Light Pollution: Burning Earth at Both Ends

Earth Hour goes global and invites the World

This year's Earth Hour now has 24(?) of last year's C40 Climate Change Summit Cities whose Mayors were in New York, May 2007. So where are the other World Mayors on this campaign trail - on their "gravy trains" instead? Sorry for the cynicism but these other guys will be JTL when what we really need to be is JIT. "Time is of the essence" according to Professor Richard Folkson, who has lectured on the "Zero-Carbon" Car : How Soon? If time IS of the essence then we must act and that means ALL of us. You know it makes sense!

Medical implications of Light Pollution

The medical implications of light pollution are now so well established that we need to get a handle on it and change the prevailing culture that states light is good and dark is bad. We need to reduce outdoor lighting to the levels that prevailed in the 1950's when its effects were not so serious. Maybe then the environment will begin to recover. Unfortunately we are up against an aggressive lighting industry that promotes more and brighter lighting by playing on the fear of crime. In this way it encourages the status quo and maximises profits. It is now well established that lighting does not reduce crime, so much lighting is not necessary. Outdoor lighting should only be applied sparingly, where needed, when needed, and in the correct amounts.

Waste and Damage from streetlighting

While there is the usual resistance to change even if for “sensible” lighting practices, there is going to be TREMENDOUS resistance to dealing with poorly designed streetlighting ---- all from the lighting manufacturers and the utilities (and their lobbyists). They have had free reign and it’s all gravy for them, but they know they are “in trouble” when we start to draw attention to wasteful night lighting. The financial waste and the air, water, and land pollution from the energy generated is huge, in the billions of dollars every year.

The lighting industry and the utilities have successfully used “fear” to continue a practice of lighting up our nights in ways that do not serve the public at all. Lighting should be about aiding night vision, not aiding the coffers of utility companies and lighting manufacturers. In California, they do not light their limited access highways and they are starting to re-evaluate the sense in lighting the access ramps. Headlights need to be factored into lighting design.

Did you know that the national Roadway Lighting Committee is made up almost entirely of people who financially benefit from “more” roadway lighting? This committee is unbalanced and should not be providing standards for the public.

We retrofitted all our acorn post top lights along East Hampton’s Main Street with a similar design, but shielded to direct the light downward, and were able to reduce the wattage by 100 watts each. In five years the project paid for itself, and now that savings is over 15,000 watts per year, reducing our municipal tax burden.

I’d suggest that people drive around at night and examine their local “streetlights”. Ask yourself and your municipal officials if the lights are serving any useful purpose. Are they lighting up private property? Are they producing glare from a drop (sag) lens on the bottom of the fixture? Are there any pedestrians that are using the lighting all night long, as they might be in NYC? Could these streetlights be turned off between midnight and 6 am by installing a timer? How much does your town pay for streetlighting per year? How do they decide “when” to install a streetlight? Was it a knee jerk reaction to an accident, even if the accident could not have been prevented with a streetlight? Are any deciduous trees being lit up, because they will be stressed by hanging onto their leaves into the dormant season and will die prematurely.

People assume that roadway lighting was installed following some sort of guideline. They were not.

Susan Harder

Dark Sky Society, NY

Ben Harder adds: Susan emailed me this PDF about light pollution. Also, for readers who are curious, I've asked Susan whether she and I might be related. We haven't identified any common relative, at least not yet.

Light Pollution & absolute waste.

I'm in full agreement with Graham Cliff, Colin Henshaw, and Susan Harder. The article quoted a waste in dollars of $10.4 billion, equal to around $34 dollars for every man, woman, and child in the U.S. And that's probably a low-ball amount! When one considers all of the other waste and losses from light pollution, it's sad.

We put men on the moon when computers weren't nearly as advanced as now; we'll soon be looking at photos taken of Pluto - and we can't light correctly at night? With all of the different types of fully-shielded fixtures now on the market, for utilities, and some lighting engineers, to say that it's not possible or feasible to achieve responsible lighting at night is ridiculous! There's far too much at stake to continue with the "status quo" or "business as usual."

Light Pollution and Breast Cancer

As an amateur astronomer, I'm all in favor of preventing light pollution, and Ben Harder's piece makes the case nicely, then seems to veer toward sensationalism.

I'm concerned about the report that 73% "more" breast cancer cases in Israel occur the country's brightest-lit areas. More than what?

A large part of any country's population -- maybe 73% of Israel's? -- lives in the brightest areas as measured by overhead photography. That's why they're bright -- lots of people living in relatively densely populated urban areas.

Is the incidence of breast cancer per 100,000 population significantly higher in the brightest (most densly populated urban) areas of Israel? And if so, how do we know other environmental factors in urban life and demographics are not responsible?

There are plenty of reasons for reducing light pollution without grasping at questionable health effects.

Accounting for population density

Robert, you raise an excellent question. Rigorous scientific studies need to take into account factors like (in this case) population density in order to distinguish potentially real effects from red herrings. In the study of light pollution in Israel, according to coauthor Richard Stevens, the researchers did adjust their data to take into account variations in population density and other factors, including income levels and residents' average age. The 73 percent figure they reported was the difference that remained after they had adjusted for those so-called confounding variables. That said, it's entirely possible that a variable they didn't adjust contributed to the higher rates of breast cancer in the brightest communities relative to the darkest communities.

More Links for You

Here are some links that may interest you:

http://missourinspa.googlepages.com/ - Missouri Night Sky Protection Act

http://ksnspa.googlepages.com/ - Kansas Night Sky Protection Act

http://darkskycamping.googlepages.com/ - Boy Scouts Light Pollution Page

http://mcrol.trianglealumni.org/ - MCROL

5th Annual Dark Sky Festival at Harmony - April 5, 2008

Ben, your story on light pollution just validates the whole purpose of the town of Harmony's Dark Sky Festival. Our event promotes and celebrates the benefits of living in a dark sky compliant community. It's also an educational forum.

We'd love to tell you more about it and encourage you to attend, if at all possible.

Feel free to check out: www.darkskyfestival.com for more info. You can also learn about our unique, environmentally intelligent town (located halfway between the Walt Disney World Resort and Melbourne Beach) at www.HarmonyFL.com.

I may be reached at melanie@doverwood.com.