@lightingexpert235 ...and it's all your fault for spewing hot air into the virtual world and contributing to virtual global warming.   
 
Seems like making your first post on this forum a ridiculous rage attach on members is not a great way to get started. just my 2 cents...

But I think the government having to force bans to make people save energy is ridiculous...but I also think that the overall state of the industry, specifically its weak attempt to move the state of the art further along is also ridiculous.  Nothing wrong with T12, but the problem is everything that is wrong with the newer technologies. It seems like people should want to develop newer, more efficient technologies that are even longer lasting, but instead, we get this junk on the market that makes the people that know better reluctant to switch...and rather than companies working hard to improve them and gain some presence in the market, they just let the government force people off of older technologies like parents taking candy away from kids. Kind of like ever increasing fuel prices, or food prices...yeah it sucks, but where else are you going to go? Companies are perfectly capable of producing reliable electronic ballasts, they just choose not to because there's no competitive edge to spending more money to do so than the next guy. Nobody in the consumer sector seems to understand the concept of long term cost, meaning the manufacturers don't need to pay as much attention to it. All people want to see is what they can get with the least amount of money NOW! If you try to explain the reason to buy the more expensive model, etc...they look at you for a second like you're on crack, and proceed as they were.

The other thing to consider is the fact that no matter how well engineered an electronic ballast is, it's simply not going to last as long as a block of iron with some wire wrapped around it. Yes, you will have to replace them more often, but it could turn out that the amount of energy saved by using the electronic ballast will pay for the increased maintenance, much like comparing SOX lamps to other lighting solutions.  That way energy is saved AND jobs are created.  This will only be true if someone could make an electronic ballast that would at least last the warranty period (5 years for most that I've seen) I would be perfectly fine having to replace ballasts every 5 years if they saved enough energy to offset their shorter service life, made lamps last longer, and ran flicker free (one especially nice advantage over magnetic).

@SOX55W: The life of the electronic strongly depend on the state of the installation.
Yes, they are way more sensitive for many things (vibrations, mechanical stress, electrical overvoltage stresses, wire length towards the lamp,...) then the chunk of iron and copper wire and this is the reason for them to fail.
They are designed to work on an installation meeting the newest code requirements (overvoltage protections,...) and in setups 100% following the requirements in the documentation.
Places, where I worked have either no problems at all with nearly any electronic ballast (include the cheapest ones, but don't count for lamp EOL effects), or none of them endure longer then few months, with the same ballast types as in the previous group.

So where I haven' seen them to fail:
  New office building, all stages of overvoltage protections, no other types on the circuit, in original brand name fixtures.

Where they do fail very frequently:
  Mixed with magnetics, usually installed as part of "gradual improvement, what the money allow", mainly when many of them are already in substandard condition (missing PFC capacitors,...)
  Cheap ballasts operated with cheap tubes, where such ballasts do not have reliable EOL protection and cheap tubes go to EOL very soon
  Old installation with frequently switched heavy loads and/or where the overvoltage protection is missing
  Retrofitted into existing fixtures, mainly those using remote ballasts (ballast is n the base on the ceiling, lamp hang abut a meter below)
  Operating in heavy vibrations (gym's, around industrial machinery,...)

I would really call this a compatibility issue: Electronic ballasts are not compatible with many existing installations...

What is ill in the bans: They either neglect the clear compatibility problem and/or expect the installation to be everywhere updated to 100% meet the requirements of the newest standards...

...and if you're in the US, next comes the useless, bloated, expensive government run program to help offset the cost of stuff like a complete upgrade, driving the country even deeper into debt, which means they have to tax the crap out of everyone to cover it, which is partly why nobody's got any money to do this stuff for themselves.  just my 2c.

But yeah, the power spikes from alot of switched inductive loads can't be good for the electronic ballasts, but then again, why doesn't it eventually fry other electronic things on the same lines, such as computers, TV's, etc. or is it only really a big deal if the electronic device is on the same switch with the inductive loads? Is there a way to protect the electronic ballasts from having magnetics on the same switch (this may actually be a problem I'll have to face with an upgrade project of my own)?  But yes, you pretty much confirmed what I suspected...poor implementation combined with the cheapest parts off the shelf. Good engineering is hard work!

@SOX55W: The computers, TV's,... are not BEHIND the switch together with the magnetic ballasts.
The problem is the kick-back originating when you switch OFF the lighting circuit. If contacts open at the moment of high current, the current continue to flow (inductance of loads) and try to find another way by elevating the voltage.
If there are ONLY those magnetic ballasts, it usually cause an arc across the switch and dissipate there quite harmlessly (switches are designed to handle this and are quite proven to endure it in a sufficient manner). But that cause up to few kV pulse on the switched line. The electronic ballasts try to catch this by their input stage (rectifier and tank capacitor), but then the whole energy is redirected towards these ballasts, into their DC bus tank capacitor. But this capacitor is usually designed to cover up for pulsation from the rectified AC and are not excessive in value, the energy from the magnetic ballast of the same power would usually charge them to the double of normal operating voltage. In real life their dielectric oxide layer break down and so he device block further voltage rise (but with some resistance), but even when the oxide recover (electrolytics work in that way normally), the extreme local load on the electrolyte cause their degradation. So multiple such pulses and they are dead...

 Well the government sure have unintended purpose. I have 2100 watts solar power. Most of my F48 every day
 use runs on DC ballast that is design to run on off grid power. I can run F48 or F40 tubes with them
 baning. and it just bad enough that they want to limit my choice of tubes that I like. more freedom
 of lighting taken away.  limiting murcury in the tubes is not being green at all. you just burn though
 more tubes though replacement; I don't like stocking up cases of tubes and bulbs which I don't have room for the up coming ban; not a fan of that. also baning incandescent bulbs is just as bad enough. Live in south Texas and it don't get freezing that often. 4 100 incandescent bulb is enough to heat my small building. at least i got
two case of tubes and 15 cases of 100 watts bulbs, got more tubes to go.

And even worse things now. China has clamped down on the companies making the rare earth phosphors (supposedly) and there will be only one large company. Right now they aren't exporting ANY of these. The claim is these small companies are polluting heavily and that has to be cleaned up, but since China has most of these rare earth elements to make the phosphors, to me it seems they want to be the only provider at their prices and this is forbidden by the World Trade Agreements, but after all this is China and I don't think they worry about not honoring the signed agreements.

Powell

When you have solar power, the lamp efficiency becomes less important and pollution to produce the lamp more important. So on solar power, i would go hands down with the "inefficient" and "harmfull" mercury that lasts for 20 years

Why do they decide to ban you from using energy the way you want, especially if it is GREEN ENERGY ANYWAY they are forcing you to pollute MORE in the name of ecology

When you have solar power, the lamp efficiency becomes less important and pollution to produce the lamp more important. So on solar power, i would go hands down with the "inefficient" and "harmfull" mercury that lasts for 20 years

I would say lamp efficiency is still about as important. A lot of energy went in to manufacture the panels themselves (and any storage batteries, both with a limited lifespan), with can't be ignored. The EROEI (energy returned on energy invested ratio) of solar power (and most renewable energy sources excluding hydropower) is low. And since using a less effienct lamp would require larger panels for the same amoutn of light, they would also require more energy to be used in the production of panels. So IMO using solar power is, by itself, only a small excuse for not using the energy efficiently.

The size of the batteries / panels determines the maximum power you can pull out of the system, and the maximum energy you an store. If the system is capable of providing the power or capacity anyway, then using it for the lamp does not add extra requirements on the system construction or maintenance

If the system (mostly inverter) is powerfull enough to power a microwave, then it is powerfull enough to power the mercury lamp when the microwave is off, so you allready have the large enough inverter anyway

If the system (mostly battery capacity and solar panel input to recover that capacity) is sufficient to run washing machine etc, then it has  sufficient capacity to power the mercury lamp (not on the same discharge cycle)

It is true that when available power would otherwise be lost if not used, using it (no matter how inefficient) is good, but it does not always apply since there won't always be such spare capacity available when needed (without making the system larger).

Which means you have to think for yourelf how to manage the power, I suppose you know it well if you use solar system, which is important skill, unlike most grid users that can plug in 'till the breaker trips and pay afterwards

Since you are lighting enthusiast you probably have few different lamp fixtures, so you can pick every time the one most suited for the task

 Ash

 you are correct; It all about energy management. most of my wattage used in summer time ac load. i also have 7.2 kw battery bank. my energy management comes at night time during the summer month that what why i run it cold during the day 62 degrees in there. but the ac runs at 600 running watts. My DC ballast F40s is factored
in my every day use. other than that during the cool month even though the winter of 400 watt heat load of incandescent bulbs.in south Texas there plenty of nights in the winter month of no heating. i can light up a lot light for what lighting mood i am in. now i am just starting to fire up my MV lights.

As for heating, you can try solar panel to heat water (one that directly heats the water pipes under the sun, not electrical) and store it in a tank overnight, and in the night run it with a small (few W) pump to radiator

I never tried it but i want to (when i acquire an appropriate storage tank), since here are many days in spring and fall where days are hot and nights are cold

Sorry for Off topic post

 due to my extreame Air condition load in hot summer texas. it take 2100 watt to keep the batteries charge
  for 24 hr operation for 4 month out of the year. so during fall and winter month my usage drop to almost
  300 watt hour. the rest ended up getting wasted as heat by the deversion controller when the batteries are full
  so i figure why not burn some of the waste power as heat inside during the cold days. not only that, i installed those panel my self for intended AC load application to ween off gasoline-alternator combo
for power.

You can swap a controller and disconnect some batteries to lower the capacity. Swap the batteries once in a while to not led the disconnected sets sulfate