# Heaters



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

So what's cheaper to run. A high wattage which is on a shorter time or a lower wattage that runs alot longer?

:fish:


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

Interesting question? I keep my house warm. I'm running two 200 watt heaters. When I added the 125 my electric bill went up $22.00 (two heaters, three filters, air pump). I'm also curious if it would save me a little money?


----------



## Andynater (Sep 23, 2012)

Its all gonna depend on run time. Your only drawing when the heater comes on. To calculate it out the difference if any should be minimal. But room temp, gonna make more or a difference I would think.


----------



## cich2it (Jul 23, 2012)

Hey Smitty;
This may seem like a dumb answer but I don't rely on my heater or thermometer to test..have 200W for 60 gal.
I use a "Snap-On" tool gun that digital reads the temp where ever I point it, it is very accurate.
May be on expensive side, but well worth it.. :lol: 
House temp is always 66-68...bills are low. :thumb:


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

cich2it said:


> Hey Smitty;
> This may seem like a dumb answer but I don't rely on my heater or thermometer to test..have 200W for 60 gal.
> I use a "Snap-On" tool gun that digital reads the temp where ever I point it, it is very accurate.
> May be on expensive side, but well worth it.. :lol:
> House temp is always 66-68...bills are low. :thumb:


 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What?


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

Generally speaking most heaters and their design are probably better to run a bit longer than off and on. At least that is what I have been told. I think a lot of it has to do with the contacts and what triggers the heater to power on. I prefer my aqueon pro heaters. Love them. They use a electronic thermostat which is supposed to prevent the heater from sticking in the on position. I think that is the major flaw of most heaters is the contacts become stuck in the on position frying the fish which is why most people prefer lower wattage heaters that run longer just in case it does stick on it won't fry your fish or at least it will give you enough time to notice the problem.

You should give the aqueon pro heaters a shot. They are really durable too.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

13razorbackfan said:


> Generally speaking most heaters and their design are probably better to run a bit longer than off and on. At least that is what I have been told. I think a lot of it has to do with the contacts and what triggers the heater to power on. I prefer my aqueon pro heaters. Love them. They use a electronic thermostat which is supposed to prevent the heater from sticking in the on position. I think that is the major flaw of most heaters is the contacts become stuck in the on position frying the fish which is why most people prefer lower wattage heaters that run longer just in case it does stick on it won't fry your fish or at least it will give you enough time to notice the problem.
> 
> You should give the aqueon pro heaters a shot. They are really durable too.


Nice dissertation but I think you missed the point. What costs less to run. Is a 300 watt heater more costly than a 200 watt? Being that the 300 will heat quicker and be on a shorter time. That is my question.


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

I don't think there's enough information to provide an answer either way. I suspect that you would need to conduct an experiment to ascertain which is cheaper. Perhaps use a current monitoring device (Kill A Watt) over two 24 hour periods, each with different heaters.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

smitty814 said:


> 13razorbackfan said:
> 
> 
> > Generally speaking most heaters and their design are probably better to run a bit longer than off and on. At least that is what I have been told. I think a lot of it has to do with the contacts and what triggers the heater to power on. I prefer my aqueon pro heaters. Love them. They use a electronic thermostat which is supposed to prevent the heater from sticking in the on position. I think that is the major flaw of most heaters is the contacts become stuck in the on position frying the fish which is why most people prefer lower wattage heaters that run longer just in case it does stick on it won't fry your fish or at least it will give you enough time to notice the problem.
> ...


As GTZ noted the only way to be sure is to monitor them separately over the course of 48hrs. I would imagine it would be negligible.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

13razorbackfan said:


> smitty814 said:
> 
> 
> > 13razorbackfan said:
> ...


So if negligible....why do ppl buy lower wattage heaters when the high watt heater will deliver a more constant temp.?
opcorn:


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

Like I mentioned above....

Generally speaking most heaters and their design are probably better to run a bit longer than off and on. At least that is what I have been told. I think a lot of it has to do with the contacts and what triggers the heater to power on. I prefer my aqueon pro heaters. Love them. They use a electronic thermostat which is supposed to prevent the heater from sticking in the on position. I think that is the major flaw of most heaters is the contacts become stuck in the on position frying the fish which is why most people prefer lower wattage heaters that run longer just in case it does stick on it won't fry your fish or at least it will give you enough time to notice the problem.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

I have a good heater and it's on a thermostat so it's not going to stick on.


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

smitty814 said:


> So if negligible....why do ppl buy lower wattage heaters when the high watt heater will deliver a more constant temp.?
> opcorn:


This is why.


13razorbackfan said:


> most people prefer lower wattage heaters that run longer just in case it does stick on it won't fry your fish or at least it will give you enough time to notice the problem.


When using an external controller, the need for a lower wattage heater isn't necessary, unless of course the thermostat fails 
Also, what leads you to believe that a higher wattage heater will maintain a more constant temperature than a lower wattage heater?


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

Because it heats quicker and is on less. Just asking a question about fuel consumption. Don't really need to hear about heaters failing, thermostats not working, fish cooking (although it is Fri.). :fish:


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

smitty814 said:


> Because it heats quicker and is on less. Just asking a question about fuel consumption. Don't really need to hear about heaters failing, thermostats not working, fish cooking (although it is Fri.). :fish:


You asked why people buy heaters at lower wattage and that is why. I am not a expert on electricity but I would imagine running a 50w heater for 1hr to heat the water to 78 would consume roughly the same amount of electricity a 150w would need to heat the same water to 78 being on for 20 minutes. The only real difference would be the extra wear and tear on the contacts for the 150w heater to turn off and on. Again...the only real way to know would be to hook it into a power consumption meter and test under the exact same conditions. Hope that helps.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

smitty814 said:


> So what's cheaper to run. A high wattage which is on a shorter time or a lower wattage that runs alot longer?
> 
> :fish:


That's funny. I thought I asked about fuel consumption.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

GTZ said:


> smitty814 said:
> 
> 
> > So if negligible....why do ppl buy lower wattage heaters when the high watt heater will deliver a more constant temp.?
> ...


The only way to know for sure is to run a experiment under identical conditions. Like I mentioned....I bet it would be negligible. The only difference is wear and tear on the heater powering on and of.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

I did find this:

To calculate the energy consumption of your aquarium, you will need to know the watts per equipment and the overall running time. The running time of the heater can either be observed in measuring the actual running time or by estimating. 15 minutes out of every hour (6 hours total per day) for lower temperatures or 30minutes out of the hour (12 hours total) for higher temperatures. This will of course vary greatly, depending on your room temperature.

Watts multiplied by hours will give you the daily wattage per equipment. (1000 Watts equal 1 kWh) The cost of 1 kWh can be found on most electric bills. The cost of one kWh should be calculated by adding up all the rates that end with "per kWh (that will include the transmission, distribution, and generation charges).

The Formula

Watts x hours x kWh cost x 30 = monthly electrical cost of the aquarium

The exact usage of electricity for each piece of equipment can only be determined by actual readings using an ampmeter, which measures the actual energy used and not the energy based on the maximum output. The formula will provide an approximate cost only.

The only way to differentiate between a higher and lower watt heater is to try this experiment with each unless you buy a meter that you plug the heater into.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

This was the only other responses I could find from a different message board and they say basically what I have said in regards to the difference being negligible or none.

If you put a lower wattage heater in it will run more often, A bigger heater will run less offten. It takes a certain amount of calories to raise your tank so many degrees. The total calories (thus wattage/time) will be the same with diferent size heaters.
Heaters are very efficient in that almost all the energy from your power source will be converted to heat. So you can not buy a heater that will produce significantly more heat per watt.

The wattage of the heater is not relevant because it is thermostatically controlled.
(more watts = less on time, viceversa low watts = more on time )

The cost of heating the tank is related to the heat being lost by the tank,
the only way to reduce that cost is to insulate your tank (or your house !)

The first point to make has already been covered, to heat a certain volume of water above ambient by a certain number of degrees takes a certain amount of energy. Small heaters on a lot, large heaters on from time to time. There are no low energy heaters. Watts = Joules per second.

The thing missing though is where does the heat go? In winter, if my tanks heaters are on, the heat generated eventually escapes into the room. The tank is therefore, a radiator. Thus, the central heating system has to work less to keep the room habitable. Keep your house well insulated, and the energy cost of heating your tank is fairly small when factoring the energy saving elsewhere in a normal room environment.

To raise a finite quantity of water by a finite quantity of temperature requires a finite quantity of energy. Efficiency normally relates to how much work is done in respect to losses, which are almost always heat. Thus, a heater, which has heating as it's raison de'tre should be very efficient since it's "losses" are what it does.

HTH


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

Thankyou


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

smitty814 said:


> Thankyou


 :thumb:


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

A little off subject, does anyone know if some of these newer style heaters such as Titanum etc. are anymore effcient? To me heaters are like filters, 150 watt Eheim says it can do 60 gallons where Aqueon or Hagen rates different for the same wattage. So I wondered if the newer technologies are any better?


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

hawkkerw said:


> A little off subject, does anyone know if some of these newer style heaters such as Titanum etc. are anymore effcient? To me heaters are like filters, 150 watt Eheim says it can do 60 gallons where Aqueon or Hagen rates different for the same wattage. So I wondered if the newer technologies are any better?


From what I read it doesn't really matter. This is what I found when a person was asked about efficiency:

_To raise a finite quantity of water by a finite quantity of temperature requires a finite quantity of energy. Efficiency normally relates to how much work is done in respect to losses, which are almost always heat. Thus, a heater, which has heating as it's raison de'tre should be very efficient since it's "losses" are what it does._


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

Thanks have never tried any of the new technology heaters.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

hawkkerw said:


> Thanks have never tried any of the new technology heaters.


I really like my aqueon pro. I smashed the heck out of one of them with a 25lb rock and it didn't even phase it.


----------



## smitty814 (Sep 27, 2012)

13razorbackfan said:


> hawkkerw said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks have never tried any of the new technology heaters.
> ...


Why are ya beating yur heaters with rocks?


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

wouldn't a full grown oscar picking at it be about the same as a 25lb rock? LOL


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

smitty814 said:


> 13razorbackfan said:
> 
> 
> > hawkkerw said:
> ...


Didn't do it on purpose. I was rearranging some large rocks when BAM!!! I could even hear the springs inside rattle around.


----------



## 13razorbackfan (Sep 28, 2011)

hawkkerw said:


> wouldn't a full grown oscar picking at it be about the same as a 25lb rock? LOL


They can be quite rough for sure not nearly as rough as a bull in a china shop(me).


----------



## hawkkerw (Jan 31, 2012)

=D>


----------

