Switching from fluorescent to LED

[jhilgeman]

This is probably a stupid question, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

I have an overhead fluorescent light fixture that uses two T8 bulbs. It has a sticker that reads (I'm typing exactly what I'm reading):

CAUTION: RISK OF FIRE USE ONLY
2xT8/32W MAX.G13 FLUORESCENT LAMPS
BALLAST RATING: 120V 1.0A 2x32W 60HZ
TO GET BEST PERFORMANCE OF LIGHTING, SELECT
10,000 HOURS LIFE BULB WITH CRI OF 80 OR HIGHER

The bulbs read as 32W, 3500k (based on the printing on the side).

Now, the other day I saw some LED "shop light" bulbs at Costco that seemed like they might be the right size. Pretty sure this is them:

http://www2.costco.com/Browse/Produ...3&topnav=..&cat=99288&Browse=1&hierPath=95905

I have three concerns:

1. Is there any problem switching out fluorescent with LED bulbs in that fixture? I've replaced regular bulbs around the house with LEDs and CFLs before, but I don't know if fluorescent light fixtures work any different.

2. The sticker on the fixture read 32W, but the lights at Costco read 38W of input power, which seems kind of high for LEDs, so I'm not sure if it's referring to 38W "equivalent" or if it actually is drawing 38W. If it's the latter, then is it safe to say that I could NOT use the LED bulbs, because the fixture wouldn't have enough power for them?

3. I assumed that LEDs were ALWAYS more power-efficient than any other type of bulb. The lights I'm looking to replace are always on - 24x7, so my hope was to help reduce power usage/cost by switching to LED. But if the old bulbs are only drawing 32W, and the LED draws 38W, then that seems like it would be a stupid and LESS-cost-effective switch. Or am I missing something?

[EDIT]
The more I'm looking at the difference between LED and fluorescent bulbs, it almost seems like fluorescent is better than LED in terms of:
1. Bulb cost
2. Lumens
3. Wattage

So is there ANY advantage to switching to LED that I'm not seeing? The LEDs vs. regular lamp bulbs seemed like such a huge improvement in terms of power savings that I figured the same would apply to fluorescent bulbs, but I'm wondering now if that was a bad assumption...

 

[pattenp]

The link you provided is to a LED fixture, not just replacement lamps.

 

[jhilgeman]

That makes more sense about the 38W, then. I was still looking at other locations for bulbs specifically (e.g. the Phillips bulb from Home Depot), though, so a couple of my original questions still remain.

The only difference is that most of the LED bulbs DO have lower wattage, but they seem to be significantly lower in light output / lumens.

So I'm still trying to figure out if there would be compatibility issues between bulbs in the fixture I already have, or if I can just pop out the old bulbs and put in LEDs.

 

[jhilgeman]

As a side note - I just found the following ROI calculator for replacing bulbs:
http://www.ushio.com/support/roicalculator.php

Based on it, it would take almost 2 years to save any money. Seems like if I wait a bit longer, the price on the bulbs may drop enough to make it more feasible of an upgrade.

 

[Electric_Light]

Drop-in LEDs are meant for commercial fluorescent fixtures with one wire going to each lamp end. It does not work with some consumer shop lights.

The lady who reviewed the Philips InstantFit said it didn't work in her consumer grade shop light. Google it. The page is called Designs with LEDs or something.

 

[Showkey]

I have three concerns:

1. Is there any problem switching out fluorescent with LED bulbs in that fixture? I've replaced regular bulbs around the house with LEDs and CFLs before, but I don't know if fluorescent light fixtures work any different.

2. The sticker on the fixture read 32W, but the lights at Costco read 38W of input power, which seems kind of high for LEDs, so I'm not sure if it's referring to 38W "equivalent" or if it actually is drawing 38W. If it's the latter, then is it safe to say that I could NOT use the LED bulbs, because the fixture wouldn't have enough power for them?

3. I assumed that LEDs were ALWAYS more power-efficient than any other type of bulb. The lights I'm looking to replace are always on - 24x7, so my hope was to help reduce power usage/cost by switching to LED. But if the old bulbs are only drawing 32W, and the LED draws 38W, then that seems like it would be a stupid and LESS-cost-effective switch. Or am I missing something?

[EDIT]
The more I'm looking at the difference between LED and fluorescent bulbs, it almost seems like fluorescent is better than LED in terms of:
1. Bulb cost
2. Lumens
3. Wattage

So is there ANY advantage to switching to LED that I'm not seeing? The LEDs vs. regular lamp bulbs seemed like such a huge improvement in terms of power savings that I figured the same would apply to fluorescent bulbs, but I'm wondering now if that was a bad assumption...

T8 not all bad......bang for the buck.

Lumens per watt and COST is the debate................

You pretty much have it covered and your concerns are valid.
That's the main reason for the heated debates in other postings.

The other concern is quality of both bulbs and fixtures.

It is the reason many of us on the side lines waiting for the LED costs to drop and the quality to be proven in the T8 bulb size.

The whole LED market is changing almost monthly.......waiting has merit.

The spreadsheet in this post covers the issue with facts:

http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=278420

 

[Electric_Light]

The LED drop-ins are meant for fixtures already attached to buildings that isn't cheap to remove and replace. If you just want LED just to have LED, I'd get an LED fixture which is about the same or cheaper than buying LED tubes and a fixture.

 

[Mustang51js]

Until the price goes way down on led,to me it's not worth it,you won't recoup the cost of the led bulbs

 

[cybrdyke]

The Philips LED tubes at Home Depot will drop right into your fluorescent fixture as long as there is one ballast and that ballast says Instant Start on it. They are 14.5 watt lamps, but the ballast uses 2 watts (-ish) per tube, so you'll be at 33 watts total. You'll save 22.77 per year per each 2 lamp fixture, figuring that you pay 10 cents per kilowatt hour.
CD

 

[Electric_Light]

The Philips LED tubes at Home Depot will drop right into your fluorescent fixture as long as there is one ballast and that ballast says Instant Start on it. They are 14.5 watt lamps, but the ballast uses 2 watts (-ish) per tube, so you'll be at 33 watts total. You'll save 22.77 per year per each 2 lamp fixture, figuring that you pay 10 cents per kilowatt hour.
CD

Your number is completely unreasonable.

Philips used NEMA Pemium ballast and reported 3200 lm per 35W. You save wattage, but you get proportionately lower light output.

A standard two lamp F32T8 fixture from the 1990s use 59W and consumes 228kWh/year with 3,800 hrs/year usage, which is over 10 hours a day everyday which is most likely more than his fixture will see. You'll have to stop using it all together.

 

[cybrdyke]

Your number is completely unreasonable.

Philips used NEMA Pemium ballast and reported 3200 lm per 35W. You save wattage, but you get proportionately lower light output.

A standard two lamp F32T8 fixture from the 1990s use 59W and consumes 228kWh/year with 3,800 hrs/year usage, which is over 10 hours a day everyday which is most likely more than his fixture will see. You'll have to stop using it all together.

My figures are spot-on. Yours are messed up beyond recognition. The 2 lamp ballast + 2 F32T8's is still 59 watts. Where you are coming up with 35 watts is beyond me. If you READ his post, his lights are on 24/7. Delivered lumens are close to the same.
CD

 

[Electric_Light]

My figures are spot-on. Yours are messed up beyond recognition. The 2 lamp ballast + 2 F32T8's is still 59 watts. Where you are coming up with 35 watts is beyond me. If you READ his post, his lights are on 24/7. Delivered lumens are close to the same.
CD

You've got to be kidding. That LED-drop in only delivers 1,600 lm per lamp.

Philips two lamp ICN2P32N will operate one lamp at 1.05 for 37W, so you can get F32T8/HL and get 3,150 lm. (3,255 lm initial, if you care about this number..)

 

[cybrdyke]

Phenomenal. Call me unreasonable, then get spanked, then without apology for being wrong on your numbers, you change the subject. Way to go.
CD

 

[CNGsaves]

^ ^ Must be the toxins inhaled from broken fluorescent bulbs !!

 

[i4ni]

I'm no lighting expert but i know what i like for a nice work environment and it is definitely not LEDs. They seem very harsh and shadow causing to me. Granted they've made giant strides in LED technology but there not ready to replace fluorescent lighting just yet as far as I'm concerned. As a matter of fact I think the old t12 ho's are damn hard to beat for quality of light imho.

 

[Electric_Light]

My figures are spot-on. Yours are messed up beyond recognition. The 2 lamp ballast + 2 F32T8's is still 59 watts. Where you are coming up with 35 watts is beyond me. If you READ his post, his lights are on 24/7. Delivered lumens are close to the same.
CD

So, I got less than 10 hour per assumption wrong. Ok?
Where you're coming up with 33W is beyond me.

Phenomenal. Call me unreasonable, then get spanked, then without apology for being wrong on your numbers, you change the subject. Way to go.
CD

35W came from Philips' self reported LM79 report: HZ13090016a/R1 that 14.5T8LED lamps used with Philips Advance ICN2P32N at 120V resulted in 3211 lm per 34.8W.

From here, you can see that F32T8/HL will produce 0.89 x 3100 x 2= 5518 LM with 56W input or two F32T8/ES (25W) 2500 LM lamps will produce 4600 LM for 45W.

It can only be concluded from the data that efficacy of this LED system is inferior to the T8 system formed using the same ballast used in Philips' own test. The existing host T8 system may use 59W with 32W T8 lamps and it will likely not jump up to the NEMA Premium level with LED drop-in. So, you can't compare values for two different ballasts to make LED look favorable (non NEMA Premium T8 value vs NEMA Premium ballast with LED value)

My statement that reduction in watt with proportional reduction in output was reasonably accurate. You just do not know what you're talking about and you're so disoriented by LED euphoria.

I have no idea how 3,211 LM is close to the same as 4,600 or even in the same ball park as 5,518 LM

http://www.lighting.philips.com/us_...erature/t8-instant-start-centium/ICN2P32N.pdf

21.2w = 186kWh, but this is compared to something that makes 72% more lumen.

10.2w = 89.4kWh x 10c/kWh = $8.94. Your $22.77 calculation over estimates savings by 2 1/2 times.

OR... you can single lamp a F32T8/HL 3100lm at 1.05 for 37W and 34.8W vs 37W = negligible savings.

 

[tfi racing]

More energy was consumed in this back and forth bantering about light levels and savings than ever would be saved in the lifetime of two LED replacement tubes.In this case the only advantage would be the ability to brag to your friend's about how great your new LED lamps are and how much cash you think you may be saving...

 

[Electric_Light]

More energy was consumed in this back and forth bantering about light levels and savings than ever would be saved in the lifetime of two LED replacement tubes.In this case the only advantage would be the ability to brag to your friend's about how great your new LED lamps are and how much cash you think you may be saving...

Get rid of your cars, buy a Prius.