Return to the Growing under Lights Forum
| Post a Follow-Up
Which is Cheaper to operate? T5 or MH?
| | |
Posted by hartfordgrower (My Page) on Wed, Apr 2, 08 at 10:30
Ok, so I understand that MH is more "efficient" than T5 in that it produces more lumens per watt. However, from what I've read, T5 has the following advantages:
1. runs cooler so can be placed closer to plants so less diminishing of light compared to MH
2. produces a greater % of light in the spectrums that plants actually use to grow.
I don't care about initial cost of equipment/ballasts/etc... Plants need a certain amount of footcandles of light in certain light spectrums to achieve growth and flowering. My question is, considering all of these factors, which will use less wattage while achieving the necessary footcandles at the plant, a T5 setup or a MH/HPS setup? |
Follow-Up Postings:
RE: Which is Cheaper to operate? T5 or MH?
| | |
| That is a close call, between t-5 electronically ballasted fluorescent and MH with vertical bulb and magnetic ballast. But remember, watts are watts. 400 watts of MH or MHP produces exactly the same amount of heat as 400 watts of fluorescent. By far the best plant light is ceramic metal halide. This has more red than an HPS and more blue than a MH. I recommend horizontal orientation for several reasons. |
|
|
|
|
