Light pollution, are we losing the battle?

[billyharris72]

On 24/10/2015 at 11:56, cotterless45 said:

I genuinely think that there is an inherent fear of the darkness of the night , somewhere deep in our instincts a need for the glowing fires to be kept stoked against danger.

Of course there is - that's when the ghosties come out!

Back when we were trying to plug the online petition I posted a request for support on an (anonymous) online forum that I thought might have some overlap (involves optics, and nature). Not a lot of support, but I did get the following.

Quote

Its a difficult area: the ungodly like darkness for all sorts of reasons. I understand the issue but am not sure I agree with the solution, or even that it is justifiable. No signature from me.

I was genuinely lost for words....

Billy.

[Ruud]

It is all so very depressing.

[RWB]

4 hours ago, Moonshane said:

That's ludicrous.

That has to be the understatement of the century !!!!!!

[johnfosteruk]

That's horrendous Nick, why the heck do these things need so much light?

[LukeSkywatcher]

8 hours ago, Patbloke said:

Oops, bit behind with my admin... Heres the pic of the super illuminated flats in South Birmingham... Glad I don't live opposite them, it's like 24 hour daylight!!!

So shall I start a new thread with it - titled light pollution award of the year?

That is just about the worst case of LP i think ive ever seen. How do the people living there sleep at night.

That is just of the scale of silly.

[LukeSkywatcher]

That makes Piccadilly Circus (at night) look like a dark sky location.

[Patbloke]

There are houses on the opposite side of the road to these flats...

They must have had to brick up their windows to get the bedrooms to be dark enough to sleep. The stupid thing is that it's an obvious case of someone miscalculating the amount of light required on walkways! Some nugget in a department somewhere who will carry on working regardless of the damage this causes to everyone in that area... Shocking

[LukeSkywatcher]

1 minute ago, Patbloke said:

There are houses on the opposite side of the road to these flats...

They must have had to brick up their windows to get the bedrooms to be dark enough to sleep. The stupid thing is that it's an obvious case of someone miscalculating the amount of light required on walkways! Some nugget in a department somewhere who will carry on working regardless of the damage this causes to everyone in that area... Shocking

Even apartment blocks in the Spanish costas/Canary Islands are nowhere near as illuminated. I notice there are a couple of street lights in the image. What purpose do they serve?. Heaven only knows......they sure are not needed by/for motorists. 

[Ruud]

It hard to say how bright it actually is - even though it is clearly an eyesore and you certainly can't observe anything but this building itself, looking up at it with all this light shining in your eyes.

The lights are shielded from shining up. The lights are fitted to the bottoms of higher galleries. Even the top gallery is covered from above.

The EXIF says 1/20s, F2.2, ISO 500. Is it really as excessively bright as we think?

---

Does anyone have any idea what sort of lamps these are? They seem very white. They're probably not the 8 watt fluorescent tubes that you see on so many older apartment buildings.

---

Still, the bottom line is that half as much light, or a quarter, might well have been enough. An eighth of this might do the trick.

[Chris__M]

A recent picture taken in my back garden, with a 360° camera. The back of the house shows the effect of my neighbour's "security" lights.