I love all the ideas, which all end up though, at:
a. Keep the old system (cheapest in the short term)
b. Switch to LEDs (expensive in the short term)

Long term, I don't think anyone argues LEDs aren't better.
I'm in a cash crunch though, with lights going out, one by one.

The 4' twin tube fluorescent uses 64 watts and pumps out 5700 lumens of
light, for $49.

The 4' LED version uses 50 watts and only puts out 4000 lumens, for $109.

That's more than twice the cost, 1700 lumens less light output, and only
saves 14 watts of energy.

If you only have a few lights on a couple hours each night, it would take a
long time to pay off the extra cost of the LED lights. Save your money and
go with the fluorescents.

However, when you start talking about 10 fixtures running all night long,
the power savings could be significant.

Of course, there may be other factors to consider. When I installed new
lights in my garden shed, I opted for more expensive LED lights, primarily
because they were very low profile. So there is less chance of me hitting
the lights as I'm swinging a rake, shovel, or board around in the shed.
I'm lucky if I turn those lights on two hours a month, and rarely at all in
the winter months. So power savings wasn't a factor in that decision.

Anthony Watson
www.watsondiy.com
www.mountainsoftware.com