Now enviro-policy to “end light pollution” has France on track to look like North Korea at night:
From The Guardian:
Lights out – France to force shops and offices to go dark overnight
French light pollution law is expected to save 250,000 tonnes of C02 a year
The French ecology minister, Delphine Batho, said she hoped the law would change attitudes in France and help the country become a pioneer in reducing light pollution.
Full story here.
We’ve come so far to rid ourselves of the dark, only to have the lights forcibly turned off by zealots.
Luboš Motl writes about the issue
“Light pollution” is quoted as another justification. I’ve seen some movies about “light pollution” and although one could a priori think that this could be a legitimate concern, I think that all the people claiming that light pollution is a problem are Luddite lunatics, too. There’s just lots of places on Earth where light pollution is nearly non-existent. You may still go there. It’s probably not too important because not too many people are going there.
Maybe “bad astronomer” Phil Plait will move to France or North Korea now, we can only hope.
Locally, the idea of turning off lights has found favor in plans forged by the lunatic fringe that inhabits our town’s “sustainability committee”, run by Former Mayor Ann Schwab, who managed to sneak in the “climate action plan” in a meeting few attended on the night of the last election in 2012. Predictably, it was approved.
Since these folks on the council seem to worship the European way of doing things, I predict they’ll soon follow with the same edict. We have a lone volunteer staffed Chico Community Observatory in the town’s Bidwell park that they fought tooth and nail 10 years ago (I know, I was a part of it then), and they’ll now likely use it as a means to an end since, “Light pollution” was discussed at the onset.
Oh, goodie! Another dramatic European demonstration of the horrific “Unintended Consequences” of anti-survival legislation enacted by fools, coming right up! Popcorn, anyone?
Of course there’s an element of exageration, it doesn’t seem to refer to street lighting. Call me a luddite, but I wish to add my two cents via 3G and iPad 4.
Anyone with a proper education shuts off all unnecessary power consuming equipment when leaving a room. I fail to see how keeping lights on from 1 am to 5 am, say, benefits anyone. Plus, I’m paying it!
Around here there’s a car park for about 30 cars. It has 13 lamp-posts. Is this normal? When I think of it I almost weep imagining my money pouring out of them in the night. I entirely fail to see why must I save energy and money when my tax money is thrown through the window like this.
There are solutions for intelligent public lighting. Sensors and lighting on demand.
Most crime is commited in plain daylight (and the most heinous and murderous in investmeNt banking).
Young people no longer know what a star looks like. Believe me, they’re surprised enough to see the moon. The night sky belongs in science-fiction sceneries. That has personal and cultural impact.
Most public lighting is innefectual, as badly conceived and installed reflectors spill light upwards.
And yes, not only do I detest useless waste, but I’m an amateur astronomer too 🙂
EJ says:
February 4, 2013 at 1:10 pm
Just think if the cavemen chose the sustainable future…. We would still be living in caves!
——————-
lol
Not drinking at the time.
cn
philjourdan says:
February 4, 2013 at 1:11 pm
@Michael Hart: re: “Ummm… the vast majority of French electricity comes from nuclear power.”
maybe the french just want to see who glows in the dark?
———————————–
The very next line.
Now that’s too much.
very funny
cn
jbird says:
February 4, 2013 at 6:07 pm
I never knew the French were so enLIGHTened. 🙂
———-
I believe that’s UNenLIGHTened.
cn
A good idea, too much artificial light in the wrong place.
Turn them off after midnight.
Let’s see the night sky properly again.
I wonder if the press release also mentioned how much money was saved?
Could the Guardian have ignored that point to lean on CO2 as the justification?
cn
Light pollution is a valid term. Lights should not shine upwards (why? to illuminate tree’s?) or should not shine into your bedroom, while you are trying to sleep. Saving energy is valid and it could be argued that you are not creating CO2 to some extend.
This should not institute turning all lights off either. But certain designs of lights have to be replaced with ones which only shine downwards.
Seeing a light bulb is bad, because it means stray light (wasted light) because it blinds you.
It could be argued that some lights are not needed and either are dimmed down or turned off.
How about motion detection?
We don’t want to make it easier for thiefs to break in our houses either.
But it is certainly true that many people are not able to see the milkyway, which is a shame.
Light pollution is real and a term not only used at Wikipedia, but also at National Geographics
(http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/11/light-pollution/klinkenborg-text).
Everybody is called to action to contribute!
Sometimes I get a peep into the minds of some of my fellow ‘AGW Catastrophe sceptics’ and I have to wince. What’s wrong with cutting down on light pollution? What’s wrong with us actually being able to look up and see the stars? What’s wrong with cutting down on needless energy costs – especially when it’s a government building paid for by the taxpayer?
Also….you Americans are always bashing on the French. Leave that to us British,we’ve been doing it longer. Facts: you won your independence thanks to France. The whole 1940 US Army if placed in France would have been swept away just like everyone else. The French were right not to join in the ill advised invasion of Iraq, Freedom Fries – pah!
Let’s get back to picking apart the lies and misinformation associated with the great Global Warming/Climate Change con job rather than this nonsense.
Do you sleep with the lights turned on? Do you really think the light scares the criminals? I don’t think so, this is just a comforting thought and nothing more. Even so, they will chose the shadows and you will never see them because of the contrast and the glare in your eyes. Light pollution is wasted energy. There is nothing useful or beautiful in light pollution. There are studies which suggest a dramatic impact of light pollution on the ecosystem and humans. besides, all of us who really like looking at the sky (as any scientist and amateur astronomer will do) are horrified to see an orange dome above our heads instead of stars. I usually like the postings here, but not this one. since when have you gone in the other extreme: that we should waste nevertheless as much resources and energy as possible, even if CO2 emissions were not such a big issue related to climate.
France has excess off-peak nuclear power, and uses load following (grey control rods). Smart meter with immersion heater and hot water tank could provide distributed storage which would also tend to reduce peak demand.
One of the joys of going on holiday to a warmer country far from any cities is lying on my back in the pitch dark and seeing the milky way with my naked eyes – oh and browsing a few objects with a pair of powerful tripod mounted binoculars.
Light pollution is pointless waste. Street lamps in the UK are just ridiculously badly designed. I would say about 20% of the light shines straight up into the sky. What is the point of that? Stick a decent sized reflector on top of them and we would get more effective lighting at ground level, a reduction in the electricity bills as you would need less powerful lights, and reduced light pollution. It is plain common sense.
I agree that it does not need legislation, just a bit of informed lobbying and education of local politicians to make sensible choices when choosing what lights to use when putting in new or replacement street lights.
If someone pays the bill, it’s immaterial what happens to the energy. There was a Green econut lawproposal to ban terrace heaters for bars/restaurants. Waste of energy to keep people comfortable it seems.
From switching off lights by law to more extreme measures is only a question of time once the first step has been made. The law can be now easily ‘upgraded’ to encompass other ‘wasteful’ uses. Xmas lighting, using your washing machine during peak load hours the list is endless how the government could invade your privacy and right of selfdetermination under the guise of energy conservation. There is no shortage of energy, there won’t be.
In Germany at high wind electricity has a negative price, they have to pay their neighbors to please take the overload of their grid. It’s all completely absurd.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-04-22/windmill-boom-curbs-electric-power-prices.html
Nice, especially if you have sunk 140 billion euro’s in your windfarms and now have to pay to get the electricity taken of your hands. Not exactly the smartest investment in the world.
Even more grating when your neighbors start to refuse to accept your electricity:
http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article112279952/Polen-macht-die-Grenze-fuer-deutschen-Strom-dicht.html
Its a total mess, considering that Germany is in big trouble with their ambitious windprogram
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-offshore-wind-offensive-plagued-by-problems-a-852728.html but they know where to get their money anyway, just up the price nationally http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/10/10/us-germany-energy-renewables-idUKBRE8990PC20121010 so just like Denmark they are now subsidizing the electricity of their neighbors
The concept of variable energy generation has been conclusively proven to be unworkable. In 10 to 20 years the generators need replacing, but with no revenue coming in they can’t even pay the original investment without supercharging the price.
Find out why an Astronomers torch shines a red light.
Bright white LED lights gifted to the councils are garbage for clear street vision. Anything towards the blue desensitises the eye creating stronger dark zones so will killer cyclist will come out you from hiding in the shadows. >:-))
Red creates less eye desensitisation in the dark.
Rhodopsin (the chemical we use in night vision) is damaged by short wavelengths more than long ones and by bright light more than dim light. So to best preserve night vision you need two things: light as dim as possible, and light as red as possible.
Tests done decades ago by the US air force established that red cockpit lighting did least damage to pilots’ night vision.
Petrossa…the Econnazi desire to ban patio heaters is new to me but true to my prediction: the reason is utterly certain to be that it is an additional attack on smokers who these heaters have largely been adopted to accomodate in elaborate outside smoking areas (in the UK since smoking was banned inside bars).
This graphically illustrates how issues of “environment” are being used as a fairly blatant tool of social control. Environmentalism equates to complete intolerance. If such a plan were carried through it would pretty much end the pub and bar industry in the UK which has already been decimated by the smoking ban. I supply services to the pub industry. I can show you astonishing listsof pubs that have closed permanently (becoming houses mainly) since the ban took effect.
One can only hope that the more people the Econazis alienate the more their grip will lessen.
AndyJ says:
“February 4, 2013 at 6:01 pm
@Wamron you incomprehensible, illiterate child.
You are a cretin. “gedditt”. So, if people here deny you of your pleasures because you say its the right thing to do onto others. That would be ok will it?”
ACTUALLY….nobody here is “denying” you anything. You admit its just your “pleasure” that is all..and YOU want to deny EVERYONE ELSE their safety, security and…indeed, their “pleasure” (eg, being able to walk in a city at night) to suit you and your selfish affectation (“oh Im an astronomer”). THAT failure of reasoning majkes YOU an idiot! You aren’t an astronomer, you are a tinkering selfish uncaring unempathic fool.
“Seems uneducated losers like you come on here when mummy has taken your xbox away so you might get some sleep before school..” Only a complete and utter pillock paints a stereotype like that based on a person who doesnt conform to the meritricious AFFECTATIONS of a perceived social role : I am university trained at both Bsc and BA, being both a qualified scientist and an exhibited artist with five books published of which one is an encyclopedic 400,000 word work on my field. I have run my own business accross several countries for twenty years and I do not possess a television All this while AndyJ piffles aroundwith a telescope pretending to be Lord Herschel.
“People who have a scientific and life interests in the world outside an LCD will count many real world hobbies through their lifetimes as unforgettable experiences that sad little scrotes like you can never comprehend..” Well Ive corrected his pathetic, anal-retentive, miserably shallow prejudices and bigotry already, but I might add that anyone who rates a pathetic pseudo-scientific hobby (playing with atelescope doesnt make anyone an astronomer, just someone locked in a fantasy of something they aren’t) ..cannot have had much by the way of interesting “life interests”. I have travelled to destinations in the US, Australia, India, and Europe since childhood, my siblings include engineers and a scientist with a theorem named after him, I have had sex with women a telescope twiddler who plays with his phallic toy could only dream of (recently I might add and numerously) and I have been a guest on TV shows and on stage in Europe.
I mention all this and quote Andy j in his lame entirety so as to highlight the way the stereotype-governed narrow little mind of such creatures work. He knows utterly nothing about a topic (me)and rushes to paint a detailed picture (X box etc) based on vivid imaginings in his fetid pent-up pathetic little excuse for a “mind”.
Some would tell him “get a life”. But I cannot see there is any hope of such a person ever getting a version of a life many would want to suffer.
For street lighting, LED has advantages in efficiency, highly directional light, low maintenance, and improved efficiency at low temperatures. No warm-up time is also an advantage for the interactive lighting described earlier. Also, if the interactive lighting option was used with the highest efficiency red-orange LEDs for the background level of illumination (warm white for active illumination) using similar technology to the L-Prize bulb http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L_Prize you should get both improved efficiency, and discrete wavelength(s) for the astronomers to filter.
Bernd Felsche says:
February 4, 2013 at 10:48 pm
Replace always-on internal lighting with motion sensing lights and then revisit that check for intruders. Adding reporting features to the lights and security can hang out in the control room watching the progress until backup arrives.
a_random_guy says:
February 5, 2013 at 12:17 am
> Geez, did anyone actually *read* the article?
Anthony expanded the scope of discussion with:
> Luboš Motl writes about the issue
> “Light pollution” is quoted as another justification.
However, I confess I didn’t read the artice – all the comments on light pollution is a bit of a sore spot with amateur astronomers.
Well done, the French. If only I could get rid of the sodium light glaring all night in my bedroom.
It used to be nice & dark at night, you could see Orion on stepping outside the front door, then the local council decided to limit the road to 30MPH. and installed streetlighting. Traffic is now *faster*, as drivers can see the road clearly, and there’ve been a couple of accidents from people screaming round the corner without slowing down.
Must try light pollution complaints. If I had an attic window I’d be shining a laser down on the daylight sensor..
As many enlightened people have stated, opposition is directed at the mandate rather than the idea itself, and correctly so.
…..oh…and given his evident inability to recognise the astronomical facilities and characters I earlier referred to, I suspect I actually know more about astronomy and certainly far more about space science than he does as well!
Nothing wrong with reducing light pollution, which is really just light that is misdirected from where it is actually needed. People don’t realise what they’re missing in terms of the night sky in many of our cities, and with higher density living there does need to be an appreciation of harmful effects of too much stray light on neighbours who have no choice in the matter. There is also medical evidence that darkness provides a better quality sleep.
The French approach is probably the wrong one however …
I hope and suspect that LED directionality will remove the problem.
Zurich, Switzerland has an observatory which, today, is essentially unusable due to street lights. It was built back in the days of gas lanterns. With directional lighting, once again it will be usable.
Like many have pointed out, directional lighting is efficient lighting. I’m all in favor of efficiency when it’s my pocket being picked for taxes to support the lighting costs.
Flagstaff, AZ calls itself a “dark skies” community. All that means is that all of the outdoor lights in the city have to be shielded so that the light is focused down and all street/parking lot lighting used to have to be sulfur bulbs, but recently they must have changed the bulb type requirement allowing LED bulbs (makes it impossible to drive at night when it is snowing).