[DSLF] Digest Number 883

[DarkSky-list@yahoogroups...]

_________________________________________________
To subscribe to the DarkSky List Forum send email
to:  DarkSky-list-subscribe@yahoogroups...  or visit:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DarkSky-list/join

Help save your town from obtrusive lighting --
Invite your Planning and Zoning department and
local officials to join us!  Please visit the IDA
website at http://www.darksky.org frequently, too!
------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 5 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

      1. Top 10 & light and health
           From: Steve Pauley <spauley@cox-internet...>
      2. Latest LP News
           From: ctstarwchr@aol...
      3. PC world news item for energy savings using Monitor shut down
           From: Dale Reid <reid@eau...>
      4. Re: PC world news item for energy savings using Monitor shut down
           From: "Karolyn Beebe" <keedo@merr...>
      5. Re: PC world news item for energy savings using Monitor shut down
           From: ctstarwchr@aol...


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
   Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 17:50:03 -0700
   From: Steve Pauley <spauley@cox-internet...>
Subject: Top 10 & light and health

Listed by Science Magazine as one of the top 10
discoveries of 2002:

"_Researchers found a new class of cells in the eye's retina
that are not part of the vision system. Instead, these cells,
called retinal ganglion cells, send signals to the brain to set
the body's clock. "

For the whole list see:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=624&e=4&cid=624&u=/ap/20021219/ap_on_sc/science_s_top_10

In 2002, Berson and others reported that these retinal ganglion cells
are most sensitive to blue light - 464-485 nm.  Their function is
not nighttime or daytime vision but to control the circadian clock located
in the hypothalamus. Under controlled lab conditions, Brainard showed
human melatonin secretion from the pineal gland (part
of our circadian system) is suppressed by just 0.1 fc
of 464 nm monochromatic light.  We need melatonin production
in the early morning hours for good health.  Shift
workers are deprived of normal melatonin production.
Shift workers have higher rates of breast cancer
than non shift workers. David Blask has shown
that melatonin is an "oncostatic" agent- that is, it
reversed the fast growth of human breast cancer cells
implanted in rats that were exposed to light at night-
in this case just .02 fc of white light.
Interruption of the darkness by light caused the cancer
cells to grow fast and also decreased melatonin levels.

Shall we enter year 2003 by continuing to ignore these
data and at night continue to spill light from blue light emitting
lamps, TV's and computers, or should we come to grips
that a potential health hazard has existed ever since the
advent of those sources including indoor fluorescent and
HID outdoor lighting (hps, mv, and mh)?

The situation will only get worse until consumers demand
all full cutoff outdoor lighting in residential zones where light
trespass is an issue, and a re-evaluation of all indoor daytime
and nighttime lighting.

Lighting has entered the realm of public health and should
"first do no harm."

Steve Pauley MD



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
   Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:14:42 EST
   From: ctstarwchr@aol...
Subject: Latest LP News


Researcher Helps Protect the Dark
http://www.californianonline.com/news/stories/20021223/localnews/632538.html

Outstanding work John!
Manassas Park wants to crack down on light pollution
http://www.manassasjm.com/news/MGB3F8BY1AD.html

Clear skies,

Cliff Haas
http://members.aol.com/ctstarwchr


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
   Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:46:26 -0600
   From: Dale Reid <reid@eau...>
Subject: PC world news item for energy savings using Monitor shut down

Here are two links that people may find interesting to help convince people that 
a little goes a long way.  Both aren't overly technical, but one makes the point 
that Pitney Bowes saved $160,000 one year in energy costs by making their 
monitors (and maybe the computers) go to sleep when not needed.  Powerful 
arguments in this day of tighter economic times.  How wonderful to save some 
bucks and electricity, even if not to shut off light.  If the doubting Thomases 
will buy into saving through computer monitors, maybe a few will pick up on 
shutting down unneeded lights.




http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,108072,tk,dn122602X,00.asp

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,41783,00.asp






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
   Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:13:45 -0600
   From: "Karolyn Beebe" <keedo@merr...>
Subject: Re: PC world news item for energy savings using Monitor shut down

Tonight, coal and nuke turbins everywhere must run at
speeds that are not much slower than what tomorrow's
estimated peak will require. If I had stock in a utility, a
nice wad of sky glow would look like $$ in the bank,
a rotten investment if you're into sustainability.

Then again, if we were all stockholders.. we could gang
up and get that excess electricity charging electric cars
that we demand the utilities use so we all breath cleaner
air the next day. Still need to lower daytime peaks
though, and sleep mode can help quite a bit on a national
scale. -karolyn


Dale wrote: > How wonderful to save some 
> bucks and electricity, even if not to shut off light.
If the doubting Thomases 
> will buy into saving through computer monitors,
maybe a few will pick up on 
> shutting down unneeded lights.
> http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,108072,tk,dn122602X,00.asp
> 
> http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,41783,00.asp




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 5
   Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 02:52:07 EST
   From: ctstarwchr@aol...
Subject: Re: PC world news item for energy savings using Monitor shut down

In a message dated 12/26/02 10:48:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, reid@eau... 
writes:

> How wonderful to save some bucks and electricity, even if not to shut off 
> light.  If the doubting Thomases will buy into saving through computer 
> monitors, maybe a few will pick up on shutting down unneeded lights.

I'm with you Dale!  Although I do not know how this is achieved, I have heard 
some countries in Europe turn roadway lighting intensity down by 50% after a 
certain hour at night when traffic density is lower.  The IDA may have data 
on this somewhere in an information sheet.  They apparently achieve 
substantial savings by doing so.  Generally, unless burning HID lamps at full 
steam for a while, running their intensity down through use of special 
ballasts tends to reduce lamp life significantly.  Maybe the technology has 
improved in recent years to overcome that problem?

Another way to harness dusk-to-dawn lighting is by installing a programmable 
Dark-to-Light photocontrol sensor that turns the lights off 1/2 way through 
the night.  This article explains how they work.  Cool stuff!

http://www.darktolight.com/photocontrol/photocontrols3_13.asp

In Connecticut, the municipalities' 200,000 roadway lights are billed for 
electricity and maintenance services based on 4,151 hours annual service for 
leased lighting.  They are charged a flat rate based on wattage of each 
fixture whether the light operates properly or not.  The profit margin is 
enormous and the fixtures pay for themselves in 3-5 years although they 
remain in service for 20 to 30 years or longer with periodic service 
replacing lamps and ballasts when they burn out.  Dayburners cost no more 
than inoperative fixtures because the electrical service is not metered.  

Essentially, if a new tariff was established based on 2,076 hours of annual 
use instead of dusk-to-dawn, this would allow turning fixtures off 1/2 way 
through the night when everyone is sleeping.  Approximately $50 million 
dollars could be saved annually and LP levels would drop significantly 
between around 1:30 AM to dawn on average.  CT is a small state, but assuming 
a random number based on 200,000 street lights per state, if this was done on 
a national level we could save $2.5 billion annually on energy costs without 
loosing anything.  

Stock holders of utility companies would not be happy seeing off peak hour 
cash cows producing only half, but haven't they been taking advantage of the 
public trust long enough as it is?  Doesn't anyone signing those checks in 
our municipalities realize CARS HAVE HEADLIGHTS and many roads are not lit at 
all?  The FARS data (Fatality Analysis Reporting System) for the years 1999 
and 2000 indicated ~18% more accidents on lit roads opposed to unlit roads. 
No scientific data exists indicating that illuminance design methods for 
continuous roadway lighting reduces nighttime accidents, so why keep using 
it?  Reminds me of the comedian Red Green and his crazy duct tape projects.

Clear skies,

Cliff Haas
http://members.aol.com/ctstarwchr



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/