View Full Version : A more "Green" system
Jamokie01
08/22/2007, 11:36 PM
With utility prices constantly rising and a world finally trying to become more "Green", I'm wondering what ways people have designed their systems to be more efficient. Anyone out there using geothermal energy to heat or cool tanks, or does anyone have more information how a heat exchange system for your tank might work? What kind of equipment would be needed? I know natural light is occaisonally used to suppliment tank lighting, has anyone taken this a step further and used solar energy in any other ways? There are alot of solar powered water pumps available, they dont seem to have made their way into the hobby yet though. Reccommendations on high efficiency lighting, reflectors, pumps, powerheads, and anything else applicable would be greatly appreciated. Im not currently planning a system change, I just think this could be a very useful topic for a hobby that is already taking so much from nature, not to mention from our wallets.
clown2be
08/22/2007, 11:46 PM
I saw the topic and its GREAT. I have cut my tank down so much with pumps , lighting, heater, chiller , ocean motion, phosban reactors, and you name it. My style today is the simple tank. I've be doing this for over 8 months and my tank still is great and my elcet bill has gone from over $1000.00 last summer to $180.00 this summer. I call it the SIMPLE TANK. I'm trying less and less every month and seeing how my tank gets effected. I've seen my SPS incrust more instead of growing branches without extra flow. other than that seems o.k. I even turn my 1 halid off for 2 days a week and no effect on color.
slang
08/23/2007, 06:04 AM
check this out.http://reefrancher.com/gallery/reefrancher/other_sun_tube_installs
Jamokie01
08/24/2007, 05:28 PM
I wish I lived in an area that got enough sun to make solar tubes feasible, but here in Youngstown Ohio, its a little on the cloudy side. The airforce built a base near here because I guess we get the most frequent cloud cover in the Eastern US.
Izshocker
08/25/2007, 05:25 AM
Anyone think of using solar panels to power everything.
ReefingBuddha
08/25/2007, 06:14 AM
clown2be - anychance we could get more detailed information about what you used to run, including which pumps and such, and what you run today? Please also include any extra work you have to do, waterchanges as such, and if at all possible some pictures of your tank a year ago and today. This would be very much appreciated. Thank you in advance.
ashrem
08/25/2007, 07:25 AM
Think reducing photoperiod and/or going a day or two a week with the lights off is a good way to start. Myself I got a 8x54 tek T5 and I have taken two bulbs off and turn off the lights a day a week. It gets cloudy outside every once in a while. Wish I own rather than rented, I would definately put in some solartubes.
Jamokie01
08/25/2007, 12:49 PM
I like to leave the lights off once in a while, maybe 2 or 3 times a month. The corals look amazing the next day, very extended. Except the xenia, its not fond of dark days.
grallster
08/25/2007, 05:19 PM
Looks as if the Solaris LED light systems would probably save alot of electricity--not only because of the efficient lighting but also less heat (so less need for fans and chillers).
I'm not sure it would save you much money though (maybe in the long, long run)!
ILoveLlamas
08/25/2007, 09:56 PM
Anyone have any info on green energy certificates? I know there is some way to buy certificates that pay your power bill, and the money goes towards adding green energy to grids. The power you may be getting is probably still from a plant, but the "green energy bonds" get more green energy added to the overall grid. neat concept. I've heard about it a lot, but never found out how to get them....
Jamokie01
08/27/2007, 12:32 PM
I think its gonna take a few more years before LED tank lighting really becomes viable. After a few years, more companies will be making the product, giving more options ("bulbs", color temp, sunrise/sunset effects, etc) and more aquarists will have used them and will be able to better explain the pros/cons, not to mention all new systems have a "break in" period to work out any unforseen kinks. And the current price is definitly prohibitive.
I have heard about green energy from your power company, but havent looked into it or heard any details.
Anybody else? Beananimal I figured you would have posted something by now.
tperk9784
08/27/2007, 02:01 PM
When I started designing my tank I took great interest in keeping energy costs to a minimum.
My tank is 24 x 24 x 20 I chose to go Barebottom due to lower lighting needs of the tank.
I chose Powerheads instead of a closed loop for more energy efficient flow.
I tried to pick lower wattage pumps when I was picking return pumps and the Pump for my CR.
tgunn
08/27/2007, 02:26 PM
I started my tank with a large beckett skimmer, fed by a PCX-70 pump which used 300w, and a large sequence closed loop pump drawing 330w.
I've since replaced the skimmer with a large recirculating needlewheel, which is gravity fed from my tank -- uses 180w now.
I've also replaced my sequence closed loop pump with two Tunze 6101 streams - these use 70w total.
Total power savings is approx $15 per month or around $186 per year.
miwoodar
08/27/2007, 03:02 PM
I agree tgunn...I'm using stream pumps rather than a closed loop too. This comparison is pretty interesting: http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/volume_3/cav3i1/Powerhead_test/powerhead_comp.htm
I also decided not to plumb my tank to the basement. It was a tough decision since I already had the pump.
I also run my AC at 79 and keep evaporation high enough so I don't need to run a chiller. My tank is usually between 79.5 and 81.5.
Jamokie01
08/27/2007, 03:22 PM
Thats an interesting article, I wish it was a bit newer and included the hydor koralias.
miwoodar
08/27/2007, 03:59 PM
Yeah - I've always wanted to expand the information to include other pumps just out of curiosity but haven't ever gotten around to doing it. The circulation pumps that are more common in today's closed loop applications are more efficient in terms of gph/watt than the external pumps included in the comparison. The stream pumps are still more efficient though.
tgunn
08/28/2007, 06:35 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10646238#post10646238 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by miwoodar
I agree tgunn...I'm using stream pumps rather than a closed loop too. This comparison is pretty interesting: http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/volume_3/cav3i1/Powerhead_test/powerhead_comp.htm
I also decided not to plumb my tank to the basement. It was a tough decision since I already had the pump.
I also run my AC at 79 and keep evaporation high enough so I don't need to run a chiller. My tank is usually between 79.5 and 81.5.
I would have used a PCX-40 for my basement sump return if I didn't already have the PCX-70 I used now. That'd bed another 220w of power savings..
I keep my tank around 78F via evaporation (fan over sump). Because of the streams and recirc skimmer I can do this. With my large closed loop and skimmer pumps last summer I struggled to maintain 82F with a fan over the sump and the A/C running hard all summer.
dascharisma
08/28/2007, 07:14 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10645760#post10645760 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tperk9784
When I started designing my tank I took great interest in keeping energy costs to a minimum.
My tank is 24 x 24 x 20 I chose to go Barebottom due to lower lighting needs of the tank.
I chose Powerheads instead of a closed loop for more energy efficient flow.
I tried to pick lower wattage pumps when I was picking return pumps and the Pump for my CR.
Although I prefer BB tanks, I think a properly setup bb tank will use far more energy than a sb tank. The main reason is the amount of flow needed to keep the bottom free of detritus. A sb tank demands lower flow to keep the sand in place.
As for the water clarity increasing in a bb tank, and thereby reducing the length of time you need to run your lights (or lower wattage bulbs) I don't buy it. A well run sb tank will not have water clarity problems so dramatic as to significantly change the amount of light penetration.
Lastly, a bb tank needs a ton of skimming power to be effective long term. A big skimmer will need more "juice" than a smaller one of the same design.
Brad
grallster
08/28/2007, 07:27 AM
I put a small window AC unit in my fishroom so I can close the door when it's nice and open the windows in the rest of the house (I don't mind 80 in the house if there is a breeze). Now I'm not obligated to crank the central air just to keep my tanks under 80.
tgunn
08/28/2007, 07:33 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10651013#post10651013 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by grallster
I put a small window AC unit in my fishroom so I can close the door when it's nice and open the windows in the rest of the house (I don't mind 80 in the house if there is a breeze). Now I'm not obligated to crank the central air just to keep my tanks under 80.
I know what you mean...
I have a feeling in my case I'd probably save energy with a setup like that or a split chiller. I imagine it's more efficient to cool just the tank or fish room than the entire house. :)
Too bad I can't put a window A/C in my basement fish room. Doh! :)
tgunn
08/28/2007, 07:34 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10650920#post10650920 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by dascharisma
Although I prefer BB tanks, I think a properly setup bb tank will use far more energy than a sb tank. The main reason is the amount of flow needed to keep the bottom free of detritus. A sb tank demands lower flow to keep the sand in place.
As for the water clarity increasing in a bb tank, and thereby reducing the length of time you need to run your lights (or lower wattage bulbs) I don't buy it. A well run sb tank will not have water clarity problems so dramatic as to significantly change the amount of light penetration.
Lastly, a bb tank needs a ton of skimming power to be effective long term. A big skimmer will need more "juice" than a smaller one of the same design.
Brad
I don't know that BB tanks would use far more energy as a rule. My tank had 48x turnover with sand, and it has 48x turnover running barebottom. Same skimmer, everything else.
Never had a problem with sandstorms either with this much flow.
Tyler
Jamokie01
08/28/2007, 11:46 AM
Im a strong advocate of DSB, but I disagree that running BB will use more energy. With the efficiency of tunze streams, it doesnt take much wattage to turn your tank into a tidal wave. Not to mention there are some efficient pumps you can use for your skimmer if your willing to spend the money. And I personally know people who have switched from 250watters to 150 after going BB with no ill effects on coloration.
Jamokie01
08/30/2007, 10:52 AM
Bump
tperk9784
08/30/2007, 12:35 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10650920#post10650920 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by dascharisma
Although I prefer BB tanks, I think a properly setup bb tank will use far more energy than a sb tank. The main reason is the amount of flow needed to keep the bottom free of detritus. A sb tank demands lower flow to keep the sand in place.
As for the water clarity increasing in a bb tank, and thereby reducing the length of time you need to run your lights (or lower wattage bulbs) I don't buy it. A well run sb tank will not have water clarity problems so dramatic as to significantly change the amount of light penetration.
Lastly, a bb tank needs a ton of skimming power to be effective long term. A big skimmer will need more "juice" than a smaller one of the same design.
Brad
As others have pointed out Higher flow in the tank does equate to a lot more power and I think you will find that many BB'rs need to reduce their photo periods or even change to lower wattage bulbs to keep from negatively effecting corals. The most common reason I have seen attributed to this is water clarity due to the lack of SB.
The only point I will agree is that most BB tanks run larger skimmers than their SB counterparts but I tend to see that most people oversize their skimmer anyway.
hahnmeister
08/30/2007, 01:28 PM
Ive been into this for some time now. You can go back and find this thread: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=550482&perpage=25&pagenumber=1
Since then, the practice has caught on more here it seems (that, or just more people are posting about it).
Anyways, here are my suggestions to save on your electrical bill:
-use natural sunlight. If you can use natural sunlight, go for it. Its more economical and effective than solar power, as solar power has a pretty high startup cost, and even the most efficient systems are only converting about 10% of the light they take in. A skylight or solatube costs a fraction of this, and means you can skip alot of your bulbs, reflectors, etc... and your heat levels are significantly lower since sunlight only provides radiant heating. Even the most efficient bulbs (halides) still waste about 75% of their electricity on conducted heat. Even as far north as I am, its still loads of light considering our tanks are about 2' deep on average, and in the wild the corals are 5-25 meters deep.
-If you cant use natural sunlight, use the most efficient lighting possible... and no, I dont mean LED's (yet). The most efficient bulbs are still 10,000K halides. Dont like all that yellow? Well... going with a bluer halide isnt the best idea either, as outputs tend to halve if not more. Rather, use a bulb that can make blue light more effectively than halide... use T5s. A MH+T5 system is the best combo per watt that you can get. T5s can make blue light better, and halides can make daylight better. Together... whoah. Also, whenever possible, use light movers. Click on my little red house to see how mine is. I love it, and my corals do as well. A few other hobbyists in my club are trying them as well, and very pleased with the results. They make one halide do the work of what 2, sometimes 3 would be required to do. I use mine on the main display, and with the supplimental T5s, it doesnt even mess with the 'viewability' of the tank... I would actually say it enhances it. And as far as bulbs, reflectors, ballasts.... dont cheap out... you will most likely end up spending more later to replace them, and you wont be getting the 'bang for the buck' that you could have otherwise. Use lumenarc3 style pendants, since a larger reflector like this will carry light farther than a smaller pendant. Use quality bulbs and ballast combos for the best output per watt. Also, get a PAR meter. The $300 that they cost is nothing compared to what knowing actual light levels will do for you in the long run. Because of my meter, I was able to figure out the minimal amount of lighting needed for my tank, and still have SPS growing like weeds (Im looking at a frag-a-thon or bust in the next 4 months here... and the tank is new!). I estimate my meter has saved me about $1000, and easily saved those in my club about the same. Having a concrete way to measure light levels w/o having to guess is a huge saver. I dont have to guess how much, or when I have to change a bulb... I know.
-Use low wattage, high flow pumps whenever possible. The only high-head pump on your system should be the return pump, and that doesnt even need to be that large. I use an eheim 1250 for my 125g... things are great. This adds less heat to the tank as well. Use tunze streams/prop driven pumps rather than closed loops. The major argument against Tunzes is that they stick out in the tank... well... not if you plan ahead. Look at Iwan's tank... a 200g with 3 tunzes that you cant even tell are there. I am going to be using a page from his methods and making aragacrete pillars for the back of my tank (to cover the overflow/back as well) to allw the tunzes to sit inside a 'shelf' that will allow them to blend into the back wall as well as a bulkhead and piece of loc-line, if not better. If you must do a closed loop, look into ReefFlo pumps. 3600gph for 140watts with minimal heat transfer is still a great deal. Pair it up with an Oceansmotions or some 'sea-swirls' and that one pump will be hitting more spots in the tank with its output than a fixed output.
- Vents. Use a canopy, or seal the room your tank is in from the rest of the house. Heat and humidity wont show up on the electric bill from your tank, but your AC will be working double time if not more. I have helped a buddy seal off his basement sump room/frag tanks and it dropped his monthly bill by a couple hundred dollars right there... just from the AC. I use a canopy that is designed to be vented to the outside via a 100cfm fan and a 4" duct. That way, all the hot and humid air goes right outside (spouses like to note the smell has been removed as well).
-Use evaporative cooling, and a good size top-off. Use fans to remove heat from the tank's surface. The amount of heat that a fan can remove through evaporation is more than you might think because the phase change allows water to absorb more heat energy than the body of water its coming from... so you can actually cool water to 80 degrees F in a 90 degree room with fans alone. Just be sure your ATO is up to the task. Also, due to my low electrical use, my 125g doesnt even have fans running yet in the middle of summer, and it stays 80 24/7.
-use efficient skimmers. That dual beckett skimmer thats using 250 watts of electricity might be replaced by something smaller, as well as 1/10th the wattage.
-use aragacrete. Its cheaper than live rock. Its more adaptable than live rock. Its lower 'impact' than LR. Reef Ceramics are all the rage in the EU. Then you just pick a few nice pieces of 'show' LR to 'seed' the system. You can also buy dry LR by the pound for about $2 from multiple places. Its mined from dry land which was once a coral reef. After a few months in the tank... its 100% LR.
-Use passive systems whenever possible. Got a recirc skimmer? Try to feed it from an overflow. The skimmer can be smaller because it will perform that much better... getting water from the surface and all, and you will eliminate a feed pump. Click my red house for more. My return pump feeds my skimmer, my Ca reactor, my phos reactor, and carbon chambers, as well as circulating the refugium and being the return. Not bad for 20 watts (kill-a-watt reading on my eheim 1250).
AS far as BB vs DSB... I dont see the point of debating. You are going to provide the flow that your corals need. You could have 90x turnover in a tank w/ sand (I have), and a BB with much less because otherwise your zoas and rics might get blown right off their rocks. Besides, as long as you use efficient flow methods with either type, the actual savings will be negligable.
RichConley
08/30/2007, 01:50 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10633678#post10633678 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by grallster
Looks as if the Solaris LED light systems would probably save alot of electricity--not only because of the efficient lighting but also less heat (so less need for fans and chillers).
I'm not sure it would save you much money though (maybe in the long, long run)!
Except they're less efficient, and create more heat per watt than MHs.
Dont believe PFO's advertising. Its nothing but FUD.
RichConley
08/30/2007, 01:53 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10650920#post10650920 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by dascharisma
Although I prefer BB tanks, I think a properly setup bb tank will use far more energy than a sb tank. The main reason is the amount of flow needed to keep the bottom free of detritus. A sb tank demands lower flow to keep the sand in place.
As for the water clarity increasing in a bb tank, and thereby reducing the length of time you need to run your lights (or lower wattage bulbs) I don't buy it. A well run sb tank will not have water clarity problems so dramatic as to significantly change the amount of light penetration.
Lastly, a bb tank needs a ton of skimming power to be effective long term. A big skimmer will need more "juice" than a smaller one of the same design.
Brad
I'm sorry, but none of this is accurate. SB tanks need just as big skimmers and just as much flow as BB tanks. They just take longer to fail when they dont have those things.
The Less Light thing has nothing to do with water clarity, it has everythign to do with nutrient levels. Food and light go hand in hand with SPS corals. Less nutrients means corals can survive less light. Running 400w on a low nutrient tank will kill your sps.
Jamokie01
08/30/2007, 02:02 PM
Great post hahnmeister
tperk9784
08/30/2007, 06:46 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10668990#post10668990 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
The Less Light thing has nothing to do with water clarity, it has everythign to do with nutrient levels. Food and light go hand in hand with SPS corals. Less nutrients means corals can survive less light. Running 400w on a low nutrient tank will kill your sps.
Everything I have read says BB tanks have less dissolved solids in the water column. wouldn't this also have an effect on light penetration?
I also believe that you are right, less nutrients in the water mean less zoox to burn off to get good colors.
Maybe they go hand in hand.
ziggy222
08/30/2007, 07:47 PM
i'm running my daughters reef on 60 watts plus a 50 watt heater.its a 10 gallon tank with 2 LED panels with a total of 248 bulbs under 20 watts.the 10 gallon sump is run by a quietone pump 13.5 watts,a 28 watt coralife pc for the chaetto,and a 50 watt heater.
my 55 gallon reef runs on 331 watts plus 100 watt heater.216 watts t5,10 watts skimmer,the sump pump quietone3000 40 watts,pc light for chaetto 65 watts,plus a 100 watt heater.
i think i'm doing as good as possible for now.i could replace the rest of the lights with LED but i'm not sure i like them yet.
hahnmeister
08/30/2007, 11:46 PM
http://www.personal.psu.edu/sbj4/aquarium/other-pics/power-conversion.gif
The power of LED's lies in their ability to be focused into almost laser-like beams of light that diffuse less. So their 'delivery system' is what makes them good, and their future potential will be awesome. But whats out there right now, as you can see... isnt really all that great. For a wide tank like a frag tank or something more than 18" front to back... they are pretty dark, and not all that efficient.
dendro982
08/31/2007, 06:33 AM
Great post, hahnmeister!
I'm also using the natural sunlight - the only problem is that it will require temperature controller (with cooler or movable shades) or a human attendant. Temperature in a sunny day raises quickly and the weather is unpredictable...
Can you give more details on venting outside? I researched this some time ago, but the heating costs should jump up immediately, when there are -30C outside :(
And in short (or link) about sealing the fish room - does it mean covering all the walls and ceiling with dry wall for bathroom use (the green one)? Is there a way to make the ceiling, at least, removable for inspections?
Thanks.
Back to the topic: the way I see the energy conservation, is keeping the tanks with inhabitants, that prefer to live at lower temperatures, doesn't require additional light to an ambient, daily or heavy feedings, have very few of them, so the system is more or less self-supporting, excluding some water changes and/or alkalinity additive.
If I'm not qualified to say so, sorry ;) (hint on another thread, expecting a storm on my head).
ziggy222
08/31/2007, 07:24 AM
its true about them LEDs i pointed a 6 by 8 inch panel around the room and it was like a mag light lol.the beem is so narrow i had to use 2 panels for a 10 gallon tank and i should of used 3 panels cause you can just make out the space between the 2 panels where its not as bright.it also took a long time for the corals to adjust to it,which makes me wonder if its even the correct spectrum for coral or if their just relying on its intensity to get the job done.
RichConley
08/31/2007, 09:01 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10670993#post10670993 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tperk9784
Everything I have read says BB tanks have less dissolved solids in the water column. wouldn't this also have an effect on light penetration?
I also believe that you are right, less nutrients in the water mean less zoox to burn off to get good colors.
Maybe they go hand in hand.
BB tanks have less dissolved solids than poorly run sand bed tanks.
People need to stop pushing this myth that sand bed tanks dont need flow or proper skimming.
hahnmeister
08/31/2007, 12:07 PM
dendro982,
Well, for a climate like that, I would vent during summer, and then just keep the fans off when its cold out. Thats what Im going to do on mine as well. Ill just seal up the canopy in winter all together. Heat shouldnt be a problem with your tank as much though, natural sunlight and all. The light would most likely need supplimentation in winter though... not much... but something more than just to add more blue. I dont think that with the natural lighting that you should need controllers for the sunlights. My suggestion would be to just have shades that you can adjust manually, and then a PAR meter ($300 Apogee)... so that way you KNOW exactly what light levels you are getting. Then you can adjust the light in summer to be what you need... usually something like 500 at the top, and 150-200 at the bottom for a daily average. I dont think you have to worry about heat though. If you have the equal of 4x400watt halides through sola-tubes or skylights, you will still only be getting 1/4 the heat, because you dont have any ballasts, bulbs, etc... only radiant heat.
As for sealing up the room... Greenboard is an option, but then you have to paint it. FRP panelling is another option, and I think you might like it because then you could make it removable.
Regards.
Jon
Runfrumu
08/31/2007, 05:24 PM
I run my halides 6 hours a day instead of 78. I'm more careful now about saving money for the tank than on it. I'm pretty quick to turn off any light in the house that doesnt need to be on.
dendro982
09/01/2007, 06:35 AM
hahnmeister: Thank you, will think about it. FRP panelling sounds very attractive, have to check how to mount it on the ceiling and how to make removable seam seals.
Pity, than there are no miracle solution for heat recovery in the winter. For a summer only now I've ever greener way ;) : the open windows and wind across the house, except the time of the heat wave (+30C :( ). No central AC, of course.
Direct sunlight: so far all is regulated manually, vinyl shades and 12" fan. After water temperature reaches 82F, have to start cooling. The condy anemone, together with the babies Tridacnas, are the good indicator of the light required (and overheating too), until the better times for a PAR meter :D
After this thread I started to check similar information, there was mentioned possibility of using programmable thermostats for the central heating for a stopping tank heating or starting cooling, until borderline temperature is reached.
Very useful thread: so many possibilities, listed in one place. Thanks, people!
tperk9784
09/01/2007, 08:24 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10674574#post10674574 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
BB tanks have less dissolved solids than poorly run sand bed tanks.
People need to stop pushing this myth that sand bed tanks dont need flow or proper skimming.
I don't see where I said sand bed tanks don't need flow or proper skimming.
By poorly run do you mean under skimmed?
I would think that simply due to the nature of having sand you would always have higher dissolved solids than a tank with no sand.
Elliott
09/01/2007, 09:18 PM
hahnmeister
your suggestions on how to save on your electrical bill are outstanding, probably the single best post I've read on RC.
thank you
kirstenk
09/02/2007, 01:20 AM
The most efficient bulbs are still 10,000K halides. Dont like all that yellow? Well... going with a bluer halide isnt the best idea either, as outputs tend to halve if not more. Rather, use a bulb that can make blue light more effectively than halide... use T5s. A MH+T5 system is the best combo per watt that you can get.
I tend to think that going with a higher kelvin MH bulb would be more "Green".
For every T5 on the tank, we must consider the energy and materials used to manufacture, package and ship them plus the waste from that process vs only Halide use.
I used to use 330W of VHO but now I don't because I switched to 12K MH's. I've reduced which saves energy on my end and the suppliers reduce as demand has gone down.
My corals are just as happy. :)
DrBegalke
09/02/2007, 07:55 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10645760#post10645760 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tperk9784
My tank is 24 x 24 x 20 I chose to go Barebottom due to lower lighting needs of the tank.
I.
How does sand increase the lighting needs?
LockeOak
09/02/2007, 08:13 PM
One thing I've noticed after switching my 10G tank to a bare bottom is that if the bottom of the tank is kept fairly clean (clear of detritus) there's quite a bit of reflected light coming back up. I don't know if it's enough to make a big difference, but with glass on all sides there's a lot of light bouncing around in there that otherwise would just get absorbed by the sand bed (especially when it gets natural sun!) Of course the bottom will probably get covered in coralline algae sooner or later.
EnderG60
09/03/2007, 04:16 PM
easy one I plan to employ on my next system.
Ground loop cooling. After seeing one in action the results are amazing.
Other stuff Ive seen/heard about that seems to be a great idea.
3 phase pumps(still need to research some more but seems EXTREMELY promising, like in the 5000gph range at 80w!)
using smaller pressure rated pumps for the return(way smaller when current is being provided in other ways) as low as 2-3x turnover isnt a bad thing when you dont have to worry about current.
using the sun is a no brainer.
BUY A KILL-A-WATT, recently got one and been playing with it alot, really shows you whats using the power and where you should make changes.
Run reactors off your return pump or the your drain(gravity is just as free as sun light)
As far as lighting goes im still not sure which is better 10k halide with actinics(T5 HO of course) or simply running a 14 or 20k bulb. I plan to test this once I get my t5 ballast replaced(and try and get my hands on a xm 10k bulb) kill a watt will tell once i get around to it. I just wish I had a PAR meter to play with as well.
Elliott
09/03/2007, 04:32 PM
EnderG60: very good suggestions. I'm exploring ground loop cooling here in Arizona, don't know how deep in the ground I need to go, have to do a little more research. I'm intrigued by underground cisterns as well for temperature control. Natural lighting here in Arizona should be optimal. Also, elevated surge tanks can also be utilized for flow. What is a 3 phase pump and how does it use less electricity?
waldomas
09/03/2007, 04:55 PM
With many of you mentioning smaller skimmers, I suprised none of you consider running your skimmer when your lights are off.
I have heard the skimming is more efficient during the dark time anyway? It could cut the power used for skimming in half!
waldomas
09/03/2007, 04:57 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10694287#post10694287 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by waldomas
With many of you mentioning smaller skimmers, I suprised none of you consider running your skimmer when your lights are off.
I have heard the skimming is more efficient during the dark time anyway? It could cut the power used for skimming in half!
Although, you may want to prolong feedings until closer to lights out! Hmmmm.....
hahnmeister
09/03/2007, 05:23 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10685249#post10685249 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kirstenk
The most efficient bulbs are still 10,000K halides. Dont like all that yellow? Well... going with a bluer halide isnt the best idea either, as outputs tend to halve if not more. Rather, use a bulb that can make blue light more effectively than halide... use T5s. A MH+T5 system is the best combo per watt that you can get.
I tend to think that going with a higher kelvin MH bulb would be more "Green".
For every T5 on the tank, we must consider the energy and materials used to manufacture, package and ship them plus the waste from that process vs only Halide use.
I used to use 330W of VHO but now I don't because I switched to 12K MH's. I've reduced which saves energy on my end and the suppliers reduce as demand has gone down.
My corals are just as happy. :)
A 10,000K bulb and a 20,000K bulb does not mean a green look. It doesnt work like color addition (where blue and yellow makes green). Ooooooohhhh, you mean going bluer would be more efficient... Lol. :bum: No, not really. The most efficient halides are the 3000Ks, then the 6500Ks... just going from those to 10,000K cuts your output in half. Then, going from 10,000K to 20,000K often cuts in half again. Phosphor based bulbs start with the blue end of the spectrum as a 'base'... and the phosphors make blue much better.
Lets compare: Take a 400watt 20,000Kish bulb... its output is most likely rivaled by many 10,000Ks at 250watts (unless its an Aquaconnect 14,000K... hard to beat that bulb, dont get me wrong, but its also about 500watts on a HQI ballast). So you can get the same PAR with a 250watt 10,000K, and then with the extra wattage, you can add a rows of T5s to suppliment the blue and actinic (reall, all you need is blue since 10,000Ks have loads of actinic already... more than a 20,000K... they just lack the blue). So in the end, you end up with a 'dayblue' look, which IME, corals tend to color up better under anyways, esp the red and pink corals, AND you end up with about 50% more output for the same wattage in the end. That 400watt halide wont have as much output as that 250watter with 2x54wattT5s and its more wattage. I used to be a fan of just using halides only... but not any more... not since T5s. The 'look' in the end is less sterile as well. Sorry, but you just dont get the same coloration on corals with 20,000Ks and blue 14,000Ks (Aquaconnect and pheonix) as you do with a full spectrum bulb. As for the extra equipment... yeah... I hear ya... but T5s in the long run should be very competitive with halides as far as replacement costs. The new bulbs dont even contain mercury anymore, and will last 2 years easily if you keep them cool.
hahnmeister
09/03/2007, 05:30 PM
As far as cooling loops in the ground... good idea. Just make sure you can spring for a Titanium heat exchanger (saltwater safe). Sometimes just having your sump on the basement floor, or adding a heat-sink tank (an additional tank like a sump that just contains water to slow the rate of heating) is enough. Evaporative cooling is all I have ever needed though... that and effective venting. I figure that the tank is in a room that is otherwise AC'ed...
Otherwise, funny you should bring the skimmer thing up. I only run my oversized skimmer at night... because it barely gathers anything during the day... and at night, during the reverse-cycle, is when the skimmer does the most to keep the pH higher. My skimmer is a recirc copy of an ATI bubblemaster 200, direct fed from my overflow. Keep in mind that if you only skim from 11pm-8am (thats about what I do now), you might need a larger skimmer than normal to keep up. I forgot to mention this because the main reason I only skim at night is to keep the noise down during the day when the living area is in use... and at night, when everyone is asleep, and skimming is at its best anyways... skim away!!! That, and honestly, I need to put another dozen fairy wrasses in my tank before it can even make enough skimmate for my skimmer to handle.
Elliott
09/03/2007, 05:55 PM
hahnmeister: I'm a little confused by your lighting post, can you give me the simplified summary? :)
EnderG60
09/03/2007, 07:07 PM
Actually you dont have to spring for a Ti heat exchanger, the awsome results I spoke of were of about 40 feet of thin wall PVC burried 10 feet down. Then just hooked up a pump to it that ran off a temp controler.
The only thing that worries me is the possibly stagnant water in the lines durring cooler days getting into the tank.
Elliott
09/03/2007, 08:13 PM
EnderG60: can you elaborate? how does the temperature control work?
hahnmeister
09/03/2007, 09:14 PM
EnderG60.... thats why an exchanger gets used. Then the cooling water and the tank water are kept on two seperate circuits, to avoid contamination/leaking problems.
Jamokie01
09/03/2007, 11:07 PM
Yea, Id be too afraid of something shifting or settling and having a pipe crack, come home to a muddy tank. Ewww.
RichConley
09/04/2007, 12:59 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10689259#post10689259 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by LockeOak
One thing I've noticed after switching my 10G tank to a bare bottom is that if the bottom of the tank is kept fairly clean (clear of detritus) there's quite a bit of reflected light coming back up. I don't know if it's enough to make a big difference, but with glass on all sides there's a lot of light bouncing around in there that otherwise would just get absorbed by the sand bed (especially when it gets natural sun!) Of course the bottom will probably get covered in coralline algae sooner or later.
Your WHITE sand is absorbing light now?
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.