do your own research and do not assume.

 

[sedate]

Please do your own research and do not assume

Excuse me? Assume what?

1) No source anywhere, outside of some highly qualified and dubious marketing claim, would seriously claim that digital ballasts produce 20 or 30% more light than a magnetic ballast. That is a seriously ridiculous claim.
2) No "red" lamp is going to compete with dual-arcs for cannabis growing - certainly not it's own
3) <$40/piece for a dual-arc is an absurdly low-price. Other posters say it's legit . . . but it's still shockingly low . . .

 

[Buddy Flowers]

"dont forget the electric bill all that will easily be over 1000 a month"


1 run 10 k watts and am under 1000

 

[ogtealover420]

"dont forget the electric bill all that will easily be over 1000 a month"


1 run 10 k watts and am under 1000[ So does this include your a/c and fans. Or is this your grow and your house too? Give me a run down of your situation if ya could.

 

[ogtealover420]

While there is nothing wrong with 12/240 v single phase systems (residential/light commercial). If you have a 3 phase system you are in excellent shape electrically speaking!

3 Phase in an industrial application can come in at the meter in either 120/208 WYE which means it has a Neutral (primary return to earth path), Ground (this is the mechanical ground wire that is secondary protection to earth and bonds the metal housings of all electrical equipment) and 3 'hots'. The hots will measure 120 v to neutral/ground and 208 v phase to phase.

The other system you'll find is a 277/480 v DELTA system and if you have a large machine shop or mfg facility this is the most desirable. This system allows smaller wires to be run since the current carrying capacity is met with the higher voltage thereby allowing smaller wires to carry the same current as the 120/208 3 ph systems allow.

voltage travels at 60 Hz or 60 cycles per second no matter what (in the USA). So by taking each of the 3 phases and moving them 120 degrees out of phase with the other phase (3 phases @ 120 degrees= 360 degrees - a full circle).

My point is that if you find yourself with a 3 phase service order as much equipment as you can i

I'll be happy to assist with any specific questions you might have with a particular installation.

Nationally there will be changes occurring very soon as to how we're going to be metered (have you had a new digital smart meter installed yet at your home or business?). The aim is to 'reduce our carbon footprints' and charge us based on time/date stamped usages with credits for efficiencies and self generated systems such as solar, wind and geothermal. .

Hmm good to know but i have no clue about phases and the 360 deal i gues I have yet more learning to do on this wiring issue. the owner claims he knows all about it and "it is not a problem" but I have my boubts so I want to understand what is goin on since it looks like it will be my time and money getting this up and running.

 

[ogtealover420]

So ihave decide to start with 2400 watts and some good old fashioned containers filled with my blend of coir/ffof/perilite/guano/seaweed/lime I will build a small room of 2x4's and plastic most likely and worrk my way up the ladder. I realy want to see an undercurrent with H&G + vertical lighting but ya know how it is.

 

[Bobby Smith]

So ihave decide to start with 2400 watts and some good old fashioned containers filled with my blend of coir/ffof/perilite/guano/seaweed/lime I will build a small room of 2x4's and plastic most likely and worrk my way up the ladder. I realy want to see an undercurrent with H&G + vertical lighting but ya know how it is.

Good idea, glad you weren't too stubborn to accept knowledgeable grower's input.

You can't become a superstar overnight - takes time, practice, and dedication.

Good luck.

 

[ogtealover420]

No reason to pay $130 for a hortilux bulb. Shop around and you can find the 1000 HPS bulbs for $80 max and 600 watt for $65. No reason to pay more, when you are in business to make money that's called overhead and in growing it really adds up fast, paying extra for all the stuff you need.

5oz on a 400 = 140 grams, 1.5 pounds on 1400 watts is less than half a gram a watt you should start small until you are pulling a pound per 600 or 2 per 1000 or else you are wasting lots of money and time.

Well I relate most of the low yeild to low yeilding but high quality strains that I had selected i could easily double my yeild by growing the northern lights or musty ice cuts i had but the potency was lacking. IMHO i was more than happy with what i got. I mean for the better part my herb was in the top ten percentile as far as taste and potency in my last couple of runs.

 

[f1ydave]

Excuse me? Assume what?

1) No source anywhere, outside of some highly qualified and dubious marketing claim, would seriously claim that digital ballasts produce 20 or 30% more light than a magnetic ballast. That is a seriously ridiculous claim.
2) No "red" lamp is going to compete with dual-arcs for cannabis growing - certainly not it's own
3) <$40/piece for a dual-arc is an absurdly low-price. Other posters say it's legit . . . but it's still shockingly low . . .

Digital Ballasts offer improvements in efficiency and bulb-life - and are often a bit brighter than magnetic ballasts on 120V circuits due to regulated power supplies - but they are absolutely will not make a bulb 20-30% brighter.

That's just not even close to possible.

^^^ The is technically correct - but the "huge difference" between the two is mostly those large numbers.

The increase in cycling provides efficiency and bulb-life and protection from hot starts - but the bulbs are just on longer when the bulb is only operating at 60hz or so vs. 40k hz . . . the plants aren't going to notice a difference here.

You admitted to understanding that Digital Ballast are more efficient, indirectly implying your understanding whyt Magnetic Ballast are inefficient. I suspect you still don't understand why this is.

You admitted that the bulb light is on longer, but also claim the plants wouldn't notice. Do you really think the plants wouldn't notice a better/longer light source? That this wouldn't make a difference? Do you notice when you are drinking cleaner water?

You stated "The difference is mostly numbers". LOL, that is exactly RIGHT! Numbers do not lie! Like I said, please do your own research, but since you refuse too. I'll lay it out for you.

I will do my best to explain this. It is not my intention to sound condescending and apologize in advance if I come across that way.

AC Power fluctuates and is short for alternating current. A magnetic ballast is only as effect as the current that is applied to it. (Power = Voltage X Current)

A magnetic ballast is a linear device, if the power changes so does the output of the ballast. Since power constantly fluctuates you have a constant uneven powerband effecting the ballast, power typically fluctuates 10% on local grids throughout the day, with many other factors that can effect that further, i.e. neighborhood power draw, business power draw, peak power, weather, quality; just to name a few.

For example, say the 240v line fluctuates (208v/240v) and drops just 20v to 220v, the ballast has just lost 20% of its effective power output, if it drops to 210v, that is a 30% drop, thus "dimming" the light. You have probably experienced extreme versions of this during storms or windy days, when the lights in your home suddenly dim.

This is where the claim that certain brands of digital ballasts are 20%-30% brighter than magnetic ballast.

With a Digital Ballast, you do not have these fluctuations. It is a constant 1000w of output at all times. The ballast acts as a voltage regulator. Digital Ballast are so efficient they even require a lot less power to operate.

I mentioned that I purchased (4) NextGen Digital Ballast, The main reason was that these are 97% efficient having only a 3% load. What does that mean? My 1000w ballast requires 30w to power itself. With a magnetic ballast this will be much higher, most cases it will be 150-300w or could be worse depending on the brand/quality.

Now add that to your power bill, 1150-1300+w x (Total Lights), 15-30% increase in wattage that is not necessary.

As far as the Red Sodium bulbs, I never stated running them alone during flower. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I was implying running them concurrently with dual-arcs, since he was talking about running 8 lights? "Ben" has had great success with this combination.

I told "ogtealover420" the reason I thought he should spend the money on a better ballast setup and a cheaper bulb now and how much easier later on, he could simply upgrade to a brighter bulb. Why spend $180 per bulb now for 8 = $1440 in bulbs? Get cheaper bulbs and better ballasts and hoods, IMHO.

I hope you have taken something away from this and you spread your new found knowledge of ballasts to those who need it!

 

[Bobby Smith]

That actually was kind of informative, in all honesty.

That being said, I only apologize in advance when I know I'm going to be a dick, i.e. "no offense, but....."

Also, I made the claim that you did about voltage drop (actually my AC repair guy told me and I simply repeated it) in the "run your lights at night" thread and I was told that the voltage drop was nowhere near what my AC repair guy had told me it was (said it could go from 220 to under 200, which burned out a part on my central air) on 100F days when the whole state is bumping their AC and the power company can't keep up.

 

[f1ydave]

That actually was kind of informative, in all honesty.

That being said, I only apologize in advance when I know I'm going to be a dick, i.e. "no offense, but....."

Also, I made the claim that you did about voltage drop (actually my AC repair guy told me and I simply repeated it) in the "run your lights at night" thread and I was told that the voltage drop was nowhere near what my AC repair guy had told me it was (said it could go from 220 to under 200, which burned out a part on my central air) on 100F days when the whole state is bumping their AC and the power company can't keep up.

Yes that is true. It may not be common, but there are a lot of factors can come into play. Older buildings will have more unstable power, etc.

FYI: most power plants never operate higher than 75% of max output anyway, even if brownouts are occurring.

My digital ballast will maintain from 90v - 260v.

 

[sedate]

It is not my intention to sound condescending and apologize in advance if I come across that way.

:evilgrin0040:

Like I said, please do your own research, but since you refuse too. I'll lay it out for you.

Oh. I'm getting excited.

You admitted to understanding that Digital Ballast are more efficient, indirectly implying your understanding whyt Magnetic Ballast are inefficient. I suspect you still don't understand why this is.

Actually, f1ydave, your post reveals that you don't understand why this is. We'll get there.

Do you notice when you are drinking cleaner water?

I'm not sure you could pick a less appropriate or more bizarre comparison . . .

For example, say the 240v line fluctuates (208v/240v) and drops just 20v to 220v, the ballast has just lost 20% of its effective power output, if it drops to 210v, that is a 30% drop, thus "dimming" the light

Um. Wow - of the several paragraphs that reveal what you don't know about electricity or electric loads, this might be the most revealing -

See - f1ydave - when an electric load is placed into a circuit of a given voltage - and that load consumes a steady amount of power - a voltage drop results in a higher draw of amperes to compensate for that voltage drop - and the wattage remains the same.

(Power = Voltage X Current)

^^^ That.

Since power constantly fluctuates you have a constant uneven powerband effecting the ballast, power typically fluctuates 10% on local grids throughout the day, with many other factors that can effect that further, i.e. neighborhood power draw, business power draw, peak power, weather, quality; just to name a few.

Of the various forces that you refer to that causes "neighborhood" voltage to drop - none of that really matters at some 10% of 120V.

10% is the typical tolerance that (non-integrated) electrical componets are designed with - so this is probably the worst number you could've used . . .

But anyway, the load will compensate immediately via amp draw and the device will not stop working or produce erratic output if the current jumps around from 105 - 130V.

Whatever the input voltage, the output at the bulb will still be 1000w - especially at 10%+/- of 120 or 220V.

With a magnetic ballast this will be much higher, most cases it will be 150-300w or could be worse depending on the brand/quality.

Naww. Any of the magnetic ballasts built in the last 10 years or so are very efficient by some historical comparison - I think you'll find magnetic ballasts typically run at about 9 - 12% efficiency.

So I agree for large scale growers, across so many lights, there are some significant cost advantages - but you are overstating the numbers a bit.

With a Digital Ballast, you do not have these fluctuations. It is a constant 1000w of output at all times. The ballast acts as a voltage regulator.

^^^ Um. Sort of.

Digital Ballast are so efficient they even require a lot less power to operate.

"Efficient" means "less power to operate" - so I'm not sure what this circular sentence is supposed to mean . . . but let's get to what you are trying to convey:

And the voltage regulator doesn't have anything to do with the electric efficiency -

A digital ballast has a voltage regulator in it - so the integrated circuitry - which does need a precision input voltage (unlike a giant magnetic core) - gets a constant voltage with which to operate.

Furthermore, voltage regulators use power themselves, so by virtue of the voltage regulator alone, the digital ballast would actually be less efficient than a magnetic counterpart if it were not for the one salient feature of a magnetic ballast that you, f1ydave, have completely missed:

See - f1ydave - the comparative efficiencies of digital ballasts come from the fact that it has far less mass to energize - less mass - less electrical resistance - more effiecient electrical usage.

The total electrical resistance of eight - sixteen ounces of silicon plated with platnium and gold - is far less than the combined electrical resistance of ten or fifteen pounds of steel and copper wire core.

It's sort of a basic fact of electronic gear - devices based on integrated circuits are always more efficient than devices based on coils.

Get it? It has almost nothing to do with output frequency, input voltage, voltage regulators, or anything else.

Now - let's get back to operating frequency:

You admitted that the bulb light is on longer, but also claim the plants wouldn't notice. Do you really think the plants wouldn't notice a better/longer light source?

Again - you clearly don't understand what it is you're talking about.

The bulb isn't "on longer" - it's just energized more times per second - with less energy per time - to keep the bulb lit.

So - a bulb operating at 60hz would get the top end of the sine-wave 60 times per second.

Where a bulb operating a 60khz would get the top end of the sine-wave 60k times per second - at 1/10,000th of the current.

But the cumulative amount of power applied to the bulb over that second - the peaks of the sine-wave summed together - is still the same.

So the bulbs operating at the higher frequencies tend to have better bulb-life since the 60khz is easier on the internal wiring of the bulb that 60hz - but that's it.

And If you think cholorphyll cares, then you have some serious misunderstandings about photosynthetic function.

So, just like I said, the difference is in the numbers - not the bud. And that's about it.

I hope you have taken something away from this and you spread your new found knowledge of ballasts to those who need it!

Ha. Ahaha.

ROFL.

:tongue0011:

Back at ya homie.