• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cocky
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Drunk
  • Embarrased
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Godly
  • Happy
  • Hateful
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
    Results 1 to 20 of 24

    Thread: Energy Efficient Pumps

    1. #1
      Noahsnana's Avatar
      Noahsnana is offline Koiphen Admin - WWKC
      is Lifetime WWKC
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      So. MD
      Posts
      51,079

      Energy Efficient Pumps

      Trying to redo my pond and need to focus on energy efficient pumps
      Recommendations... what's out there now?

      Pond is about 12,000 gal

      Thanks
      The will of God will not take you where the grace of God cannot keep you. .....
      "I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." -Winston Churchill Zone 7a
      I believe it can happen... Koi World Peace
      "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

    2. #2
      kimini is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,676
      In general, really efficient means expensive, but when done right, the initial expense is paid back in low energy costs, a savings which is forever.

      Though crazy expensive, probably the most efficient is the Flow Friend Pro. It lowered our monthly energy expense from 375 watts to 70W, and that adds up. This pump is best for very low head and a lot of volume. For a slightly higher head, the regular Flow Friend will do well, but is just as expensive.

      That said, it's all about how high you pump the water - height = $$$. Before changing pumps, see if you can lower the total height ("head") that the pump is working against. Two of the biggest offenders are wonderful waterfalls many feet tall, and traditional shower filters that are 3-4 feet tall. If you're moving a fair bit of water (and at 12,000 gallons, you will be), every inch of vertical height is costing you every month. I designed a low-profile shower filter that's roughly 12" tall, and between that and the uber efficient pump, it'll have paid for itself in another year or so.

      I have a thread about this very topic and will try to find it... found it: https://www.koiphen.com/forums/showt...fficient+pumps
      Last edited by kimini; 04-28-2021 at 11:01 PM.

    3. #3
      Noahsnana's Avatar
      Noahsnana is offline Koiphen Admin - WWKC
      is Lifetime WWKC
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Aug 2004
      Location
      So. MD
      Posts
      51,079
      Quote Originally Posted by kimini View Post
      In general, really efficient means expensive, but when done right, the initial expense is paid back in low energy costs, a savings which is forever.

      Though crazy expensive, probably the most efficient is the Flow Friend Pro. It lowered our monthly energy expense from 375 watts to 70W, and that adds up. This pump is best for very low head and a lot of volume. For a slightly higher head, the regular Flow Friend will do well, but is just as expensive.

      That said, it's all about how high you pump the water - height = $$$. Before changing pumps, see if you can lower the total height ("head") that the pump is working against. Two of the biggest offenders are wonderful waterfalls many feet tall, and traditional shower filters that are 3-4 feet tall. If you're moving a fair bit of water (and at 12,000 gallons, you will be), every inch of vertical height is costing you every month. I designed a low-profile shower filter that's roughly 12" tall, and between that and the uber efficient pump, it's already paid for itself.

      I have a thread about this very topic and will try to find it... found it: https://www.koiphen.com/forums/showt...fficient+pumps
      Thanks I will take a look at the thread
      The will of God will not take you where the grace of God cannot keep you. .....
      "I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." -Winston Churchill Zone 7a
      I believe it can happen... Koi World Peace
      "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

    4. #4
      EmeraldDragon's Avatar
      EmeraldDragon is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      Depressed
       
      Join Date
      Mar 2021
      Location
      Walnut, California
      Posts
      723
      If you are going out to spend $$$ for a redo and upgrades anyway, not saying that it is related in anyway. Why not put the cost into Solar Energy? Once you got that installed, in the long run you will saved $$$. Especially if you do it for the whole house. If will saved you a lot more.
      -=[Sunny]=-

      I have served, I have fought to defends the rights and freedom for all Americans. I am a proud Retired Veteran!

      Zen's Pond and Garden - The Zen Zone that keeps our sanity alive every day!


    5. #5
      jmajid is offline Junior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Feb 2014
      Location
      Houston
      Posts
      26
      I have been considering moving from my external 3/4HP Lifegard Seahorse pump/leaf filter combo to a DC powered variable speed pump after having seen that they can be useful for not only control of flow, but consume less power as flow decreases and less power overall.
      The seahorse pump i use right now consumes around 550W; i have seen comparable head/flow DC pumps that consume down to 100 to 150W.
      Examples include the Sicce SDC and the Jebao/Jecod DCT or other series of pumps.

    6. #6
      kimini is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,676
      Quote Originally Posted by EmeraldDragon View Post
      If you are going out to spend $$$ for a redo and upgrades anyway, not saying that it is related in anyway. Why not put the cost into Solar Energy?...
      It's funny that you suggest this. I'm on a solar forum and the engineer experts who've crunched the numbers say that money-wise, it's better to reduce power consumption instead of adding panels.

    7. #7
      batman's Avatar
      batman is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2013
      Location
      Gotham
      Posts
      1,108
      To make solar pay you need artificially high electric costs and government subsidies. At my electic rates a energy efficient pump pay back is 3 or more times longer than people living in CA.

      Lookup Zac's testing of the pond pumps to make a general comparison. It takes a combination of an energy efficient pump sized to an energy efficient filtration system to reduce energy costs. Reduce the system pressure needed and move to a smaller pump producing the same flow is an option to save.

      As for the DC marketed pumps. First off they are all AC but that is another story we won't discuss here. They are similar in construction to mag pond pumps used for years and they typically have a much lower lifespan vs other pond pumps. Expect 1/3 to 1/2 the life. Zac's testing showed they are indeed more energy efficient but at low head pressures. Pumps such a Periha and Alpine EcoTwist are examples.

      This doesn't apply to the Flow Friend as they are in a class by themselves.
      Last edited by batman; 04-29-2021 at 12:36 AM.
      The real Batman wears polyester! Don't be fooled by the plastic imposter.

    8. #8
      EmeraldDragon's Avatar
      EmeraldDragon is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      Depressed
       
      Join Date
      Mar 2021
      Location
      Walnut, California
      Posts
      723
      Quote Originally Posted by kimini View Post
      It's funny that you suggest this. I'm on a solar forum and the engineer experts who've crunched the numbers say that money-wise, it's better to reduce power consumption instead of adding panels.
      Maybe I am wrong to suggest this. Understandable that we all needs to reduced power consumption, especially living in SoCal. SoCal is the worse place (IMHO) to be when it comes to this kind of things.
      -=[Sunny]=-

      I have served, I have fought to defends the rights and freedom for all Americans. I am a proud Retired Veteran!

      Zen's Pond and Garden - The Zen Zone that keeps our sanity alive every day!


    9. #9
      kimini is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,676
      In fact, the guys on the solar forum that concluded that cutting back usage live in San Diego. That said, they used huge spreadsheets with virtually everything calculated, so it could be applied regardless of location. Energy costs, the site's solar exposure, subsidies and amortization of the solar components can really alter what the "best" solution is, or if there is even one at all.
      Last edited by kimini; 04-29-2021 at 10:50 AM.

    10. #10
      Alarakalama is offline Supporting Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Dec 2020
      Location
      Virginia
      Posts
      43
      I have yet to complete my pond build, but Periha pumps appear to have the lowest cost of ownership. On paper, they look amazing. Hopefully by the end of this summer I can speak more from experience! Like the Flowfriend, it is for very low head conditions only - perhaps a few feet.

      Brent

    11. #11
      cottagefog is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2011
      Location
      Illinois
      Posts
      599
      Solar panels are becoming more and more popular in our area, but for me here in Illinois I was given a price of $24,000 to solar panel my house and needs. Cutting my electric bill and given the year 2036 where I would come close to breaking even. Ouch

    12. #12
      wildwolfdisco is offline Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2020
      Location
      Southern California
      Posts
      90
      Quote Originally Posted by cottagefog View Post
      Solar panels are becoming more and more popular in our area, but for me here in Illinois I was given a price of $24,000 to solar panel my house and needs. Cutting my electric bill and given the year 2036 where I would come close to breaking even. Ouch
      I think holding as little as 20 Apple share would give a better return than that... wow 15 years...

    13. #13
      Nuspeed007 is online now Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      May 2019
      Location
      San Jose, CA
      Posts
      118
      Quote Originally Posted by cottagefog View Post
      Solar panels are becoming more and more popular in our area, but for me here in Illinois I was given a price of $24,000 to solar panel my house and needs. Cutting my electric bill and given the year 2036 where I would come close to breaking even. Ouch
      That means you are quite electrical efficient, good for the wallet & environment. Pumps are getting better and more efficient, if you can budget for the FF pump series and plumbed for 240V that is a very elegant solution. The new DC pumps (Jebao, Periha...) are attractive, low operating cost but if the housing, impeller, electronic are plastic then you need to ensure adequate insulation & housing in those snow belt region.

    14. #14
      batman's Avatar
      batman is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2013
      Location
      Gotham
      Posts
      1,108
      Quote Originally Posted by Alarakalama View Post
      I have yet to complete my pond build, but Periha pumps appear to have the lowest cost of ownership. On paper, they look amazing. Hopefully by the end of this summer I can speak more from experience! Like the Flowfriend, it is for very low head conditions only - perhaps a few feet.

      Brent
      The Flow Friend Pro has a very low head limitation. The Flow Friend Standard has higher head limits. For the Periha pumps you still need to keep below 5 ft head pressure to keep in the bigger savings range. Above this energy efficiency slips at a higher rate. Counting pipe and filtration resistances plus height lifted very easy to surpass this.

      The factory Periha charts are exaggerated. Look at Zac's testing.
      Last edited by batman; 04-29-2021 at 11:31 AM.
      The real Batman wears polyester! Don't be fooled by the plastic imposter.

    15. #15
      jmajid is offline Junior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Feb 2014
      Location
      Houston
      Posts
      26
      I remember seeing the posts on pump testing; cant remember if it was only Zac or someone else also... as one of the test threads went sideways i remember...
      Do we know if anyone tested the Sicce pumps?
      Any experience of those?
      My usage would be relatively low head, external, in an insulated garage in Houston, TX so the temps would be relatively ok year round... in the very cold snap recently we had outside temps of 8degF, but the garage inside was measured at 34 to 36degF at the coldest... In summers it stays below 80degF inside, even when the outside is >100degF.
      I do agree, need to consider head and filtration options as part of the equation to energy efficiency.

    16. #16
      kimini is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,676
      Quote Originally Posted by cottagefog View Post
      Solar panels are becoming more and more popular in our area, but for me here in Illinois I was given a price of $24,000 to solar panel my house and needs. Cutting my electric bill and given the year 2036 where I would come close to breaking even. Ouch
      Solar panels typically have a 20-yr guarantee to remain above XX% output, as they degrade over time. After about 20 years, the system is wearing out overall and may need replacement. So that "$24,000" has the potential to reoccur all over again, depending how much of the system is replaced and how much prices have changed (probably upwards). Point being, running costs must absolutely be figured into any overall calculation about whether solar is really the right choice. So many people either purposely or ignorantly get it and feel all good inside, with zero concept about what it's really costing them. A low power bill doesn't mean much by itself.

      Oh, and a big thing that many/most solar home owners don't realize: if the power to the neighborhood goes off, so will their power! This is on purpose, and is to prevent back-feeding power into an otherwise dead grid when linemen are trying to fix it. So, the idea that if the power goes off, they'll be the only one on block with all the lights on is simply false, unless additional circuitry is in place. And don't get me started on the real cost of batteries...
      Last edited by kimini; 04-29-2021 at 01:27 PM.

    17. #17
      batman's Avatar
      batman is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2013
      Location
      Gotham
      Posts
      1,108
      Many with roof solar mounts are getting water leaks from the many holes needed to secure the panels. Any roof maintenance is at least double labor with panels involved. Most home roofs were not designed to mount solar panels. They might have a place in future energy production but it's not on individual homes roofs.

      It's like the roof solar heating collector scams of the late 70s and 80s. Now you see none. Everyone that had one paid big $$$$ to have it removed and the roof fixed.
      Last edited by batman; 04-29-2021 at 11:54 PM.
      The real Batman wears polyester! Don't be fooled by the plastic imposter.

    18. #18
      Kathy is offline Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      May 2006
      Location
      Hawi, Hawaii
      Posts
      95
      You're so right about the roof leaks. We had one leak repaired 3 times. It caused quite a bit of damage to the drywall, not to mention the mold issues associated with dampness. We had our panels installed when government subsidies were at their peak, so we were lucky. We have minimal battery backup for the refrigerator and lights. Before the addition of our ponds, we added 12 more panels. We went from paying the minimum fee of $26 to $260 once all the ponds were up and running. We live in on the Big Island of Hawaii and electricity costs are very pricey, $0.54 to $0.66/kwh, depending on time of day usage. We installed Periha, MoMing and Alpine Eco pumps to help keep usage down. We found the MoMing is capable of pushing much more water at higher head compared to the others. The Alpine Eco doesn't seem to hold up as well as the other 2, as we've already replaced one pump after 3 years. We have a 5000gal, 1700gal, 800gal, 500gal and 2-300gal ponds for turtles, 3 of the small ponds with shower filters.

    19. #19
      batman's Avatar
      batman is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2013
      Location
      Gotham
      Posts
      1,108
      At 54 to 66 cents a KWH I'd go 100% with airlifts and gravity filtration. None of the pumps listed above come remotely close in efficiency.

      Good info on the Mo-Ming pumps.
      The real Batman wears polyester! Don't be fooled by the plastic imposter.

    20. #20
      kimini is offline Senior Member
      This user has no status.
       
      Feeling:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Oct 2007
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      1,676
      Agree with going to airlifts once energy expense gets that high. If the system has to be redone to incorporate it, do it.

    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •