No. With usage, tubes produce reduced light output, put a heavier load on the ballast causing more heat, and use every bit as much power as new tubes. If you can use them someplace where you don't want a lot of light, and don't care how much they cost to operate or how hot they get, great! Save them for spares in case of tube failure or breakage, give them to someone who needs them more than you do, or trash them. Good Luck ~Ken~

If you need only occasional waterfall to add oxygen to this thing (I assume), the VF3050 is actually a better deal. 24 hour run is going to be insane on any pump. The VF3050 is actually a better deal as you can set it to run whatever speed you want (less than a two speed). I suggest this over the VS3050 you mentioned as the VF has the modulated output flow option. This would allow you to run the very low speed and at programmed intervals, it will crank up to whatever speed you want for a specific time and then drop back down to low flow. I've put a few of them on ponds and they save tons compared to standard pumps. Two speeds usually do not have the flow requirement on low that people need in these applications.

RG- Sorry for spreading the "only time will tell" bug. Good comments regarding the VF pump. Having the ability to adjust to a precise flow and maintain that flow probably has some value for some customers and installers, but this is a niche market. For all the other applications, Ive always been an advocate of applying the right size pump/filter for the application and applying proper piping to the system for the flow desired with routine maintenance on the filter to avoid system inefficiency. The fact remains that VF will increase speed and power to overcome these system shortfalls and this will cost the homeowner money. At what point does the homeowner get a warning that the system needs maintenance. With a non-variable flow pump, the answer is system pressure. With a variable flow pump, when is the signal sent to the homeowner that something is wrong and how much money has this cost the homeowner due to a system that is not operating efficiently. If the answer is system pressure also, then what is the value of having a variable flow technology when a variable speed (VS or 2-speed) or even a 1 speed will do the same for the homeowner. Kelly- Although the goal of achieving 2 speed pricing with improved efficiency sounds good, the reality of variable speed technology cost will prevent this from happening. Rare earth permanent magnet motors coupled with variable frequency drives is an expensive combination. To cut costs, the rare earth magnets will have to go and then we are back to the good ole PSC technology which is what we have in 2 speed pumps today. There may be some cost opportunity on the drive side of the design, as the current drive is a Cadillac when a Yugo will do for these pool applications, unless the VF market takes off, which will require the Cadillac drive and require the higher cost as a result. My guess is this will remain a niche market. The reality is variable speed technology is expensive and from my HVAC experience, has always fallen short on value offered vs. price. On the other hand, there may be market for a de-featured multi-speed pump with a "yugo" variable speed drive and a high efficiency PSC motor that will fall at the same price point of todays 2 speed, with the advantage of having more than 2 speeds. I could see this being a very real product in the near future with recent technology advances in drives. But, todays VF and VS offerings cost too much and fall short on the value they offer over a 2 speed, in my opinion. Kinda related..I have not been able to find anything from Jandy on their variable speed product. Have you seen anything yet? Maybe their offering has the lower price point (less expensive drive) and better efficiency at higher rpm with the Jandy impeller. Just curious, because obviously Jandy is not spending much money on advertising or marketing for their variable speed product. Tres- Good idea on comparisons between VS/VF and 2-speed/1-speed. This type of testing would have to be done on the same pool system to take piping size and hydraulics out of the equation and look at true power consumption differences between the technologies. Then on top of that, you will find that each technology will have a sweet spot on efficiency. The 1 speeds and 2 speeds will perform better at higher flow applications, the variable speeds with permanent magnet motors will perform better at low flow applications. So the results would have to be reported at different daily duty cycles.example, daily power consumed at X hours of high flow and Y hours of low flow, high flow only applications, low flow only applications, etc. Maybe this is the data that RG is referring to..I hope so and will be waiting to see this comparison data also. I have not seen a significant increase in my electricity bill either with my two 2 speed pumps and two 1 speed pumps, but as you indicate, all other appliances and loads on those appliances mask the true energy consumed by just the pool itself. I have 3 AC units that are running a lot during these dog days of summer along with the pool pumps getting a lot more daily use this time of year (especially the 3HP slide pump), so it really becomes convoluted. During the winter, our electricy bills are very low, less than $40/month. This is because the two one speed pumps are winterized and the two 2-speeds only run a few hours a day at low speed. We have gas heat so the only electricity demand for HVAC is the small indoor fan motors. We really like our winter electricity bills! Subl1002- Right on.apples to oranges comparisons that are misleading. I think Pentair should do themselves a favor and take their energy calculator off their site or at least give an option for a 2 speed comparison. Also, think the energy companies should focus on proper plumbing and pipe size standards for the pool industry rather than focusing on the pump efficiency. The pump will only consume as much power at the system demands, so why not focus on ways to minimize the demand. Im really surprised what RG said related to oversizing pumps in California. I would have thought they would have been early adopters of properly sizing pumps, filters and piping before any one elseoh well.so much for logic. This is the problem with power companies and government officials.they dont always see the big picture and always go to the component suppliers and burden them with improved efficiency but at a higher price. Case in point, in 2006, all AC units had to have 13 SEER minimum efficiency level. The HVAC industry lobbied hard for 12 SEER (which is slightly lower efficiency but at a much better cost) but our government with heavy California CEC influence passed the higher effiency 13 SEER requirement. Well, guess what.now consumers are buying a lot more window units due to cost of the 13 SEER equipment which is now burdening the power companies with higher demand because these window units are terribly inefficient. We showed this trend data to CEC officials recently and they said "Oh my.this is not what we intended at all".yep and thats what happens when you dont balance cost vs value and lose sight of the big picture. In the case of pool pumps, if the CEC ever mandates the Pentair pumps then the power companies will see a higher power demand as a result because these pumps are so inefficient at higher speeds. Hopefully the power companies realize this and are working with the CEC to mold their policies. Colt 357- YeahI thought the same thing.180K units sold per year..thats a lot. I am very surpised that your price point was lowered considering copper, steel and aluminum commodities have increased by 50% just in the last year. This is having a major impact on our HVAC pricing these days and there is a lot of copper, steel and aluminum in these pool pumps also. I dont think this version of variable speed is the future. I do, however think that a low cost variation of this technology with a few speed options will do well. This whole VF value story is not very sound in my opinion and the current VS pump is technology overkill for most pools in my opinion with the only value being replacing multiple pumps with one pump that will save some initial investment. Whew.I need to go rest my typing fingers and do some beverage curling at poolside now.

How efficient is a heat pump? https://www.cooling-heating.org/ An Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP) will typically produce around 3kW thermal energy for every 1kW of electrical energy consumed, giving an effective “efficiency” of 300%. It is thermodynamically impossible to have an efficiency of more than 100%, as this implies that more energy is being produced than is being put in. For this reason the performance is expressed as a Coefficient of Performance (COP) rather than an efficiency. The above example would be expressed as having a COP of 3. The reason that it appears that more energy is being produced than is consumed, is because the only “valuable” energy input is electricity used to drive the compressor and circulating pumps. The remainder of the energy simply transferred from a heat source that would otherwise not be used (such as the ambient air, ground or a river) so is not considered as an energy input. While the term Coefficient of Performance (CoP) is commonly used, it is important to understand the differences in order that the heat pump will work successfully, and to be able to compare different models that might be using different measures. Seasonal Coefficient of Performance (SCoP). Used mainly with ASHPs to give a measure of heat pump performance over the year, taking account of varying air temperatures. There are three climatic zones defined across Europe, defined in BSEN14825. Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER. Used mainly with ASHPs to give a measure of heat pump cooling performance over the year, taking account of varying air temperatures. There are three climatic zones defined across Europe, defined in BSEN14825. Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER). This is a measure of the ratio of delivered thermal power to total electrical power. This includes ancillaries such as any fans, pumps and controls. Seasonal Performance Factor (SPF). This is the most useful definition, as I gives a measure of the ratio of delivered thermal energy over the year, to total electrical consumption. But, as with other forms of “renewable” energy, where the source of fuel is virtually limitless and free, it is the total cost of generation rather than the efficiency that really matters. For comparison, other forms of heat generation have the following efficiencies: Condensing gas/oil boiler: 90-96% efficiency Conventional gas/oil boiler: 70-80% efficiency Direct electric heating: 35-45% efficiency (including losses in generation and distribution). As the temperature difference between input and output increases, so does the compressor pressure needed to power it, and hence the COP decreases. It is therefore important to understand the temperature at which it is rated, and the range over which it will be used.