digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Lunar-Resonant Streetlights: Wonderful Idea

treehugger.com — People who live in cities are rarely aware of the natural cycles in the sky; even the moon,

show profanity settings
expand all
  • ramong, on 10/10/2007, -6/+29Never mind the energy savings, can you imagine being in the city at night and actually seeing the stars?? that would have such a profound psychological effect on people, it would make them calmer and more positive. It would also make them sleepier so they would want to go to bed earlier.
    • robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5What are stars??
    • dorkino, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5You still wouldn't be able to see much of the night sky in the city. Street lights are not the only source of light pollution. But this is a step in the right direction.
    • catalysis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1People love their electric light though. Many city dwellers would probably like the lights cranked up to daytime levels 24/7 if possible.
    • duality, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I can attest to that. One time, I took a friend and his girlfriend to my parent's house in the country for a party. He had lived in a city for his entire life. On the way back, the two of them asked me to stop the car...on the highway, pretty much in the middle of nowhere. They wanted to get out and look at the stars. We spent a good fifteen minutes stargazing, and I even got to show off a bit of my astronomy knowledge at that time. After we were back on our way, I contemplated the fact that I had always taken the stars for granted. Perhaps this will have a similar effect on other people as what I saw that night.
    • plus1chromosome, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1HERE HERE! We miss the stars.

      Perhaps we might one day have our city children look up and want to know how Hubble found the galaxies to be traveling apart from eachother – maybe they’d one day ask why it is that suns explode combining hydrogen into biological chemical elements that make up your body --- maybe one day we could have another Carl Sagan.
    • plus1chromosome, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1HERE HERE!
      We miss the stars. Perhaps we might one day have our city children look up and want to know how Hubble found the galaxies to be traveling apart from eachother – maybe they’d one day ask why it is that suns explode combining hydrogen into biological chemical elements that make up your body --- maybe one day we could have another Carl Sagan.
  • fpcyber, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Very "think outside the box" idea. I love it. Lowers the energy costs, lightbulb costs. However I would assume these sensors have to be cleaned regularly, as I bet they are pretty sensitive.
    • geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why would they need to be cleaned a lot? They're facing upwards, the rain would wash them off. Furthermore, they're photodiodes, most of them detect the most light in the infrared range, so they can see through most stuff that would get put on them (except for maybe a birds nest, which would just cause the lamp to malfunction and always think it's bright out due to the birds/eggs).

      It's basically a modification of how streetlights that aren't on timers have always been done (only instead of detecting daylight as a way to turn off the lamp, it's detecting light intensity and adjusting the brightness on it).
      • AUniquePerson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0You're forgetting about a little thing called bird poo.
    • Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm sure they could find a way to make it require few cleanings - there are tons of light-based sensors that are used that don't need constant cleaning.
    • lnappropriate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Wait a second, why would they need sensors?
      The moon follows a predictable cycle, they can just program it to change the light level every day.
      • HairyFotr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If the sky is too cloudy or foggy you can't see the moon. But if they would program it according to a weather map and maybe put some sensors around town, that would be ok too.
        The good thing about sensors on every lamp is that every light is independent - I'm not sure the lights can be turned on and off one at a time right now, and some corners/alleys just require more lighting.
  • fernando26, on 10/10/2007, -13/+16This is neat and all, but less lights = darker = more people getting hit while riding their bike, walking, etc at night. Also more cover of darkness for ppl wanting to do things at night that don't want to be seen. These are just 2 examples, I'm sure you can come up with many more given a little while.

    This is a lawsuit waiting to happen if implemented. Just imagine: someone's kid is killed while walking home from his part-time fast food job around the corner because some tiny soccermom in a massive SUV "didn't see him crossing the street in the dark, sorry!" and the parents sue the city (i.e. you're tax money) for umpteen million dollars.

    While its a good idea, it has too many downsides... =(
    • netengineer10, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10It depends on how you look at it. I think in certain cities it could easily work, and others it might be a bad idea.

      In general, if it cuts energy consumption by 90%, its something we have to seriously consider. Also, what your not realizing is that if there are less lights on the street, the bicycle rider with reflectors will stand out more to the cars headlights. The cars in the street will stand out more to the people crossing it.

      We can't be afraid to try new ideas because we are afraid of the consequences, especially when the current ideas of more coal and nuclear power plants are much more risky. How much tax payers money goes toward city lighting? If we can save, we can reduce taxes, or have our taxes diverted to better causes like new schools.

      As far as "Cover for people wanting to do things at night that don't want to be seen?", in these times more than any, when we are being pumped full of fear to look out for "terrorists" and report any "suspicious packages" we run into in our train stations or bus stops, in order to justify a war and more killing, i will redirect you to Mr. Franklin Delano Roosevelt. "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself "
      • Akaji, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"We can't be afraid to try new ideas because we are afraid of the consequences"

        That's what landed us in Iraq. I think what you mean to say is that we can't be afraid to try new ideas because we're worried by unsubstantiated claims of the consequences.
        • netengineer10, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Of course, the context of that sentence was incorrect, thanks for the correction. We also have to weigh which consequences will be more damaging to society as a whole, rather than just a couple of accidents. More people die of lung cancer than any other type of cancer.
    • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Wouldn't the alleys and similar places have very low visibility of the moon, and therefore be on more often?
      • luckykpolice, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2which would be worse than now how?
    • santiago1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Why not have LED based street lighting with IR sensors mounted around the poles. That way, when someone comes near, the lamp will "ignite", then turn back off after a period of time. Save energy and allow for adequate lighting for the pedestrians and with LED lamps, you can focus the beam directly down onto the street.
      • thcobbs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3That would be awesome. Of course, someone would have to take time-lapse photos so we can watch it like a game of re-generating pac-man.
      • rootneg2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1As far as I can tell, it's already been implemented along at least a few roads in Austin, TX

        freaked me out the first few times I biked down a road and the streetlights popped on.
    • profOblivion, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6You're right, although I don't think the idea needs to be taken to the extreme of having the lights turn completely off during a full moon - just dim them, so that the amount of light reaching the ground is constant.

      I think a more sensible solution (long-term) for saving energy and limiting light pollution is more efficient use of street lights. The common "cobra-neck" style model is terrible for shooting light up into the sky rather than at the street. Simply using more efficient shielding and directing the light downwards properly can go a long way to being able to not have them turned up as high as they are now, still allowing the same amount of light at ground level, and curbing some of that nasty light pollution.
    • greenm1981, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The lighting would be the same as if the lights were on full time. Ambient moonlight + adjusted streetlight = Full lighting. If the clouds obscured the moon, then the streetlight would adjust to compensate.
    • AndreiOttawa, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Aren't SUVs equiped with headlights?
    • frsrblch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The moon really isn't all that bright... it's enough to see by, barely, once your eyes adjust to the darkness. If they dimmed the bulbs, I think they would save more like 20% during the full moon, not the revolutionary savings they're predicting.

      Just think of driving in the country at night, and tell me it's bright enough for this idea of theirs to work at all.
      • corneliusJones, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Once your eyes adjust to the darkness (which I think we can agree is a good thing to do at night) you will be able to see just fine. Streetlights now are overkill and disrupt your night vision, so when you do drive into the country your eyes do not have to adjust as much. Plus we'll be saving tons of energy, and be able to see the moon and stars again, and using our night vision.
    • squegie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't see how revolutionary this is. The lights in Bedford County, PA have a night sensor. When it gets dark, they come on. In fact, some of them are oriented incorrectly (or street is graded incorrectly). With some of these lights, when I drive near/under them, the light goes out as it picks up my headlights.

      Granted I think it's mostly an on/off proposition and not an off/slighly on/fully on deal. Using a variable photo-sensitive resistor/transistor set would be quite useful. But the actual circuitry/technology has been in place for quite a long time. We would just have to replace a $0.50/sensor with a $0.75/sensor.
  • OrlyonokEaglet, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1Apparently some people are not aware of clouds at night?
    • qevlhma93, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7If clouds cover the moon, the sensor will light up the streetlights.

      ie: the fact that it is a sensor :)
    • fpcyber, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Someone needs to read the links in the article. These streetlights dim depending on the amount of moonlight.
    • OrlyonokEaglet, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1So you need an extra cloud sensor, duh!
      • jotate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wow, you're dumb. Even if you're being sarcastic. Just dumb.
  • notque, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2This would be awesome here. Would really enjoy it.
  • KevinLiu, on 10/10/2007, -14/+10Darken up city streets, huh? Hope you like rape!
    • dorkino, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If it gets me laid, then I'm all for someone raping me.
    • Unlgued, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3GJ on not reading the article. This wouldn't take from the illumination, just supplement the existing natural illumination as necessary. Certainly no one wants the streets to be darker.
    • Urusai, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Of course...hehe.
    • corneliusJones, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1well i think we know what kevinliu will be doing once we get these new street lamps...
  • Otto, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4A better solution would be to cover streetlights with a shade, forcing them to aim all their light downward. Then you would still be able to actually see the stars from the tops of buildings and most places above street level and such. All this does is to make the streetlights go out when the moon is full, which doesn't much help anything.
    • dreamlayers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's called full cutoff lighting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution#Improving_lighting_fixtures
      It helps but you still get quite a lot of light reflected off the ground and various objects.
    • Bilabrin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I believe this is also an idea promoted by the Dark Skies association. The downward covewrs that is. Althogh in suburbs I can see the whole moon-responsive lighting working. I mean c'mon why are you riding your bike at 10:30 in the street anyway. Plus most bikes have reflectors and headlights nowadays. I remember getting pulled over 3 times in 6 mo's before I got my car for riding my bike w/o a headlight.
  • cliffzdude, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4My God...it's full of stars!
  • DrCube, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3See now: I was taught that there is an excess of electricity produced at night (as the demand is less and a similar amount is produced) and that street lighting was a way of stopping this being wasted. Is this the case? If so this surely undermines any 'energy savings' unless we find other ways to store/use said energy.

    Still, I would love to see these used purely from a reduced light pollution point of view.
    • OrlyonokEaglet, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Not to mention the light pollution credits such a city could sell...
    • dreamlayers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Why can't power plants just produce less electricity at night?
      • Timmmm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Some can (e.g. gas I think), but others, especially nuclear cannot be turned off every night. It would be way way way too expensive.
      • JorgeGT, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hydroelectric facilities can also reduce their power, i'm sure about that, and I suppose nuclears could reduce the speed of the reaction (carbon retardants), but obviously they cannot be "shut down". (the restart process is very long)
        • Chrontius, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Nuclear plants can, however, be throttled without actually scramming the reactor.
    • aminorking, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's more to do with electricity being cheaper at night as there is less demand.
    • wogfella, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0aminorking is right - more power is generated at night because of the street lights and people going home and turning on all their lights to see and read and watch the teev and electric heating and surf the porno-net, the only savings would be in offices where they actually turned off all the flouro lights and computers which (let's face it) a lot of idiots don't do. During the day offices may have their lighting on but no-one's screwing around with their home TV's or their computers (except torrents of course).
      Don't ask me why they make the rate cheaper at night....
  • rlvis, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Yup, and people who live outside the city are rarely aware of things like not having sex with their cousins.
  • mr1337, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2This would be a wonderful idea to get people to be able to see the stars again, especially in metro areas, but I don't think the moon will be able to offer the amount of light in all places that are needed for safety. Areas with a lot of buildings or trees won't be fully illuminated, and crime goes by unnoticed easier in darker places. If you want to save electricity, put solar panels on top of your street lights.
    • corneliusJones, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0If certain areas aren't getting enough moonlight, then the light sensors will pick that up and make the lights brighter.
  • Babygirl86, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I think its a good idea where i live your lucky if u can see the moon or stars in the parks let alone anywhere else. I think it would help people too. Alot of the people here rarely leave the city so most of this stuff would almost be new to them. I think it would help relax people and probably help everyone sleep. My sister just had a baby and my sister has problems with the street light coming through the windows. Plus it gets very hot in the baby's room with the curtain shut so even just a couple of nights with low light would help my niece adapt
  • Richandler, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4This would be a criminal's dream in the inner cities. No lights! The lights are placed up for that sole reason. Safety.
  • OrlyonokEaglet, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Will never happen, I foresee stronger city lights for the surveillance cameras to get a better picture.
    • endlessoul, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Good point. But there is night vision if need be. As long as they compensate for the lack of moonlight, then I think they're a great idea.
  • dexedrine, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0This is such a great idea!!! Of course it has a lot of downsides and lawsuits waiting to happen....I'm just upset I never thought of it....
  • dreamlayers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The light of a full moon can seem bright if your eyes are adapted to low light, but in a city there will be lots of bright lights which will prevent that. For example what about seeing pedestrians after oncoming traffic passes?

    I also wonder about how they intend to dim the streetlights. I've never seen a high pressure sodium dimming ballast. A quick search shows that one can find such things http://ballastchina.en.alibaba.com/product/0/51602502/HPS_Dimmable_HID_Electronic_Ballast.html but I bet they're a lot more expensive than what's used in streetlights nowadays.
  • BuzWeaver, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2This will be great for gang initiation night.
  • bongobong, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Actually, we've had something similar in some places in Sweden for a couple of years or so.
    Though our version dims based on how light it is. So even if there's a full moon but really cloudy, you'll still be able to see since the lights will then be on.
  • Lister169, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Beware of the moon...stick to the road and stay off the moors."
  • HanSolo69, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It doesn't matter how full the moon is it's still going to be dark in a cramped city with lots of buildings blocking the light
  • Jadart, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Wow, something that's not complete ***** on treehugger. Cool idea.
  • futureisours, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4This is the most ridiculous idea i've ever seen. Going outside and staring at stars only encourages people to get high and take drugs. If you really want to see stars than just look online at high resolution pictures of stars... much better than looking outside.
  • kra1813, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0***** retarded! Only flaming fruitcake liberal would like this nonsense.
  • Humptydank, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Uhmm, streetlights are there for my safety and are supposed to be bright, especially on dark nights. If you're going to start varying things like that, why not just turn them off and let the moon do its job?

    I would vote for a few nights a year, say, during the Perseid meteor shower, when large cities and companies are encouraged to turn off their lights and make the city dark. Then, for that night only, the police can increase foot patrols, and people can go up on their roofs and watch the show. It would be a nice way to promote astronomy to kids, especially when they, as I did, first start to like it simply because you're allowed to stay up late.
  • Jumile, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I thought of this and what are now "OneClick IntelliPanels" when I was 10 (25 years ago). Glad to see someone's doing something with them. :)
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.