In om, meow2222 wrote:
Clive Mitchell wrote:
In message , Andy Wade
writes
wrote:

There is also Victor's point about flicker, but really if a light is
flickering noticeably its replacement time anyway, so its not such an
issue in practice. It is in large lighting installations though, where
faulty fittings are liable to be left running. But as long as its
working ok, there isnt a problem.

Unless stroboscopic effects in connection with rotating machinery are a
problem.

I believe it's in the kitchen, so there is a high possibility of putting
ones hand into the seemingly motionless cake mixer. :P

machinery strobing is possible with mag ballasts, but doesnt normally
happen, and does not make it look stationary even when it does. Its not
as much of an issue as is often thought, even in workshops. In a house
its a non issue. And cake mixers are well interlocked

Although I agree with these presented facts, I do not find majority
extent (slightly short of 100% even if hardly) of negation of some
advantages of electronic ballasts to be any argument at all against
arguments on basis of unrelated issues such as energy efficiency (reduce
power consumption anywhere from roughly 7 watts to roughly 25 watts per
pair of 4-footers, depending on who you listen to and also depending on
what you do! Replace a pair of F40T12's and a non-electronic ballast for
these with a pair of F32T8's and an electronic ballast for those and power
consumption has a good chance of being decreased by roughly 24-25 watts -
along with a majority of red and green colored objects being illuminated
more brightly!

- Don Klipstein )