The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) has released a report which probes the impact of high concentrations of artificial lighting on the environment and society. The RCEP was established to advise the Queen and other governmental bodies on issues regarding environment, by means, usually of reports. This most recent report, according to organization’s website (www.rcep.org.uk), considers various areas of influence including: aesthetic effects, effects on the natural world, human health effects, energy use and the like.

One of its most useful and intriguing aspects stems from the third chapter of the report, entitled ‘Social Benefits and Drawbacks of Outdoor Lighting’. Here the necessity of outdoor lighting is recognized, especially in its role in contributing to safety, communal events and economic activities. However the report draws a very strong distinction between what is necessary and what is perhaps, ‘overkill’. For instance, more light may not bring about a better outcome. Likewise in particular cases, the task at hand could be more efficiently completed with less or more regulated light.

An example of which can be evidenced in section 3.3 of the report:
“We note that from April 2009 the Highways Agency has turned off lighting after midnight for five hours on sections of the M4 and M5 which have a good safety record and low levels of night-time traffic, primarily to cut energy use and carbon dioxide production.21 We welcome such initiatives and hope to see their wider uptake by the Agency and other highway authorities.”

The report urges government officials to reassess the need of its lighting choices, by emphasizing the fact that much of the lighting serves no practical purpose for safety concerns; largely because the area in which it is located is underutilized or because injudiciously placed.

Though the exact influence of the report is unknown, by pushing government officials to strongly weigh the pros and cons of their outdoor lighting choices, perhaps wiser more effective choices will be made in the future.

Image credit: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/
Source

“President Obama recently acknowledged that unfortunately the U.S. will not have a comprehensive global treaty at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen next month. The president also noted that we can’t walk away from Copenhagen empty-handed.

The lack of a strong Senate bill on climate has hampered U.S. efforts to lead on a global treaty. Now it is more critical than ever that President Obama goes to Copenhagen to lead on next steps for a swift, decisive, and comprehensive global treaty. He must also know that we are standing with him and urge him to be even more personally engaged in pushing Congress for the strongest possible clean energy and climate bill

Tell President Obama to step up on climate both at home and in Copenhagen — sign the petition today and we will deliver your message to the Obama administration.”

This particular petition began on November 2nd. Today marks the nearly two week long United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark (December 7th – 18th). Has the Obama administration made any efforts in producing a comprehensive global climate treaty since November? Up until now, no.

But as of today, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has declared Green House Gases (e.g. C02) a health hazard, “paving the way for new regulation of emissions from sources such as power plants, factories, cars and trucks” (Source: Bloomberg). According to Kevin Book, a Washington-based managing director for analysis firm ClearView Energy Partners LLC., this now arms President Obama with “new regulatory powers that could help forge consensus in efforts to curb global warming; also gains standing when asking other nations to make commitments for a new global climate treaty.” Book further commented that, “you can’t go and argue for other nations to make changes if you haven’t made any yourself.” President Obama plans on attending on the final day of the talks, when most of the world leaders plan on attending, rather than “this week as originally planned.”

The EPA recognizing greenhouse gases as a threat to American lives is a step in the right direction, but much is still yet to be done in order to solve this global crisis. There are a dime a dozen treaties worldwide that promise X% of cuts by year Y. That’s all said and dandy, but what can you do NOW? An often overlooked form of pollution, light pollution affects the planet’s ecosystem everyday – remember, we’re a part of it. No new technologies need to be developed to reap immediate benefits. Light pollution is 100% solvable. Shielded lighting paired with energy efficient light bulbs equates to energy savings and darker skies. Furthermore, using a shielded motion sensing light means you have light when you need it. Environmental issues should not be viewed as political, but rather as physics. I’ll expound upon this idea for Wednesday regarding climate change.

Americans are removed from their waste because it is placed in some far off landfill. European countries are far too packed so they must learn how to reduce the amount of things that are thrown. In some places, trash is picked up once a week and recyclables once a month. To deal with this many companies have stopped packaging, no more cardboard boxes. Likewise, many people avoid make garbage because they know they will be stuck with it for a little while.

Most of America was built for cars. Although in some of the first big cities like New York and Boston, cars are not exactly easy to get around in partly because of the traffic and partly from the small unaccommodating streets. However, even these cities have been rebuilt and made more accessible for cars. Europe on the other hand was built and settled, long before cars were common. These cities were not built for heavy traffic; most of these old pre-car cities have created trains that can get people almost anywhere in Europe.

In some places in Germany, passive housing goes on for blocks. Passive homes are very strict energy efficient buildings which are not heated, except on very cold days. There is a similar concept in Switzerland called Minergie. There are some high class neighborhoods which do not allow cars in the street. In such a case, the only parking options are far away and could cost an individual yearly the same amount he or she spent on their car.

Source of image: www.sweden.se

The ways in which Europeans are green is less based on conscious decisions and more the result of a lifestyle which is expected because of necessity. However, as much as Europeans are green they still have flaws, for example in Italy it is normal to throw your trash out the window of your car.
This shows that Americans given the opportunity and change in lifestyle could be just as green as Europeans and many would come to appreciate the lifestyle with its added inconveniences.

America seems to consistently lag behind Europe when it comes to being environmentally friendly, yet in America it seems as though everyone is talking about being green; all the companies seem to advertise how green they are. In fact, being green in America is not only seen as being trendy, but as partaking in one of the most current, important issues. Somehow despite all the hype over being green and all the media attention about the effects of being environmentally unconscious, America has much higher carbon emissions than Europe, especially Northern Europe.

This leaves many people wondering how this could be possible, and the answer is not Europeans’ inherent drive to be green and save the environment. It comes from their differing lifestyles, and what their daily routines are shaped around. Not to say they do not care about the environment but their lives are fashioned in a particularly green way.

In each culture certain things are expected, in Sweden, for example being green is like having manners. In Stockholm’s Arlanda Airport, trains are the fastest and cheapest way of getting around. Despite the fact that taxis are hybrid, they are only used by people who are not able to ride the trains or bus, or are too snobby.

In American grocery stores it is surprising if you get asked “paper or plastic?”, but in Europe nobody walks around with plastic bags, which in many ways guilts you into doing the same. In Rome, a place American’s tend to associate with glamor, nice apartments usually exclude dryers, microwaves, endless heated water, and air conditioners. In addition, refrigerators and cars in Rome are very small. For example the new Fiat 500 can reach 56 mpg when fueled with diesel.

Americans lives are consumed with things they ‘cannot live without’. Things like two story houses, perfect temperature in their houses and cars, a fridge in the house and garage, SUV’s, and the like. These things have set Americans in a specific path that makes it almost impossible for them to accommodate their ‘needs’ and be green enough to come close to the emission levels in Europe.

In Europe, people are raised in a way so that they cannot help but be green. The apartments have racks for clothes drying and thick wall for temperature control. America is much bigger and roomier than Europe; Americans have been able to get away with massive homes, cars, highways, and even a high percentage of waste because of the sheer size of America. Europeans do not have this luxury. Europeans realize that Europe is small and that many people live there, they are constantly aware of the ways they affect the environment.

Article based on information from http://e360.yale.edu/

Percentages of shared bikes in Europe

U.N officials had hoped that the recent summit meeting for environmental awareness would show that leaders could unite and make real commitments to lowering carbon emissions globally. However this did not prove to be the case, making an agreement in Copenhagen within 70 days seems nearly impossible.

Each of the leaders spoke of all the ways in which their countries would like to lower greenhouse gas emissions but none made any real commitments, especially the key countries such as United States, China, and India. This behavior from the United States and China, which make up for about 40 percent of green house gas emissions was particularly disappointing.

Image found at: www.therenewableplanet.com

President Obama and President Hu Jintao have finally acknowledged the importance of lowering carbon emissions but have yet to lay any concrete plans. President Hu Jintao did talk about various ways in which he would like to steer China into a more environmentally friendly direction: planting forests, reducing dependency on fossil fuels by 15% and the percentage of carbon dioxide tied to national income; all in hopes to make China greener by 2020.

While China’s efforts are commendable they are not enough; they are unclear, unspecific, and not very binding.

President Obama noted the urgency of the situation saying that nations must unite and work for progress toward a greener environment and economy. He said that the developed countries which are accountable for a considerable portion of pollution must commit to lowering greenhouse gas emissions; the poorer developing countries should be helped in their efforts to lower emissions and establish green economies.

Many people felt let down by President Obama’s speech, and had hoped he would take advantage of the situation and make clear the United States’ commitment toward the green movement.

President Obama, did however vocalize his objectives for America’s green movement by promising to make the greatest investment in green energy in American history. In turn he declared that the US would increase its efforts to improve carbon emissions standards for vehicles and make green energy more dominant.

The President of India, Pratibha Patil, was absent of the summit meeting. However India’s environmental minister stated that India also aimed to lower greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel energy.

Some countries did state notable goals for a greener world. Japan declared that its goal for the next decade involved decreasing emissions by 25 percent and committing to help the green movement by contributing financially and technologically.

Currently one of the most significant features of modern day life is the continuation of daytime life and activities well into the night. People are continually bringing activities previously restricted as ‘daytime activities’ into the nighttime, for example: night jobs and night school, catching up on work and school at night, hanging out at night, and even travelling at night. All of these activities are made possible from using electric lights to drinking caffeine to stay awake and at night.

Evidence has shown that heavily populated areas in the U.S. particularly the east coast, have areas where light is consistently 100% above natural brightness to areas which are 27-81 % brighter than the natural level. In such cases the North Star is not even visible.

Source of Image: http://i.ehow.com

This constant infiltration of non-natural light causes light pollution. Light pollution has been attributed to destroying human and animal cycles and disturbing the natural circadian clock. The circadian clock is responsible for a significant percentage of gene production, managing hormone production, brainwave pattern, and cell regulation. All of these functions are very important for stable human health.

Human exposure to non-natural forms of lighting has been shown to disrupt the circadian clock and in turn increase ones likelihood to get what are currently some of the most common and deadly diseases: cancer, obesity, diabetes, depression, cardiovascular disease, and even insomnia. Non-natural light has not officially been proven to be the cause of breast cancer but it has been proven to disturb the circadian clock, speeding the growth of the tumor.

The connection between electric lighting and sleep disorders is expected. The two most common pathways to sleep related disorders come from working nightshifts and choosing to go to bed late and in turn, wake up late.

A study published in Pediatric Research explored the possibility that continual non-natural lighting in neonatal intensive care environments could damage premature babies’ circadian clock. The researchers tested newborn mice by leaving them under continual electric lighting, and the mice could not develop a regular circadian clock or maintain regular cycles.

Nightshifts have been linked various times to the development of cancer. While it has yet to be proven, the evidence from multiple studies has backed up this theory. It seem as though with more research night shifts might be proven to be carcinogens.

This is not the first time the Obama Administration has created legislation designed to curb carbon emissions by targeting the car industry. Yesterday however does mark a special event as the administration pushed through documentation which has not been harshly opposed by either environmentalists or the industry. Prior legislation has received harsh criticism from either those concerned with environmental implications or those worried about hindering the car industry.

This legislation targets both groups as well, meaning the reforms it proposes address both sides. The aim is to implement a five percent increase in fuel efficiency, so that 27.3 mpg in 2011 would lead to 35.5 in 2016. By 2016 as well, all new car models will have a limit on the carbon they produce, to approximately 250 grams of CO2 per mile.

Image found at: www.getreligion.org

Both environmental and industrial groups and their lobbies have voiced their praise for the legislation. The CEO of the Alliance for Automobile Manufacturers stated, the “rules are essential to providing manufacturers with the certainty and lead time necessary to plan for the future and cost effectively add new technology.” He also enthusiastically commented on the opportunity to work with the administration through this national program to increase fuel efficiency and improve CO2 levels.

If the legislation is as successful as is hoped, car buyers would save around three thousand dollars throughout a car’s lifetime, emission would drop by more than nine hundred million metric tons and naturally foreign dependency would wane.

Second and third world countries are frequently concerned that if they become environmentally friendly, their ability to thrive economically will be hindered. However a recent report by the World Bank showed that these nations can achieve a symbiotic relationship between economic stability and green consciousness. The key is to be climate conscious while developing. It is clear that avoiding the climate crisis is impossible, it is also apparent that this dilemma affects the entire world. Therefore all nations must consider the way in which they can both develop and instill environmental favoring policies.

For this to be possible developing countries must immediately incorporate green technology into the development process. They must open up their minds to what their society could be if they begin to implement new green technology. They must also realize what society will be if they do not implement new technologies and do as much possible to limit climate disaster.

Found at: http://newzar.files.wordpress.com

Developing countries are extremely important for success of innovative technology and global progression. These countries must realize where new technology is most essential and discover most effective way for them to be utilized.

Experts believe that these new environmentally savvy technologies are the key to development in underdeveloped countries, and to limiting an environmental catastrophe. They realize that it is a monumental task both intellectually and technologically. This must not deter these countries from stepping forward and committing themselves to researching and creating new technologies which will limit carbon emissions.

To create an environmentally safe world we must start by not just creating new innovative technology, but by also making sure that developed and underdeveloped countries are employing existent green technologies. It is definitely possible to send more technology to these countries, and things can be done to guarantee that it is done. Any new global climate deal should contain an agreement which combines creating and sharing these technologies.

Before the process of creating new technologies begins to affect these countries’ societies and their practicality should first be researched. Research and development funds, therefore, must be at the least tripled. This effort would be assisted by encouraging both public and private investors to research and fund new inventive green technologies.

For over 2,000 years the natural irregularity of the earth’s axis has resulted in the arctic region moving away from the sun during the arctic summer, which in turn lessened the sun exposure. This process has caused the arctic to now be 600,000 miles farther from the sun than it was in AD 1. Naturally, one would expect this drastic distance to lead to at least a 1 degree Fahrenheit fall in temperature. However, the temperature has risen 2.2 degrees since 1900, and the past decade has been the warmest in two millenniums, going completely against natural expectations.

This among other evidence coming from the arctic climate, has lead researchers to believe that global warming might cancel out the earth’s natural cooling and heating systems. These researchers feel this new information gives them reason to disregard the previous belief that the warming of the climate was a natural occurrence.

Found at http://webpages.csus.edu

This conclusion was made through an experiment where scientist measured the rings in tree trunks and glaciers around the arctic, these natural forms of data all showed the same thing. They showed that in the middle of the 1800’s with the beginning of a new era, specifically the age of industrialization, massive amounts of carbon dioxide were sent into the air, and the warming of the arctic region began.
Evidence shows that the arctic region has heated at three times the rate of the rest of the earth, providing evidence for the theory of arctic amplification.

Arctic amplification states that global warming affects the arctic region more than others. The arctic region has ice sheets which reflect the sun, however global warming causes these ice sheets to melt. Without this reflective ice barrier, vegetation and dark water underneath absorb more of the sun’s rays. The absorbed rays are then sent back into the atmosphere which results in more greenhouse gases being let loose into the environment and increasing global warming.

The rise in temperature has been confirmed by the shrinking glaciers and higher ocean waters. Scientists are unsure how high the oceans will rise but many believe that a 7 ft rise could be likely if greenhouse gases do not decrease.

It is clear through cases such as this and many others that the global warming issue is something that we cannot ignore, nor should it be placed on the back burner. Outside of the disastrous effect of greenhouse gases on the environment, higher global temperatures and the resulting increase in ocean water have been linked to unusual oceanic behaviors including larger tidal waves. Melting glaciers also mean that the habitat of creatures like the polar bear is drastically shrinking, putting their survival at risk.
———
Take time to educate yourself about the effects of global warming and finding ways you can help to solve this dilemma. By using environmental friendly lighting fixtures and conserving energy, you are making small improvements in your lifestyle which will have significant positive impacts for our globe.

Source
Canadian astronomer writer Terence Dickinson said in a press release issued by the county’s economic development department that:

“Lennox & Addington County is the most southerly point in southern Ontario where the night sky is so pristine. It gives you a night sky experience very similar to what was available 100 years ago. You can’t find that in many other places.”

“The northern two thirds of the county, anywhere from about a 20 minute drive north of Napanee, is unobstructed by light pollution. If you go west toward Toronto, the glow of the population centres gets brighter; adding that August and September are great times of the year to be looking up into the night sky.”

“The prime astronomy months in this area are May, August and September. Mosquito populations are starting to decline now, and the sun is starting to set a little earlier.”

“We’ve been looking at what we think are unique experiences, and some of the things we can certainly highlight as being special about L&A, and stargazing and astronomy is one of those.”

“As cities grow, and light pollution gets greater and greater, suddenly Lennox & Addington becomes one of those real hot spots that people are going to want to travel to. This is where you can take advantage of amazing skies and see amazing stars; a lot of those people who are involved in stargazing as a hobby, or beyond that, certainly are demographics that we want to target. And they are individuals who will want to spend money while they are here. There’s a large amount of spinoff from that.”

As everyday passes, it seems as if more and more cities, counties and countries are beginning to take light pollution seriously. Whilst community leaders have solicited local municipalities and governments for help, I personally find it quite disheartening that dark-sky sanctuaries must be erected to protect from encroaching light pollution. Perhaps, over time, the need for such sanctuaries will diminish but I presently find our negligence for the night sky depressing. I sincerely hope for the best.