Inexpensive replacement for these garage flourescent lights?

Thanks for confirming. The funny thing is that the only difference is the diameter (and the wattage), so, it's odd that they're "obsolete" just because they're a bit fatter.

What's so bad about a 40W tube versus a 32W tube? Is the 8 watts really a big deal?

Or is there some other reason to ban "fat" tubes?

Since I think I have two bad ballasts, the single four-lamp ballast for 20 bucks is what I'm gonna get tomorrow at Home Depot (if they have it).

I measured the T8 LED with a ruler and it was close to one inch, but the T12 was off by a lot. It was 1-3/8ths of an inch, or a T11 in diameter.

Hmmm... that sounds like exactly the same setup, only different colors. I guess the colors actually "mean" something then... 'cuz color is the only difference on the outside.

Thank you for that hint, as I did not know that. They never taught me anything about this stuff in school.

Given out of 16 bulbs I took out, only about half were still working, so I'm surprised only one ballast was outright dead (with another suspect).

I don't know anything about LED tubes but if it was "direct wire" that might be better because who needs the ballast anyway?

I don't even understand what the ballast even does, in the case of the LED tubes.

Do you?

You need to get the bulbs to match the ballast which in this case is 'instant start'. I have not bought any floursecent bulbs ina while, but the last time I bought them seems that I could get a box of 12 for only a little more than 4 bulbs.

If going to the LED type bulbs you may not even need the ballast. I have not replaced any flourscent with the LED in the same fixture so can not comment on that.

It could be the 8 watts or more likely the makeup of the tube. Less glass and material. The tubes do contain mercury so less of that to deal with. They kept cutting down on the mercury in the t12 tubes and someetimes they would not start up if it was much below 50 deg F. Not sure of the makeup of the coating on the inside ot the tubes, but less used there also.

I worked in a large company that had thousands of bulbs. Toward the last of the t12 tubes we had many that would not start up and this was in a room that was over 70 deg F.

It's not obvious why they banned 40 Watts but kept 32 Watts (which seems miniscule of a difference).

Googling, I found this: Why did US Department of Energy discontinued the T12 lights?

Here is a direct quote of the main reason: "T12 light bulbs were becoming extremely inefficient"

Here is a second direct quote of the secondary reason: "Polychlorinaed Biphenyls are used in T12 fixture ballast manufacturing"

Huh? Why would a T12 ballast use PCBs while a T8 ballast wouldn't? Makes no sense to me. Does it make sense to you?

Googling some more, I find this: The Case Against T12 Bulbs that Invited the Ban

Which says (verbatim): "the conventional four-foot T12 lamp still consumes a whopping 40 watts every hour. On the other hand, the more modern T8 lamp consumes anything between 25 and 32 watts of energy in an hour."

So I guess the 8 watts mattered to the DOE.

SImilarly, it says "The T12 lamps are not long-lasting", but, since when does the DOE care about how long bulbs last (especially since incandescents don't last all that long either).

Now we get to the hazardous waste where it says "T12 lamps release toxic mercury and PCB waste products".

Huh? Why would T12s release more of these than T8s?

I only yesterday figured out how (by looking it up) a legacy ballast works with LED tubes, but I couldn't find an article that explains how it works with LEDs.

Thanks for providing that reference information. I have to admit, the two 4-bulb lamps currently with the LEDs in them are brighter than the sun it seems, at least in a garage they are.

Compared to the fluorescents, they rock with light output!

I just hope they last, given they are T8s on a T12 ballast.

It would be nice if I can just cut out the ballast altogether. Maybe the LED bulbs work with or without the ballast? I'll call Feit tomorrow to ask if that's possible.

Reading more, I think they are just making most of this stuff up.

This article lists all the stuff that was retired:

100 watt and 150 watt incandescent A-lamp ? banned January 1, 2012 75 watt incandescent A-lamp ? banned January 1, 2013 60 watt incandescent A-lamp ? banned January 1, 2014 40 watt incandescent A-lamp ? banned January 1, 2014

T8 single-pin fluorescent 8 foot slim and high-output ? banned January

2009 Most reflector lamps over 50 watts (except some 65W) ? July 1, 2010 Magnetic ballasts for many standard fluorescent lamps ? July 1, 2010 T12 fluorescent tubes 4 foot ? banned July 14, 2012 T12 fluorescent tubes 2 foot U-Bend ? banned July 14, 2012 T12 fluorescent tubes 8 foot (slim and high output)? banned July 14, 2012 T8 with low CRI ? banned July 14, 2012 (DOE changed CRI to 87 in April 2011) PAR20, PAR30, PAR38 Halogen standard lamps (within 40W to 205W) ? banned July 14, 2012

So it just seems to be an "efficiency" thing since they all have different secondary reasons.

That article lists:

- The package components yellow

- Thermal expansion & contraction cause components to crack

- Phosphor degeneration

- Nucleation

- EM

- ionizing radiation

- Metal melting on the chip

- Whiskers shorting out traces

- thermal runaway

- current crowding

- electrostatic discharge

- reverse bias

This bulb seems to simply require me to "bypass the ballast":

Bill,

Your package photo shows a lumen output of just 1700 lumens, compared to around 2800 lumens for a fluorescent bulb. So technically it's putting out LESS light.

Your old bulbs were probably dimming with age and giving off a bit more of a "warm" glow. Your new LED's have a whiter light, which can make them seem brighter when they really aren't.

In any case, as long as you're happy with the light output it doesn't really matter.

Take care,

Anthony Watson

t

OK - A few things on the nature of LEDs and the nature of Fluorescent lamps , and the nature of ballasts, magnetic or electronic:

a) LED lamp/tube/whatever emitters are flat devices mounted on some surface that distributes the light in a 'designed' manner. A fluorescent tube emit s light in all directions, much of which is absorbed by the surrounding she et metal (remember back in the day, reflective shields were added above the tubes to capture some of this light and in a 4-tube fixture, usually two were removed to 'save energy') LED tubes do not have this failing and direc t most of their light were it is actually useful. So, lower lumens, more li ght.

b) Fluorescent lamps can lose more than 60% of their output and still funct ion. Most, however, crap out at about 70% of original output. But one run c ontinuously may go as low as 40% before actual failure - which is when the filament at either end or both ends fails.

c) 'Magnetic' ballasts are just like any other transformer-based device. Th ey do not "PUSH" current, what is connected to then "PULLS" the current. So more efficient lamps will *pull* less current.

d) Electronic ballasts are switching devices, and also do not PUSH. Nor do 'bad lamps' affect them as badly as they do magnetic ballasts. Typically, t hey do not overheat or die from that process. They die, mostly, from the fa ilure of some internal component such as a capacitor.

e) Putting a T8 lamp on a T12 ballast will vastly shorten the life of the l amp, UNLESS the ballasts is marked specifically as T8/T12 compliant. A T12 ballast runs at a higher voltage than a T8 ballast. Again, switching ballas ts are often designed to 'sense' what is connected to them.

So, guys and gals, the choice as to whether to convert or purchase new is o ne that should purely be made on the basis of saving landfill and/or mine-t o-landfill cost analysis - after which comes energy efficiency. Making a ne w fixture takes energy from some source, the processing of materials either 'new' or 'recycled' or some combination of both, and the shipping of that material to a user. Whereupon it is used-up or consumed and the detritus is either landfilled or recycled. There are costs associated with every step, in cash and in environmental impacts. The energy associated with a new fix ture, disposing of the old and environmental considerations will offset a g reat deal of energy used by an old fixture, if it is otherwise operating ef ficiently. But, if it is not, then one owes the future the decision to go w ith the fixture that has the lowest overall impact on the environment - fro m when the raw materials are mined or refined to how much of it could be re cycled in the future, to the actual cost of disposal, to the energy used du ring its life.

And why it is, thereby, that first-cost should almost NEVER be a deciding f actor when making any purchase of any nature of any item/appliance that con sumes energy as its primary function.

Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

nt

Buying the wrong thing at any price is still....buying the wrong thing. We have been importing LED T8 since 2010. The BEST method is to ignore the "wo rks with ballast" claims (most do NOT) and get tubes that work directly. Re move the ballast, take LINE to one end of the tube, NEUTRAL to the other (t here is usually enough wire internally to do this using cutters and a wire nut or two) and be done with it. These tubes are generally the same price. Also use a CORRECT color temperature. For most applications, we use 4000K. Warm offices, 3000K. You don't need no stinking ballast, folks.

Klay

Yes, definitely. I was horrified to discover how inefficient old T12 ballasts were. When I did my LED retrofit, I made before/after measurements. I was using 32W-rated T12 lamps, and the old 2-lamp ballast drew 103W!!! Yikes, I would have done this sooner if I had known!

Using a commercial 350 mA LED lighting power supply on a string of 20 "1 W" LEDs to replace the two-lamp set, it drew 21 W. The light output is probably less than two new T12 lamps, but plenty of light for a kitchen, with 3 of these 2-lamp fixtures.

Well, I'm totally happy with my 20-LED strings. Color temperature is much better than I expected, nobody has complained at all. Light output is fine, and you can't beat 21 W line draw for the equivalent of 2 T12 lamps.

Jon

Well, T12 ballasts made before 1977 or so MIGHT have had PCBs in them, but more likely it was phased out a decade before that. Certainly, no NEW ballasts have had any PCB content for decades.

Jon

Thanks for noticing that detail. The old bulbs must have been dimmed, as you noted, over time. The new light is bright, by comparison.

Yikes! I guess I should replace the T12 ballasts with T8 electronic ballasts.

If there's a sale on em... I will. :)

Thanks for that update.

After reading a few of these articles, and after noting that the government bans *plenty* of other bulbs (which don't have ballasts), the *real* reason is just the energy efficiency, I'm sure.

I guess the write of that article I referenced needed more words, so they went on about PCBs, but, that's not the real reason.

They even banned some T8 bulbs, for example. And Halogens. And incandescent.

So, it's all about energy.

On 11/03/2016 3:16 PM, Bill Moinihan wrote: ...

No, it's "all for the children"...