Cube Ballasts versus converted ballast from home bulbs

[Jack.pe]

Have just bought a 24G nano Cube and am horrified at the amount of heat that the Ballast makes... this must mean that the electricity consumption is way higher than the quoted 72W for the two lights (2x36W) all in for the standard Cube lighting..Does eanyone know what the actual current draw is?.. now in these environmentally aware times I am very keen to minimise the energy needed to run the tank.

So as the thread about converting ballasts from home bulbs says that with ballasts from "screw-in compact fluorescent lamps" there is much less heat I was wondering if this meant they were much more efficient?? and if so why do the Cube manufacturers use something so large, bulky and wasteful?

 

[skipm]

They use the core and coil ballasts because they are cheaper. An electronic ballast is more efficient, uses less electricity and generates less heat. They also usually give you a longer bulb life. You can replace the original ballasts but if you do I recommend placing the external to the canopy and make sure that the housing you place them in is suitable for the job (adequate venting and good splash protection). I have read about "robbing" the ballast out of a screw in compact fluorescent lightbulb before but never got around to actually trying it myself.