[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
(ATMoB:Discuss) "It could happen here..." [San Diego switches to HPS light]
Following is a wonderful Editorial piece appearing in last Thursday's
San Diego paper... I enjoyed it so much I thought I'd share it with
our local clubs. It's easy to see how the whims of local politicians
could undo all our wonderful work here in New England, too!
Forwarded without permission. Please do not forward for other than
personal use: All copyrights apply under appropriate laws.
Lew Gramer
------- Forwarded Message
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A dim idea
How many politicos to change 24,882 lamps?
The problem with changing San Diego's streetlights from low- pressure
sodium to high-pressure sodium isn't just that it would blind
observatories on Mt Laguna and Palomar Mountain. The new lighting also
would be expensive to install and would increase the city's electricity
consumption and electricity bills. That's not a very smart idea in the
midst of California's energy crisis. The city of San Diego has 24,882
low-pressure lights and 14,717 high-pressure ones. Both lights are the
same brightness, according to experts. But some people believe the
high-pressure ones look brighter. Of course, since this whole
streetlight controversy is about public perception, the technical
details about brightness hardly matter. The fact is, some residents have
complained they don't like the way yellow low-pressure lights look, and
that they feel safer under whiter, high-pressure lights. The yellowish
lights may look dimmer, and you can't discern colors as well beneath
them, because everything has a similar grayish cast. Some politicians,
including Mayor Dick Murphy, also like the way the high-pressure lights
look. The needs of the internationally famous observatories that look
deep into the heavens are of little interest to municipal leaders who
concern themselves with Earthly matters such as sewage and potholes.
However, the cost of converting to whiter lights, and the increase in
the city's electricity bill, should concern municipal politicians and
constituents. The price tag is $2.8 million to replace the low-pressure
sodium lights, and the increase in energy costs would be an additional
$500,000 a year. 'That's quite a few potholes. The plan by a City
Council committee, championed by Mayor Murphy, would be a gradual
conversion, not an immediate appropriation of $2.8 million. But the
rationale for this plan is suspect Murphy calls the yellowish lights "a
criminal's best friend," and says his support for whiter lights is in
keeping with his intention to make San Diego "America's safest city." As
a former judge, Murphy apparently saw some cases in which witnesses'
testimony about the color of suspects' clothing or cars was less
reliable because of the yellowish lights. Certainly, that wouldn't be a
good thing. But we wonder if such an anecdotal rationale is enough to
warrant spending millions and blinding the observatories. Besides, San
Diego already is one of America's safest big cities. And the crime rate
is still declining here, even while it's leveling off in other cities.
The battle over high-pressure sodium vs. low-pressure sodium
streetlights is an aesthetic issue, not a public safety one. Some people
just don't like the way the yellowish lights took. That might be reason
enough to change them - if it weren't for the millions of dollars in
costs and the blinding of the observatories and the waste of precious
energy. The City Council committee's recommendation to switch the lights
is a decision in search of a reason.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- End of Forwarded Message