Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

helliun t1_iuw0s0y wrote

Reply to comment by civilrunner in Scientists Create Glow In The Dark Plants That Could Replace Streetlights In The Future by sopadebombillas

yeah that makes sense it's definitely weird that they don't already do that. but per my first question is there no application that you could think of for this? I'm willing to accept if there's not but I just feel like there could be

12

civilrunner t1_iuw0v0e wrote

It's pretty simple. It costs money to add a shade, they don't have the budget for it so they don't.

2

helliun t1_iuw10la wrote

i meant any applications for the plants mb that wasn't clear

6

civilrunner t1_iuw16fm wrote

No idea. Releasing a bunch of engineered plants that I assume would reproduce and spread may also not be the best idea.

14

SWATSgradyBABY t1_iuw6szd wrote

It's not that at all. They don't care about light pollution. Also, they are crazy obsessed with the spectre of crime. So the more light, the better.

5

civilrunner t1_iuw9mpw wrote

I mean they do care about light pollution, and you could have all the street lighting you want without light pollution if you just prevent the light from going up. Good lighting prevents crime and improves safety.

But when it comes to anything cities have to weigh budget priorities and shading the top of light posts just doesn't have the priority as other things.

3

SWATSgradyBABY t1_iuwax1h wrote

Where is the evidence that they're concerned with light pollution? I'm concerned. You seem to be. I wish they were.

3

civilrunner t1_iuwbooe wrote

It's something pretty commonly discussed. There just isn't the budget for the solution most of the time. Money and production drives everything and causes people to need to make trade offs and prioritize things. If they had all the money and production imaginable then they wouldn't have to pick trade offs but sadly we do.

3

SWATSgradyBABY t1_iuwcq4l wrote

We have these organizations called NPUs, neighborhood planning units. I've been attending various ones for 2 decades now. I see the budgets and understand the tradeoffs. Residents don't want em more than they want plenty of other nonsense.

1

nblack88 t1_iuwvvpf wrote

Residents DON'T want them? That surprises me. Can you give insight as to why?

I'm a big fan of Dark Sky friendly lighting, and donate to the International Dark Sky Association (IDA) sometimes. Every resident I've spoken to who experienced the transition has enjoyed the new lighting, provided it's implemented well.

1

blueSGL t1_iux9hew wrote

it'd be infrastructure costs. If you can get lights that direct light correctly but are not slot in replacements and need to replace/retofit the attachments/poles they will not get used as they cost more money.

and the above holds true if there are slot in replacements but they cost more money.

The solution needs to be cheap and easy to implement otherwise it will face massive barriers to being done.

1