There’s an alarming trend on social media - thanks to the likes of “tik-tok” - to eschew sunscreen…
What’s wrong with society when few “incluencers” can persuade the numpties that there’s nothing good in sun-protection?
I’m left flabbergasted - at the idea of the sheer reach of these oxygen thieves…
This is one of the many reasons why I try to avoid social media these days. It contains so much toxic shit to get angry about, that I think the world would be better off with making it a crime to post anything at all on social media. The brain damage simply using social media does is beyond astronomic.
Wear a decent broad brimmed hat.
I suppose the sun is light pollution, but there is no life without it.
The Chinese wanted to build a giant satellite that would act like a second Moon and
illuminate China at night. It would save a lot of energy, but would kill astronomy.
I had read somewhere about the lighting system for nights in a country, imagine the implication on nature and the environment, nocturne animals confused day and night, exchange of carbon dioxyde from trees… nature gave us 24 hours of which half are dark and half are light, if we start playing with this who knows the result.
A story went around a few years ago, an australien found a cord connected to a cloud that could produce rain, so pulled and got rain the next guy came along and wanted sun for his holiday … the tail goes on and on. Would be the same for light.
Agree 100%.
Have you read the science fiction novel “The BlackCloud” by Fred Hoyle.?
Science fiction is no longer on my list to read, no real reason just stopped some years back.
Not on my list either.
I just mentioned it because it gives an appreciation of how delicately balanced our Earth environment is. Cutting off the sunlight would wipe us out.
Not sure what is the connection with Linux or how the discussion drifted, but just adding a bit more on light pollution.
The use of artificial lighting has hugely increased, driven by the wish to increase perceived safety and security specially in urban areas. In addition the older monochromatic lighting has been replaced by full colour lighting which gives much better colour rendering but is generally less efficient and can not be filtered out e.g. for sky observation. As a result the areas lit has increased, the lighting levels have increased and associated energy & CO2 emissions have increased.
Some of that is “progress” but what really gets me is the amount that is just lighting the sky: overflying a city at night looks lovely, but all those lights you can see are a total waste. It can be eliminated or very significantly reduced using better designed and aligned light fittings. This can be seen when overflying over areas where you only see the light reflection from roads and pavement and almost nothing from the fittings. End of rant! 
… and by the way, thanks to all of you guys for contributing to make this a great forum
As we move forward with technology and light bulbs were replaced with long life tubes, and now led lights is the polution also changing ?
Many years ago i just bought a bulb 60, 80 100 watt with the only choice being bc connection, as some stage we moved to edison screw fittings , no big deal. Then fluorescent tubes for offices and mainly kitchens. These then came in different shapes, needed starters to get them going.
Now its led lighting on edison screw as a general statement.
But i went shopping a few weeks back and thought must replace the bulb in the room… easy … 10 w led 27 mm es… but what colour … white, warm white, cool white, there were so many and also came with remote controls and colour change options.
Ok i know the difference in luminous measure but my original choice of just buying a bulb has moved so much.
I remember a trip to the hospital in the uk and a visit to the toilet which was blue lighting, i asked why it was to stop drug users shooting up.
We have a path to the beach from our village which now has led lights run by solar power, fixed into the concrete, no idea on life expectancy, looks really attractive and no running costs, polution or safety, which is more important
Just an observation.
Monochromatic? You mean things like mercury vapour lamps?
I did not realize astronomers could filter that out, but it makes sense.
You are right, this is a general discussion… no Linux link at all
I grew up in the city I’ve spent the majority of my life living in. We had streetlights at street corners for pedestrian and traffic safety when I was young. City blocks have always had long and short sides (rectangular shaped), but today, streetlights are
placed every so many houses (ostensibly for residential security?), what a waste. There’s a shopping center at the end of the block I live on, and its parking lot lights are kept on all night. Again, what a waste. How does a lit parking lot make the shopping center any safer when all the stores are closed, and no cars are parked in the lot? This has never made any sense to me. With today’s technology, I suspect that motion detection in each store, and a system to alert police of an intrusion would produce better results at a much lower cost.
Because the lights on my block are amber-colored, and shielded toward the ground, I can see the night sky in my backyard, but it’s not what I was able to see as a child. When I was a teenager, I met a girl who lived near a rural suburb a few miles away from town. I’d ride my bicycle out to her home and back, sometimes coming or going after dark. It always struck me how many stars I could see out there, and how much closer/brighter they looked. From out there, the night sky looked three-dimensional, but not so much anymore. Today, when I go out to that area, the lighting is much brighter (light pollution has spread) than it was back then, and I can no longer see the stars nearly as well as I did in my younger years. Because I live in North-West Ohio, U.S.A., light pollution has become a real issue, that I fear no one takes seriously. While I can’t say that I’ve noticed any health related effects from all the light pollution, I do think it’s a terrible waste of resources, and an unnecessary expense for taxpayers.
Ernie
Hi @ernie ,
I like your story and it is similar to mine , except I got the opportunity to work in remote locations where the night sky was unpolluted, and when we retired we moved out of the city.
Our night skies here in regional NSW were fabulous when we first moved here 25 years ago, but have declined as the region developed. We can still see the Milky Way
but can no longer see the Magellanic Clouds.
The local astronomy group use a local dam site. Dams tend to be down in hollows surrounded by hills, so the night sky there is less affected by light pollution.
I agree, there is no large or obvious health effect, but there may be some subtle long term effects emerge as we learn to like in this new illuminated world.
I agree, but I think the issue could be mitigated if our governments would learn to do the necessary hard work, rather than taking the easy way out all the time. I have no issue with streetlights at intersections, even all night. That could save lives. However, why do we need three or more streetlights per city block, and why illuminate a parking lot all night when the facility’s closed, and the lot’s empty, especially if taxpayers foot the bill? If every city in the world could cut their energy use by 10 or 20 percent, think what effect that would have on our planetary carbon footprint. It may not solve the issue, but it wouldn’t hurt, either.
Ernie
Yes it does look like that.
No wonder the ancients came up with the idea of a celestial sphere.
That would be an easy target.
We survived for centuries without electric lights. As recently as my grandparents generation knew only gas lights. Modern use of electric power is wasteful.
Ok so do you carry a torch ?
Or use your mobile phone app when out at night in the dark or do you wait till your eyes adjust to ambiance for lighting ?
I carry a head torch, which i use at the end of conferences or concerts to allow me to find cables, connections or simply move chairs. Great my hands are free, but if i meet anyone or look up they are blinded by my light. I a’ the only one in the team to use one the others depend on mobile phone lights.
I agree. That’s why I chose such a small percentage. In all reality, many cities should be able to reduce their power usage significantly more by examining how they use it, and looking for areas of waste, but when was the last time you’ve ever heard an elected official admit that (s)he may have been wasteful with taxpayer’s money? There lies the rub. Any thoughts on a solution?
Ernie
Community owned power generation.
If local government had to make power , they would not waste it.
Also gets rid of long distance high voltage transmission lines.
This is a great idea, but how many cities do you think would be willing to bear the cost of building/purchasing the required power generation facilities? What about green energy? The Federal, regional (State here in the U.S.), and community governments could go together to fund residential solar power for homeowners who want it, and regional/neighborhood windmills could be another/additional possibility. If I had the financial resources, I’d convert my home to solar power today, and if there was a small windmill available for residential use, perhaps something like a generator/alternator driven by a vertically mounted helical blade, that could be mounted atop the house’s chimney, perhaps doubling as a rain guard, too. I think the piecemeal solution I’m describing here may be easier for governments to handle (still expensive, but taken in smaller bites) What do you think?
Ernie
It works well for small isolated communities, especially in Australia where solar power plus batteries is a feasable option and not overly expensive.
One state in Australia has gone for all renewable energy. They have some huge batteries. At moment they still depend on neighbouring states to fill gaps, but they will get there… it is doable, you just need a lot of capital to set it up.
It works for a small community, it works for a whole state, I dont see why it cant work for a large city.
I think power wastage will self correct , if power usage and generation are the same
authority.1
You could be right. I wonder why the U.S.A. hasn’t gotten on the bandwagon in such a large way yet. It’s probably because what we have now is already here, it’s cheaper, and it’s easier than changing the way we handle our power needs.
I think another advantage of a more regionalized/localized energy infrastructure may be that it’s more stable, and secure. If, for example, a neighborhood grid in Cleveland, Ohio suffered an interruption, the neighboring grids wouldn’t be impacted, and, if the regional grid’s set up correctly, they may even be able to help mitigate the issue. I wish we were already there. How much better would it be, not to have my power interrupted because someone hit an electric pole in the area.
Ernie