Light Pollution in S L Tribune
What are the thoughts about arguing from a health standpoint vs. loosing the night sky. I really don't think politicians care one wit about loss of the night sky but I think they would be more responsive to some of the new studies that are pointing to excessive and non-stop lighting as a cause of Breast Cancer and now colon cancer as well as disruptions to wildlife? We are creatures that evolved with a dark nighttime and darkness serves a purpose. Robert Taylor -----Original Message----- From: Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Light Pollution in S L Tribune Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 22:12:50 -0800 (PST) Ditto?from me --?didn't know you subscribed to this newsgroup, Sheila. ? I think we who care about the night sky should campaign, again,?for decent light pollution standards. The argument should be made on two grounds: light pollution is a terrible scourge, destroying nighttime access to the views that should be our natural heritage, and?it wastes resources?when people beam energy into the sky. The last few times?made astronomy expeditions?to the Wedge, I?was annoyed by the big arc of light pollution off toward Moab. Best wishes, Joe
During interviews, lectures or conversations I always put economic cost of wasted energy, increased air pollution caused by the unnecessary burning of fossil fuels to generate the wasted energy and threats to animal and human health ahead of the need to preserve the night sky. It is nice, BTW, to see the positive effects of Tooele County's light pollution ordinance. Lights on billboards built before the law shine up while he new ones shine down. The strip mall built at the north end of Stansbury Park before the law has awful lights on the back walls of the buildings (though the parking lots lights are ok) while the strip mall at the south end built after the law has shielded lights. That last BTW, is due to a few of us politely complaining to the county during construction which resulted in the lights being modified. Slowly but surely I really do think that many people (except maybe those at YESCO that make money off of light pollution) are beginning to see the light (or is that dark?). patrick On 01 Dec 2008, at 11:21, Robert Taylor wrote:
What are the thoughts about arguing from a health standpoint vs. loosing the night sky. I really don't think politicians care one wit about loss of the night sky but I think they would be more responsive to some of the new studies that are pointing to excessive and non-stop lighting as a cause of Breast Cancer and now colon cancer as well as disruptions to wildlife? We are creatures that evolved with a dark nighttime and darkness serves a purpose.
Robert Taylor
To add another of my 2 cents worth (make it 4 cents!! total, close to my limit): a good approach may be to push legislation to give some kind of tax break to people and municipalities toward the purchase of light shielding. -- thanks, Joe --- On Tue, 12/2/08, Patrick Wiggins <paw@wirelessbeehive.com> wrote: From: Patrick Wiggins <paw@wirelessbeehive.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Light Pollution in S L Tribune To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Date: Tuesday, December 2, 2008, 12:57 AM During interviews, lectures or conversations I always put economic cost of wasted energy, increased air pollution caused by the unnecessary burning of fossil fuels to generate the wasted energy and threats to animal and human health ahead of the need to preserve the night sky. It is nice, BTW, to see the positive effects of Tooele County's light pollution ordinance. Lights on billboards built before the law shine up while he new ones shine down. The strip mall built at the north end of Stansbury Park before the law has awful lights on the back walls of the buildings (though the parking lots lights are ok) while the strip mall at the south end built after the law has shielded lights. That last BTW, is due to a few of us politely complaining to the county during construction which resulted in the lights being modified. Slowly but surely I really do think that many people (except maybe those at YESCO that make money off of light pollution) are beginning to see the light (or is that dark?). patrick On 01 Dec 2008, at 11:21, Robert Taylor wrote:
What are the thoughts about arguing from a health standpoint vs. loosing the night sky. I really don't think politicians care one wit about loss of the night sky but I think they would be more responsive to some of the new studies that are pointing to excessive and non-stop lighting as a cause of Breast Cancer and now colon cancer as well as disruptions to wildlife? We are creatures that evolved with a dark nighttime and darkness serves a purpose.
Robert Taylor
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com
participants (3)
-
Joe Bauman -
Patrick Wiggins -
Robert Taylor