Electricity Question.

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
Hey guys, I am using 3 big cfl's right now and it keeps my light bill very low.
I'm looking into getting a 300 watt led light. I was wondering if the led will put off a lot more electricity, but do you guys have any idea around how much.

Say my light bill is 100 bucks when using my cfl's. How much do you guys think it would go up if I switched to led.
 

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
Hey guys, I am using 3 big cfl's right now and it keeps my light bill very low.
I'm looking into getting a 300 watt led light. I was wondering if the led will put off a lot more electricity, but do you guys have any idea around how much.

Say my light bill is 100 bucks when using my cfl's. How much do you guys think it would go up if I switched to led.
There's a simple formula for how much a light cost to run:
Watts/1000 x hours run x days run x KWPH cost.

Example: where I am in Georgia the average cost for power is 11.6 cents per kwh. So, a 600 watt hps lamp during flower stage (12 hours per day on) would look like this:

600/1000 x 12 x 30 x 11.6 = 2,505.6 amounts to $25.05 per month.

The problem with LED ratings is that they're padding the power most of the time. They'll count the number of actual lights and call it that amount of power when it really isn't. For instance, the Mars Hydro 300 watt light. It's not a true 300 watt light. It has sixty 5 watt bulbs, so they call it a 300 watt light when the reality is it's actually a 132 watt light.

So, that said, if you run that particular LED through the numbers, here's what it looks like:

132/1000 x 12 x 30 x 11.6 = 551.232 amounts to $5.51 per month.

But there's a rather huge difference in performance between the two, so you have to take that into account as well. For instance, at the end of the grow if you saved 120 to 150 dollars in power bill but wound up with 6 ounces less of product, is it really worth the savings?

There's a lot to look at before you decide. Most of the time, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. It comes down to what works best for you rather than how much it really costs. Are you growing just one or two plants for you only? Then I would lean towards an LED since yields aren't the main factor for you. Are you growing as a medicinal supplier? Well, then yields are a primary concern and you'll need to carefully weigh the power costs savings vs. whatever yield differences you may face.
 

emepher

Well-Known Member
Hey guys, I am using 3 big cfl's right now and it keeps my light bill very low.
I'm looking into getting a 300 watt led light. I was wondering if the led will put off a lot more electricity, but do you guys have any idea around how much.
By "big" CFLs, what do you mean? Are they the "100W equivalent" ones you'd use in a lamp, 42W bulbs that are beefier versions of those, or ones more the size of 1-liter or 2-liter soda bottles that actually use 100+ watts? And as TacoMac alluded to, a 300W LED light is not the same as a "300W" LED light. You want to be sure you are going by the actual wattage used so you can always do an apples-to-apples comparison, not the maximum wattage the diodes themselves are rated for, since LEDs are almost always under-driven in growing applications.

That said, if you are just growing for yourself in a small space, CFLs can work for a plant or two, or something like the cheap Mars "300W" (132W actual) might work fine. Or get two of those (haven't used them personally, just giving examples) - the quality is considered poor but when they work they are okay and easy, and $60 or so online is dirt cheap. The amount of light you needs depends on how much space/how many plants you want to cover, and any lighting technology will work if you set it up correctly. And for a personal grow your power bill probably won't kill you, no matter what type of lights you use.
 

2Beachbum

Well-Known Member
The amount of light you needs depends on how much space/how many plants you want to cover, and any lighting technology will work if you set it up correctly. And for a personal grow your power bill probably won't kill you, no matter what type of lights you use.
Very good advise.

That being said, the difference is gonna be fluffy buds.
42w cfls they proclaim is 100 watts does a decent job for vegging.
Never tried for Flower.The T 5 Bad boy is decent for Flower
Just you get fluffy buds, compared to HID lighting
Where you can get rock hard nugs.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
look at the watts the lights use

and compare ..

..easy

in most cases LED is a lot cheaper

good luck
I'm using 3, 68 watt cfl's.
I know that led's can be cheaper but the effect of the light is what I am wanting to know. How much better is an led compared to cfl or hps when it comes to how fast you can harvest the plant.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
There's a simple formula for how much a light cost to run:
Watts/1000 x hours run x days run x KWPH cost.

Example: where I am in Georgia the average cost for power is 11.6 cents per kwh. So, a 600 watt hps lamp during flower stage (12 hours per day on) would look like this:

600/1000 x 12 x 30 x 11.6 = 2,505.6 amounts to $25.05 per month.

The problem with LED ratings is that they're padding the power most of the time. They'll count the number of actual lights and call it that amount of power when it really isn't. For instance, the Mars Hydro 300 watt light. It's not a true 300 watt light. It has sixty 5 watt bulbs, so they call it a 300 watt light when the reality is it's actually a 132 watt light.

So, that said, if you run that particular LED through the numbers, here's what it looks like:

132/1000 x 12 x 30 x 11.6 = 551.232 amounts to $5.51 per month.

But there's a rather huge difference in performance between the two, so you have to take that into account as well. For instance, at the end of the grow if you saved 120 to 150 dollars in power bill but wound up with 6 ounces less of product, is it really worth the savings?

There's a lot to look at before you decide. Most of the time, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. It comes down to what works best for you rather than how much it really costs. Are you growing just one or two plants for you only?
Then I would lean towards an LED since yields aren't the main factor for you. Are you growing as a medicinal supplier? Well, then yields are a primary concern and you'll need to carefully weigh the power costs savings vs. whatever yield differences you may face.
Wow that's a lot of math lol. I am only growing one plant and it's an auto flower.
I'm growing just for myself to smoke.

My autoflower takes 8 to 9 weeks to harvest and when I used to grow with cfl's, it took a lot more time to harvest. I'm not worried about the cost per month, so that's not a factor.

I just really want to know if I get a 300 watt led will it take a couple weeks off of my harvest time? If this is true than I will definitely get an led.
I was looking at the mars hydro and I heard some bad things about them. The other is the viparspectra and I haven't heard problems with those.

So pretty much, what do you think. Would getting an led make the plant ready to harvest in 8 or 9 weeks compared to just using cfl's? I'm sorry for all these questions but you sound like you know what your saying. Thank you so much for your detailed description.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
Very good advise.

That being said, the difference is gonna be fluffy buds.
42w cfls they proclaim is 100 watts does a decent job for vegging.
Never tried for Flower.The T 5 Bad boy is decent for Flower
Just you get fluffy buds, compared to HID lighting
Where you can get rock hard nugs.
I never even thought about how the buds would come out. I remember when I grew with cfl's, the buds were fluffy.
Can't I get those nice hard nugs using an led?
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
By "big" CFLs, what do you mean? Are they the "100W equivalent" ones you'd use in a lamp, 42W bulbs that are beefier versions of those, or ones more the size of 1-liter or 2-liter soda bottles that actually use 100+ watts? And as TacoMac alluded to, a 300W LED light is not the same as a "300W" LED light. You want to be sure you are going by the actual wattage used so you can always do an apples-to-apples comparison, not the maximum wattage the diodes themselves are rated for, since LEDs are almost always under-driven in growing applications.

That said, if you are just growing for yourself in a small space, CFLs can work for a plant or two, or something like the cheap Mars "300W" (132W actual) might work fine. Or get two of those (haven't used them personally, just giving examples) - the quality is considered poor but when they work they are okay and easy, and $60 or so online is dirt cheap. The amount of light you needs depends on how much space/how many plants you want to cover, and any lighting technology will work if you set it up correctly. And for a personal grow your power bill probably won't kill you, no matter what type of lights you use.
I use 3, 68 watt cfl's. They are the very big ones, like a half foot long. I grow in a small closet so I don't have much space so do you think an led will grow the plant a lot quicker than cfl's?
 

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
If speed is the concern, then no. It's not going to make any real difference. At 300 watts, there is no single light that's magically going to knock several weeks off your grow time.

Anybody that tells you otherwise is selling you something.

Your grow time can be dramatically altered by your nutrient regimen and the amount of light and other environmental factors (temp, humidity, CO2 levels,etc.) combined, but you're not going to take roughly 300 watts of cfl out, put 300 watts of LED, T5 or HPS in and suddenly cut your grow time by weeks. That's just not going to happen.
 

emepher

Well-Known Member
I use 3, 68 watt cfl's. They are the very big ones, like a half foot long. I grow in a small closet so I don't have much space so do you think an led will grow the plant a lot quicker than cfl's?
Oh, nice! I see a lot of people trying to use a few little 13W CFL's, and they wonder why their plants are tiny, spindly, or give them 4g, but 200W of CFL is doable. I've seen decent success with 6 x 42W CFL's, and of course it was better after adding 100W from LED's.

More light is always better, of course, so I'd consider adding light. You could certainly do worse than what you've got, so if you have the budget to add light, do it, and maybe keep what you've got going on if you have the space. 300W of more light (or probably less than that if the light you are looking at is "300W" rather than 300 actual watts) won't kill you when the power bill comes. No light runs on air, but your current 204W plus 300W (or 132W, more likely) is probably of little concern. TacoMac did the math and showed his work up there in post #3, so he gets full credit, and I'll reiterate that you can expect to add about 5 bucks to your power bill, maybe $10, tops. And you'll like the results.

Switching to a 400W HPS rather than adding the LED is something a lot of people would probably recommend here, as it would get you a LOT more usable light for a similar monthly cost, but that would come with its own set of concerns, heat management being one. Personally, I'm only interested in COB LED now, but I acknowledge that any technology that gets you enough light can produce some good herb.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
If speed is the concern, then no. It's not going to make any real difference. At 300 watts, there is no single light that's magically going to knock several weeks off your grow time.

Anybody that tells you otherwise is selling you something.

Your grow time can be dramatically altered by your nutrient regimen and the amount of light and other environmental factors (temp, humidity, CO2 levels,etc.) combined, but you're not going to take roughly 300 watts of cfl out, put 300 watts of LED, T5 or HPS in and suddenly cut your grow time by weeks. That's just not going to happen.
Thank you a lot, you saved me 100 bucks. I should send you half lol.
Thats all I've been wanting to know. To get an led or not get an led.

I think my plants would grow faster under my 3 huge cfl's than a 300 watt led, I am prolly wrong though lol.
 

edwardvanhalen123456

Well-Known Member
Oh, nice! I see a lot of people trying to use a few little 13W CFL's, and they wonder why their plants are tiny, spindly, or give them 4g, but 200W of CFL is doable. I've seen decent success with 6 x 42W CFL's, and of course it was better after adding 100W from LED's.

More light is always better, of course, so I'd consider adding light. You could certainly do worse than what you've got, so if you have the budget to add light, do it, and maybe keep what you've got going on if you have the space. 300W of more light (or probably less than that if the light you are looking at is "300W" rather than 300 actual watts) won't kill you when the power bill comes. No light runs on air, but your current 204W plus 300W (or 132W, more likely) is probably of little concern. TacoMac did the math and showed his work up there in post #3, so he gets full credit, and I'll reiterate that you can expect to add about 5 bucks to your power bill, maybe $10, tops. And you'll like the results.

Switching to a 400W HPS rather than adding the LED is something a lot of people would probably recommend here, as it would get you a LOT more usable light for a similar monthly cost, but that would come with its own set of concerns, heat management being one. Personally, I'm only interested in COB LED now, but I acknowledge that any technology that gets you enough light can produce some good herb.
Hey buddy thanks for the detailed reply.
I am running 3 of those huge 68 watt cfl's. I can't even fit anymore around my plants, so it is getting as much light out of a cfl as it can.
I would never hang one of those small cfl's for lighting a living room.

I wish I could grow with an hps but the heat would be impossible for me to contain. I can't get a air filter or scrubber or anything like that because of my space.
I hear a lot about these cob led's, I'll have to take a look. Thanks again man.
 

Lordhooha

Well-Known Member
If your worried about energy cost do like I did get solar to run your house. I'm an network engineer and use this brand for everything. I setup solar to run my entire house and a grow room running two 1000 watt hoods and still end up getting paid by the power company. Now I run LED's and get almost 40 bucks a month from them.

https://www.ubnt.com/sunmax/sunmax/
 

emepher

Well-Known Member
If your worried about energy cost do like I did get solar to run your house. I'm an network engineer and use this brand for everything. I setup solar to run my entire house and a grow room running two 1000 watt hoods and still end up getting paid by the power company. Now I run LED's and get almost 40 bucks a month from them.

https://www.ubnt.com/sunmax/sunmax/
I'm worried about energy costs too, but not as worried as I am about the cost photovoltaic panels, inverters, and the ancillary installation costs. I love the idea of solar, for many reasons, but the upfront cash and time to ROI are major barriers for a lot of us. I'm a decent DIY'er, including with electricity, but I'd still want to pay an electrician to hook me to the grid and make sure I meet code, which is a consideration above and beyond the hardware costs. Maybe some day, but not tomorrow.
 

researching

Well-Known Member
Buy a kill a watt, figure out your cost per kw/h. Mine is $.11 enter the value into the kill a watt and everything will tell you an estimated cost and also your consumption so you can really see what and where your costs are. I should have bought one long ago.
 

Lordhooha

Well-Known Member
Guy's sweating a hundred bucks and you're suggesting thousands of dollars in solar arrays?
Lol I just thought hey why not. Seemed like a good solution......maybe not . I'm a network engineer and a veteran so new tech geeks me out. That's the only reason I've thought of getting the smart bee monitors.
 

iHearAll

Well-Known Member
lol i just stepped on my solar panel yesterday after moving it. well it broke. right in the trash.
 
Top