Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reduces energy costs.
Could lower light pollution.
Need to be replaced less often.
A more pleasant light, to some.
Cons
Blue light could suppress melatonin production.
Blue light could disrupt animals’ habits.
Glare could bother drivers.
Brightness is irritating, to some.
Eco-friendly LED lights may damage your eyes, according to new research. A study has discovered that exposure to LED lights can cause irreparable harm to the retina of the human eye. Blue LEDs is disrupting circadian rhythms and for possibly causing brain damage.
In many instances simply retrofitting new LED heads on old columns was often a bad idea, because the spacings aren’t right for the characteristics of LEDs.
LED streetlights are popping up left and right in my neck of the woods everywhere: in Chicago proper, in suburbs, and on state-owned expressways. I don't know about most people, but I don't like them. Yeah, they have merits, like saving energy, but in my opinion, not much else. First off, instead of having a warm amber glow that boosts my mood a little at night, they shine in a harsh, stark light that reminds me of a hospital operating room. Second, they have very strong glare, and they blind me momentarily if I accidentally look up at at them; that can't be good for driving safety. Third, I read that they cause worse light pollution than high-pressure sodium (amber) streetlights do, even if they save energy. And they can disrupt sleep for nighttime drivers (after they get home, that is), since any light with blue wavelengths tricks the brain into thinking it's morning.
So what do others think, as far as LED streetlights are concerned? Yeah, meh, or nah?
I say we go back to the oil lamps they were using in the early 1900's! They were warmer, comforting and classy. My investments in oil companies has no bearing on this comment.
I say we go back to the oil lamps they were using in the early 1900's! They were warmer, comforting and classy. My investments in oil companies has no bearing on this comment.
I know you were being facetious, but I really liked the gas lamps I saw in New Orleans. It was mostly front porch lights on people's houses. The houses were built with no setbacks, so the lights actually illuminated the sidewalks. I really liked the warm glow. Very comforting. Impractical, maybe, but damn, it looked nice. I vaguely recall seeing a few gas streetlights too, but I could be wrong.
Reduces energy costs.
Could lower light pollution.
Need to be replaced less often.
A more pleasant light, to some.
Cons
Blue light could suppress melatonin production.
Blue light could disrupt animals’ habits.
Glare could bother drivers.
Brightness is irritating, to some.
Eco-friendly LED lights may damage your eyes, according to new research. A study has discovered that exposure to LED lights can cause irreparable harm to the retina of the human eye. Blue LEDs is disrupting circadian rhythms and for possibly causing brain damage.
In many instances simply retrofitting new LED heads on old columns was often a bad idea, because the spacings aren’t right for the characteristics of LEDs.
This topic is about streetlights. I feel that I'm less concerned about circadian rhythm when I'm behind the wheel at night, and more concerned with staying alert and awake. Another concern is effectiveness of the streetlight's cast.
If cost weren't an issue, I'd be in full support of an HID-like xenon bulb behind a focus-able projector lens. Each light could be adjusted to spread or narrow, much like a Maglite beam. They could throw a lot of light, with a very narrow "you're blinded" zone. Maybe we can narrow this down to a zone where most vehicle roofs would be overhead by the time you're under it, it glare would be less of an issue for some drivers.
I understand there's a need to retain visibility ahead, just as much as there is to light the immediate area.
LED streetlights are popping up left and right in my neck of the woods everywhere: in Chicago proper, in suburbs, and on state-owned expressways. I don't know about most people, but I don't like them. Yeah, they have merits, like saving energy, but in my opinion, not much else. First off, instead of having a warm amber glow that boosts my mood a little at night, they shine in a harsh, stark light that reminds me of a hospital operating room. Second, they have very strong glare, and they blind me momentarily if I accidentally look up at at them; that can't be good for driving safety. Third, I read that they cause worse light pollution than high-pressure sodium (amber) streetlights do, even if they save energy. And they can disrupt sleep for nighttime drivers (after they get home, that is), since any light with blue wavelengths tricks the brain into thinking it's morning.
So what do others think, as far as LED streetlights are concerned? Yeah, meh, or nah?
The LED lights show mostly true colors. The older amber lights distorted color completely. You couldn't accurately describe the color of a car under them, if you called the police. But the LED lights are much brighter. There was a dangerous problem of some drivers not turning on headlights, because the street lights gave enough illumination, that they didn't notice. So with the LED lights, this will undoubtedly become worse. There is a street light directly across from my driveway and when they replace it with an LED, it will be almost like daylight in front of my house, all night. When I relax in a lawn chair in my front yard on a warm summer night, I'll have to wear some clothes.
This topic is about streetlights. I feel that I'm less concerned about circadian rhythm when I'm behind the wheel at night, and more concerned with staying alert and awake. Another concern is effectiveness of the streetlight's cast.
If cost weren't an issue, I'd be in full support of an HID-like xenon bulb behind a focus-able projector lens. Each light could be adjusted to spread or narrow, much like a Maglite beam. They could throw a lot of light, with a very narrow "you're blinded" zone. Maybe we can narrow this down to a zone where most vehicle roofs would be overhead by the time you're under it, it glare would be less of an issue for some drivers.
I understand there's a need to retain visibility ahead, just as much as there is to light the immediate area.
I think the main concern is the color temperature. So, why not install 2300-2500 bulbs and everyone will be happy? Still bright, still energy saving and long living, but more eye-friendly and somehow more pleasant to look at. The white/bluish light is weird to look at night. We don't need to make day of a night...
Proper spacing is also important. They shouldn't just replace bulbs in existing lamp posts. They are way to close to each other.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The technology exists, and an amber glow is a better spectrum for night lighting.
