Talk:Light pollution: Difference between revisions
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
Fluorescent street lights have existed which cause the lowest amount of light pollution compared with any other type of light source. I would like to see some sourced elaborations on [[fluorescent lamps]] regarding their levels of light pollution particularly compared with [[sodium lamp|sodium]], [[metal-halide lamp|metal halide]] and [[LED lamp|LED]]. |
Fluorescent street lights have existed which cause the lowest amount of light pollution compared with any other type of light source. I would like to see some sourced elaborations on [[fluorescent lamps]] regarding their levels of light pollution particularly compared with [[sodium lamp|sodium]], [[metal-halide lamp|metal halide]] and [[LED lamp|LED]]. |
||
Thanks, |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
Revision as of 00:02, 17 September 2017
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Light pollution article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 120 days  |
.jpg){kind=small} | Astronomy C‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Environment B‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
|
||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
To-do list
Here's a list of possible things that the article might benefit from, in no particular order:
Its members are universities, public administrations, representatives of manifacturing industries and so on. It produced a specific standard UNI 10819 to (very theoretically) protect the sky from light pollution and some lectures to defend it against the hordes of people that recognized how that standard LEGALIZED light pollution rather than reduce it, but if every one agree I can try to translate their thoughts. To point out how scientists can vary their opinions about this topic it could be useful to summarize prof Zichichi article on catholic magazine "Famiglia Cristiana" and the remarks of prof Maffei, an italian astronomer who pionereed infrared photografic surveys to Zichichi's article. Again, I can traslate. As a final suggestion based on my own experience in Italy I have to remark that the "dispute" about light pollution depends on the strong relationship that links light and energy industries, universities, politicians. Light and energy industries are trying to increase profits and do not accept any regulamentation, universities have to defend their own business and do not like that someone else discovers and applies cheaper and environmental safe lighting rules, politicians fear to lose a powerful argument to gain votes, summarized as "daylight intensity lighting for safety against crime". But I have to remark that only 7 1/2 italian regions on 20, 40% of land and 30% of population have to bear "industrial" lighting rules: in 2007 Liguria, Friuli Venezia Giulia and half of Trentino Alto Adige rejected UNI standards to adopt "zero lighting above lamps" rules. How can exist a "dispute" about light pollution when the majority of a nation says that night skies have to be protected ? --195.210.65.30 (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
|
1. Remove the liberal bias from the article. Oh wait, you wouldn't have an article without that...
- Reality has a liberal bias. Not necessarily for things that only affect relations between humans (whether murder should be illegal or not, whether kookoo libertarians should let legal heroin stores open in front of schools or not, guns, abortion, gay marriage..) but definitely for environmental things. The conservative track record is very bad on that. And don't say liberal is tree hugging people that want no wood to be used ever and think the tree's spirit speaks to them, the average liberal's nothing like that.
Feel welcome to edit the list, of course. Izogi 23:55, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
request edit
 | It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at D. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
Hi,
The web page listed in the resources links http://www.need-less.org.uk/ is no longer live.
http://www.hillarys.co.uk/skyglow/ is a good substitute for an interactive lightmap of the UK.
Luke
- Not done: Link is not dead. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Are the light pollution maps backwards?
The article says "A similar image from 2012 illustrating the growth in light pollution." However, according to the images as they are show, it makes it appear as though light pollution has been reduced in the last decade. If this is just a result of the images having different filters applied coming from different sources, this needs to be pointed out. Tar-Elessar (talk) 13:41, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
- I have my doubts about the second image. I don't think they're backwards - I think the second image is just wrong (that is, it's not indicative of light pollution). Australia's population is heavy dominated in along the eastern seaboard. The light sources in the middle of Western Australia are quite erroneous (there is just no population to speak of at all where those light sources are. According to the NASA website, they are likely wildfires (bushfires)). If there's no further information, I'm going to remove the second image, as it doesn't show us anything about light pollution.
- peterl (talk) 03:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- Please correct as needed, the depiction of N.America shows as if light pollution has gone down, which (i think?) is not the case. Also, in case any one wonders the original source for the pictures; Pic1 : http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=55167 & Pic2 : http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/view.php?id=79765, according to the first source, "This image of Earth’s city lights was created with data from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) Operational Linescan System (OLS). Originally designed to view clouds by moonlight, the OLS is also used to map the locations of permanent lights on the Earth’s surface."; and according to the second source, "The nighttime view of Earth was made possible by the “day-night band” of the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite. VIIRS detects light in a range of wavelengths from green to near-infrared and uses filtering techniques to observe dim signals such as gas flares, auroras, wildfires, city lights, and reflected moonlight." I dont think both of them are comparable. Akash (talk) 05:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
There is no question that these images are not comparable, as noted above. I am familiar with both satellites, have published research using data from both DMSP and VIIRS. Cluginbuhl (talk) 01:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Light pollution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ile.org.uk/index.php?page=pollution
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.darksky.org/programs/model-lighting-ordinance.php
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060315214321/http://www.irby.com/IrbyCircuit/Vol1No2/energysavings.htm to http://www.irby.com/IrbyCircuit/Vol1No2/energysavings.htm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/AIM/chap2toc.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120513142946/http://depts.washington.edu/epidem/Epi591/JNCI%20Editorial.pdf to http://depts.washington.edu/epidem/Epi591/JNCI%20Editorial.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721032922/http://www.coconino.az.gov/comdev.aspx?id=144&terms=lighting to http://www.coconino.az.gov/comdev.aspx?id=144&terms=lighting
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100706041538/http://docs.darksky.org/AGM/2009/Luginbuhl.ppt to http://docs.darksky.org/AGM/2009/Luginbuhl.ppt
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120502014929/http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/Roads/Pages/Traffic/Traffic-signals-and-streetlights/Envirosmart-streetlight-retrofit/EnviroSmart-streetlight-retrofit.aspx to http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/Roads/Pages/Traffic/Traffic-signals-and-streetlights/Envirosmart-streetlight-retrofit/EnviroSmart-streetlight-retrofit.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Fluorescent lamp as a type of street light to compare light pollution levels
Hi there,
Fluorescent street lights have existed which cause the lowest amount of light pollution compared with any other type of light source. I would like to see some sourced elaborations on fluorescent lamps regarding their levels of light pollution particularly compared with sodium, metal halide and LED.
Thanks,
2A02:C7F:204:8300:A097:9259:90E1:A767 (talk) 00:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)