Light Pollution Masks the Milky Way for a Third of the World’s Population | Hacker News Reader

Light Pollution Masks the Milky Way for a Third of the World’s Population

nytimes.com

183 pointshvo71 comments

I think the first time I've witnessed the Milky Way was only 3 years ago at 27. Ever since than I'd often grab my DSLR and drive a couple of hours in the middle of the night outside the city limits to shoot the stars. Quite frankly, unless you live close to a large city like NYC, you're likely 30 minutes to 1 hour away from a decent location to observe the Milky Way.

You're probably not going to see it in its full glory as you would at the Grand Canyon, but it would still be a memorable sight. If you're interested in chasing the Milky Way, check the light pollution map [1] to find some dark spots around your area and then head over to Clear Dark Sky [2] to check weather and visibility conditions. Also, if you're Android or iPhone user, check out Star Walk 2 [3] to help locate the Milky Way (and a ton of other neat stuff!) when you're on site.

[1] http://darksitefinder.com/maps/world.html

[2] http://www.cleardarksky.com/csk/

[3] http://vitotechnology.com/star-walk-2-guide-sky-night-day.ht...

Not in the UK. More like 6 hours to get somewhere in Scotland or Wales thats not populated at relatively high density. Even then ive never seen the milkyway apart from on a greek island in the middle of nowhere. The UK is as denseley populated as the densest New York state in the USA. Europe is very different to the USA on what the impact of a hundred years of industrialisation has meant.

That's not really true. There are a fairly large number of "Dark Sky Discovery Sites" where there are laws controlling the amount of light pollution, and where you can see the Milky Way really well. You're probably not more than an hour or two from one, and a few hours from a "Milky Way Class" site. I'm fortunate enough to live quite near the Kielder Park International Dark Sky Zone.

There's a map here: http://www.darkskydiscovery.org.uk/dark-sky-discovery-sites/...

They've got a 'milky way class' site about 5 miles from Croydon, good luck with that!

I applaud the people who set up this site and map, but they should be a bit more honest that going to a special event in a park isn't going to eliminate the continuous orange glow which exists anywhere within 50 miles of London, let alone allow you see the sort of sky that's visible in really remote locations.

I'm sure Kielder would be a great place to go, though. I'd love to go to Kielder Observatory.

It's a shame the International Dark Sky Association hasn't gotten more traction. They advocate the use of lighting and fixtures that reduce light pollution without sacrificing illumination for safety, etc. (Spoiler: just make sure the light shines down and not upwards). http://darksky.org/

The fixtures aren’t the only important variable. It also helps to reduce the amount of short-wavelength (“blue”) light, and overall reduce the brightness of street lamps. Most LED streetlamps are absolutely awful, even when shielded, and far brighter than necessary for nighttime lighting (hint: human eyes are really good at adapting to low light levels).

On my street in San Francisco, the street lamps were replaced last year with LED lamps. The new lamps are shielded to only direct light downward and sideways, not upward, but because they are at least 2–3 times brighter than the previous street lamps, and have a ton of output in the blue part of the spectrum (4000K CCT), they actually create more light pollution in the sky than the previous lamps, because they reflect a ridiculous amount of light off the street. They’re also blinding in the peripheral vision of pedestrians and drivers, and they make the street feel like some kind of industrial warehouse. Bleh.

Have you noticed any trouble sleeping since the new lights, due to all the extra blue wavelength light?

They're slowly, slowly picking up it seems. Gradually, more parks & such are being designated dark sky sites (which spreads their name- I learned about IDA @ Canyonlands), and a few towns like mine are starting to adopt dark sky initiatives.

Let's not leave out the option of simply not using fixed, always-on lighting in many locations. The evidence for safety benefits from it is generally mixed:

* There's definitely a benefit to lighting pedestrian crosswalks, though that benefit might be increased if the lighting is triggered by a pedestrian pressing a button before crossing.

* There is a benefit where vehicles are prone to hit fixed objects or drive off the side of a curve, but reflectors or low-output marker lights can provide that benefit in many cases.

* There does not appear to be a reduction in crime from installing fixed lighting in public places. Criminals require light to select victims and break in to vehicles or structures. Some studies have shown reductions in crimes; others have shown increases. Most show no significant effect.

In addition, the capabilities of portable lighting have increased dramatically since most of our cultural assumptions about street lighting came to be. A pocket-sized bicycle light powered by a modern LED and an 18650 Li-ion battery can provide a generous amount of light for urban riding all night long and then some and recharge from a MicroUSB cable in a few hours.

An often overlooked reason the lights being always on in convenient stores, groceries, ect: to increase the likelyhood that the perpetrator is spotted and can be later identified. Also helps the video cameras catch them.

It seems like having PIR sensors turn on the lights would still take care of that, and likely scare away anyone who'd sneaked into a dark building...

However, lights turning on and off are more annoying to those just trying to sleep.

It can be, yes. Such lights should be designed to minimize their spill in to other areas. A crosswalk light, for example shouldn't light up everything. It should light up people in the crosswalk. Using LEDs, it can also have a fade in/out over a couple seconds to make it less jarring.

From this map I wonder:

http://www.youcanseethemilkyway.com/light-pollution/

WTF are these huge masses of light off the coasts of Argentina and Peru?

I saw this comment was downvoted and I figured you were trolling or something, but then I looked and there's a legit mystery there.

There are two big masses of lights, one off the coast of Peru and one off the coast of Argentina, that aren't connected to any landmasses whatsoever. Look 250 km W of Barranca (which is north of Lima on the Peruvian coast), and for the rest, start with the Falklands and look for a cluster 100 km north, one 150-200 km northwest, and one 100 km west.

The cluster off of Peru might be displaced from the Ecuadorian islands to the north -- the shape looks vaguely similar to the islands Isabela, Fernandina, Santiago, Santa Cruz, and San Cristobal (at around 0 deg N, 90 deg W).

I suspect the cluster near the Falklands has been displaced about 300 km to the southeast -- the "ring" just north of the Falklands matches the area around Comodoro Rividavia, the western cluster matches Isla Wellington, and the northern inverted-Y shape seems to roughly follow highways 26/40 in the western part of south Argentina.

EDIT: I moved around a bit more and noticed there are lots of faint streaks off of the coasts of South America, including a fairly big blob just east of Rio. I don't know whether it's browser-specific or something screwy on the backend.

EDIT 2: while most of my local area (Denver) looked sane, I noticed a bright cluster near Hereford, CO (around 41 N, 104 W) and that's just pure farmland. The map shows [0] in the middle of a fairly heavily light-polluted area.

[0] https://www.google.com/maps/place/Avondale,+CO+81022/@40.966...

fishing vessels: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Malvinas/

Interesting. I'd definitely believe that for some of those clusters (particularly the inverted Y). Not sure it fits with the cluster near Peru, and definitely not the one in northeastern Colorado.

The one in NE Colorado is likely oil extraction from the Niobrara shale formation.

The street view is from 2007. If you switch to aerial view (from 2016) you'll see many identical looking installations which are likely oil wells installed during the previous 10 years.

http://archives.datapages.com/data/mountain-geologist-rmag/d... says that since 2009 some 4400 wells have gone into Weld County, CO.

In 1994, a post-earthquake power grid blackout in LA caused all the light sources in an area to stop functioning. Allegedly, an observatory received calls about strange shapes and lights in the sky; what people were seeing was the Milky Way for the first time. [1]

[1]: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/04/local/la-me-light-po...

(there's some doubt as to the legitimacy of the story, but it's still a funny tale)

Growing up, I spent all of my time in areas with lots of light pollution. When I was younger and read about how people would use the stars to navigate, I was incredulous -- it didn't occur to 6-year-old me that in times past you could see more than just a dozen stars.

I'm still incredulous if I'm being honest. Even though I know this.

It's not difficult to get compass directions from the stars, that's not a bad start.

It's been the other way around for me; I grew up in a place with clear skies. Now I live in cities, and rarely even see the stars, never mind dimmer features. I miss it, and make sure to get some time in the fall and winter to get to a place where I can see the stars again.

As a kid in coastal Northern Florida, I could see the Milky Way by night, and the moon rockets by day. The two sights left a very positive mark.

My wife and I camped near the Grand Canyon the night before a raft trip there. I'd forgotten how beautiful the Milky Way was, was amazed she'd never seen it, and delighted at her delight to see it.

I find it very strange living in a city, where every night you can go outside and practically read a book with the amount of reflected light. Having grown up in remote Western Australia, I got to see the whole 'fish-bowl' effect of the night sky, basically every night.

I still try to get around an hour or two outside of the city every weekend just to stargaze.

This article is quite shallow, but the one linked below is excellent and discusses in some detail several of the serious side-effects of light pollution (on human health, animal populations, crime, as well as wasted money):

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/08/20/the-dark-side-2

If you're interested in seeing it, there's a nice website that has tips on how and a light pollution map:

http://www.youcanseethemilkyway.com

Not mentioned: shooting stars! When I lived in Taos, NM I saw hundreds a year. Since moving to the bay 5 years ago, I've seen 1 or maybe 2.

I grew up in the NYC metro area. I thought shooting stars existed only in fairy tales like wizards and dragons.

Yup, on a clear, dark night you should be able to see a few if you spend any length of time looking up at the sky.

Also ISS, We caught it last night and it was incredibly bright since it was just after sunset.

A good ISS pass should be visible virtually anywhere-- at its brightest (when it's passing almost directly overhead), it'll be either the second or third brightest object visible in the sky (behind the moon and occasionally Venus).

Yes, you can see it even in LA. It's pretty noticeable since it moves quite fast (takes around 3-5 minutes from horizon to horizon)

It's crazy to me that you're not allowed to just dump your garbage in a public park, and yet you're allowed to run lights on your property all night if you want.

Beyond just the aesthetics, from a public health perspective it's ridiculous that we lock people up for smoking weed, but allow pretty much unlimited light pollution even though it's likely worse in terms of health.

Aside from the fact that dumping garbage in a public park and leaving your lights on are not even remotely close in terms of impact, it's important to point out that one actually serves a utility.

Having lived in cities where electricity is extremely expensive and lights are scarce, I can vouch for the value of light (particularly in poorer, urban areas) during night time. Perhaps you cannot appreciate lit roadways and sidewalks until you've experienced their absence.

It depends on the location. In large cities and urban areas sure it makes sense, but outside there is really little need for street lighting.

I'm from a village (~350 people) that to this day still doesn't have street lights and it's great - if you go out at night you just carry a torch. Any nights when it's clear you get a great view of the Milky Way (although there are some large towns ~15 miles away so it could be better).

The roads in the area are all unlit too, so anytime I drive on a main road or motorway with street lights (outside populated areas) it makes me cringe.

Most people don't care enough about seeing the stars. They would rather feel safe in their neighborhoods if they need to go out at night, and street lights do a good job of providing that feeling.

street lights do a good job of providing that feeling

But there isn't significant evidence that they provide that reality. Changing the perception is very much an uphill battle.

The first time I encountered a highway that was fully lit (I-287, maybe), I thought it was the weirdest thing. Cars have headlights, right?

For three or four days around the full moon, you can drive at midnight with no lights on - especially in the winter when there's snow to increase the contrast. These are things you do when the nearest entertainment is the WalMart 15 miles away, haha.

You might avoid lights between cities, but within cities, highways may have pedestrians.

It's illegal to be a pedestrian on a US interstate highway.

Not sure why this is downvoted, that's a true statement most of the time[1]

[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Freewaye...

One reason to love living in the country. Sometimes there is just nothing better than a beanbag, blanket, and a clear night sky.

The data used in the interactive map is old. Near the Falklands Islands you should see, along the 200-nautical-mile border of the Argentinean sea, a huge ammount of light: squid fishing ships, most of the are said to be chinese.

For example, like this: http://www.inquinamentoluminoso.it/download/mondo_ridotto0p2...

From the italian site, http://www.inquinamentoluminoso.it/worldatlas/pages/fig1.htm

> The Scene Viewer can't be opened in your browser. Web Scene Viewer is not supported on mobile devices.

Anybody have a nice high-resolution screenshot of this? That's the content I was most interested in!

There is one from 2006 by David Lorenz at UWisc

https://djlorenz.github.io/astronomy/lp2006/

Both static images and a Google Maps layer is provided.

https://i.imgur.com/h3AZ5cm.jpg

I believe I may have commented on this before, but it's my opinion that artificial (especially electric) lighting is a cause of huge health and psychological problems. Not long ago the power was out in my neighborhood for about five hours at the end of the day. When the sun went down, it actually got dark. People came out on their porches to catch the last rays of sunlight, creating a sense of community as neighbors saw each other for the first time. With the neighborhood getting dark at the end of the day, I actually started to feel sleepy. It felt _good_ for the day to feel like it was ending.

Something really is lost with pervasive, always-on electric lighting.

I haven't read it yet, but this book on the topic looks intriguing: https://www.amazon.com/End-Night-Searching-Darkness-Artifici...

For my part I've blacked out my window as much as possible to exclude the light from street lights and neighbors, and I've introduced a smart light in my bedroom which I use to simulate the rise and setting of the sun. It's really helped me get a sense of the days' start and end which I've been missing, though I hadn't realized it until that power outage.

Personally I think it makes going out in the wilderness special.

If it was always there we wouldn't appreciate it.

I think history records that the night sky has always been appreciated.

I've spent time in the Australian Outback and I don't recall a night going by when I didn't appreciate it, it's a marvellous spectacle and a real shame it's hard for most people to enjoy!

I've lived on the US East Coast my whole life. I like to camp, so I thought I had seen the Milky Way before. Then, I took a canoeing trip in northern Minnesota and camped a night on an island in the middle of a lake. It was a crystal clear night and there was zero light pollution. Gorgeous! Here I was a decently well educated adult and I had no idea the sky could look like that.

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11880876

I'll make the same comment here: I was just in Mitzpe Ramon, IL with my family on a moonless weekend night. It is supposed to be the darkest point in Israel. The viewing was fairly good that night. And yet my kids were disappointed upon seeing the Milky Way. They'd expected the night sky to look like what they've seen in photos, like shown in the NYT article, even though I'd forewarned them not to. :-(

Anyone in the Bay Area is a two hour drive South to the Esalen Institute which has hot springs on a cliff over the Pacific open to the public from 1am - 3am. I recommend everyone to go there and experience the Milky Way from there. [0]

[0] http://www.esalen.org/page/esalen-hot-springs

There is a nice animated video about people waking up the wonders of a natural night sky: https://vimeo.com/67419875

I can still remember the first time I saw the Milky Way. At first, I thought it was just a cloud, but man, it was beautiful.

I wonder if this hasn't always been true. From the first community fires lit at night, to the days of gaslights and now electric street lights, much of the population has been in cities away from clear skies. Only a lucky few have ever lived alone away from towns.

Forests (aka the largest connected land-based photosensor arrays on Earth?) and whole ecosystems likely use the visible night sky as a shared clock/synchronization mechanism.

Can't begin to imagine the potential consequences of it "going bright".

After living in remote parts of North America for 10 years, I recently visited my home country of Australia.

In the middle of a town of 30,000 people, near Melbourne, the stars were jaw-droppingly good. So much so I setup my DSLR and took a bunch of photos.

My 4 year old son asked for a Remote Control Helicopter for xmas this year. Specifically, a Helicopter with a laser beam so that he could shoot out the street light that shines on our back yard.

Evidently I complain about this a lot.

Frankly, I'm OK with trading off massive economic growth and reduction of human misery, including conquering darkness itself, in exchange for having to take a trip out to the country if you want to go stargazing.

What if it's not a tradeoff we need to make? What if you can have both a dark sky and a thriving civilization?

The fact that 1/3 of the world's population (in a world where 1/2 lives in urban areas) does not live in such circumstances strongly suggests that that is an arrangement is not empirically available, or not empirically valued.

Even more frankly, I'm not sure that availability of stargazing is a universal enough aesthetic preference, compared to extremely widespread desire for nighttime illumination, to give it any significant policy weight at all.

> an arrangement is not empirically available, or not empirically valued.

Maybe its value is beyond your reductionistic analysis. For example, light pollution impacts bats which pollinate flowers which only bloom at night (cactus, etc).

I second this. Who knows, maybe motion sensors can give us the same utility with less power and light pollution.

>light pollution

That's the most cynical name you can give to civilisation. Life in the dark is horrendous no matter how many stars you can see.

This is something to be proud.

Life in the dark is magnificent.

You have been eaten by a true.

"a grue" - that should read. Thanks autocorrect.

I like the dark.

Portable lighting is a thing. Cars have lights on them. I carry a flashlight when I go out at night.

The light I carry is under 1x4" in size and can provide enough light to see well enough to walk comfortably and to be seen by cars (70 lumens) for 15 hours on a single charge of its rechargeable battery. Should I want more light, it can match the output of a car headlight (1000 lumens) for an hour.

Lights with this kind of performance can be had for $15, plus another $10 or so for the battery and charger. It's not a binary choice between life in the dark and illuminating a bunch of mostly-unused space.

I agree with you. That said, a cursory google search suggests that NYC serves over 10M people with only 25K street lamps. So I suspect that, in many places, there is something to be said for the efficiency of fixed lighting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com