4 ms·

What is the impact of an increase of energy spend each day by this birds? They need more food, so they will eat more insects and grain. I doubt that it is a ne

What is the impact of an increase of energy spend each day by this birds? They need more food, so they will eat more insects and grain. I doubt that it is a negligible amount. It could easy affect the amount of birds that an ecosystem can host, and way more things down the line. All these rapid changes can mess up the equilibrium in our ecosystems. Light pollution also affects insect behavior. If light pollution makes birds consume more insects and it also reduces the number of insects it is an accumulative problem. - Light pollution is a driver of insect declines: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320719307797 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00063...

Lammy 1y ago
I don't even need to go as far as the birds and the bees. The modern pervasive light pollution affects my behavior. My city's streets feel like a movie set these nights in a really uncanny unreal way. LED lighting is too good, too cheap, makes it too easy to have way too much goddamn light in every corner of every street over every hour of every day. It feels like it's so machines can see better, not so I can see better.
- stinos 1y ago
  makes it too easy to have way too much goddamn light in every corner of every street That's essentially correct, but modern tech also makes it relatively easy (and in the end cheaper compared to non-LED) to - make lights with a properly focused well directed beam instead of flooding the whole place; we have a new one close to our house and it sheds light only on the street itself to the point you can almost see a nice straight line where the light beam stops and beyond that line it's markedly darker than it used to be even though the light beam itself has a higher intensity - make lights which emit in wavelengths which are less environmentally harmful for flora/fauna - make each lantern remote controllable (on/off/dimming); main street lights here dim after 11pm and are truned off in all secondary streets (there's a website dedcated to listing the best models for all of this but I cannot find it anymore) The thing which is lacking here mostly is awareness and governments willing to implement this properly. We live in a rather small rural village which did implement all of this - too bad there's no research project assesing before and after but since it counters most of the negatives I assume it should turn out positive for the environment. Birds are definitely positively affected by it: execpt for owls I don't hear any singing in the middle of the night anymore. And in any case it feels pretty 'normal' to come home at night while it's properly dark.
  - throw0101a 1y ago
    > That's essentially correct, but modern tech also makes it relatively easy (and in the end cheaper compared to non-LED) I don't think modern tech is really needed for (some of?) the things you list: * we've know about lenses and focusing for centuries (the highly directional Fresnel lens was invented ~1815). * incandescent lights have been around for a century and they were <3500K since the beginning; sodium street lights (<3000K) have been around for decades too It is not so much modern tech that's the thing as modern (better) understanding: we've actually done research into the topic, and that research is more widely known; see for example this report by the city of Toronto on effective lighting (that mentions Dark Sky certification by name): * https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/8ff6-city-planning-bird-effective-lighting.pdf https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/8ff6-city-...
  - Lammy 1y ago
    > it sheds light only on the street itself to the point you can almost see a nice straight line where the light beam stops and beyond that line it's markedly darker than it used to be even though the light beam itself has a higher intensity This is one of the biggest contributors to the uncanny movie-set feeling for me. I don't like it :/
  - quickthrowman 1y ago
    Here’s the thing: all of those things you mentioned (dimming, occupancy sensing, focused beams, light shields to prevent light pollution on other properties) are options that can be added on during manufacturing, but an engineer needs to specify that those options are required or else someone will win the bid with a more basic light pole head without all those options. The customer (municipality or state) often will compare the nice lights with all of the options you listed against a more basic light during the planning phase and opt to spend less money on the more basic lighting.
    - stinos 1y ago
      Indeed I implied this when saying 'willing to implement', but one thing to note: the customer should be smart enough to consider total cost of oownership. I.e. there's the price of the light but also the price of having to replace it and having it on etc. The extra price of functionality allowing to decrease the amount of on time might pay itself back. I vaguely recall in my municipality this was one of the reasons they went for the slightly more expensive initial cost of full control ability anyway - not completely sure though.

Lammy 1y ago

I don't even need to go as far as the birds and the bees. The modern pervasive light pollution affects my behavior. My city's streets feel like a movie set these nights in a really uncanny unreal way. LED lighting is too good, too cheap, makes it too easy to have way too much goddamn light in every corner of every street over every hour of every day. It feels like it's so machines can see better, not so I can see better.

stinos 1y ago
makes it too easy to have way too much goddamn light in every corner of every street That's essentially correct, but modern tech also makes it relatively easy (and in the end cheaper compared to non-LED) to - make lights with a properly focused well directed beam instead of flooding the whole place; we have a new one close to our house and it sheds light only on the street itself to the point you can almost see a nice straight line where the light beam stops and beyond that line it's markedly darker than it used to be even though the light beam itself has a higher intensity - make lights which emit in wavelengths which are less environmentally harmful for flora/fauna - make each lantern remote controllable (on/off/dimming); main street lights here dim after 11pm and are truned off in all secondary streets (there's a website dedcated to listing the best models for all of this but I cannot find it anymore) The thing which is lacking here mostly is awareness and governments willing to implement this properly. We live in a rather small rural village which did implement all of this - too bad there's no research project assesing before and after but since it counters most of the negatives I assume it should turn out positive for the environment. Birds are definitely positively affected by it: execpt for owls I don't hear any singing in the middle of the night anymore. And in any case it feels pretty 'normal' to come home at night while it's properly dark.
- throw0101a 1y ago
  > That's essentially correct, but modern tech also makes it relatively easy (and in the end cheaper compared to non-LED) I don't think modern tech is really needed for (some of?) the things you list: * we've know about lenses and focusing for centuries (the highly directional Fresnel lens was invented ~1815). * incandescent lights have been around for a century and they were <3500K since the beginning; sodium street lights (<3000K) have been around for decades too It is not so much modern tech that's the thing as modern (better) understanding: we've actually done research into the topic, and that research is more widely known; see for example this report by the city of Toronto on effective lighting (that mentions Dark Sky certification by name): * https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/8ff6-city-planning-bird-effective-lighting.pdf https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/8ff6-city-...
- Lammy 1y ago
  > it sheds light only on the street itself to the point you can almost see a nice straight line where the light beam stops and beyond that line it's markedly darker than it used to be even though the light beam itself has a higher intensity This is one of the biggest contributors to the uncanny movie-set feeling for me. I don't like it :/
- quickthrowman 1y ago
  Here’s the thing: all of those things you mentioned (dimming, occupancy sensing, focused beams, light shields to prevent light pollution on other properties) are options that can be added on during manufacturing, but an engineer needs to specify that those options are required or else someone will win the bid with a more basic light pole head without all those options. The customer (municipality or state) often will compare the nice lights with all of the options you listed against a more basic light during the planning phase and opt to spend less money on the more basic lighting.
  - stinos 1y ago
    Indeed I implied this when saying 'willing to implement', but one thing to note: the customer should be smart enough to consider total cost of oownership. I.e. there's the price of the light but also the price of having to replace it and having it on etc. The extra price of functionality allowing to decrease the amount of on time might pay itself back. I vaguely recall in my municipality this was one of the reasons they went for the slightly more expensive initial cost of full control ability anyway - not completely sure though.