From someone who suffer from light-sensitivity - LEDs are a disgrace. I am happy to see this discussion here - seems there are more people with similar issues with LEDS.
Dark Sky Lighting
41–50 of 58 posts
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#42Ok, I’m sold. Can I get a link to some high quality residential outdoor fixtures? I’m digging through the links on that page and not finding much.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#43There are some nice curb-cut effects of dark-sky lighting: - The circadian rhythms of birds and nocturnal creatures are less severely affected - Amber lights produce less insomnia - The dumb streetlight across the street doesn't blind me from my bedroom window
> The dumb streetlight across the street doesn't blind me from my bedroom window
I had this issue, and I contacted the power company to re-aim the offending streetlight.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#44This is one of those issues where, assuming the lighting is sufficient to keep people safe at night, only some a few bloody-minded people would object to it, and everyone else can find a reason to like it.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#45It's sad to see more sites not testing outside of the Chrome/Edge/Safari cartel. Here are a couple related resources which actually display in a non-Chrome browser:
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your argument is that someone stating "night time should be night time" has the same standing as someone stating "night time should be day time," just because neither person owns night time? No, they don't actually.
People feel their perspective about outdoor light is the obviously principled one which is uncontestably based on obvious realities everyone should agree of until they start talking at the bar about which hour offset the local clock should be in winter. The posted page goes through great effort to frame the problem from every perspective it possibly can precisely because it has spent enough time on the topic to under…
No, not really. There is a null state of the world on this dimension and many others.
Next up in Zamadatix's Magic Mirror Funhouse: "It's purely a matter of opinion whether or not you want your city:...
1. Constantly blaring a siren (for no reason at all other than my opinion) at 100 dB
2. A thin layer of battery acid covering the ground in all public places
3. Live shooting ranges operating on every avenue
4. A perpetual smog that smells of rotten eggs
Many people have many different angles they consider important reasons for the sirens/battery acid/live shooting ranges/smog."
Again: You can go sniff your rotten egg smog on your own time, outside of the commons we all share. Whether its my obligation to find my preferred egg-free air or your obligation to find your preferred rotten-egg air (privately) is not really just a matter of opinion, even though we may both have opinions on it.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
People feel their perspective about outdoor light is the obviously principled one which is uncontestably based on obvious realities everyone should agree of until they start talking at the bar about which hour offset the local clock should be in winter. The posted page goes through great effort to frame the problem from every perspective it possibly can precisely because it has spent enough time on the topic to under…
No, not really. There is a null state of the world on this dimension and many others. Next up in Zamadatix's Magic Mirror Funhouse: "It's purely a matter of opinion whether or not you want your city:... 1. Constantly blaring a siren (for no reason at all other than my opinion) at 100 dB 2. A thin layer of battery acid covering the ground in all public places 3. Live shooting ranges operating on every avenue 4. A perp…
I'm not really going to engage on the "$person's magic mirror funhouse" type conversation as it doesn't go anywhere.
My opinion is it'd be nice to have dark skies. I'm talking about how we can properly dismiss the alternative views, not why I think x is what you as an individual should want to prefer or not.
If the majority of people want something of the commons other than what I want then I'm going to assume my preference is the one that seems like rotten eggs for some reason to a lot of people, figure out why it is, and debate it. I'm not going to assume they just need me to state I find the opposite a problem so it's on them to of figure out - I'll just be left with what I see as a rotting eggs smell and nobody who cares because it doesn't seem that way to them.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, not really. There is a null state of the world on this dimension and many others. Next up in Zamadatix's Magic Mirror Funhouse: "It's purely a matter of opinion whether or not you want your city:... 1. Constantly blaring a siren (for no reason at all other than my opinion) at 100 dB 2. A thin layer of battery acid covering the ground in all public places 3. Live shooting ranges operating on every avenue 4. A perp…
I'm not really going to engage on the "$person's magic mirror funhouse" type conversation as it doesn't go anywhere. My opinion is it'd be nice to have dark skies. I'm talking about how we can properly dismiss the alternative views, not why I think x is what you as an individual should want to prefer or not. If the majority of people want something of the commons other than what I want then I'm going to assume my pre…
But we're not having a conversation about the full scope of reasons a person could want A or B. I'm saying the null hypothesis is Dark Nighttime. You are insisting it's not. GP above said one argument against Dark Nighttime is that it puts them to sleep. That is not a good reason, as Nighttime for humans is meant to be sleep time, and for animals where nighttime is meant to be wake time, the dark is what keeps them awake.
If GP wanted to raise issues like safety, then we could have a conversation about that topic, where there are legitimate positions to hold. But they didn't, and neither did you!
They said dark lights make them sleepy and you argued there's no "default state" of darkness at night, it's purely opinion. Both of these specific arguments are very bad.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#49the film in the article says:
"a 100 W light bulb turned on every night for a year takes equivalent energy output from burning half a ton of coal"
I get that this film is probably dated, but there are so many things wrong with this:
1. 100 W for 8 hours at night * 365 days in a year is 292 kWh; a ton of coal burned in a power plant produces ~1,000 kWh. so, much less than half a ton. still alot though...
2. modern 100 W light bulbs typically use LED and only require ~14 W of power (so ~14% of the power draw)
3. neither of the above actually matter though because power at night is essentially free; wind turbines, hydro, geo thermal, etc. all continue to work at night and can't be easily shut off, even though demand for power is much much lower.
given that energy waste is not an issue, the benefits of solving this problem are restricted to being able to view stars, preventing a few birds from running into buildings, and requiring residents near outdoor lighting to install curtains (though it seems like even with lights that are dimmed and pointing downwards, most people that live near them would still install curtains anyways, whether for darkness or just privacy...).
This must be weighed with the benefits of having lights on in the first place.
Re: Dark Sky Lighting
#50the film in the article says: "a 100 W light bulb turned on every night for a year takes equivalent energy output from burning half a ton of coal" I get that this film is probably dated, but there are so many things wrong with this: 1. 100 W for 8 hours at night * 365 days in a year is 292 kWh; a ton of coal burned in a power plant produces ~1,000 kWh. so, much less than half a ton. still alot though... 2. modern 100…
> 2. modern 100 W light bulbs typically use LED and only require ~14 W of power (so ~14% of the power draw)
You are limiting yourself to residential light bulbs, which previously typically came in "100W" (actually 1,600 lumen) and "60W" (actually 800 lumen) varieties. Yes, the modern indoor 1600 and 800 lumen bulbs now use less power.
But if you look up street lights, you'll find HPS/Halide can use 100-400W, while modern LED use 50-150W. Also architectural lamps that wash against the side of a building may have different outputs.
Given the hundreds/thousands of street lights out there, if (say) half the light is going up (or even sideways) that's a lot of waste: we could all the photons that are going up/out could be redirect down then we could reduce the power needed even further.
> 3. neither of the above actually matter though because power at night is essentially free; wind turbines, hydro, geo thermal, etc. all continue to work at night and can't be easily shut off, even though demand for power is much much lower.
And what does this light do to people's (and animals') circadian rhythms? What does the excess glare of street lights do to road users (like drivers), especially after it has rained? What have we lost 'culturally' by not being able to see the stars?