Anti street light social networking site group !

[iamjulian]

The price of the current method of producing energy is going to go up, which in turn will accelerate the development of producing energy by other means. Energy is not finite, only the means by which we produce it. So technically we don't need to reduce the amount we consume, we just need to change how we produce it before non renewables become economically unviable.

So what is the link for your "Save our night sky" page?

[darkly]

That'll be nuclear then, something most of us realised a long time ago.

All these green re-newables aren't much better than an expensive gizmo, they're just not reliable enough.

I read in (I think it was) New Scientist that these tidal boom things actually cause such devestation to the estuaries where they plan putting them that they aren't considered viable.

[astroimpulse]

Wind power isn't a gimmick. It's a very good source of energy. Solar is fantastic but far too much (financial) to be viable on a huge scale for many. Solar towers are an exceptional idea but until they're properly built they're very much still theoretical. Although I believe Australia are experimenting with them.

I agree on tidal...currently the solutions are very negative to the immediate environment. Excellent power source but too damaging to capture.

Nuclear is a really good source. The problem is the ridiculous cost of building and dismantling plants. And historically they're unbelievably unreliable and overly complicated. If you know of the history of nuclear plants you'll know the nightmare they've been for this government. It's the reason they've been hesitant over a proper programme for so long. Can't blame them after some of the failures (not environmental...operational failures).

It is the future of mass energy though (in my humble opinion). Something that we need to accept. But if implicated properly (which has to take time as it's still in it's infancy, to be fair), it will be an excellent source.

Harnessing power (no matter what way) is always going to have some poor effects along the way. Which is why we need to use it more efficiently.

Personally I think it's an exciting time for mankind.

[MG1]

Wind power may not be a gimmick, but it is certainly not effective in urban locations due to the disruptive effect of buildings on the lamina flow of air. Even on top of tall buildings is just Eco bling.

It is effective in remote locations, off shore and in Coastal locations where there is a fairly consistent on/off-shore breeze. Unfortunately this seems to be where people object most.

If I remember correctly, you need winds of approx 4.5 knts.

But back to streetlights. Ere in brizzle the council are spending a fortune switching to lower energy White lights! So not only will it get brighter, but my LP filters will be useless.

Interestingly quite often lights are where groups gather. Maybe it's so they can skin up easier?

But remember let's not make ourselves unpopular by targeting lights that do affect peoples sense of security in the street. Well designed street lights can be a good thing.

Where there is more of a concern is buildings with lights left on, ridiculous home security lights, depots with massive 24hr floods, sports stadium (games should be played during daylight only) and the single most annoying for imagers...aircraft navigation lights.

Once we've sorted these we can move onto street lighting.

Then we can campaign to have all buildings unheated so that we can reduce the heat turbulence that affects our seeing.

[Ags]

The wind farms in Holland are spectacular and inspiring. I used to pay 5 euros extra on my electricity bill to guarantee it was generated from renewable resources.