As many of you know, in July of next year, electromagnetic high power factor rapid start ballasts will become illegal. This is the result of the EPACT amendment of 2005 which makes "efficiency standards" so high that magnetic ballasts won't be able to meet them and are effectively banned. This is to pave the way for the newer instant start electronic ballasts. If electronic ballasts are so much better then why is it necessary to ban magnetic ones? Let the market decide which ones are better. I personally like magnetic ballasts better because they last longer and lamps last longer because of the gentle startup cycle. And there's the awesome blinking of preheat start up and the awesome startup flicker of rapid starts. Tell the government to keep out of the lighting industry!

They need to stay out of customer relations all together! This is making me mad!

I totally agree!

They took our MV ballasts away! they are taking our incandescent lamps away, and they are trying to make us use LED lamps and no magnetic ballasts, electronic ballasts are absolute TRASH and need to be banned in favor of magnetic ballasts! the government really needs to do there fair share of research BEFORE butting into our business!

I agree with Rudy. Post a link to the petition. I will sign it right away. It may also help if we can get some actual research statistics from some of the pros here. Perhaps someone can do some measurements of current and such.

Even though I'm in Canada, most of the above applies to me too. They are also banning magnetic ballasts in 2010 and incandescent lamps in 2012 up here. I think they're not touching MV up here but I could be wrong about that. I agree magnetic ballasts are really reliable since I have 40+ year old ballasts that still work quietly and like new. Instead of banning these "outdated" technologies I would much rather them give incentives for using electronic ballasts and efficient lighting if they like them so much but leave magnetic ballasts and incandescents on the market.

Guess I'll need to start stocking up on ballasts and incandescents then...  

Is there a site for posting a petition? I figure posting it here on LG would get the most attention.

This is stupid...why get rid of absolutely reliable (magnetic) technology for junky-useless (electronic) technology? I understand that they are more energy efficient but any savings you would have from that would be quickly lost due to frequent ballast replacement, so in essence, these ballast will end up costing more. Isn't that a step backwards? What is wrong with these people? If they are so concerned with saving energy why don't they try to improve the efficiency of the already proven magnetic ballast technology? I mean really, 30-40 years? You can't touch that!

Magnetic ballast efficacy come in the expense of it's weight - less losses mean thicker wires and lower saturation, what both mean more material needed.
But there is other aspect: Lamp life is way longer on electronic ballast, as in the electronic is feasible to lower the crest factor, so much less stress (so wear) on electrodes, what slow down arctube blackening. Second aspect is, then the electronic allow much more freedom to program the ballast output VA characteristics, so make feasible the stable operation of even much more blackened lamps without cycling or arctube explosions, so lamps are operable much closer till reaching the lumen loss limit.
All this assume properly designed and decently made ballast units, of course...

Does this all apply to the uk too, im not too sure.

Not exactly "magnetic", but the requirement for minimum efficiency level would be imposed, in the course of few years.
But magnetic ballasts meeting such requirement would be so heavy and expensive, they would be really a niche, if they "survive" at all.

IF government decides to get involved in lighting efficiency standards (and they will continue to), I think it's only fair to demand that they are also involved in lighting DURABILITY standards. Is this about saving the environment or about saving money? We know it's really the latter, and that is why we get cheap garbage that is produced by workers that aren't paid enough to produce good products OR even work in healthy working conditions.

I wouldn't have a problem with LEDs, CFL's and electronic ballasts IF they were made with quality components that would last their rated lives. What we have now are products with packaging that boast rated lives & lumens well above their actual performance characteristics. Pretty much ALL consumer electrical and electronic equipment is made in China, the fit & finish is awful, the components leak, blow up, wear out or cause cascading failures in other components in a fraction of the time older devices did.

But manufacturers just need to meet minimum efficiency guidelines and who cares if the product lasts 2 months, that means the customer will be back to buy more, particularly if the product warranty department never returns customer's calls. It's too much trouble to take legal action over relatively inexpensive consumer products, so the manufacturer wins.

It's definitely a bigger issue than just banning mercury vapor, incandescent lamps or magnetic ballasts. Look at the quality of these remaining products now - some displayed right here on the gallery - and they are awful too.

I have ONE beautifully-made T8 electronic dimming ballast, program start of course. I would like to be able to find another one, but have not been able to, lately. If people nowadays go back to the values Americans had back at the first World War (materials were scarce, so you made things LAST) and go ahead & pay a little more for something GOOD - and take care of the employees that make the products so they have MOTIVATION to make them well - then we might get somewhere! Until then, I guess we can continue to hoard our own stockpiles of yesterdays' goodies.

Wow, very well said and I think that pretty much explains it. I totally agree. I think I could 'like' electronic ballasts if they were at least not a total piece of garbage. To this day, every type of fixture I have installed outdoors that had an electronic ballast has since been replaced with one that had a magnetic ballast- not the same thing but it makes the same point. Now why can't they introduce electronic mercury ballasts (of decent quality), the ballast could be designed to be more energy efficient than the magnetic one so wouldn't that mean there would be no need to get rid of mercury lamps?

I agree with all your sentiments, but I think your best bet is to do as I've been doing any buy as many magnetic and Mercury ballasts as you can afford...

Already doing that. Now people will start running mercury lamps on mh ballasts.