[Darksky][OL-Forum] breast cancer, wasting, FCO...

Jan Hollan
Fri, 19 Oct 2001 17:30:52 +0200 (CEST)


...just part of the Oct 18 digest, to bring your attention to the
mailinglist. Become a member of yahoogroups.com to be able to read
the whole archive.

jenik

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 18 Oct 2001 08:01:53 -0000
From: OutdoorLighting-ForumAyahoogroups...
To: OutdoorLighting-ForumAyahoogroups...
Subject: [OL-Forum] Digest Number 308

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-unsubscribeAyahoogroups...

------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 11 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

      1. Fw: Working Night Shift in Bright Lights Increases Breast Cancer Risk, Studies Find
           From: "Karolyn Beebe" <keedosAearthlink...>
      2. FW: Ch 7 news story: reply
           From: "Fitzpatrick, Eric (J.)" <efitzpatAvisteon...>
      3. Notice of message repair/recycle
           From: kgflemingAatt...
      4. Notice of message repair/recycle
           From: kgflemingAatt...
      5. Fwd:  Susan Harder, subj: light pollution Laws
           From: kgflemingAatt...
      6. Fwd:  Karolyn Beebe Re: light pollution Laws
           From: kgflemingAatt...
      7. Fwd:  Kevin Fleming Re: light pollution Laws
           From: kgflemingAatt...
      8. Fwd: George Nickas Re: light pollution Laws
           From: kgflemingAatt...
      9. "Good Lighting" list at IDA
           From: patricAghostriders...
     10. Re:  light pollution Laws
           From: John Gilkison <jgilkisoAzianet...>
     11. Web link alert
           From: kgflemingAatt...


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 07:00:41 -0500
   From: "Karolyn Beebe" <keedosAearthlink...>
Subject: Fw: Working Night Shift in Bright Lights Increases Breast Cancer Risk, Studies Find

"Melatonin is produced by the pineal gland during the night. Studies
have shown that bright light reduces the secretion of melatonin. In
women, this may lead to an increase in estrogen production; increased
estrogen levels have been linked to breast cancer."

From: "Scott Griswold" <grizAsky...>
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 10:10 PM
Subject: Working Night Shift in Bright Lights Increases Breast Cancer
Risk, Studies Find
>
> I just saw this headline scroll across the bottom of the screen
> on FOX NEWS. I went to their web site and found it on the main page.
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,36625,00.html
>
> Peace, Health & DarkSkies,
>
> Scott




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 10:50:33 -0400
   From: "Fitzpatrick, Eric (J.)" <efitzpatAvisteon...>
Subject: FW: Ch 7 news story: reply

Group,

Here is a warrior that is very active with the our cause.  Has anyone else
heard of the unfortunate effort below?  I really like Norbert's statement on
how "Electricity use is perceived by far too many as clean and efficient".

Eric.

-----Original Message-----
From: Norbert Vance [mailto:norbert.vanceAemich...]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 11:51 AM
To: millerrAmdot....mi.us; bwauldronAmediaone...;
bfrybargerAprodigy...; efitzpatAvisteon...; ekimrousAjuno...;
conpubcoApop....net; dave1actAaol...
Subject: Ch 7 news story: reply


Sirs:

On Sunday evening your news broadcast featured a brief story about a man
so motivated as to venture to Washington to petition Congress that porch
lights be turned on to fight crime and rally support for our cause
against terrorism.  Perhaps his heart is in the right place but his
actions will only make a bad situation even worse.  Since the producers
know this gentleman, please have them relay the following facts before
he takes his "cause" any further:

1) Electricity use is perceived by far too many as clean and efficient.
It is neither as coal-burning power plants are a top producer of air
pollution, greenhouse gases, and acid rain.  The Monroe Edison
coal-burning plant, for example, pumped out 12 million pounds of
pollutants in 1998 alone. The only people that profit from this are the
power companies.  Those with respiratory ailments will further suffer.

2) The mass use of porch lights will needlessly burn precious fossil
fuels.  Such waste only further INCREASES our dependence on foreign
energy sources, i.e. the Middle East, and the need to venture into
pristine wildlife areas searching for energy sources.

3) Nighttime is a NATURAL PHENOMENON.  Every light we burn at night
leads to the natural destruction of bird migratory routes, nocturnal
animal behavior (including our own!), and a dark night sky.  This *light
pollution* will only serve to clutter an already oppressive
orange-tinted dome of light that blankets every urban sky in the
nation.  An entire generation of youth has grown up without ever
experiencing the stars above, one of the last contacts with nature urban
dwellers could still enjoy, because of our misuse of outdoor lighting
the past few decades.  We absolutely don't need MORE light, in spite of
the supposed reputation that it reduces crime.  In fact, a Department of
Justice study found no relationship between lighting and crime
reduction.  Some of our brightest lit areas suffer more crime because
they are blighted by poorly designed, over-luminous lights.
Interestingly, some towns have actually reduced crime and helped the
environment by turning lights OFF!

If this gentleman wishes to help, he can petition that every homeowner
use motion detector lights so that we REDUCE the amount of energy we
consume.  Moreover, I hope your news department considers more carefully
what it calls "news".  The long range need to cut our energy dependency
and protect the environment far outweigh the efforts of a transitory
patriotic cause.

Sincerely,

Norbert Vance
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 5
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:34:57 -0000
   From: kgflemingAatt...
Subject: Fwd:  Susan Harder, subj: light pollution Laws

--- In OutdoorLighting-ForumAy....., Susan Harder <lookoutAh.....> wrote:
Dark Sky Advocates:

For your information:  the attached link is "the opposition" to the
proposed New York State and Suffolk County legislation.  Any thoughts
about how, or who to ask for help in dealing with this writer or her
ideas, please respond.  (My letter to editor, among other things, 
asked them to be sure that anyone writing about legislation first be 
told to read it.) 

Here are two links to a recent "Opinions" column in Long Island 
Newsday, a newspaper. The quotes in the Voices segments were not in 
response to the article. (Note the comment from our utility, LIPA 
Chairman, Kessel. This is the company that promotes leased 400 watt 
unshielded dusk to dawn floodlights on public utility poles, for 
closed businesses.  As a concession to dark sky advocates, they no 
longer install new 1000 watt fixtures, or so we have been told.) 

The writer:  Michele W. McColgan, "Lighting scientist at the Lighting
Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's School of
Architecture." 

Susan Harder
East Hampton

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpmcg142414070oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewpoints%2Dheadlines

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpoth142414069oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewpoints%2Dheadlines
--- End forwarded message ---




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 6
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:52:54 -0000
   From: kgflemingAatt...
Subject: Fwd:  Karolyn Beebe Re: light pollution Laws

--- In OutdoorLighting-ForumAy....., "Karolyn Beebe" <keedosAe.....> 
wrote:
Susan Harder wrote:
> The writer:  Michele W. McColgan, "Lighting scientist at the 
Lighting
> Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's School of
> Architecture." 

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpmcg142414070oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewpoints%2Dheadlines

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpoth142414069oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewpoints%2Dheadlines

Additional information: Michele Mc Colgan Lighting Scientist
687-7103  (fax 687-7120) mccolmAr.....

Write to Letters Editor, Newsday, 235 Pinelawn Rd., Melville, N.Y. 
11747-4250, fax (631) 843-2986 or e-mail to lettersAn.....  Read the 
instructions in: http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/  
Here's my letter -- Karolyn


Editor,

On 10/14 Michele W. McColgan claims outdoor lighting is 'necessary to 
meet certain necessary societal goals' like 'highlighting historic 
areas and landmarks..."  She also says lighting "may draw people to a 
downtown area.." Syracuse NY decided to light up historic Clinton 
Square for that reason. Can't say what the energy for all the light 
costs taxpayers, but a cam is trained on the square so we get to see 
if it's worth the cost.

You can access the cam at: http://www.syracuse.com/clintoncam/  It 
can be set to any of the last 24 hours. Since I learned about in 
August I've looked for people at various hours of the previous night 
a few times a week. I suggest people concerned with how their tax 
dollars are being spent do the same. If any readers are city 
planners, I urge you to to do so as well before you launch a similar 
project in your city.

I couldn't stroll Clinton Square after dark and trust that my night 
vision wouldn't shut down. My eyes are attracted to bright lights 
like moths are; I look and visibility shuts down every time, so I 
understand why so few people ever show up at night. Now if the 
grounds in the area were illuminated softly by attractive, well 
shielded lighting fixtures, my head could be up and my eyes ready to 
tell what's in darker areas. I'd also find more stars over
Syracuse.

--- End forwarded message ---




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 7
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:57:56 -0000
   From: kgflemingAatt...
Subject: Fwd:  Kevin Fleming Re: light pollution Laws

--- In OutdoorLighting-ForumAy....., kgflemingAa..... wrote:
I get the impression that "Lighting scientist" Michele 
McColgan didn't bother reading the NY bill. She seems 
to think it bans outdoor lighting.

For a scientist she doesn't seem to hold facts in high 
esteem. She cited none. If fact, was there anything in 
that piece other than pure (unfounded) opinion? If so I 
missed it. She doesn't reflect well on RPI.

Kevin 		

> Dark Sky Advocates:
> 
> For your information:  the attached link is "the opposition" to the
> proposed New York State and Suffolk County legislation.  Any 
thoughts
> about how, or who to ask for help in dealing with this writer or her
> ideas, please respond.  (My letter to editor, among other things, 
asked
> them to be sure that anyone writing about legislation first be told 
to
> read it.) 
> 
> Here are two links to a recent "Opinions" column in Long Island 
Newsday,
> a newspaper. The quotes in the Voices segments were not in response 
to
> the article. (Note the comment from our utility, LIPA Chairman, 
Kessel. 
> This is the company that promotes leased 400 watt unshielded dusk to
> dawn floodlights on public utility poles, for closed businesses.  
As a
> concession to dark sky advocates, they no longer install new 1000 
watt
> fixtures, or so we have been told.) 
> 
> The writer:  Michele W. McColgan, "Lighting scientist at the 
Lighting
> Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's School of
> Architecture." 
> 
> Susan Harder
> East Hampton
> 
> http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpmcg142414070oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewp
> oints%2Dheadlines
> 
> http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpoth142414069oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewp
> oints%2Dheadlines
> 
--- End forwarded message ---




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 8
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:10:48 -0000
   From: kgflemingAatt...
Subject: Fwd: George Nickas Re: light pollution Laws

--- In OutdoorLighting-ForumAy....., nickas <nickasAh.....> wrote:
The site for the Lighting Research Center at RPI is at 
http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/.  The Center is funded by the following:  

California Energy Commission
                                               Consolidated Edison 
Company of New York, Inc.
                                               GE Lighting
                                               Genlyte Thomas
                                               New York State Energy 
Research & Development
Authority
                                               Northeast Utilities
                                               Northwest Energy 
Efficiency Alliance
                                               OSRAM SYLVANIA, Inc.
                                               Philips Lighting
                                               United States 
Department of Energy
                                               United States 
Environmental Protection Agency
                                               Xcel Energy

Given this list of sponsors, we should not expect much in the way of 
science from this outfit if it steps on sponsor toes.  McColgan 
apparently is not on the faculty, so I have some doubts about her
"scientist" status.  Also somebody else with a Master's degree on the 
faculty is listed as a "Lighting Scientist" so apparently they define 
scientist loosely.  My guess is that a big shot assigned McColgan the 
task of writing a piece supporting the lighting industry.  gn

Susan Harder wrote:

> Dark Sky Advocates:
>
> For your information:  the attached link is "the opposition" to the
> proposed New York State and Suffolk County legislation.  Any 
thoughts
> about how, or who to ask for help in dealing with this writer or her
> ideas, please respond.  (My letter to editor, among other things, 
asked
> them to be sure that anyone writing about legislation first be told 
to
> read it.)
>
> Here are two links to a recent "Opinions" column in Long Island 
Newsday,
> a newspaper. The quotes in the Voices segments were not in response 
to
> the article. (Note the comment from our utility, LIPA Chairman, 
Kessel.
> This is the company that promotes leased 400 watt unshielded dusk to
> dawn floodlights on public utility poles, for closed businesses.  
As a
> concession to dark sky advocates, they no longer install new 1000 
watt
> fixtures, or so we have been told.)
>
> The writer:  Michele W. McColgan, "Lighting scientist at the 
Lighting
> Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's School of
> Architecture." 
>
> Susan Harder
> East Hampton
>
> http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpmcg142414070oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewpoints%2Dheadlines
>
> http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpoth142414069oct14.story?
coll=ny%2Dviewpoints%2Dheadlines

--- End forwarded message ---

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 9
   Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 14:05:35 -0700
   From: patricAghostriders...
Subject: "Good Lighting" list at IDA

I wish to suggest some updates to your web page entitled "Good Lighting
Fixtures and Where to Get Them," located at

http://www.darksky.org/ida/manuf.html

to include a few cut-off fixtures designed for residential and light
commercial use.

Some that come to mind are:
The newer "GlareBuster" residential light
(http://www.theglarebuster.com)
The YL108 "Reflector Light" by American Fluorescent, and 
The RSM-100 by Regency.

Additionally, I wish to recommend that the reference to the "Acorn"-type
post-top light pictured with the refracting globe, be removed from the
list of "good" fixtures, as it's design is completely contrary to the
types of good lighting promoted by the IDA.
Patric Johnstone


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 10
   Date: (unknown)
   From: John Gilkison <jgilkisoAzianet...>
Subject: Re:  light pollution Laws

From: Carol Rehder
A local advocate 
for sane outdoor 
lighting in the 
Las Cruces, NM area.

I'm sending you by mail a news paper clipping from Silver City which I
thought you'd be interested in.  Also, I talked to Vincent Pettes of Codes
today about the sag-lens lights in the parking lot they just built next to
Desert Hills elementary school.  Apparently, the architect slipped them
in---but they plan to change them out to FCO.  So that is good news.  Maybe
I need to send a copy of the ordinance to all the architectural firms---

Also, he said they had sent out 40 letters to businesses which needed to
realign their floodlights, and that next week they were going to make an
inspection tour of these 40 to see who, if anyone, had complied.  They are
working on it, so I am pleased to hear of any progress, however small.  He
said one business was very irate and wanted to know who had reported him,
but Officer Pettes told him that was none of his business.  He doesn't feel
it is their business to know, but if push comes to shove, I don't care if
they tell them it was a committee member, or even my name.  What do you think?

Carol

        In this instance they don't want to know what I think!

Yes I got your new phone number.

*
John Gilkison
President, National 
Public Observatory
jgilkisoAzianet...
www.astronomy-national-
public-observatory.org