On the agenda for tonight’s city commission meeting – upgrading 1,379 streetlights inside the city limits from “high-pressure sodium (HPS) and mercury vapor (MV)” lights to LED.
In a memo, Asst. City Manager David Junger states that the initiative is part of “a statewide Georgia Power initiative to work with local governments to upgrade roadway lights to LED lights”. Georgia Power will foot the bill, so it’s no cost to the city.
Why do this? Mr. Junger cites Georgia Power literature that states…
Georgia Power indicates that LED lights offer more safety because they produce a broader spectrum of light, which provides better illumination of street signs, bicyclists and pedestrians. LED light spreads more evenly, reducing fixtures are also more efficient, not only producing more light for less money, but also lasting much longer than traditional HPS fixtures.
If you’re interested in the color difference between the conventional streetlights and LED, this YouTube video does a decent job of show the difference. Also, Georgia Power wrote about the effort in its newsletter back in Summer 2015.
Photos courtesy of Georgia Power.
I am horrified by the transformation of other municipalities (i.e. Atlanta) by these LED replacements. These are ridiculously bright and often provide the same effect as multiple cars with their headlights on. Whereas the older lights had a cover, these are more like bare bulbs. Definitely not something you want to look at directly, but sometimes it’s unavoidable. I’m not sure who came up with the idea that streets should be nearly as bright at night as in the day. Dark skies are a gift to embrace and enjoy. We also need darkness for proper sleep. Many have reported that these replacements emit exactly the type of light we need to avoid at night (same as smartphones). If you have a bedroom anywhere near one of these lights, you may need to switch to blackout window treatments. Now, I do *love* the energy savings and long life of LEDs. I understand why municipalities would be tempted by these. I’d just like to see a more well-rounded alternative.
A reasonable concern.
My perception is that the newer “soft white” LEDs are not so harsh as some of the earlier “bright white” models. Those are the ones I use inside my own home and they seem just fine.
Perhaps, hopefully, there are new external municipal versions available that provide the same cost savings without the harsh brightness? I’m sure some expert can tell us more, but I would be optimistic.
We experienced the switch to LED lamps in a parking lot near our home. The change was not positive for us. We like the non-orange color and energy savings, but it is equivalent to bright headlights shining in our house from sundown to sun up. If I’m not careful and my eyes happen to look toward the lights, I see spots. That’s not the case with the current street lamps. The LED’s also seem to cast a much more intense light much farther into our yard. While we used to just have a light orange glow that diminished the farther away you get from the lights, we now have bright white light cast all the way into our back yard. (Over 200 feet away).
Agreed. It’s a harsh light. Not suggesting that we should necessarily demand a romantic hue in our street lighting but there’s something about the ember glow of old skool lighting. If nothing else, I’d like to at least see some degree of “softness” required. I think the new DHS parking lot at Commerce and Howard uses the LEDs mentioned by Carl and that’s some pretty harsh stuff.
I hope the city can update us with a better sense of the options.
The tradeoff is safety. Cars parked along Parkwood have experienced multiple break-ins where the street lighting is poor.
Our car was broken into last week while parked directly under a streetlight. LED lights won’t deter theft.
Sorry that happened to you. I don’t think LED or any lighting is 100% theft deterrent, though.
But how many more kids are these new streetlights going to add to the schools?
This is a bad idea if we have any inclination to look at many stars or comets or planets in the future. More and whiter light feels safer but causes more light pollution. The observatories at Agnes Scott and Fernbank will be affected.
LEDs can be installed with lower color temperatures and fully shielded fixtures, (only shine down), which Georgia Power may be willing to install. They don’t mention either in their literature though.
This page includes a case study of Los Angeles showing that energy savings from their retrofit came mostly from lower levels of light on the street but with higher levels of light pollution — http://www.flagstaffdarkskies.org/led-lighting-dark-skies/
I would love it if Decatur pursued a dark sky initiative but I recognize that is probably a fantasy. The mayor of Roswell brought it up several years ago but he got hammered by the car dealerships that imagine hoards of vandals running through the dark keying all their stock.
Some links for those interested in the Dark Sky Initiative:
Lighting, Crime and Safety — http://darksky.org/light-pollution/lighting-crime-and-safety/
Examples of quality outdoor lighting — http://darksky.org/lighting/lighting-basics/
Turn off the lights, already. It’s nighttime.
At least high pressure sodium lighting currently in use is near the red end of the spectrum and has less effect on night vision.
So does it have to be all or none? Could it be that it would be wise to use LED in some places, but not in others?
I would strongly request that this be postponed until more analysis can be done on the re-lamping specifications and shielding configurations. Implementing standard State re-lamping procedures here will almost inevitably create a number of undesirable lighting conditions (i.e. perceived overlighting, light overspill, light trespass) that will be difficult to rectify after the fact. Some thoughtful research, consulting & adjustment of the basic specification may very well alleviate these issues in advance and we’ll still receive the benefit of better color balance and efficiency that LED can offer. We specify retrofit of these kinds of fixtures all of the time and have observed that even if the lumen output/color temp. is similar (or better) than the old fixture, that LED appears more harsh & bright and that the light source cannot be observed directly because of it’s intense brightness. The only way to understand how these will look in advance is to lamp sample fixtures and observe them under actual conditions. Lamping a few in a row of street lamps with different lumen outputs/color temps. would be one way to get a more realistic idea of how these will look. Thank you DM for alerting us to this potentially dramatic change to our evening appearance!
I too think it’s a harsh light. But we all must bow to the power of Safety First! After all, if harsh street lights hold the promise of saving just one life, they are worth all the fitful sleep and lost stargazing in the world.
A properly lit area promotes safety and does not need to appear, “Harsh”. I’ll defer to the experts on whether or not brighter lights promote more safety than moderate light.
I can’t believe that one lightbulb would be that much more safer than another. Criminals operate in the dark — not in a certain kind of light. This movement is about energy savings — which is an admirable cause — but not necessarily at the expense of our night sky.
Who is it again that pays for the power to the streetlights (and would therefore be pushing this agenda)?
(BTW, not trying to belittle your concern — just trying to express that I think this is not the best way to address it.)
Please don’t.
I believe I’ve seen these bulbs already installed somewhere in the metro area in fixtures similar to the city required streetlights rather than in the higher overhead Georgia Power pole street lamps. They were terribly bright and in the Decatur style streetlights shine in every direction (not just downward).
In regard to the claim that increasing the amount of lighting somehow increases safety, take a look at “Lighting Crime and Safety” (http://darksky.org/light-pollution/lighting-crime-and-safety/) at the International Dark-Sky Association website.
BTW, notice how much darker the shadows from the LED lights are in that demo clip.
I strongly oppose this measure. I have brought this up previously with Georgia Power, as I do not know how these ever got approved in use in any case. Brighter lights have not been shown to be safer. These lights are garish, distracting, & most likely have ill effects. I strongly oppose this meaure.
I feel like there’s a lot of misinformation in this thread generally, apparently based on spotty anecdotal experiences and good ‘ol fashioned kneejerk NIMBYism. LED lighting is a broad category with an almost infinite amount of options. Chances are if you are basing your judgment on an installation somewhere else in town, that that technology is already obsolete. Yes, LEDs generally = more light for (much) less energy. But they are also far more easily customizable than any other light solution. The brightness, light temperature, and angle can all be calibrated to achieve what we’re going for here without blasting out our retinas or aggravating light pollution. Of course, for Dark Skies folks, any light is going to be bad light, so I can’t really help you there. But I do believe if implemented conscientiously (and if any city is going to be conscientious about this, it’s Decatur), LED street lighting can be a boon to both the environment and safety without subjecting us to garish, intrusive glare. We just need to make sure that caution is exercised.
Is Georgia Power offering the city an infinite number of options?
Will Georgia Power also foot the bill to replace whatever is installed once that technology is obsolete?
Are Decatur’s streetscape light fixtures customizable and can LEDs be calibrated in those fixtures?
Personally, just not as confident as you seem to be that Decatur will have the amount of control or exercise the level of caution you suggest.
Of course, for Bright Skies folks, all light is good light.
Sarcasm aside, these are all excellent questions, and I hope the city asks them before agreeing to anything.
Guilty as charged on that last line, and I almost didn’t include, but your oversimplification of the DSI perspective begged for acknowledgement. Glad to see that you do agree with some of the DSI mission.
Dark Sky Initiative does not hold that any light is bad light. It is about warm color temperature, shielded fixtures and lower brightness. Reducing any two out of the three factors gets you a 50% reduction in light pollution.
GA Power doesn’t seem to be offering any alternatives to their chosen fixture and color temperature. We’ll see at the meeting.
And Decatur isn’t saving any money from this BTW. It will cost the city a little more each month while GA Power will save anywhere from 12% to 70% in energy delivered, (depending on how you calculate the equivalencies.)
Sorry to cast aspersions. I actually support much of DSI’s mission. And you raise some good points. If GA Power is the only one that benefits financially, than the least they can do is be accommodating in the type of fixtures used.
If you’re interested in seeing the stark contrast between the two, drive or walk down the Chevelle or East Pharr after dark.
Either, a recall referendum on the City of Decatur Commission is called for, and/or, a state referendum regarding Georgia Power is called for. This sham about input from the people… The government has a determined plan resistant to the will of many of the people. Hopefully, the new influx of people coming into the town will throw out this government!
Just, wow. Streetlights, are what we are talking about. Thankfully, lumpinthereoad said, coherently and inoffensively, what I was thinking. Streetlights, thanks Obama.
Wow…I’m trying to decide if this is just elaborate sarcasm or the most gratuitous example of a first world problem I’ve seen in a while.
Without any notification to residents by the City or Georgia Power, Georgia Power has been making the switch in Avondale, and the LED lighting is harsh.
Is it possible to use motion sensing technology to turn efficient warm street lighting on and off, within some radius of detected motion? This would relegate light to where it is needed (around the motion) and turn if off where it is not needed (where there’s no motion), minimizing light pollution. Hypothetically, lights turning on and off in response to the presence and absence of motion would keep the source of the motion lit up as it moseyed down a street (whether the source of the motion was an upstanding citizen, a thief, or a car). Adding some simple computer logic and wireless (or wired) communications would enable street lights within a predetermined radius of the motion to turn on and off in unison, so that the motion didn’t appear to be moving under the small spotlight diameter of a single streetlight. I imagine the sensation of walking under such a motion sensing street light system would feel remotely like walking down the freezer aisle of a grocery store with the freezer lights that turn on as you approach them, except without the ice cream.
I actually think having streetlights blinking on and off constantly would be far more distracting than properly calibrated steady-on lights — both for pedestrians and for the people living near them. That kind of thing is fine when moving from room to room, or in a stairwell, or — as you point out — in a grocery freezer aisle. But in an open outdoor environment, it’d be somewhat maddening.
I have to agree that lights turning on and off every time a car drives by would drive me crazy. This is what they are proposing for the belt line, though I think those lights will be much closer to the ground.
This is a horrifying proposition. The present out of control light trespass in Decatur calls for reduction not escalation. That “after” picture above is a disgusting prospect of turning our quiet neighborhoods into industrial gulags where a human’s sense of nature and time is reduced to what they can see on TV. Where do I sign up to fight this really really bad idea?
If you want to see them in action, drive down McKinnon Dr. We’re part in the city/part in unincorporated, and the county installed them recently. They do a much better job of illuminating the street, and the light post spacing is such that the whole street isn’t swathed in daylight.
Oh, I hate to hear that about McKinnon. It was always so nice housesitting over there because the area was genuinely dark and very pleasant for sleeping.
It was passed as recommended. The new fixtures should be dimmable (though that won’t change the color temperature), won’t project light above a horizontal plane, can be retrofitted with shielding to project a narrower beam down (but that will have to be a special request) and will eventually be networked back to GA Power so they can track them for maintenance. The city pays a flat fee monthly by fixture type. This of course leaves no incentive to dim them or turn them off at a certain hour, (which would be GREAT IMHO).
The new fixtures are only street lights, not the decorative fake-historical lights common downtown. Those are maintained by the city and power is paid for as used, I suppose.
GA Power has nailed this process down pretty tightly. The city gets put on a “waiting list” for the “upgrade” then notified that GA Power is ready to proceed. All the decisions, other than the decision to sign the contract, are already made. It seems that the only question that remains is how responsive they will be when people ask to have a light dimmed or shielding installed.
The acorn street lamp is as relevant today for pedestrian focused lighting as it’s been for over a century. What makes you consider it fake-historical? Is a manual can opener fake-historical because its design has remained relatively consistent over the years?
I open cans with my teeth, as should all right-thinking Americans.
Do you use your fake-historical incisors?
I’ve had whale bone dentures since age 7.
Finally! My chance to rant on about how much I hate modern can openers. The plastic, the bulbous handles, the fun colors… Arrgghhh!
Noticed last night that Decatur does have a couple of street lamps on the Ponce side of the MARTA pavilion (near the curve in East Court Square) emitting light that looks more blue-green than yellow-orange. Don’t know if they are LED or some other lighting technology.
And although I somewhat agree with your characterization of the lamps as “fake-historical,” a lamp of similar design does appear in a 1942 photo at this link: http://atlantatimemachine.com/misc/east_ponce_106.htm. To me, the “fake-historical” label has some validity in that Decatur is copying certain historical downtown features and applying them in areas where they were not previously used. And at the same time, Decatur has introduced new features (such as street trees) that may easily be imagined to have been part of some historical downtown but in reality may have had no or only limited use in previous city streetscapes. (Again, see the 1942 pic.)
No complaints about either practice, just interesting.
The blue-green lights are mercury vapor lights. It’s what they used before the orange high pressure sodium bulbs- they switched most of the MV bulbs to HPS in the 80s and 90s, but some got looked over. I love ’em, they have such a classic 1970s look. It really ticked me off when they used Orange HPS lights in American Hustle, but Hollywood never gets time travel right.
A lot of people who are mentioning the old school Amber glow of the streetlights are the same people that want yellow tinted street lighting; I think for many people it’s just that they don’t like change. 25 years ago, they changed the colour of the lights from blue-green mercury vapor to the orange sodium vapor lights, and there were people who didn’t like that change either, so I don’t know if the complaints about colour are really valid.
I do think there’s a point to be made about the brightness and glare of the LEDs, though. Regardless of the colour, the new lights in Atlanta are brighter. They aren’t as bright as the first ones they put in, which were like flood lights, but they are significantly brighter than the old ones. This is a problem. When we get a more efficient light source, we always want to make everything twice as bright just because we can afford to do so. Research study after research study proves that brighter lights after a certain minimal level don’t make a difference in crime, so why are we wasting money and getting rid of our night sky?
There is a middle ground to be had here; Decatur should improve on the LED streetlight program that Atlanta implemented by making the lights a degree less bright and putting some sort of diffusion lens on the lamp so that glare isn’t an issue.