41–50 of 89 posts
The article is saying "cool it and dim it" but I think they mean to say "warm it and dim it". They suggest the temperature should not be above 3000 kelvin.
That is because redder colors correspond to a cooler or lower color temperature. Colloquially, we think of blues as cool and reds as warm, but blue light is actually more energetic (or "hot") than red light.
And people go install 4,000 and 5,000K LED lights in their kitchens and homes because it feels modern, can you imagine the disruption. I always insist on installing 2,800K at a max with my clients.
Title is misleading; it's not LED streetlights, it's the color temperature of LED streetlights. While the article raises a few good points, color temperature isn't new; it's not like LEDs have some inherent issue that impacts health.
I would argue that people with those crazy LED headlights are even worse. Since I often work late, I get the pleasure of being temporarily blinded as a white dwarf passes by at 45mph regularly.
And don't even get me started on the LED eye melters that cyclists are running these days. Some are about as bright as car headlights, but the spread and aim are inferior - especially since the folks that run those invariably seem to point them up from the horizontal. I keep thinking about mounting a 8 D cell maglight on a gimbal on my handlebars to give them a photon in-kind response.
And what about laptop monitors?
And what about laptop monitors?
The article is saying "cool it and dim it" but I think they mean to say "warm it and dim it". They suggest the temperature should not be above 3000 kelvin.
That is because redder colors correspond to a cooler or lower color temperature. Colloquially, we think of blues as cool and reds as warm, but blue light is actually more energetic (or "hot") than red light.
> "In addition to its impact on drivers, blue-rich LED streetlights operate at a wavelength that most adversely suppresses melatonin during night." I wonder if this ends up saving thousands of lives by decreasing fatigue in drivers. The blue light argument seems like absolute hogwash; we're exposed to orders of magnitude brighter blue light every day. It's called daylight, and the streetlights dont't even emit UV.
Yes, but daylight only occurs during the day, hence the name.
Only because for more than a century the overwhelming majority of domestic light bulbs aped the colour temperature of candles, so that nightlight unconsciously became associated with yellowness.
There's nothing inherently 'right' about warm yellow light, it's entirely subjective based upon conditioning. For example people in hot, arid climates describe blue-white light as relaxing because it is associated with the cooler early morning. To them, yellow light is the scorching midday Sun. Having lived exclusively with 'daylight' domestic lighting for nearly a decade I agree with them.
The solution to disruptive street lighting is not to fiddle with colour temperatures but to turn off the lighting when it's not required. A residential street doesn't need to be illuminated at 03:00 if there are no cars or pedestrians, but managing that would require motion sensors. Easier just to let the bulb burn away through the night.
I would argue that people with those crazy LED headlights are even worse. Since I often work late, I get the pleasure of being temporarily blinded as a white dwarf passes by at 45mph regularly.
And don't even get me started on the LED eye melters that cyclists are running these days. Some are about as bright as car headlights, but the spread and aim are inferior - especially since the folks that run those invariably seem to point them up from the horizontal. I keep thinking about mounting a 8 D cell maglight on a gimbal on my handlebars to give them a photon in-kind response.