|
|
Post by MungO on Aug 9, 2024 19:54:29 GMT
What would happen?
Would the floodlights use the charge quicker than it could charge itself up?
Diminishing returns.
|
|
|
|
Post by mayland0s on Aug 9, 2024 20:32:57 GMT
What would happen? Would the floodlights use the charge quicker than it could charge itself up? Diminishing returns. Yes . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2024 21:04:03 GMT
Ok, I'm not an electrician or a mathematician, but I do like researching stuff like this.
I found out Midstream Lighting installed 70 LED floodlights at Brizzie. They claimed it would reduce the power wattage from 90kw to 77kw.
Now most of that energy will be lost as heat. Afaik the most efficient bulbs only convert about 40% of the energy consumed into light. As the lights are relatively new but a discontinued model, we can probably assume they fall just short of that. Say 35%.
Modern solar panels are only capable of converting about 20% of the light that hits them into energy. For the sake of making the maths easier, let's just assume we have a means of ensuring all the light hits the panels.
So we spend 77,000 watts of energy powering all our floodlights. About 30,000w are emitted as light. The solar panels are able to recycle about 6,000 of those watts into energy.
Each of the 70 floodlights draws 1,100 watts, so the solar panels would be able to power 5 of them. Run the cycle again and you'll probably have enough energy remaining to power a child's nightlight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fisch on Aug 9, 2024 22:13:40 GMT
LEDs only reduce sodium lighting draw from 90Kw to 77Kw? Seems a bit underwhelming. According to CHAT GPT... "Overall Energy Savings
Switching from sodium to LED lighting typically results in energy savings of around 50% to 75%."
|
|
|
|
Post by MungO on Aug 9, 2024 22:18:48 GMT
Ok, I'm not an electrician or a mathematician, but I do like researching stuff like this. I found out Midstream Lighting installed 70 LED floodlights at Brizzie. They claimed it would reduce the power wattage from 90kw to 77kw. Now most of that energy will be lost as heat. Afaik the most efficient bulbs only convert about 40% of the energy consumed into light. As the lights are relatively new but a discontinued model, we can probably assume they fall just short of that. Say 35%. Modern solar panels are only capable of converting about 20% of the light that hits them into energy. For the sake of making the maths easier, let's just assume we have a means of ensuring all the light hits the panels. So we spend 77,000 watts of energy powering all our floodlights. About 30,000w are emitted as light. The solar panels are able to recycle about 6,000 of those watts into energy. Each of the 70 floodlights draws 1,100 watts, so the solar panels would be able to power 5 of them. Run the cycle again and you'll probably have enough energy remaining to power a child's nightlight. You've just won post of the season right here 👏👏👏 This is fantastic posting. As I thought, it's diminishing returns. Like those 2p machines on the sea front and on Tipping Point. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2024 0:17:45 GMT
LEDs only reduce sodium lighting draw from 90Kw to 77Kw? Seems a bit underwhelming. According to CHAT GPT... "Overall Energy Savings Switching from sodium to LED lighting typically results in energy savings of around 50% to 75%." Ah, you're assuming lighting intensity stayed the same. The lights are actually 60% brighter. Source here. |
|
|
|
Post by Fisch on Aug 10, 2024 2:03:15 GMT
LEDs only reduce sodium lighting draw from 90Kw to 77Kw? Seems a bit underwhelming. According to CHAT GPT... "Overall Energy Savings Switching from sodium to LED lighting typically results in energy savings of around 50% to 75%." Ah, you're assuming lighting intensity stayed the same. The lights are actually 60% brighter. Source here.That'd account for it. All them lumens sploshing about the place 😁 |
|
