Ask Slashdot: Setting Up Non-Obnoxious Outdoor Lighting? 445
An anonymous reader writes "My neighbor recently complained about my outdoor floodlight shining in her window. While trying to address this problem, I read an essay about the tragedy of light pollution, and started to think that this is a much broader issue. With all the new lighting technologies out there, this may be the right time to rethink lighting — both indoor and outdoor; public and private. I solved my problem by replacing the floodlight with a spotlight, but I also considered installing a colored light. What are some strategies for illuminating what we need to without casting excess light everywhere and inadvertently blinding our neighbors or keeping them awake?"
But why? (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you need a floodlight for?
IMHO there is way too much lighting - residential areas just plain don't need outdoor lighting at all; what's wrong with just carrying a torch?
Re:But why? (Score:4, Funny)
Too much danger of starting a fire.
let me translate that into slashdotese: (Score:4, Informative)
if (FireFury03 == 'Brit'){
torch = 'flashlight';
};
Re:let me translate that into slashdotese: (Score:5, Funny)
Ever since the appearance of the Fleshlight that word has been lost to me.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Go up to an American cop, standing outside a blazing building, and tell them you were there before the fire and brought a torch to light the place up. See how well that goes for you.
Re: (Score:3)
Or maybe that you're going outside to light up a few fags. Usually works just as well, depending on the crowd.
Re: (Score:3)
You're going to make me explain the joke, aren't you?
In British English a "fag" is a cigarette. "Going out to light up a fag" is the equivalent of saying "Going out for a smoke".
Re: (Score:3)
if ( Person.HasAccent(Accents.British)) {
explanation = 'plausible';
};
Re: (Score:3)
Why would you argue the opposite. As an Australian living in the USA, speaking in Australian English just gets me blank stares. After a little while I realised that people either didn't know what I was talking about or had to think for a little bit to work it out. Making communication difficult is one of the cornerstones of impoliteness.
Re: (Score:3)
um, living in Ireland I would have to say nobody says top of the morning to you or to be sure to be sure apart from tourists looking to get a belt. To be fair you probably will not get one but everyone in the world will be evaluating you a tosser or some kind of a tool.
In most parts of the world trying to copy accents is generally seen as being cringe worthy and annoying. Nobody in England talks like dick van dyke.
As for the other piss poor Australian accent copying, often endured by New Zealanders as nobod
Re:Small correction (Score:5, Funny)
The horror disgust and hilarity concerning "fanny packs" are very real, but they have nothing to do with the meaning of the word "fanny."
Re: (Score:3)
ERROR: Null reference exception. penis is null.
You really should have checked to see if that property was populated before using it.
Re:let me translate that into slashdotese: (Score:4, Funny)
You'd be surprised at how many people are completely oblivious to the concept of humor.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:let me translate that into slashdotese: (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course! Without it I am likely to be eaten by a grue.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:But why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Low voltage lighting along the walking path might be an answer then. For most people, that will light the path well enough, but in the worst case you can at least tell where the path is because of the lights at the edge.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Short answer, my landlord installed the floodlight and the motion detector that runs in. I think she was partly concerned with security, which I don't really think is an issue.
Its fairly well documented that whilst lighting provides an increased sense of security, it frequently decreases security in real terms by creating deep shadows.
Longer answer, my wife has MS which gives her both vision problems and balance problems. She also walks with a cane which would make it hard to carry a torch. I think that a lot of older people have similar issues.
Fair enough - I understand that people with disabilities may need additional lighting, etc. Although I can recommend keeping a head torch handy - the modern LED ones are light, bright, and last a long time. Another possibility is to have a remote controlled light (rather than a motion detector), which would avoid mis-triggering by wildlife.
My local council made a decision to turn off some of the street lighting between 1am and 5am a few years ago, saving several tens of millions of pounds in energy charges. This was met with lots of complaints along the lines of "this is endangering the elderly and school children!" (who are obviously always walking to and from school at 1 in the morning(!)). Eventually a new council was voted in and undid all that.
Re: (Score:3)
this is endangering the elderly and school children
The fuck?
Re:But why? (Score:4, Interesting)
A head lamp may be a good solution. They can be worn, obviously, on the head. But they can also work well around the neck. Head is more intuitive and easier to work with, the light goes where you look and doesn't bounce around during movement.
I camp a lot and no longer bring an area light, everyone gets a head lamp. Keeps the bugs down as well.
I've shown at least a dozen contractors my headlamp and they are always impressed (as they try to hold a flashlight between a shoulder and the neck).
I use mine at home a lot, for grilling outside or walking around the house in the dark. Skip rechargeable batteries, they are a pain and their usage time is not impressive.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Informative)
I loathe flood lights, especially motion-activated ones. I walk the dogs at night and hate being blinded by 150 watts of light suddenly blasting into my eyes. They actually reduce security in most cases, since no one is going to even look the general direction of that much light, the shadows they create are essentially impenetrable, and people will automatically assume that the person standing in front of the door actually belongs there.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:But why? (Score:4, Insightful)
You should inform your landlord that motion sensor lights, and lights in general, do little to deter crime. When you provide lighting it means the criminal doesn't have to use a suspicious flashlight and draw attention to themselves.
To take it to the extreme: if lighting prevented crime then NYC and Paris would be the least crime ridden cities in the world.
Low voltage, perhaps solar/battery powered, lighting in the areas you need it would be best. Point lights, such as spots and floods, are annoying and wasteful as they need to send light from the single point outward across a distance with enough intensity for it to reflect back to your eyes which are dilated to accommodate the very bright light in the foreground which blinds you. Lower wattage lighting distributed around the area you wish to illuminate provides a much more usable light at lower intensity and dispersion levels.
You'd be VERY surprised what a few strings of LED solar yard lights will to to light up your yard completely, but not annoy your neighbors.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
If you are trying to light up the entire yard I agree. But if you are only trying to light up walkways then they work very well.
Re:But why? (Score:4, Interesting)
Ive tried many solar units. Even if the mower and the snowblower and the dogs dont get them, the light output is dismal, and the number of charge cycles before you throw away the batteries or the whole unit is small.
Re: (Score:3)
Use small, localised lights, not one big one (Score:3)
Rather than one big light (no matter how well targeted), consider a bunch of smaller lights all the way along the path.
There are various ranges available, most are solar powered LED, some have motion sensors built in. Here are some examples I found on Amazon
Mini "lamp-post style" [amazon.com]
Motion sensitive, solar powered. Bigger, and you wouldn't need so many [amazon.com]
Illuminated road/pathway studs [amazon.com]. They look like cats-eye road studs, and would illuminate the edge of the path.
There are others that might be more appropriate for
Re: (Score:3)
Mini "lamp-post style"
These almost universally suck.
Any clear/white plastic will yellow, the metal will rust, then the top eventually comes off and it's an eyesore until you remove it in disgust.
If you're not willing to dig a trench and run wiring to proper outdoor grade lighting, just don't bother.
Re:But why? (Score:4, Insightful)
All the studies i checked (sorry no ref, that was 15 years ago) on the subject correlated closely drops of burglary with increase of outdoor lightning in the same area.
But why not explore other sources of lighting? glowing plants [glowingplant.com] for example (they had some success with kickstarter [kickstarter.com] a few months ago)
Re: (Score:3)
Except, at present it looks like complete vaporware. Lots of neat pictures, and you can buy swag with those same pictures on it, but no actual plants.
If I've missed the link to the real product, please call me a moron and send me to the right spot!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Depends on where you live. If you live in a high crime area (a thought that evades many posters as they live in comfy, safe communities) lighting around your home is a necessity. Though, most break ins that occur tend to be during the day time when people are at work, there are still some that occur at night. If you live in a community where break ins are rare or a non-issue then you don't need a blinding spotlight or use a properly tuned motion detector for when you arrive home at night.
obligatory
A few yea
Re:But why? (Score:5, Funny)
I have one hand on the leash, another on the flashlight, and then somehow manage to scoop the poop....especially in the rain while trying to balance an umbrella.
My floodlights are on motion sensor, however. It helps cut down on the obnoxiousness.
You should purchase my patent pending "pooper-scooper with a light" in one handy device. It has gun style mounts so you can change from light, to laser sighting, to scope... just in case the dog poops out of range.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Informative)
Ever tried a head- or shoulder-lamp? They're made to solve *exactly* this problem and are extremely effective.
>My floodlights are on motion sensor, however. It helps cut down on the obnoxiousness.
Only if well configured. I can't tell you how many floodlights I've seen that get triggered by somebody walking past outside the yard, or by neighborhood animals passing through, or even wind blowing through a bush. The only thing more annoying than a floodlight constantly shining in my window is a having it turning on and off all night long.
Re: (Score:3)
I find a switch is an effective way of modulating a light source.
Re: (Score:3)
Except that head mounted lamps are already widely commercially available, and if you can't find one at your local hardware, sporting goods, or grocery store, there are a variety to chose from if you shop online. Even with shipping, the cost is typically cheaper than the cost of a floodlight fixture, and installation usually doesn't involve drilling holes, permanently wiring into the electrical grid, or turning any screws - though I wouldn't object to tightening any loose screws you find while you're poking
No one uses their backyard anymore? (Score:4, Interesting)
You need light in your back yard to see when you're grilling something at night....
Do people on here NOT hang out in their back yards in the evenings when the weather is nice?
I'm kinda dumbfounded at the number of people that can't seem to understand why you'd want to "light up" your backyard...does no one spend time outside anymore with a grill and some cold beer and friends/family sitting around the patio table?
Re:But why? (Score:4, Informative)
Please make sure that motion sensor isn't too sensitive. Having people's floodlights pop on while you're trying to take a quiet walk (on the street, not their property) and look at the sky is obnoxious. Floodlights winking on and off when the wind blows is obnoxious as well.
You might consider a light on a headband. I sometimes use a 'grill light' around my neck when I need my hands free.
If you really need the flood lighting on a motion sensor, perhaps a red light is in order so it doesn't mess with night vision so much?
Re:But why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, raise the light and angle it closer to straight up and down. The it will provide plenty of light but reduce the cast-off. The problem the neighbor faces is usually less a problem of how bright it is, but how direct the light is.
Re: (Score:3)
The security lights come with the worst motion sensors possible. I'd gladly (well, maybe reluctantly) pay for a decent sensor if you have a recommendation. Something like a quality burglar alarm sensor, but weatherproof.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Informative)
Try one of these, they are great for this kind of stuff.
http://www.amazon.com/Energizer-Industrial-Headlight-Batteries-Included/dp/B00352O79U [amazon.com]
I may look a tool wearing one, but since discovering it, i'll never turn back to handheld torches for poking around the garden.
Re: (Score:3)
I used one of these replacing the radio in my wife's van. You are supposed to disconnect the battery, so extra light is needed. Having the light on you head, gives you a "third" hand. I don't care if I do look silly wearing it, it made the job much easier.
Re:But why? (Score:4, Funny)
LED safety glasses (Score:3)
I use led safety glasses [amazon.com] which are a lot less dorky looking and work pretty well.
Re:LED safety glasses (Score:4, Funny)
It would seem that your definition of "less dorky looking" is radically different form mine....
Re: (Score:3)
That was just a cheap example, in case OP responded with "Not paying that much". I have others, but that would suffice for taking the dog out for a crap.
Re:But why? (Score:4, Informative)
personally, it's hard to walk my dog at night (so it poops/ pee before bedtime). I have one hand on the leash, another on the flashlight, and then somehow manage to scoop the poop....especially in the rain while trying to balance an umbrella.
Allow me to introduce you to a revolutionary new concept [petzl.com].
My floodlights are on motion sensor, however. It helps cut down on the obnoxiousness.
In my experience, motion sensors on external floodlights are perpetually triggered by wildlife.
Re:But why? (Score:4, Informative)
My floodlights are on motion sensor, however. It helps cut down on the obnoxiousness.
Floodlights that go on for 10 minutes in the evening and then go off are minorly irritating.
Floodlights on a motion sensor that go on every time a cat walks by, the wind blows a tree branch a bit too much, a car drives by or a person walks by are VERY annoying. Not so bad if they're YOUR floodlights, but I ended up installing blackout curtains because my neighbours' motion sensitive floodlights kept lighting up the bedrooms in my house randomly for 1-minute periods. Nothing's worse than repeated unexpected lighting changes.
At least make sure your light is calibrated so it's not going off when it shouldn't, and that your light is positioned so it only floods the area the motion sensor senses.
Re: (Score:3)
No it doesn't. I hate being blinded by those, without warning, as I walk the dogs around the neighborhood at night. They're far more obnoxious.
Re: (Score:3)
Ask Trayvon Martin about how that strategy might work.
Re:But why? (Score:4, Interesting)
I need floodlights to keep the scavengers (as in metal recyclers) from coming into my yard to steal my table and chairs
But the lights don't need to be on all the time. Use motion sensors to trigger the lights. The "startle effect" when they come on makes them a better deterrent than always-on lights. Also, install a few of these fake cameras [amazon.com]. I put several around my house. They look very realistic, and have blinking LEDs to make them more noticeable, but are a tiny fraction of the price of a real camera. Put up a "beware of dog" sign, whether you have a dog or not. Get a pair of used, and well worn, size 14 work boots, and leave them on the porch.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Funny)
And scatter some shotgun shells around the perimeter, just for effect.
Claymore mines work (Score:3)
Why not try using Claymore mines: http://www.amazon.com/Airsoft-Claymore-Wireless-Remote-Spring/dp/B0037MH646 [amazon.com] ?
They scare the living Bejesus out of wiggin' meth-heads.
Re:But why? (Score:5, Insightful)
we're not really creatures of the dark.
Not true. Humans function perfectly well in the dark.
Outdoor lighting, overall, is most definitely NOT nice to have, aside from very specific occasions where it is briefly necessary. It's bad for security, bad for aesthetics, bad for sleep, and bad for health (physical and mental).
Mandatory Reading (Score:5, Funny)
Watch out, they may respond with poisonous gas!
http://www.27bslash6.com/halogen.html [27bslash6.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Lol, well worth the read.
Ground lighting (Score:2, Interesting)
Your first thought might be "boy this would be easily solved by one massive bright light affixed somewhere high up" but you'd get better results with less neighbor-annoyance (since the light is close to the ground, your fence/the bushes in your front yard will stop it.
Sure it's more work and admittedly can be a pain to wire your yard (if you go that route, there are solar powered designs out there) but it looks a hell of a lot more attractive than floodlights.
Re: (Score:3)
What's the obsession people have with turning everything into daylight?
Humans can see quite well in low light. You miss out on a lot of stuff if you're constantly worrying about where the nearest light switch is.
all the maddest scientists have one... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Your first thought might be "boy this would be easily solved by one massive bright light affixed somewhere high up"
During my limited time spent outdoors I think I've seen what you speak of. Except it was a blinking light with a period of about 24 hours. Also, it hurt my pale skin...
LED (Score:2)
Check out the International Dark Sky Assn (Score:5, Informative)
is your neighbor hot? (Score:3)
why else would you shine a floodlight into a woman's window?
Only use lighting when needed... (Score:4, Insightful)
The simple solution to this problem is to only use lighting when it is really needed, ie. when there is a human within range who wants to have some extra light. As soon as the human is gone, switch of the light. Use a motion sensor adjusted to human-sized objects so it does not trigger every time the neighbour's cat comes wandering by. Aim it so it does not get triggered by passers-by who have no intention of entering the designated area.
Night time is supposed to be dark. Make it so. Turn it off!
DIY solutions are the only way to have CONTROL (Score:2, Interesting)
I did this in my back yard. 10 "old" 60W Edison bulbs with nice large filaments, strung up between two corners of the roof line, and a dimmer switch rated for 1000W.
It's quite nice and it's no brighter than you need it to be.
Rope lighting (Score:2)
White Spandex (Score:2)
While it might not be exactly applicable to your backyard lighting application, it's something to think about.
Neighbors? (Score:3)
Wouldn't know, I don't have any neighbors within viewing distance. With that comes a beautiful view of the night sky. Get out of the suburbs and live a little! ;)
Re: (Score:3)
If you really think its feasible for everyone in the world to live with a 3 acre buffer, your delusional.
A 3 acre buffer won't help you - light pollution is still very visible 50Km away from the edge of a big city, and its getting worse (cities are expanding, but they're also increasing the density of the lighting); there aren't that many dark sky locations left in the UK because there just aren't that many places far enough from a big city.
It's all relative (Score:5, Funny)
Goggles (Score:5, Funny)
Surely this is the excuse you've been waiting for to buy night vision goggles?
Bug zappers... (Score:4, Funny)
...hundreds of them. Keep you occasionally illuminated and entertained at the same time.
Dramatic outdoor lighting. (Score:3)
Google "dramatic outdoor lighting". With a little work, and not too much expense, you can add some nice lighting to your property that will give you more security without irritating your neighbors. It will also enhance the look of your home. I wish more people would do this instead of installing glaring flood lights that come on every time the wind changes direction.
Astronomy Guy Here (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I think the perfect device for scaring people out of your backyard would be some low power red lasers hooked to a motion sensor. Bonus points for a tracking setup.
Re:Astronomy Guy Here (Score:4, Funny)
I try to keep the SWAT team out of my back yard. Their APCs mess up the lawn.
This is easy (Score:3)
Use lenses and reflectors to make sure the light does not go anywhere but where you want it to. Very easy to do, but not the cheapest thing to do. Most people care about cheap not correct.
Once you stop being cheap and design your outdoor lighting correctly, all these problems go away.
Google "full cut-off lighting" (Score:3)
Light fixtures that shine the light where you want it (typically down) and block it from shining where it's not needed. Many communities that have building codes are requiring these where people can still see the stars at night.
They can be used in combination with motion sensors or stand-alone.
But if you live in one of those communities where everybody has a spotlight on the front of their McMansion to show the stone façade work off to passers-by ... well, some things just can't be fixed.
Be coherent (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Just use three lasers—a red laser, a green laser, and a blue laser. :-)
The real problem (Score:5, Insightful)
The real problem with outdoor lighting is that fixtures are installed incorrectly probably 99% of the time. is there ANY reason that >50% of the light escaping the fixture should be going skyward? Aim the things properly and > 90% of the light pollution problem will go away (what remains is incidental reflection from the ground or scattering by water vapor). I have been in well-lighted gated communities where careful design went into outdoor lighting, and despite the ground being well lit, you still get a great view of the sky.
I am finishing a move to Lee, NH and in my backyard I can see the Milky Way very clearly, and for the first time I can actually spot the Andromeda Galaxy clearly without resorted to averted viewing.
Near me I have two NASCAR tracks and one drag track nearby (Lee Speedway, Star Speedway, and one New England Dragway). Lee Speedway is a short jog through the woods and Friday nights, sky viewing is crap; driving by I checked out the lights, and they're aimed at about a 30 angle, throwing 70%+ of the light up to the sky. I don't mind the noise at all from the track, but the light pollution is very annoying, because when those stupid lights are on I can't see much more in the sky than I can see in Boston. The problem can be solved very easily by aiming the lights correctly. It would still create a light dome from reflected and refracted light, but it would be very minimal.
Most of the problem is due to installer incompetence. There is no reason - no need for these lights to not be aimed properly. In fact, IMHO, it should be part of NEC to require outdoor lighting to be aimed as well as wired and sealed properly.
Best solution: natural starlight (Score:5, Insightful)
I live in a wood in Scotland three miles from the nearest streetlight, half a mile from the nearest other house. I don't have any exterior lights, because I don't need them. There's no more than two nights a year when it's murky enough - usually because of fog - to need a torch. The human eye is extremely good at adapting to low light, if you give yourself a couple of minutes to adjust. And out of doors, on planet Earth, it is literally never dark.
Starlight is a free natural service offered you by the planet which doesn't run up your energy bill or cause light pollution. Use it.
Low Pressure Sodium (Score:3)
First off, practically all outdoor lighting SHOULD be low-pressure sodium. It's the most efficient you can get, it has a narrow spectrum that won't affect astronomy, and the amber tint doesn't harm your night vision nearly as much as white light.
Secondly, as other have said, aim it all properly. You want to light up your walkway, fine, focus on that area with the minimum light you need, and keep the rest dark if possible. With lights always installed above your head, omnidirectionality doesn't make any sense, as about 80% of that light will be shining off into the sky where it's useless and causes that light pollution.
LED under eve lighting (Score:4, Interesting)
I live in a 1960's ranch house. I used LED motion lights in my back yard and LED rope lights under the eaves of my house up front. The City of Las Vegas recently replaced the HPS lights with LED, so the amount of light pollution hitting my yard is now negligible. By hiding the LED's behind the eaves, they are not visible from most viewing angles. The soft yellow glow from my walls is enough to light up my yard, but not enough to attract bugs. The light washing down onto the windows of the house is enough to produce a pleasing night light inside, and the glowing walls outside make it harder to tell which rooms have lights on inside. I had to run about 150' of the lights. Very satisfied. I got them at Costco.
I also purchased LED motion lights. These were a little obnoxious and directional, so I pointed them up into the eaves to bounce and soften the light. Much less annoying for the neighbor who's bedroom window my lights hit.
Where is the geek answer? Tuned modulated lasers (Score:3)
Re:Sigh (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sigh (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because the benefit outweighs the cost does not mean it is not pollution. It just means the pollution is potentially justified (arguments nailing down the costs and benefits aside). Putting oil slicks on ponds benefits people in some areas by killing mosquito larvae, but that doesn't mean it isn't pollution, even if the costs out weigh the befits. An emergency generator running a hospital during a power outage produces a crap ton of benefits, but that doesn't mean the exhaust is pollution free. The costs don't have to be direct human health costs either, as they can include quality of life costs and damages to wildlife (the latter may be considered part of the former...).
Also, just about every light pollution campaign I've seen isn't arguing removing lighting. It is about using lighting as needed, and not being wasteful. Light designs that seen 10-50% of the light directly into the air are not increasing security, just wasting electricity. Lighting that is uneven is wasting electricity on the excessively bright areas while not providing enough illumination in other ares. In that case, it is large detriment to security, as someone hiding in shadows when your eyes are accustomed to a brightly lit path is even better hidden than if on consistently lit, dim path.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, there is considerable evidence that the safety benefits of poorly designed illumination are not real, and that badly though out illumination can actually cause more harm than good. Well lit is not the same thing as brightly lit.
Re: (Score:3)
Of course it's pollution. The first google'd definition is: "The presence in or introduction into the environment of a substance or thing that has harmful or poisonous effects." (wikipedia's entry explicitly calls out light as a pollutant).
First, light is clearly a thing, and we've added it to an environment in which it would not have otherwise been. Second there are lots of studies that bright, constant lighting at all hours is harmful to the otherwise indigenous or natural ecosystems: light pollution ha
Re:Sigh (Score:4, Informative)
Except that "light pollution" isn't pollution by definition, and the safety benefits of illumination in cities far outweighs any potential inconvenience to astronomers.
Also the benefits of electricity far outweigh the environmental damage caused by generating it; the benefits of oil far outweigh the wars required to get it; the benefits of censorship "to protect the children" far outweigh the problems... Trashing the environment and other people's freedoms with the excuse that there is some benefit that you think outweighs them is a pretty crappy thing to be doing.
Illuminating the more hazardous road junctions is certainly beneficial. Illuminating the city centres may well be a good thing (although I think we currently massively exceed the amount of illumination required - there's absolutely no need to light them up like day time, especially at times of the day when there's almost no one around.) But residential areas really don't need street lighting at all - would it kill you to take a torch when you go out at night?
Street lighting uses a huge amount of energy (8% of all energy in the US is used for street lighting); it makes the night sky invisible (this isn't just about the astronomers - everyone should have the right to enjoy the natural environment); lighting frequently decreases safety by providing deep shadow for attackers to hide in and glaring drivers; 24 hour lighting completely fucks up wildlife, and there's some evidence to show it can cause psychological problems for humans too.
Re: (Score:3)
There's little evidence that lighting city streets at night keeps it safer. At best it displaces crime to places where there are no lights. At worst, it provides light so that criminals can see what they are doing, without carrying their own light to bring attention to themselves.
It's also very hard for a potential mugging victim to see outside the direct glow of the street light. Attackers can hide outside the circle of light, and wait for the victim to leave. Since the victims eyes are not dark adjust
Re: (Score:3)
There is no such thing as "light pollution". That's not to say that shining a floodlight through a neighbours window isn't inconsiderate, but it's not "pollution".
I don't know what your definition of pollution is, but excess outdoor lighting is ugly, it's unwanted, it can cause adverse change (everything from sleepness nights to wildlife deaths [nationalgeographic.co.uk] to increased [fau.edu] levels of vandalism and other crime. And it has detrimental effects on health including a carcinogenic effect. [nih.gov] I call it pollution, you call it light trespass or whatever you like but I suspect there is a level of excess light that you would call pollution. Can your neighbor shine floodlights into your window? How
Re:Sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Pollution is merely a contaiminant introduced into an environment that causes adverse change. Light pollution can have adverse effects on the environment beyond making astronomers cranky. There are also medical studies showing that excessive light has adverse effects on the health on both humans and other animals.
You're simply misinformed and bashing a strawman.
Re: (Score:3)
And if I go for a walk in the forest the foreign element of my boot can have an adverse effect on the ant that I stepped on but raising it to the level of "pollution" is an exaggeration. For any sane amount of lighting the by far greatest impact on the environment is the street, not the street light or for that matter the dwelling and the outdoor light. Nocturnal creatures instantly retreat to the shadows and day creatures like ourselves "pollute" ourselves with thousands of times more artificial light at "
Re: (Score:3)
Actually excessive light can severely interfere with both plants and animals natural cycles, damaging health and possibly even survival, especially in the long term. One of the most extreme examples are undersea oil pumping rigs - big brightly lit towers standing above a black seascape. The "pillars of light" memorial in New York had the same problem: birds apparently get disoriented by the light and "orbit" it rather than continuing on their journey. Over land it may be immediately survivable but still
Re:Sigh (Score:5, Funny)
Certainly not Rock and Roll
Re: (Score:3)
If you're a criminal, there's no reason to stop shooting people. Everyone else is just going to keep shooting people.
See the problem? Light pollution is the sum of multiple people's emissions. If you reduce yours, over time, other folks will notice and reduce theirs, but even if they don't, there's still less light pollution than there would have been had you not done so.
Put another way, light pol