Re: VHO Efficiencies
Doug Skokna wrote:
>Greg Tong wrote:
>>Yes. And there's no comparison. T8s win hands-down. The efficacy of VHO
>>lamps (lumens per watt) is comparable to incandescent lamps. They're not
>>energy "efficient" at all.
>I don't see that. The Grainger catalog shows incandescents (Phillips 100
>watt, "soft-lite") at 17 lumens/watt, VHO's (60", 4100 dK) at 66, and T8's
>(60", 4100 dK) at 95.
>Clearly, the VHO's are not as good as the T8's but these data show them
>superior to incandescents.
Perhaps I should have written that VHOs and incandescent lamps are
comparable in that both of them are not considered energy "efficient." In
the lighting industry, VHOs are not in the energy-efficient category. You
can see why as Doug points out--T8s provide 50% more light for the same
watt of electricity.
(Of course, VHOs have their place. If you can fit only 4 tubes over your
tank and want more lumens than four T-8s can provide ...)
San Francisco, CA, USA
gtong at sirius_com
"Every infinity is composed of only two halves."