budfriend
- 234
- 28
Log the KillaWatt Meter Total from the 600w ballast plugged into the wall for 12 hours.
Then Log the KillaWatt Meter Total from charging the battery bank that runs the 600w ballast for 12 hours and you will see that it takes more KWH of GRID Power to charge the battery bank than it does to simply run the ballast off Gird AC Power.
Take pictures of the KillaWatt Meter Readings and show us whats up.
I feel you brother, How much is your current bill now? and what do you think it would be normally( I think you said $650) thanks
Exactly. A watt is a watt is a watt... The only way this would be beneficial is if you were using solar, wind etc.This would work if you have no other options,but you lose too much in the conversion. The watts per panel converted to ac will keep the power companies in business a long time. JK
Exactly. A watt is a watt is a watt... The only way this would be beneficial is if you were using solar, wind etc.
I keep seeing the same theme in so many posts concerning you "saving money" this way. But wasn't it your intention in the beginning to be able get OFF THE GRID, not to save money?
Personally, as long as it's not costing me a great deal more to run a setup like this, I'm definitely "down" for the power company not knowing that I have 3 or 30 lights burnin!
CORRECTION: A KW/HR is a KW/HR used and that's what makes ELECTRIC BILLS!! Nethier of what you both say makes any since at all...:indifferent0023: Your words shows you haven't done your homework. So go back to school or stay around and be schooled makes no differance...:itwasntme. A watt is a WATT is A watt is correct in the since of how many kilowatts your watts pull..So it's all is KW/HR usage when it comes to ELECTRIC and you both could not be more INCORRECT of what your saying that a charger will use more KW/HR then 2-600watters. Shows again you have only judged but not VENTURED........ ;] I am living proof and the proof is in the PICTURES. It's as simple as this UNTIL one tries i guess there will always be those left behind...good day fellow farmers..:rauch08:
It has nothing to do with hating, man. It's using logic and a VERY fundamental understanding of electronics to correct this misinformation.BBM....the way I see it, 50 Cent said it best:
"....if the haters hate, then let em hate, and watch the money pile up......"
:dull
Your logic is completely broken dude. How about for an experiment control you run the setup for a month on your inefficient battery system, then the next month run it directly off the grid. There is absolutely no way your electric bill would be any cheaper with this system.
Dude you want to blow hot air up some skirts that's fine I spent too many years as a marine electrician to listen to your hot air. If you are into saving money you are wasting your time. If you want to go offline I could understand. But then why waste your time buying chargers and using them. I could see somewhat keeping them around for long time grey days. But I would just switch over to the grid on those days,less power since you will not have the loss in the conversation. You are pulling more amps for your lights using your system rather then running 240 off the grid. So right now you are having a bigger signature of using power,and that is what you seem to be wanting to hide.
Also those of you that want to look into this because a 300 dollar inverter is going to put out a crappy sine wave which will miss with electronics if you use any. It would be no problem for mag ballasts and I would think with digital ballasts also but I would look into that. JK
What is the efficiency rating of your inverter? What is the surge cap. rating? then you lose what you put into your batts at least 20%, then add the loss thru the cables. I sorry guy it's math,no emotions. JK
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?