[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[OL-Forum] Digest Number 683
OutdoorLighting-Forum "The largest uncensored and most active non-geographic based forum on light pollution."
To unsubscribe from a Yahoo list send a blank email to listname-unsubscribe@yahoogroups...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 10 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. regulations
From: Susan Harder <lookout@hamptons...>
2. Re: No Light Xmas
From: Steve Davis <w2sgd@juno...>
3. Re: More Response
From: Steve Davis <w2sgd@juno...>
4. Re: Re: No Light Xmas
From: "John M. McMahon" <mcmahon@mail....edu>
5. Dr. Barry Clark's new paper: Lighting & Crime
From: kgfleming@worldnet....net
6. TAN: No Light Xmas
From: "John M. McMahon" <mcmahon@mail....edu>
7. Re: THE FIVE FREEDOMS/regulations
From: John Gilkison <jgilkiso@zianet...>
8. Re: Re: No Light Xmas
From: nickas <nickas@hanover...>
9. street lighting outvoted
From: "Roger L. Hammer" <hamme1rl@cmich...>
10. IDA's Practical Approaches
From: rlgent1@aol...
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:02:26 -0500
From: Susan Harder <lookout@hamptons...>
Subject: regulations
What good does it do, for a "good" lighting designer to suggest "good" design, if the client, or their electrician
or their contractor, is free (without regulations and specifications) to do whatever they want, including firing
the "good" designer, or changing their recommendations? We need regulations, NOW.
Susan Harder
By the way, my point was not to "attack" Mr. Reeder. I chose not to attend the lecture, "If you light it they
will come", based on the mailer. My comments were directed at the graphics on the mailer, which was prepared and
approved by someone at IES. And it was abominable.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:07:24 -0500
From: Steve Davis <w2sgd@juno...>
Subject: Re: No Light Xmas
John M. McMahon wrote:
>>Steve Davis wrote:
>> Like "Buy Nothing Day', it is going to be no lights on the tree or
>> outside. -sd
> What tree?
Any tree - artifical or real - with or without roots -
indoors or out. If you don't have a tree, substitute bush.
Who can see anything with sparkle? -sd, left of center -
but who decides where center is?
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:49:54 -0500
From: Steve Davis <w2sgd@juno...>
Subject: Re: More Response
Reg Wilson,
No one questions your qualifications or what you have done.
You are one of the very few who do "get it".
It is the others in the lighting industry plus the city
planners, town council, chambers of commerce, etc.
who either don't get it or have never heard about it.
I and others have knocked on plenty of doors
only to be told we are "nuts" or worse.
Ask where the light polluters get their ideas from and look
at the market place. Then you can make comments.
As for taking a few personal hits along the way, that comes
with the territory. I have taken plenty as the result of
actions by others in my field or others working for the
same employer. Now that people are beginning to see the
light, you can expect more and have the opportunity to
do something about it other than make wild dreams come
true. -sd
________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:42:05 -0500
From: "John M. McMahon" <mcmahon@mail....edu>
Subject: Re: Re: No Light Xmas
Steve Davis wrote:
>
> > What tree?
>
> Any tree - artifical or real - with or without roots -
> indoors or out. If you don't have a tree, substitute bush.
Or skip the whole time-consuming drill ...
OLPC:
Yet another new and prominently uplit flagpole has gone up
in the open field behind a True Value store. The store faces
Rte 11 in Lafayette, NY but the open field has frontage on
I-81. There it stands, calling attention to itself -- and
more importantly, the *back* of the store building, itself
festooned with various advertising signs ... though these
are interior-lit. On Monday evening the blowing like-effect
snow allowed one to see the extent of the pillar of light as
it reached upward beyond the pole and flag.
Lovely.
John McMahon
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:08:58 +0000
From: kgfleming@worldnet....net
Subject: Dr. Barry Clark's new paper: Lighting & Crime
I got this a few days ago from Barry Clark from down under. I've only read
about 1/5 of his report and find it very interesting reading. Not only is the
report interesting but so are the circumstances under which Barry sent it to
me and others, as he eludes to below. I hope you'll all take the time to read
his report while I sort through three day's emails I received in a dump
yesterday after unloading my stuffed inbox. It'll give me a chance to catch
up.
A link to Barry's report is also available on the ICOLE home page at
http://icole.home.att.net
Kevin
---------------------- Forwarded Message: ---------------------
From: "Barry Clark" <bajc@alphalink....au>
To: <icole@worldnet....net>
Subject: Outdoor Lighting and Crime
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:07:32 +1100
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'Outdoor Lighting and Crime, Part 1: Little or No Benefit'
Part 1 of the extensive revision of my earlier 'Outdoor Lighting and Crime'
is now available from the Astronomical Society of Victoria website
http://www.asv.org.au/ and other sites (do a search). For example,
http://amper.ped.muni.cz/ has it in a very smart pdf booklet form. Make
sure the paper you get has 'Part 1' in the title.
Part 1 is an examination of the scientific literature on lighting and crime.
It exposes biased and poor experimental work and analysis, and indicates
that there is little or no benefit of outdoor lighting in terms of crime
reduction. Many experts in criminology and lighting have now seen drafts
and the finished version of Part 1. Since its public release I have not had
any complaints or adverse comments about the technical and scientific
content in the finished version.
Unfortunately, however, I have had objections from a couple of dark
skies people on the grounds that it might upset the lighting industry and
make them uncooperative. I don't believe that it will, but others are
entitled to think what they like. Regardless, the idea of a softly, softly
approach to turning light pollution around might have looked the way to go
once but the blunt fact is that it has failed catastrophically, despite some
welcome successes in getting outdoor lighting ordinances adopted. It
is now clear that the sustained increase in artificial skyglow in populated
areas of the world is typically over 10% per year, 2.6 times per decade, or
45 times over forty years. At the present rate, most of the populated world
will end up with all-night twilight within the 21st century, if not within
our own lifetimes. Setting out to do some deep-sky observing will increasingly need
to take on the characteristics of a solar eclipse expedition to remote
corners of the earth.
Even if the nice guy method worked so perfectly that everybody fitted FCO
shields to everything overnight, it would delay the worldwide increase in
skyglow only by about three years at most by my estimate, after which the
exponential increase would again predominate, virtually unabated from then
on as appeals for moderation in the amount of light used thereafter will
doubtless continue to fall mostly on deaf ears. The recent San Diego
relighting decision, among many others, shows that most people don't care much about
dark skies for astronomy.
Not only does the exponential growth in artificial skyglow need to be
stopped, it has to be reversed for several good reasons. From the
greenhouse gases and energy conservation viewpoints, it would be desirable
to get back to the situation at or near the Kyoto base year of 1990. This
would require at least two thirds of all present outdoor lighting to be
decommissioned or equivalent reductions in energy use achieved by lower
wattage lamps and curfews, with no new lighting installations thereafter
unless offset by energy reductions elsewhere. That will need ironclad laws,
not appeals for voluntary restraint.
Much of Part 1 is devoted to a paper by criminologists Farrington and Welsh,
a meta-analysis of existing experimental results on lighting and crime.
Their paper claims that outdoor lighting does reduce crime. My finding is
that the analysis uses results from many flawed experiments, and thereby
gives what I believe to be an erroneous green light to the lighting industry
to turn night into day. The lighting industry is already using the result
in advertising.
Part 2 of my paper is still a few weeks from completion. Currently it has
133 pages, including 13 figures. I have finished collection of data and the
data analysis, and the text is about 97% complete. The evidence is
overwhelming that the growth of lighting over the twentieth century has been
an essential link in the growth in the crime rate in that time. This is
most unpalatable, but there is no natural law that says facts have to be
palatable.
Barry Clark
Melbourne, Australia
"Excessive light at night is a weapon of mass environmental destruction."
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:42:01 -0500
From: "John M. McMahon" <mcmahon@mail....edu>
Subject: TAN: No Light Xmas
Steve Davis wrote:
>
> -sd, left of center -
> but who decides where center is?
Doesn't matter as long of you're left of it. Better still,
abandon the between-the-40yd.line mentality and go stand in
the end zone. Then it doesn't matter where anybody else is
playing. Of course, nobody may hear you shouting from down
there ... but you might be able to make a reception when the
ball comes your way ... then it's an automatic score.
OTOH, it's been my experience that if you go far enough
left, you wind up agreeing with lots of things with sensible
people on the right: property rights, privacy, etc. It's not
really linear, you know.
Eclectically yours,
John McMahon
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: (unknown)
From: John Gilkison <jgilkiso@zianet...>
Subject: Re: THE FIVE FREEDOMS/regulations
Susan
Good job Susan, you must be doing something right to have stirred
up a shit storm that made it half way around the globe :~)>
For those of us who are tired of all the sucking up and ass kissing
going on inside and out of the IDA, and this seemingly incestous relationship
that has developed with the "Lighting Industry", we thank you.
What I think based upon what I am seeing and hearing is that the
industry is conceeding FCO, but they want to keep their uplighting for
various cliental ego gratification schemes, and to reserve the right to
ratchet up the lumens as much as can sell to gullible retailers. Where
ever you propose lighting level controls they will come out in force against
you, and accuse you of being a special interest group. They want to sell as
much non cut off stuff as they can that they still have on their shelves and
that they are still producing.
In Bradshaw on the Family he talked about the five freedoms. When
you don't have the five freedoms you are growing up in an mental and
emotionally unhealthy family environment. I would include the wide community
in this family to as they all come from families and are an extention of
the family.
THE FIVE FREEDOMS ARE
1: TO SEE WHAT YOU SEE.
2: TO HEAR WHAT YOU HEAR.
3: TO FEEL WHAT YOU FEEL.
4: TO THINK WHAT YOU THINK.
5: TO SAY WHAT YOU THINK AND FEEL BASED UPON THE PREVIOUS
FOUR FREEDOMS.
Anytime I see people on this list or any place else matter telling
me or others icknay on exercizing your five freedoms nay I walk the other
way. I have always reserved the right to say when I don't think the Emperor
is wearing any clothes. If later I find I have been wrong, why I am perfectly
willing to apologize. People who are generally more intellectially honest will
gravitate towards the truth more often then people who are more willing to
accept intellectial dishonestly dressed up as thought I feel.
*
John Gilkison
President, National
Public Observatory
jgilkiso@zianet...
www.astronomy-national-
public-observatory.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:29:01 -0500
From: nickas <nickas@hanover...>
Subject: Re: Re: No Light Xmas
"John M. McMahon" wrote:
> Steve Davis wrote:
> >
> > > What tree?
> >
> > Any tree - artifical or real - with or without roots -
> > indoors or out. If you don't have a tree, substitute bush.
>
> Or skip the whole time-consuming drill ...
>
> OLPC:
>
> Yet another new and prominently uplit flagpole has gone up
> in the open field behind a True Value store. The store faces
> Rte 11 in Lafayette, NY but the open field has frontage on
> I-81. There it stands, calling attention to itself -- and
> more importantly, the *back* of the store building, itself
> festooned with various advertising signs ... though these
> are interior-lit. On Monday evening the blowing like-effect
> snow allowed one to see the extent of the pillar of light as
> it reached upward beyond the pole and flag.
>
> Lovely.
>
> John McMahon
>
>
> OutdoorLighting-Forum "The largest uncensored and most active non-geographic based forum on light pollution."
> To unsubscribe from a Yahoo list send a blank email to listname-unsubscribe@yahoogroups...
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:26:57 -0500
From: "Roger L. Hammer" <hamme1rl@cmich...>
Subject: street lighting outvoted
One of my students informed me that residents in his very rural community of
Lake Township, Roscommon County, MI voted not to light the streets in town
beginning Jan 1. He said he thought it was because they didn't want to pay
for lighting, but when the Twp Board voted to keep the lights on anyway and
pay for it out of the general fund, many in attendence protested, they
simply didn't want the lights on at all. I'd like to see this issue appear
on more ballots in the future.
Roger
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 05:03:23 EST
From: rlgent1@aol...
Subject: IDA's Practical Approaches
Seasons Greetings,
For those who don't know me, please let me introduce myself. I have been
working as a full time volunteer for IDA since 1996. I have served as the
IDA Public Relations Officer, News Editor, and now live in Italy. I
currently serve as the IDA European Liaison Officer and the Chair of the IDA
Sections Working Group. I am also active in IESNA and CIE.
First, let me thank you for your memberships in IDA. They are much needed
and greatly appreciated. We also appreciate your efforts to sign up new
members. There is strength in numbers, and with thousands of members in 75
countries, IDA is making a big difference.
Normally, I do am not active on these lists, but I feel obligated to make a
statement based on many messages that have recently been posted to several
e-mail groups. Let me reemphasize that these messages do not represent IDA's
philosophy. Also, these discussion groups are not the "official voice of
IDA."
One of the reasons I have worked so hard for so long as a full-time IDA
volunteer is that the IDA philosophy works. What is that philosophy? In a
nutshell, it's "IDA makes friends, not enemies." Why does this work?
Because everyone benefits from better quality lighting. This makes our case
easy to make.
Some people have suggested that IDA should do more. Believe me, we are doing
all we can to control light pollution. IDA is flooded with hundreds of
requests on a daily basis, and it is a huge challenge to keep pace with all
the work. The media wants to talk, new sections are being formed, laws are
being debated, and there is much to be done.
Many of the senior IDA staff and board members have spoken in support of
lighting ordinances. During my time at IDA, I have been invited to testify
before several state legislative committee hearings. In addition, I have
appeared before many dozens of city councils and other government agencies to
talk about the benefits of better lighting. I have written a multitude of
letters of support. But my actions pale in comparison to what others at IDA
have done. Again, we are making enormous changes. When people hear our
recommendations, they usually act.
IDA much more than a bunch of astronomers. We now work successfully with
environmental groups, government officials, lighting engineers and designers,
and many other organizations. Together as a team, we make better progress.
I recall a favorite quote from a South Carolina conference on protection of
coastal areas, years ago. One lady who worked to protect sea turtles from
bad lights said her most important recommendation was to "Treat every person
as if they were your best friend." Talk about "southern charm."
IDA will continue to make policy announcements in our newsletter and on our
web site. For example, the IDA board reviewed our updated statement on
Lighting and Human Health. This is now being distributed widely. Other
statements will be issued after careful consideration.
IDA continues to educate the public about both the problems and solutions of
light pollution. We now have developed many new products to help everyone in
this effort. We have new videos, CDs, Information Sheets, and so much more
is being prepared for use. We are loaded with success stories. The press
coverage continues on a daily basis. We are making a difference. Stand by
for more news as IDA continues to lead the effort to control light pollution.
In closing, I hope to see many of you again at the IDA annual conference in
Tucson, AZ, USA, next March 21-23, 2003. Please don't forget to send me your
lighting award nominations for 2002.
Wishing everyone the very best for the holidays and successful New Year.
Still proudly serving as just one IDA volunteer,
Bob Gent
European Liaison Officer and
Chair, Sections Working Group
International Dark-Sky Association, Inc.
cc: IDA Board of Directors
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/