Most of the opinions expressed on this web-site re the curfew on lighting are pitiful, to put it mildly. They show a blatant disregard for the environment, and those responsible for such opinions are part of the problem.
Let’s get one thing straight. Lighting does not reduce crime. This has been well established over the past few years, yet people persist in installing more and brighter lighting in the mistaken belief that it will help. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most crime occurs in daylight, ergo criminals need light. If you expand lighting, then you will encourage people to behave at night more as they would do during the day. If lighting stops crime, explain why it is that during power cuts, criminality drops to zero?
I’m not against lighting, but it must only be used sparingly, on a needs must basis; when needed, where needed, and in the correct amounts. Street lighting where deemed necessary should be full cut-off or better, and all security lighting should be motion operated. On minor suburban roads street lighting should be subject to an 11p.m. till dawn curfew, and not switched on again until the following night. Decorative lighting that does not serve any useful purpose should not be tolerated.
So how do we guarantee safety on our streets? There are methods of making roads safer without naive recourse to street lighting - cat’s eyes, reflective paints, and baffles on motorway reservations rank high on the list.
Two thirds of all street lighting could (and probably should) be eliminated without any serious effect.
So what are the benefits of reduced lighting? First and foremost we regain our night. Living things need darkness in order to function normally, and the orange fog that currently pervades our cities prevents them from getting it. Lights attract insects, so our cities have been sucking them up for decades, like a vacuum cleaner. Consequently the country has become increasingly sterile. So what you might ask? Well, any decline in insects will have a concomitant effect on higher order consumers, and because of this we are now seeing serious declines in spiders, amphibians, reptiles, common birds and small mammals. If that does not concern you then go on as before, but the environment will pay you back anyway, with compounded interest.
Insects also pollinate plants, so the decline of insects is important because it will ultimately affect crop production. Reduced plant diversity will exacerbate the already declining insect population, making the situation worse.
Increased lighting levels also affect humans. It suppresses melatonin secretion by the pineal gland. Melatonin is also an anti-oxidant that suppresses cancer, and this has lead to increased levels of breast and prostate cancer in illuminated areas. This is backed up by the fact that blind women rarely get breast cancer.
Satellite imagery of the Earth at night that became available during the mid 1990’s revealed the lights of thousands of cities world-wide, cooking the atmosphere all night, three hundred and sixty nights a year, year in, year out. It is no longer possible to deny that this is having an effect on global warming, and this is not taking into consideration the carbon dioxide emissions produced from the fuel used to keep them going.
So to conclude, all this excessive lighting is detrimental not only to the environment, but to ourselves. Darkness is normal at night, and the sooner we realise that fact, the better. These curfews are coming because they are an absolute necessity, so the nay-sayers should put up and shut up.
I’m a professional lighting designer, and you’re wrong.
You’re referring to information that’s been put forth with an obvious agenda other than crime prevention. Over and over, police departments across the nation (The US, mind you) consistently recommend two things for improved home security and residential crime prevention: a good lighting plan and a good watchdog.
Here are some references:
http://www.iesna.org/
http://www.cpted-watch.com/
http://www.leepac.org/
http://www.thecptedpage.wsu.edu/Resources.html
http://www.defensiblespace.com/book.htm
http://www.cptedsecurity.com/
Lights attract insects, so our cities have been sucking them up for decades, like a vacuum cleaner. Consequently the country has become increasingly sterile. So what you might ask? Well, any decline in insects will have a concomitant effect on higher order consumers, and because of this we are now seeing serious declines in spiders, amphibians, reptiles, common birds and small mammals.
As if city lights pull all the country insects toward the lethal concrete jungle where the self-destructive humans live , like a giant bug zapper? And when this happens, there aren't any left in the countryside, they've all come to the city to meet their doom.
I can't tell you how totally silly this sounds. Do you have any idea how many offspring a single insect can produce? Let a bucket of standing water persist for a while, and the mosquitoes will carry you off and mug you in the woods.
I live way out in the country on a small Alabama farm. There is no lack of insects here! There is no lack of small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds, and assorted wildlife. In fact, if city lights would attract the bugs out of here I'd be forever grateful, as would my garden and corn patch, peach and pecan trees, and assorted plants.
Where did you study entomology, by the way? At the school I teach at, we have a very vigorous entomology department. I'm sure they'll be very interested in you bug lighting theory!
I've got a better idea. Instead of trying to force your Marxist BS on the rest of society, YOU crouch at your dung fire near your mud hut and "shut up."
Meanwhile the rest of us can continue to enjoy what passes for civilization in relative peace.
I hear ya, mate. And next off, we'll set about eliminating all those artificial caves. People need to learn to live in purely natural caves, or sleep under the stars.