Author Topic: Global warming and light pollution  (Read 188 times)

larterpchaka

  • Jr. Astronomer
  • **
  • Posts: 99
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Global warming and light pollution
« on: December 24, 2017, 12:50:17 AM »
Perhaps the answer is as simple as what parents have been telling That There children Because the dawn of electricity
Shut the light off when your done !
Kill two birds with 1 stone ( sorry PETA )
I cant imagine how much trying to light up the planet contributes to global warming, but seems to me to be among the easiest things to remedy.  And as an additional bonus your taxes may actually decrease.
That is a triple win !



John Jankowski

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2017, 02:11:34 AM »
Commercial and residential lighting (plus highway lighting) combined accounts for apx 11% of electric power consumption in the United States(about 412 billion kWh)according to eia.gov (US Energy Information Administration). Of that, residential lighting's share was about 150 billion kWh (about 36.4%). I'm not sure whether these figures are from end-use metering, or whether they also take power-line transmission losses between generating plants and end users as well. According to the EPA, electricity generation contributes apx 37% of total US CO2 emissions- and therefore lighting contributes (0.11 * 0.37 *100 percent) of total US CO2 emissions.

IRRESPECTIVE of the overall issue of climate change causation and extent - and only considering aggregate sources of CO2 emissions as a statistic - that means that only about 4,1% of CO2 emissions in the US are due to commercial, highway and residential lighting combined and only about 1.4% are due to residential lighting's share. True, reducing overall CO2 emissions involves reducing the incremental contributions from lots of different sources, but at the same time it's apparent from the above stats that lighting contributes a relatively modest proportion of CO2 emissions, and so from that standpoint, the reductions in CO2 emissions from more efficient, less light-polluting lighting practices will be a relatively modest increment.

This does not, of course mean that reducing light pollution via better, more efficient lighting practices isn't worth doing for many reasons beyond just CO2 reduction, or even for that modestly incremental reason as well - but rather that the potential gains to be had in terms of CO2 reduction from reducing light pollution may not be as large as you might intuitively assume. YES, I was kind of surprised by this too!

olaralal

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2017, 06:03:49 AM »
I think this could be a very interesting and valuable discussion. The TOS states:
<p class="citation">Quote

Especially be aware that posts involving sensitive topics like global warming, taxes, religion, politics or lifestyles could be considered "hot button" topics depending on their content and perceived intent. This is a judgment call the moderators of the forum will make. Please exercise your best judgment before posting.

[/quote]

The title of this tread caught my attention. I think it is great to look at difficult issues from every angle possible. Just please remember to be respectful.

I will add to the discussion that converting fossil fuels to electricity is a very inefficient process which adds an approximate multiplier of 3X CO<sub>2</sub>than what is seen if just the energy content is compared.

Logan Budd

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2017, 03:31:25 PM »
What I find amazing is the waste of power, I grew up during the Energy "Crisis".
I always turn lights off when not in a room. I don't use outdoor lighting except for some low voltage garden stuff. Seems like today's generation doesn't care to much about conserving energy, let alone light pollution.
Irregardless of how power is generated or ones thoughts on climate change, it just makes common "cents" to conserve resources.

Mayur Wilson

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 121
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2017, 08:42:17 AM »
I really fail to see how global warming can be considered a "hot button" topic. It's not really a 'matter of opinion' any more, just like doubts about relativity or proponents of flat earth theories are no longer credible.

Matt Gibbs

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2017, 06:57:45 PM »
Please you guys don't spoil the thread - the issue of the extent to which more night-sky friendly lighting practices may result in significant CO2 reductions (or not) is worth examining for its own sake - even beyond whatever extent there may (or may not) be any resulting effect on climate - because it's also a proxy for what sorts of effects such reductions may have on demand on the electrical grid (and power generation needs).

tradneedcoegen

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2017, 06:33:16 PM »
Quote
Please you guys don't spoil the thread - the issue of the extent to which more night-sky friendly lighting practices may result in significant CO2 reductions (or not) is worth examining for its own sake - even beyond whatever extent there may (or may not) be any resulting effect on climate - because it's also a proxy for what sorts of effects such reductions may have on demand on the electrical grid (and power generation needs).


I agree with FirstSight. I will let this thread continue IF there are no more hints of politics, etc.

Matt Gibbs

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 103
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2017, 11:21:08 PM »
In the spirit of the thread, I'll add one hint that I learned from the installer when I had to replace my heat pumps (both of them within three years of each other, to the tune of $13,000) ... they're prevalent here in the relatively mild (usually) Mid-Atlantic states, and across the South ...

Many folks think they're saving energy by programming their thermostats to drop the temperature to, say, 60 degrees while the house is unoccupied in the winter time, having the heat come on and warm things back up to 68 or 70 in the hour or so before they come home ... and programming a similar adjustment the other way in the summer months. While this is true with fast-recovery systems (i.e. gas), it's not so with heat pumps! Heat pumps do not play well with recoveries of that magnitude. When they come back on in the wintertime, they'll treat anything over about a four-degree change in temperature as an "emergency" setting and kick in the auxiliary heat -- which usually takes the form of a coil pack in the air handler ... the equivalent of kicking on a couple of high-wattage hair dryers, to warm the house quickly. Watch your electric meter during one of these recovery cycles and it'll rival the spin cycle on your dryer. And even if your heat pump is "intelligent" and has a "recovery" setting that keeps the auxiliary heat off in these circumstances, recovery is very slow and the system will take an hour or more at full-steam to recover those degrees you thought you were saving all day, and your resulting energy usage, and bill, will be higher. Heat pumps work best, and most efficiently, when you set them to one temperature and leave them there. Our thermostats had energy-usage displays, and I experimented with this. The guy was right!

vichanettgrif

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2018, 04:50:31 AM »
Quote
In the spirit of the thread, I'll add one hint that I learned from the installer when I had to replace my heat pumps (both of them within three years of each other, to the tune of $13,000) ... they're prevalent here in the relatively mild (usually) Mid-Atlantic states, and across the South ...
Many folks think they're saving energy by programming their thermostats to drop the temperature to, say, 60 degrees while the house is unoccupied in the winter time, having the heat come on and warm things back up to 68 or 70 in the hour or so before they come home ... and programming a similar adjustment the other way in the summer months. While this is true with fast-recovery systems (i.e. gas), it's not so with heat pumps! Heat pumps do not play well with recoveries of that magnitude. When they come back on in the wintertime, they'll treat anything over about a four-degree change in temperature as an "emergency" setting and kick in the auxiliary heat -- which usually takes the form of a coil pack in the air handler ... the equivalent of kicking on a couple of high-wattage hair dryers, to warm the house quickly. Watch your electric meter during one of these recovery cycles and it'll rival the spin cycle on your dryer. And even if your heat pump is "intelligent" and has a "recovery" setting that keeps the auxiliary heat off in these circumstances, recovery is very slow and the system will take an hour or more at full-steam to recover those degrees you thought you were saving all day, and your resulting energy usage, and bill, will be higher. Heat pumps work best, and most efficiently, when you set them to one temperature and leave them there. Our thermostats had energy-usage displays, and I experimented with this. The guy was right!

That's pretty much true with most systems, I was told just to move the temp by two or three degrees the most. The human body is quite sensitive to small degrees.
Of course it does depend on the size of the dwelling, the amout of time you will be away and type fuel used.
Speaking of things left on all day, porch lights!
Yes I know its winter and folks don't want to come home to a dark house, but I saw this in the Summer too.
Folks buy those fancy lamps and want to show them off I guess. It's a growing trend in the neighborhoods experiencing gentrification.

creasseinicomp

  • Jr. Astronomer
  • **
  • Posts: 98
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2018, 03:32:45 AM »
Quote
I really fail to see how global warming can be considered a "hot button" topic. It's not really a 'matter of opinion' any more, just like doubts about relativity or proponents of flat earth theories are no longer credible.

Sure it's a matter of opinion. Most people simply state, as you did, that "the matter is settled". Saying so doesn't make it so.
Subtle name calling, ridicule, and insult, such as trying to equate those who have doubts about man-made climate change with "flat earthers" is just tiresome, and just begs the question, and really says not a whit more than "I'm right, you are wrong." Make your scientific case if you wish, but simply saying "there is a consensus among scientists" or "it's over" doesn't cut it. There was of course a time when the consensus was that the earth was flat, that there were epicycles, that there were intelligently created canals on mars, etc. etc. Your confident declaration that you have the answer, and that skeptical inquiry is unacceptable simply substitutes rhetorical flourishes for scientific analysis. Since "global warming" has been used as a political tool by those who seek economic revolution, and even (as late as two weeks ago) has been set forth as a supposed cause of terrorism, I submit that we must continue to question and test the evidence, and posited solutions. The economic and geopolitical stakes are quite high, and not on just one side of the equation.

dogswargersdurch

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2018, 07:51:46 AM »
"As late as two weeks ago"
And as early as the mid 1980s when the President of the USA signed several treaties and laws.
It's just been about the last 8 years since this has been a devisive issuse.

izweekwardmas

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2018, 07:04:00 PM »
Reread the post. I'm quite sure you have misunderstood the line you apparently reference.

Devon Dank

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming and light pollution
« Reply #12 on: January 08, 2018, 03:39:35 PM »
I think there was some good information that could have come out in this thread, but for now we are done and the thread will be locked.