Dark-sky Advocates to Push for Nationwide Lighting Reforms [light pollution]

spaceref.com ^ | 24 Oct 02 | Sky and Telescope

[RightWhale]

Dark-sky Advocates to Push for Nationwide Lighting Reforms [light pollution]

Energy and lighting specialists from throughout the U.S. and Canada are gathering in Boston, Massachusetts, this weekend for a meeting of the International Dark-Sky Association (IDA). They'll be taking aim at the ubiquitous pall of urban skyglow known as "light pollution," its effects on our health and our society, and what can be done to halt and reverse its spread.

Members of the news media are welcome to attend the sessions on Friday, October 25th. These invited talks and panel discussions will take place at the Museum of Science in Boston. Speakers are nationally recognized experts from the lighting industry, government agencies, power-utility companies, and others from the fields of medicine, environmental science, and astronomy. Key areas of discussion will include:

-- the glare and energy waste associated with poor-quality lighting
-- the effects of light at night on humans and wildlife
-- community and commercial efforts to improve lighting practices

A press conference will be held at 12:45 p.m. in Cahners Theater at the Museum of Science.

The second day of the meeting, Saturday, October 26th, will convene at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge. Due to limited seating, we are not encouraging attendance by members of the news media. Instead, we will try to arrange interviews on Friday with the Saturday sessions' invited speakers and other experts in attendance.

Satellite images dramatically reveal that roughly of a third of the light used outdoors escapes upward, totally wasted, into the night sky. The IDA estimates that each year in the United States, more than $1 billion is spent to generate this wasted light -- resulting in the needless burning of some 6,000,000 tons of coal annually.

Founded in 1988, the IDA has about 10,000 members in all 50 states and 70 countries. Its 450 organizational members include lighting engineers and manufacturers, security personnel, government agencies, and municipalities. The IDA is a nonprofit research and education organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the nighttime environment and our heritage of dark skies through quality outdoor lighting.

[palmer]

You went from NM to MN? You either have a dyslexia problem or you like cold w\aether.

[Physicist]

Do you, personally, really care about the energy efficiency of light fixtures?

If so, why?

I sure do, because I'm a taxpayer who helps to pay for the light that does me more harm than good. Moreover, the additional demand for power puts upward pressure on what I pay for the power I use myself.

And it's not just astronomy: I have to draw the curtains at night because the light from the sky here in Philly is literally bright enough to keep me awake.

[gridlock]

Here is my objection, in a nutshell:

When it comes down to nut cracking time, the political process is going to have to determine winners and losers.

The Dark Sky advocates want to use any means available, including government regulation, to limit the amount of fugitive light pollution. Their reason for this is obvious. But instead of being up-front about their desire for darker skies for the purposes of astronomy, they will dress up their crusade with a lot of extraneous and irrelevant information about energy conservation and environmental quackery.

The advocates know that this will give them a much stronger position in the political process and make the chance of eventual governmental intervention in their favor much greater.

The problem with this is that the political decision will inevitably take some rights from some to give a benefit to others. That's what the politics of regulation is all about. By introducing a lot of extraneous arguments, the political process is distorted, and too much weight is placed on the interests of the Dark Sky advocates. Which means they will probably carry the day, eventually.

I guess if you are rooting for the people doing the manipulation, you don't really care that it is deceitful. But just remember that others will do it to you, also.

So twenty years from now, when you are bicycling to work in the middle of a Maine winter because some enviro-weenies succeeded in banning the internal combustion engine, don't dare complain about how they won by making up a bunch of nonsense about global warming and caribou, because you will have advocated the practice of winning through manipulation.

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

We need to reduce the night glare so that I can sell neon billboards attached to megasatellites in low-Earth orbit. Just imagine a series of these carrying DemonRat messages during the campaign seasons.

[Physicist]

The Dark Sky advocates want to use any means available, including government regulation, to limit the amount of fugitive light pollution.

Now who's not being up-front? It isn't dark skies you object to, it's a specific solution that you fear. I fear that solution, too, as a matter of fact. But that argument is quite apart from the (very real) merits of a dark sky.

In reality, the lion's share of the light pollution comes from public-sector streetlamps.

[sphinx]

We took the world's greatest four year old to Big Meadows Lodge on Skyline Drive a couple of weeks ago. Totally unprompted, she volunteered, "Hey, there's a lot of stars!" In fact, it was a clear night, and I'm glad to report the whole Milky Way is still there. Can't see it in the city, of course.

So the city girl now knows there are more than a dozen stars. Too bad we have to drive a hundred miles to show her.

[RightWhale]

It is unfortunate that Int Dark-Sky is trying to preserve something since that makes them the same order of scoundrels as the greenies. But you know the greenies don't give a fig about the night sky, nor any kind of science. I don't know that any Int Dark-Sky associates are interested in any greenie campaigns at all. Different kinds of people. Haven't seen a greenie yet who had real numbers to work with. IDS is using education and economics to influence local governments in the types of lighting they purchase for municipal use. They are also trying to make low-light scattering, higher efficiency lighting appliances available for homeowners and businesses. Too bad these things are being mandated instead of people just using common sense.

I hope to be driving a methane fuel cell powered car 20 years from now even though it will emits clouds of the notorious greenhouse gas - water vapor.

[gridlock]

To put it another way:

Remember a few years ago a University was trying to expand the Mt. Polamar facility to put in a big steerable array? Astronomists from all over the world were in favor of the plan, but the project was keeboshed by the Endangered Species Act.

It seems that there was a specific species of squirrel that lived on the ridge where they wanted to build. So the locals, who were opposed to the construction of the facility for their own reasons, sued under the ESA. They did not really care about the squirrel, of course. It was just a tool they used to stop the project that they opposed for whatever selfish reasons they had.

I don't know which side ultimately prevailed, but the misuse of the ESA wound up delaying the project for years, at least, and led to a lot of wasted money and aggravation. The astronomers railed endlessly about how unfair it all was.

Now the boot is on the other foot, and the astronomers are kicking for all they're worth. Ironic, isn't it?

[united1000]

Do you remember during the earthquake in CA that the police were getting calls from people who had slept in the street the night before about all the lights in the sky? They had no idea what they were seeing!!! They were seeing STARS !!

There is not a reason in the world that a person can't install a light fixture that shines the light down, instead of a fixture that shines half the light up into the sky! It's a waste of energy, costs more, and ruins the night sky!! Good luck to them........

[1rudeboy]

Where's the irony? Sounds like the astronomers got screwed both times.

[taxcontrol]

The foolish man builds a 10' bonfire and stands 10' away. The wise man builds a 1' fire and stand 1' away.

[RightWhale]

The wise man builds a 1' fire and stand 1' away

I forgot to mention that not only will the city manager be pleased to pay less of an electric light bill, but city taxes can be reduced by this amount as well.

[ScholarWarrior]

But it makes such a good indicator of civilization.

Ever seen the night picture of the world from space?
The U.S., Europe, and Japan are reasonably well lit.
The rest of the world is in the dark. And is likely to stay that way.

[RightWhale]

A couple of the brightest lights are oilfield flares. You want dark, go to the middle of Africa or N Kor. Maybe dark isn't first on the list of things to have. OTOH, all the light going into space from civilized areas is light wasted, which is money wasted. It might be just 1 or 2% of our budget, not the big item, but it could be improved. A little pay boost for everybody.

[another cricket]

I forgot to mention that not only will the city manager be pleased to pay less of an electric light bill, but city taxes can be reduced by this amount as well.

Yeah, they'll (*snicker*) lower taxes! Maybe in your town.

In my town, on the other hand, they would find some reason to raise them, bless their evil little hearts.

If they can make a light that would allow me to see the sky a little more clearly and would be cheaper to use then there has to be some reason why people aren't buying and using it. People and especially businesses don't waste money if they can help it. So there has to be a catch somewhere.

a.cricket

[RightWhale]

there has to be a catch somewhere.

The main catch is that lighting fixture stores don't stock them, and they don't stock them because no one asks for them. And no one asks for them because lighting fixture stores don't stock them.

But the big suppliers are making them and in some locations provide them because big customers, municipalities and DOT specify them.

Install a fully shielded porch light and tell your neighbors it is superior in many ways and make them jealous so they will want them too. They are really nifty, and don't glare in your face as you approach your own house. Takes getting used to, being able to actually see things you might otherwise trip over in in the glare from your porchlight.

[LBGA]

Countries that allow citizens to earn enough money to light their homes is a beautiful thing.

[gcruse]

Around San Jose, and for the benefit of the Lick Observatory, the street lighting is down-directed,
amber, and just what you are describing. On a clear
night, I could see maybe twenty stars. Not much improvement, really, but the observatory seemed happy.
Here in Texas, the difference is notable. But if you
really want to see a night sky, drive through Blythe
or Needles, Arizona and get out of the car at one or
two in the morning. It'll make you dizzy.

[clamper1797]

I'm completely in the dark about this subject