3 ms·

I think that, in general, people will agree with you and would prefer not too have so much ambient light at night. So assuming that, I think it's a good idea t

I think that, in general, people will agree with you and would prefer not too have so much ambient light at night. So assuming that, I think it's a good idea to ask the question: If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? There are probably a lot of benefits that people get from lighting that would be lost with less of it. If we don't understand what those are, it's hard to weigh the pros and cons.

ceejayoz 4y ago
> If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? Because it's been too gradual of a thing for most folks to really notice. Take someone to a dark sky site and they'll likely have their mind blown. I was in Freycinet National Park in Tasmania last year, and you could step out of a lit room with no time for eyes to adjust and still see the Milky Way laid out in the sky.
edhelas 4y ago
From what I read from it, it is driven by the "fear of the dark" in a lot of cases. Also, what could prevent us to have lights that are turned of when there is no-one around and for the other cases, have our own source of light (like for example... a mobile phone or a head-light) ? Big optimization.
rootusrootus 4y ago
> If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? At the risk of stating the obvious, it is because your assumption is incorrect. Or perhaps more specifically, it is too narrowly focused. People may generally prefer a dark sky, but clearly they don't generally prefer it over having a well lit landscape.
- Nifty3929 4y ago
  And there you go right there. That's exactly what I'm talking about. One reason people might light things up is that they prefer X (a well lit landscape) more than they value a dark sky at night. Other ideas: Landing strips. Safety (perceived?) in public spaces. On streets. Around homes. Etc. I'm not arguing these are good tradeoffs or not, just that they ARE tradeoffs for some people, and there's no moral imperative one way or the other.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    We are slowly making some progress, new streetlights are generally shrouded better than they were in the past. But then LED lights tend to be harsh, towards the blue end of the spectrum. I'd like to see shorter lights with warmer color temperature, at least. There is a section of I-5 between Portland and Seattle, perhaps a couple miles long, that has blue streetlights. Like, really blue, not just blue-ish white. It's like driving under a blacklight. The Internet tells me this is the result of a manufacturing defect and the effect is not intentional. I hope they replace them soon, they're kinda distracting when you're driving.
    - Nifty3929 4y ago
      I think it would be better to understand more clearly what light sources are contributing to keep things focused on the more substantial contributors. Is it streetlights? Indoor home lighting? Landscape lighting? I really don't know, but I think it's important to look at. How is it different at 9pm vs 2am?
toss1 4y ago
>>If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? I'd first point to the Tragedy Of The Commons. For anyone to put up one extra light or string of lights, is only a small extra cost to the installer. But the externalized costs and cumulative effect is insanely destructive. If we think about it, it makes no sense to screw up the lifecycle of almost every plant and creature on the planet. But most people are entirely ignorant of the harms, and cognizant only of their naive preferences and fear of the dark. So, they put up a light, or string of lights, or entire parking lot or city of lights. Without considering the consequences, perhaps beyond the budget. Just because something has been built does not mean that there was a good justification for it. It only means that there was a bad but sufficient justification for the immediate cost and that the externalized costs are ignored.

ceejayoz 4y ago

> If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? Because it's been too gradual of a thing for most folks to really notice. Take someone to a dark sky site and they'll likely have their mind blown. I was in Freycinet National Park in Tasmania last year, and you could step out of a lit room with no time for eyes to adjust and still see the Milky Way laid out in the sky.

edhelas 4y ago

From what I read from it, it is driven by the "fear of the dark" in a lot of cases. Also, what could prevent us to have lights that are turned of when there is no-one around and for the other cases, have our own source of light (like for example... a mobile phone or a head-light) ? Big optimization.

rootusrootus 4y ago

> If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? At the risk of stating the obvious, it is because your assumption is incorrect. Or perhaps more specifically, it is too narrowly focused. People may generally prefer a dark sky, but clearly they don't generally prefer it over having a well lit landscape.

Nifty3929 4y ago
And there you go right there. That's exactly what I'm talking about. One reason people might light things up is that they prefer X (a well lit landscape) more than they value a dark sky at night. Other ideas: Landing strips. Safety (perceived?) in public spaces. On streets. Around homes. Etc. I'm not arguing these are good tradeoffs or not, just that they ARE tradeoffs for some people, and there's no moral imperative one way or the other.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  We are slowly making some progress, new streetlights are generally shrouded better than they were in the past. But then LED lights tend to be harsh, towards the blue end of the spectrum. I'd like to see shorter lights with warmer color temperature, at least. There is a section of I-5 between Portland and Seattle, perhaps a couple miles long, that has blue streetlights. Like, really blue, not just blue-ish white. It's like driving under a blacklight. The Internet tells me this is the result of a manufacturing defect and the effect is not intentional. I hope they replace them soon, they're kinda distracting when you're driving.
  - Nifty3929 4y ago
    I think it would be better to understand more clearly what light sources are contributing to keep things focused on the more substantial contributors. Is it streetlights? Indoor home lighting? Landscape lighting? I really don't know, but I think it's important to look at. How is it different at 9pm vs 2am?

toss1 4y ago

>>If people general prefer a dark sky at night, why do we have so much lighting? I'd first point to the Tragedy Of The Commons. For anyone to put up one extra light or string of lights, is only a small extra cost to the installer. But the externalized costs and cumulative effect is insanely destructive. If we think about it, it makes no sense to screw up the lifecycle of almost every plant and creature on the planet. But most people are entirely ignorant of the harms, and cognizant only of their naive preferences and fear of the dark. So, they put up a light, or string of lights, or entire parking lot or city of lights. Without considering the consequences, perhaps beyond the budget. Just because something has been built does not mean that there was a good justification for it. It only means that there was a bad but sufficient justification for the immediate cost and that the externalized costs are ignored.