Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Setting Up Non-Obnoxious Outdoor Lighting?
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?"
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?
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Watch out, they may respond with poisonous gas!
http://www.27bslash6.com/halogen.html
paul reinheimer
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.
use smaller LED lights possitioned around where you need lit. you can get waterproof ones and run them on the outside of your driveways and whatnot
The http://www.darksky.org/ has several resources. Better yet, become a member.
why else would you shine a floodlight into a woman's window?
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!
--frank[at]unternet.org
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.
My father in-law has a large backyard. To keep the light where he wants it he by using rope lighting. For the flood prone areas he'll use clear plastic tubes on some custom made stakes to elevate the lights and keep rope straight. The stakes aren't 3d printed. They're just rob iron bent into the shapes wanted and painted black to stop the rust.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
You're obviously not an astronomer. See this photo for a good example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Light_pollution_country_versus_city.png (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution)
Do what makes the difference between amateur event lighting designers at crappy small festivals and professional high-quality lighting designers. Crappy ones will point bright lights into people's faces and it hurts. Good designers will put up white fabric and sails everywhere and point lights into the sails and sometimes up into the sky.
While it might not be exactly applicable to your backyard lighting application, it's something to think about.
1) Burglars like to see where they are going
2) turn off your goddamned lights when not needed
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! ;)
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Of the five or six houses on my street, we all have an unspoken rule of leaving our outdoor lights off when we're not outside.
But one neighbor has a motion sensing light that is set so wide that it turns on when I walk out my front door, which is very annoying.
If you're an astronomer pro or amateur, or even if you merely enjoy the night sky, there most certainly is light pollution.
I've lived in both the middle of nowhere and in urban areas. The difference is staggering. (To air quality, too.)
I have seen numerous home owners bathing their homes in light from a floodlight shining at an upward angle from the lawn. These lights are 500W halogens and some of them use two of them, 1 cool kW. Are you one of them? Do you have to do it? Of course, it is your money, how you spend it is your right. But it is also my right call such a spending idiotic, and draw inferences about the intellect and self confidence of such people.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
It's all relative - replace your light with a carbon-arc searchlight, the sort they used to light up bombers during the War. After a couple of weeks of that making her bedroom look like a film set, she'll be thrilled when you put the original one back. Alternatively, put the light on a strobe circuit. Then you can claim with perfect accuracy that you have reduced the light output to half of what it was previously, and as a bonus her room will look really cool.
Surely this is the excuse you've been waiting for to buy night vision goggles?
...hundreds of them. Keep you occasionally illuminated and entertained at the same time.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
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.
Proverbs 21:19
no, pollution is something that damages life. gives people cancer, kills fish and other animals, kills trees, etc
light doesn't kill or hurt anyone. unless you are shining a light into the jungle where night time animals rely on cover to survive
As a long time stargazer I can sympathize with your neighbor and its pretty much the reason I moved out to the country. Floodlights are the worst, they illuminate every which way. Good lighting uses something to shield the light from going up and sideways and focuses the beam down toward the ground. We installed pot lights outside and use colored lights in them that are softer but are still plenty bright enough to see if you go outside. Also, there is no substitute for simply turning them off when you are in the house, although that is easy for me to say where I live. In the city some see them as a deterrent to people sneaking around their yard. You could always put your lights on a motion sensor as well I guess. You can google for outdoor residential lighting that minimizes light pollution. Check out a few astronomy forums, there are plenty of militant anti-light folks there that could advise you as well.
Ambient light covers moving around at dark is most places, or just get a torch / flashlight. For cameras / security use IPcams with IR sources, or other lowlight solutions.
An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
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.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
There is no such thing as "god" but light pollution is real.
if (FireFury03 == 'Brit'){
torch = 'flashlight';
};
Most of what is viewed as "needed" outdoor lighting isn't. Separating need from emotional desires would go a long way to stopping light pollution.
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.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Using a laser you will light exactly the point you need
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.
It's a term that's come into use to describe an effect. If you go by the dictionary term of pollution, no, you are correct, taken literally 'light pollution' does not exist. But the phenomena the term is associated with does. So call it whatever you like, if it makes you feel better about the dictionary's feelings.
Except that "light pollution" isn't pollution by definition, and the safety benefits of illumination in cities far outweighs any potential inconvenience to astronomers.
Invest in infrared lighting and infrared goggles.
You can then turn it up *full blast* and put on your goggles
anytime you need to view the resplendent glory of your yard.
What is noise pollution?
Preventing someone from practicing their hobby is surely damaging their quality of life.
Light pollution has been a common phrase for a long time.
Seriously - until outdoor lighting is revamped on a large scale, there's no point in trying to "cut down" on light pollution of your residential dwelling. Everyone else on your street, along with the city, is just going to keep doing what they always been doing.
The better question is "What can I do to get a government mandate rolling to limit the types of outdoor lighting in order to restore visibility of the night sky?"
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
What do you need to light up? Why?
I second the suggestion for full-cutoff lighting. If you need lighting at all.
...laura
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.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
if (FireFury03.Speaks(Languages.English)) {
torch = 'flashlight';
};
Privacy is terrorism.
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 comes at the cost of a lot of wasted calories and time, which may reduce long-term survival. At sea it's a lot more likely to be fatal when they run out of energy with no land within reach.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
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.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Hoax!! Photoshop!
Privacy is terrorism.
Come to the Epping/Lee New Hampshire area sometime on a clear night other than a Friday. Then, come back when there are races going on. You'll see what light pollution does - you go from having Magnitude 6-7 visibility to having a night sky resembling Boston's, all because the lights throw >70% of the light into the sky rather than on the ground, because they are improperly aimed.
Submitter's problem is that the neighbor's light was installed by an incompetent asshole, so much of the light she is paying for is being wasted - shined on the neighbor's property and into the sky. If aimed properly not only do you preserve night viewing, and NOT piss your neighbors off, you get more for your money by concentrating all those lumens where it is actually needed- on the ground.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
I use led safety glasses which are a lot less dorky looking and work pretty well.
screw that noise, build a moonlight tower and show Mother Nature who's BOSS!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Hi, I'm the anonymous coward who asked the question. I forgot to add one issue to the post -- what about car headlights? As a bicyclist, I feel like I'm trying to compete with cars for attention at night, and the brightness of their lights is unnecessary (especially in an urban area with other lights). Also, I sometimes get headlights in my window. I see two functions for the headlights: the visibility of the car, and visibility for the driver. The visibility of the car could be achieved with much less light -- perhaps distributed over the body of the car. Achieving visibility for the driver is harder without a bright source (or some sort of smart lighting system along the road). Any thoughts? My only thought is that a non-white color may be just as effective without being as obnoxious... but I'm not too optimistic about that.
It most certainly IS pollution. It's unwanted, degrades the environment, and provides no benefit in return.
I went to small solar lights, the kind used for garden walkways, to be the only lighting on my back porch. For the price of one annoying regular floodlight with cranky movement sensor, I put up several solar lights in the spots I wanted. Now I have soft, unintrusive light that allows me to see my dogs and any obstacles on the porch easily. You just don't need as much light power as you are probably used to - try going with less, and your eyes will adjust. Bonus: No bugs seem to be drawn to this kind of light, here in the San Bernardino Mountains in CA. So no more invasion of moths each time I open the door.
I proposed turning the streetlights off at midnight in my town but I don't have any US based examples of that working. The fear is that it will be less "secure".
Besides wasting energy casting light where it is not needed there are many real and well studied effects on the health of both humans and animals attributed to light pollution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution.
Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
Outdoor lighting is nice to have, we're not really creatures of the dark.
Sometimes but mostly it seems to just be a waste of energy and just obscured the night sky. If you are actively doing something outside then sure, use whatever lights you need. But most lights seem to be just wasteful and unnecessary.
So a big pile of garbage on your lawn is cool? Sure it'll stink horribly, but stink doesn't kill or cause cancer. Boom box across the street going 24/7 keeping you awake is cool?
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 to increased levels of vandalism and other crime. And it has detrimental effects on health including a carcinogenic effect. 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 about stroboscopic flashing lights tuned to disorient and possibly trigger seizures? How about lasers? I'm not joking, given the fact that running a laser advertisement is now practically free, expect to see the night sky filled with McDonalds ads and other annoyances. If we continue to treat light pollution as a non-issue, our beautiful night sky will be replaced with pop-up ads.
The proper solution to the OP's problem is to:
1) Stop shining your lights in the direction of your neighbour 2) Use a motion-sensing light so that it at least only turns on when it needs to be
I agree with you here. This is a very good start. Ask yourself, "Is the light necessary? Is it necessary to run continuously? Would I like it if all of my neighbors had the same light? What if millions of people did exactly what you are doing, would the environmental impact be worth it? Does it provide even and useful illumination of an important area or does it provide glare and deepen shadows?"
If you do need lights, LED lights provide many advantages over older outdoor lighting technology. They are smaller than discharge tubes so can be focused better. They can be placed where you need them and they consume far less power than incandescent lights. They can be PWM dimmed, they can be cycled instantaneously (opposed to the 10-20 minute warm-up of sodium/mercury discharge lights) without significant reduction in life. Rural areas could turn off streetlights unless they detect someone (a car or a mobile phone) in the area.
If you put safety first, then nothing will ever meet your criteria of being too 'inconvenient'. Too bad for the astronomers that are only trying to figure out what the universe is made of. In the meantime, how's TSA working for you?
You can get LED lighting fairly simply these days, and I think it's a lot better for outdoor use. Basically, think christmas tree lights but more subtle. You can get tubes or flatter strips that you can put pretty tastefully wherever you actually need to see. Consider lining walkways with dim LED strips rather than blasting everything with an obnoxious bright light. It's easy to attach them to deck rails or gutter lines. On a dark night they're enough to see what you're doing and where you're going and on a well moonlit night, well, you shouldn't need them. :-) You can light up a pergola well enough that you can sit and hold conversations quite comfortably... to me the softer lighter light feels more natural than a single bright beacon on a pole.
They also have the advantage of being long-living and low cost (typically as they're overall lower wattage than huge floods).
Search amazon for "rope light" or "led strip light". Pre-strung ropes with plugs are the simplest, but you can get long strips of light that you can daisy-chain which require special ballasts (AC adapters).
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.
What are you a moron? Stop wasting electricity! Here is an idea, turn the light on when you need to see something outside otherwise... TURN IT OFF!!!
There is no such thing as "light pollution".
Really? I think you might want to actually try researching the topic first since the existence of light pollution isn't even a debate.
Certainly not Rock and Roll
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
There are a lot of resources easily found on Google that discuss the problem of light spill and how improperly directed lighting is more dangerous than no lighting (since it creates dark spots and an illusion of safety).
The most recommended solution is to use lower power lighting and more units if necessary, ensure they are equipped with shades that direct the light down and make all effort possible to keep the light from being direct at the observer's eyes as that is the biggest problem with safety (and comfort). Lights that are elevated above people are the hardest to prevent from shining in eyes as they have to be restricted quite heavily to a small spotlight beneath them to prevent blinding people on approach and created dark spots. Keep the lights low, directed down and out of eyes!
I tried to find a collection of fixture designs I saw circulated a few months back but my search-fu is weak today. It basically compared designs of common lighting figures and pointed out the problems. For instance light bollards are generally quite useful since they sit below most people's eyes but poorly designed ones allow light to shine upward and into the observer's eyes directly causing night blindness. A proper bollard uses a shade or proper design to ensure the light is directed out and down and none up toward the eyes. Keeping the lighting level low and using more bollards makes it easier for people to transition into dark areas where the bollards can't go without causing them undo strain.
An anecdotal story: where I lived outside DC there was a bike / walking trail that followed the road until a certain point where it diverged into a more scenic area. The whole path was lined with tall traffic lights that shone quite brightly but where the path diverged, the lights didn't follow. The path was equipped with either timed or motion lights (that didn't detect motion well) at a completely different intensity but still quite high and shining outward. Walking that path in late dusk was super hazardous because you couldn't see where you were going. The lights would go on and off and the shadows it cast made it impossible to see if you were going to step in a hole or if the dark areas under the groups of trees you had to walk past had anyone concealed. It was a horrible design and it rendered the path unusable.
The primary goal of good night-time lighting is eliminating glare. That is, you should not be able to see the light source, only what the light is illuminating. Light going straight from the source into your eyes reduces their sensitivity. With eliminating glare as your goal you can use your imagination for good lighting. Put baffles on elevated lights. Put lights on the bottom sides of hand railings so you see where you step.
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.
Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
Why do we have lights on all over the city when there is no one awake? Surely it takes more than darkness to create a criminal so merely turning off the lights shouldn't increase crime.
no, pollution is something that damages life. gives people cancer, kills fish and other animals, kills trees, etc
Of you mean like disruption of sleep rhythms, or disruption of ecosystems? Five seconds of research would have pointed out the negative effects of light pollution.
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 has been linked to changes in melatonin production, problems with bird migration, sleep cycles in nocturnal animals, the ability of vulnerable animals to hide at night during normal foraging times. Here are a few links:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0056563
http://physics.fau.edu/observatory/lightpol-environ.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_light_pollution
There are many many more. Sure some human benefits of illumination may outweigh these, such as safety, but with more options becoming available (more efficient, dimmer, more focused lights), those benefits can be had with a lower polluting impact. It's not just a problem for astronomers, although I would like to see the stars a bit better!
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.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
no, pollution is something that damages life. gives people cancer, kills fish and other animals, kills trees, etc
light doesn't kill or hurt anyone. unless you are shining a light into the jungle where night time animals rely on cover to survive
There's plenty of evidence to show that 24 hour lighting fucks up the wildlife and causes psychological problems for humans.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Outside You know the rows of path lights typically powered by a solar cell on the top that are a glowworm if you don't have long nights and short days? Well, if they're on a path or steps then make the one at each end responsive to some stimulus, eg the light from an opening door or a IR approach AND have the chain react sympathetically so they all light up one recognising the next's burst into life. This means the light output can be much higher for a short period rather than emitting a miserable glimmer all night. Once proven the tech could be baked in a 2-cent chip. Also the setting-up would give /.ers hours of tweaking fun.
Inside As a midnight programmer I often want to go downstairs to make a cup of tea etc. My computer room has subdued lighting and I don't want bright lights in the stairs when 3 leds will do. But I would like the simplicity of battery source with automatic operation.
OP, on behalf of those of use who live next to assholes -- Thank you for being a considerate neighbor! Even if you don't find a perfect solution, the fact you care enough to do the research and find something better is admirable.
If all of our lights made a noise that was equal in volume to their brightness, we would probably find excuses to use a lot less of them and learn to develop our night vision.
I have night blindness, so I had to answer that same question in the past. What I did is install solar powered led lamps in the garden that provide some soft glow at night and a more powerful spotlight with a motion sensor trigger covering the front door and garage. The sensor keeps the lights on for a few minutes after detecting movement then shutdowns automatically.
That was enough for my needs and I've never received any complaints from my neighbors (did I mention that the spotlight was powerful?)
No such increase, in my country one of the safest towns to live in has no street lighting at all.
Except that "light pollution" isn't pollution by definition
Now we're arguing definitions. It's unwanted and potentially harmful. It's not pollution in the way that dumping oil in a river or uranium in a field is, but it's pollution in the way that noise pollution is.
In any case, "light pollution" as a two-word phrase is a noun with a clearly-defined definition. Whether "light pollution"(noun) is the same as "light"(adjective) "pollution"(noun) is irrelevant.
the safety benefits of illumination in cities far outweighs any potential inconvenience to astronomers.
Really? Because I've seen studies that show an excess of illumination is in fact harmful to safety, through two mechanisms. First, with high ambient light and bright headlights, you can get temporarily blinded by the light. Secondly, that brightness cannot cover all areas you need to see for driving - I'm talking mainly about pedestrians, who can easily be in shadows until it's too late. Having less light would counter-intuitively be safer, because then your eyes can adapt to the darkness and be able to see them.
I could, if I cared, pull up citations for all of this, but since you're arguing with no such references, I can't see why I should be assed to, either.
Trying to not annoy his neighbor with his lighting. There have been a lot of cases where a problem neighbor refuses to take down a light, and has to have it done for them repeatedly in the night. America has a serious problem with in-duh-viduals who have no respect for anyone but themselves.
Check out what they do in Hawaii County, Hawaii (the Big Island). They have street lights but must control light pollution for the sake of the telescopes on Mauna Kea.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
The only tragedy about light pollution is that they named it pollution. Other than that, I've only ever heard of it negatively affecting stargazers. It actually benefits pretty much everything from air travel to animals.
If you have to ask, you are too stupid to be working around low-voltage electronics.
It's very common in the mid-west to see solar lighting around patios and walk ways. You can get small ground lights to stake along the sidewalk some for less than $3 they are easy to install since they don't require wiring. They provide enough light to walk down the sidewalk find your car keys but do not attract as many insects as a flood light or regular patio light {don't bother the neighbors}. Most home improvements stores carry multiple models ranging from the ground light to much nicer more conventional looking patio or yard lights.
The true geek solution is infrared lighting and night vision goggles.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
What you're supposed to do is start with a ridiculously obnoxious light, then back it down to the one you want. 1200 watts, pulsing randomly, and buzzing loudly. After a month of that, you placate your neighbor by putting up the regular light you really want. You have to properly condition them to accept raised levels of annoyance.
Use a tracking setup with face recognition that is able to aim two not too weak lasers right into the eyes of a burglar. He won't do very much burgling ever again! Don't forget to remind any legitimate visitors to wear laser-proof glasses though.
But seriously, lasers are great. What you could do is replacing a floodlight with a setup consisting of a laser and moving mirrors that projects a grid onto your property. This would give you very low light levels and still instant visibility of everything that moves out there (since it would deform the grid).
No, that is equal opportunity lighting. Affirmative action lighting is racist.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Fixing light pollution doesn't necessarily mean not having lights at all. For example, my new house has a standard lamp that shines in all directions by the back door. The effect is that it very dimly illuminates everything, but also shines brightly in my eyes so that its illumination is only a small improvement over not having it turned on. A better light design would cast the light downwards so that it's not in my eyes, rather than outwards. It might also be mounted higher, so that the downwards light covers the needed area - or it could be replaced with several smaller lights. Among the benefits of a design like that:
I probably need to see the ground (or things on or near the ground) more than the fences or treetops that the current light illuminates - by focusing the light on the ground, it will be brighter there rather than wasting its light where I don't need it.
The light won't shine in my eyes, which will help my night vision.
The wattage of the light could be reduced, since its output is focused on only the areas that need illumination.
If most lights in an area get this treatment, then the night sky becomes visible. (I once took a photo in Death Valley of the Milky Way. When I returned to my home in $SUBURBAN_SPRAWL, I took another photo with identical settings (aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc.) to see what I'd get - the result was a photo that was completely blown out because there was so much light bouncing around in the night sky.)
I couldn't find a good comparison photo with a quick google, but somebody else probably can - there is quite a difference between a yard that is illuminated properly and one that just has a giant floodlight spraying light in every direction.
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.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
It's only pollution if it's going up. (oversimplification alert!) You don't need to put people in the dark to get the night sky back, just put proper reflectors and shades on things.
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 adjusted, he's at a significant disadvantage.
The only thing we can say with confidence is that street lighting reduces the fear of crime, not crime itself. And even if it did, astronomy is more important than you think. Astronomy is one of a very few sciences that addresses the big questions, "what is the nature of the universe?".
Besides, there are much better ways we can reduce street crime.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Why not try using Claymore mines: http://www.amazon.com/Airsoft-Claymore-Wireless-Remote-Spring/dp/B0037MH646 ?
They scare the living Bejesus out of wiggin' meth-heads.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
As a Landscape Ligthing distributor I would say that design and product selection are key here. Light pollution and electricity usage are concerns, but intellighen product design and LED technology are helping in these areas greatly. "Just use a torch," is one answer, but not always the best or safest option.
If you are just adding//changing fixtures to your house, there are many "dark sky" rated fixtures that throw all of the light down. These greatly lessen light polution, and also will eliminate the glare that your neighbor is complaining about. Light polution is created by any light that does not hit a surface. If you have a flood light that is pointed horizontally, about half of the light is wasted and is simply poluting our sky. Many "dark sky" fixtures also incorporate motion sensors.
If you want to have light in a yard away from a structure, it is important to use a lamp that has a beam spread that is narrow enough to ensure that the light is not directed into your neighbors yard. If the yard is small, you may need a narrow flood or spot lamp that keeps all of the beam spread on your property. There are also LED options here that are wet location rated. An LED can do with about 20 watts, what a 90 watt halogen has done previously. Most LED are not wet location rated, (damp is not the same) so consult a landscape lighting professional for options.
LED landscape lighting is also great because of its long life. You can put a lamp at the top of a tree and shine all of it down to create a "dark sky" effect with a flood light, and not worry about having to change the lamp for 10 years. This is a great way to create a nice "moonlight" effect of tree shadows, without wasting any light via light pollution.
My company, Bulbtronics, offers all types of lighting products, but i recommend contacting a professional in your area with the Association of Outdoor Lighting Professionals if you want a landscape light project done correctly.
Some ideas, many of which probably have been mentioned in various posts already:
Hope this helps!
Moths and other night insects. Maybe have an actual peek, it might help to understand the issue a bit better.
Perl Programmer for hire
Buy her to curtains, or perhaps get your landlord, who installed the obnoxious lighting to do it.
So you won't admit that there is hyperbole and equivocation in the term light pollution? and that this equivocation is done on purpose to make easy points?
p.s. I'm very much against light pollution. After all what's the point of illuminating outer space with sodium street lighting? But I have no problem admitting that the term "light pollution" is in a whole other category to most other pollution sources and a bit of a cheat.
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 "unnatural" hours of the day with no significant ill effects to show for it.
It's fair that astronomers speak of it that way in context with astronomy, since they're so extremely sensitive to it the same way I'd also accept hyper-allergics speaking of "contaminants" in food to describe what is insignificant and imperceptible impurities for others, but outside of that you just look like a fool. In short, unless your lights are inconveniencing anybody and they're reasonably necessary for their purpose don't worry about it, you're not some kind of eco-terrorist. Or if you are, you probably are in a thousand more significant ways than that.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Headlamps. You only need light where you are looking. I thought this was a solved problem?
In theater metal flaps called barn doors are used to control where light falls. Flood lights typically have a very wide beam pattern. You could mount a flap of metal at the top of the fixture to limit how far out the light projects. If your problem is just with a neighbor's single window then a square of opaque material mounted on a very stiff wire and then adjusted to block the light to that window would work.
The other approach is down light. Use a more focused flood light and mount it higher and aim it down so excess light does not spill into your neighbor's windows.
Personally I have a different solution. Since I want light for walking around in my yard, I use battery powered motion detector LED lights. These are small units you mount on the wall. When you walk under them they light up. The only problem is that you have to change the batteries every year or two. But this is a lot cheaper than running a flood light all night long. The units I use are Megabright MB-DLM-83, http://www.amerasiaenterprises.com./ They are nice because the LED lighting head flips down so you can mount them vertically and shine the light on the ground. I still have conventional outdoor lighting for when I am working outside at night.
polarizing film on THEIR windows, crossed polarizers on YOUR lights(!).
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?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
The basic idea of flood and even spot lighting is to scare people and creatures.
The fact that you have the light going in the wrong direction is obvious, but not how badly you have the light in the wrong direction.
What you want is to illuminate the ground and pretty much nothing more than 1 ft above the ground.
Try Landscaping lights. Small lights that get staked into the dirt, rather than on the wall. They let you see see the ground so you don't trip.
They pretty much work just as well for security, if you put in a motion detector as well. You may not see the bad guy's faces, but you know they are there, and that's good enough 99% of the time.
They also use less electricity to get a better job done, less light pollution as well.
they might cost a bit more for the initial outlawy of multiple sockets, but the savings in electricity more than makes up for it over the long run.
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"
Motion sensitive, solar powered. Bigger, and you wouldn't need so many
Illuminated road/pathway studs. They look like cats-eye road studs, and would illuminate the edge of the path.
There are others that might be more appropriate for your pathway.
Hope that helps.
Paul Leader
What are some strategies for illuminating what we need to without casting excess light everywhere and inadvertently blinding our neighbors or keeping them awake?"
Last I looked, they made these things called motion-sensor triggered lights as an off-the-shelf item. They only go on when you're opening your front door, for example.
--
BMO
Crazy cheap and simple to install, keeps light down low where it won't bother your neighbors. Walmart had some for 79 cents each the other day. And zero impact on your electric bill.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
All lighting is about one thing: sending light from a source, to a scene, then back to your eye. No matter what you do make sure no light travels directly from the light to your eye. That is glare. Glare is bad.
Law 1) No light should travel from the source to the eye.
You'll find that one simple law puts all kinds of demands on where the lights get positioned and how many you have. In general point "flood lights" straight down. One flood can't light an entire yard.
Rabbit out of a hat time:
Law 2) Keep the lighting uniform.
Sudden changes in light level create light and dark spots that cut visibility. You eye adapts to the bright spot and you can't see into the dim area. Monsters hide in shadows.
Don't put out a ton of light next to a dark, shrub filled area. Keep the light dim. Ramp up the light level just a bit as you reach your doorway.
If you want to be considerate and absolutely need outdoor lights then consider putting shades on them to direct the light towards your property. If you don't need the light on continuously then consider getting a motion activated switch or even just a remote control switch.
However if the neighbor complains that her window is no longer dark due to incidental lighting then she should consider getting a darker curtains or a window shade. A friend of mine had a similar problem with a neighbor after he moved into his new house. His flood lamp (really a spotlight) illuminated his driveway whenever he arrived or departed his house. His neighbor complained because she was used to it being completely dark outside her window. Change alarms people.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Astronomy is important, but professional astronomy doesn't happen in the heart of large cities, so light levels in large cities aren't relevant to professional astronomy... Even if there was zero light, most major cities aren't in good geographic locations for astronomy anyhow. The atmosphere is rather detrimental to making observations, hence why observatories tend to be located at very high elevations.
dictate that your light should not stray from your property. Why do people assume that they can do this kind of thing in the first place? Does it not cross their mind that not everyone will appreciated the night lit up like day? There are ways to switch the light off when you are no longer in the yard. Either a manual switch, or motion detectors adjusted to human size objects in closely defined areas. There are ways to design the lighting so that it does not spread past your property line. In any case, if none of these solutions are workable, live in darkness. There is no excuse that justifies this kind of imposition on the neighbors. None, not your fear of the dark, not a medical condition, not your personal preference. None.
The USA is only 4X older than me...perspective
If you want to light up anything at night, light pollution must occur because things reflect light. That's how we see. If you light up your yard, even if there isn't a light pointed at your neighbor's window, there will be plenty of indirect light. Your only option is to bathe your yard in infrared and wear goggles at night.
Just like the safety benefits of electrical power far outweigh any potential inconvenience to people who insist on breathing, making coal and gas power plants completely free from pollution.
Now that you've solved that problem, can you redefine a few more words to eliminate unemployment, poverty and that noise that chalkboards make?
We put soffit lights in. They point down and illuminate the ground - just like other DarkSky solutions. Dark sky lights point down and have a shield around the bulb, so all light goes down. Soffit lights are can lights in the soffit - the roof overhang area. There is nothing to shine in neighbors eyes, and the light is around the perimeter of the house as a security deterrent. Flood lights that point up, make a house look creepy. Again, simple solution. Downward pointing lights with shielded bulbs.
Most, if not all, outdoor lighting allows the light to extend beyond the area that needs lighting. By placing 'blinders' around the light source you can block the light from areas that it is not needed. If all outdoor lighting were designed this way it could greatly reduce light pollution.
Tell her to close her blinds.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
You really are extremely ill-informed; you should try to fix that. A good start would be with this:
Astronomy is important, but professional astronomy doesn't happen in the heart of large cities, so light levels in large cities aren't relevant to professional astronomy...
Go state that exact thing to a professional astronomer and ask for his/her thoughts. You'll find that the world is not nearly as simple as your "I wish it was so, therefore it is" attitude would have it. Perhaps after being told how completely wrong you are by the person you presume to speak for (actually, every one of your statements in these comments is so close to the opposite of reality that I really must wonder if you're doing it on purpose) you'll be motivated to actually learn something before commenting? Insert oblig. Lincoln quote here...
Ouch.
Happy people make bad consumers.
At work (school district in a low income area), we have been looking at Totus Solutions LED security lighting platform. totus-solutions.com Each LED is aimed and they can be programmed to be dimmed when no one is in the parking lot. Looking at a demo model and pictures of installations, they produce very little light pollution if any.
If security is the main concern, I would use infrared cameras. Post a sign that says night vision cameras are in use on this premises. And use low voltage lights to illuminate pathways.
I know it's too low-tech for the /. crowd, but simple metal shades or screens that blocks light from spilling over into unwanted areas (including up into the sky) are a remarkably effective - and cheap - way to reduce light pollution and save electricity. First, you avoid lighting areas you don't care about. This is particularly helpful with light going sideways or upwards and night lighting anything you care about. Second, by "recycling" wasted light, you can use a slightly smaller bulb, saving electricity.
Sure, diffuse light reflected from the ground contributes more to light pollution than shutting off the lamp entirely, but diffuse reflections don't hold a candle to the insanity of illuminating the sky directly.
-JS
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.
Often in Error, Never in Doubt.
Switch off the outdoor lighting and you'll be amazed how well your eyes adapt to the dark. Or is it psychological? Are you afraid of monsters lurking in the shadows?
Why does the neighbor even have to tell you the light is a bother? Couldn't you see that for yourself? I have a similarly rude neighbor that I had to tell on several occasions to shut the damn thing off.
Sure, we hang out. Built a deck just so we could. No electric lights, though. We look at the stars, we light the occasional candle, we laugh, talk, eat and drink -- all without requiring electric lights at all. And I live where it is *dark* (NE Montana.) When we grill at night (generally, we don't), a small flashlight suffices to examine the food. Tastes the same, light or dark.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Is she Austrian? http://www.27bslash6.com/halogen.html
It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
If you think the term light pollution is hyperbole, it is not a problem with people who use that term, but a problem with your expectation of pollution. Not all pollution issues are Captain Planet villain level problems. Some issues are just on the level of annoyances and quality of life detractions, even if the local biosphere can in the big picture of things handle the pollution without long term effects.
creatures like ourselves "pollute" ourselves with thousands of times more artificial light at "unnatural" hours of the day with no significant ill effects to show for it.
Maybe you should look into some research of health effects of night time lighting before saying that...
The main problem with most outdoor lighting is that it is all direct lighting, so if you end up on the receiving end of the light your practically blind. My solution was indirect lighting (point it back at your own house or enclose the light in some sort of semi-opaque fixture.
If that doesn't work for you, simply reduce the wattage of the light. You don't need a 600watt halogen flood light when a 15watt compact florescent will provide more than enough light to see by. I've also used colored bulbs. Red, blue, green, and yellow "accent" lights work great out side and provide a much more subdued lighting scheme. Lower wattage though is the best solution all around. I also use a dimer switch on my one light so I can turn it down quite a bit when I don't need it bright.
If ANY of your floodlights fall on your neighbours property, you're being a dick. There's nothing else to it, it is annoying, don't do it. Take it from someone who's had both bedroom light and back yard light cast by neighbours, it makes me mad.
especially outdoors, very dangerous.
You can''t do that here in the midwest.. the floodlights draw every bug in a 1/2 mile radius to come & join your picnic.
Those lights are pointed that way for a reason. They -want- their stadium to light up the night sky for miles around. It impresses the hell out of their target audience.
If it wasnt for the EPA, they'd have a big column of smoke too.
Begin with passive infrared (PIR) sensors and when they is triggered, enable your narrowly-focused pulsed-infrared laser illumination system so your cameras can get a high res look at what triggered the PIR. Your image recognizer will then compare with previous captures to determine whether the movement was caused by a squirrel, blowing leaves, or a band of Ninjas. If it is Ninjas, turn on the tri-color visible laser illumination system. Use an intensity capable of seeing or burning through the black Ninja clothing so that a good color photograph can be captured and sent to your local rent-a-cop or SWAT team. Optional spectrometer will log the absorption lines of the vaporized Ninja clothing to see if they show any traces of drugs or explosives. Your visible-light lasers will be polarized and pulsed in a pseudo-random NRZ pattern so that the synchronized Kerr cells in your own bedroom window can keep out the glare while allowing you to enjoy the beauty of a starry night sky. The visible laser wavelengths will be selected so that a multi-layer interference filter can be installed on each of your neighbor's windows in order to block the light.
Many solutions, depending on your budget. On the high end, there's this http://www.darkstartheatrical.com/products/GAM-GOES-Ellipsoidal-Spotlight%3A-Weather%252dtight-outdoor-ellipsoidal-zoom-spot.html Ask any theater major about "barn doors" for a cheaper one.
muggings and other violence goes down when we turn up the lights in our city.
While it is wonderful to see a sky full of stars, and I highly recommend people venture out into the more rural areas to experience that.
But gazing up at the stars while you are being raped is not pleasant at all, in fact it will be the most traumatic experience of your life.
I honestly believe that when we give aid to other countries, it shouldn't be primarily for food (or condoms). It should be for outdoor lighting in urban areas.
The first comment asked exactly what I'm wondering - what in the heck do you need a floodlight for?
Anyhow, it's easy to get rid of visible light pollution - infrared.
Less energy is used in the transformation to IR and it has a much greater reflectivity (and detectable heat signature).
All you have to do is purchase a little paid of IR bin/monocular device that powers on and off based on movement when you pick it up or put it down (eliminating the OMG HUGE CHORE of turning power on and off with a switch or push of a button).
You want to see what's outside lurking around? Instead of walking to the window and looking out at your light arrays, how about looking out with an IR device and even having it lit with that cheap, low-power light bulb replacement?
Wait, I forgot. It's "too much work" to even reach for a device to look through. Light pollution wins.
</snark></serious>
Well, I can definitely say that it is *not* Rock and Roll.
That photo has been doctored. I've been way outside a city on a completely clear night with a new moon. I've never seen the galaxy like that.
http://www.darksky.org/
And pull down your blind to stop the light streaming in. There's a 24h business opposite my apartment that has floodlights that make it so I don't need a light to read by in my bedroom. It upsets visitors a bit, but I've managed to acclimatise to it and sleep with them on. (and save sh*it-tonnes of lighting electricity)