I'm not a big fan of LEDs, but I am open for new technoledgy and I hope LEDs do improve. The things I don't liek about LED are that, A. the cost is too high. There is no reason for prices to be so high; B. The quality of LEDs still has to stand the test of time. no one knows for sure how long one will last; C. the fixtures are just plain ugly looking. On top of that, the fixtures are not service friendly- look at all those screws. and D, they're replacing the classic and conventional luminaires we all love.
I agree on reason D. That means that once they ones we grew up with are all gone from Boston, I will no longer come back to Boston.
It's bad enough I've stopped photographing street lights in Holbrook, MA because these General Electric M250R2 FCOs have taken over the old Mercury Vapor luminaires that used to be used in Holbrook, MA.
We can't avoid technology improvements. I think LED's would be a good light source. I just think they should make them in a cobrahead style. With drop lens or FCO optics. I do like HID, but since LED's are getting better and better, those will soon be the dominant light source. LEDS will take over HPS like HPS took over Mercury Vapor.
Hey MH, induction, CFL, fluorescent, CMH, even HPS have mercury in them.........to be honest......it's the mercury that makes the world greener!!! More Mercury = Less Throwing things away....longer lasting.....
The IDA should really be focusing more on light fixture designs instead of what source to use....because...if they try to fight more about MV, the companies will just start making MH inside fixtures that IDA hates....and MH inside buckets are worse than a MV inside a bucket actually! They just need to face the facts and not go overboard and consider more consersive ways like shielding MV fixtures by providing free shield installations, help out companies improve reflector designs instead of working hard to get rid of light source and forcing others to remove their MV fixtures. They should be in more friendly perspective and respect people if they prefer MV, keep the MV just help find ways to improve the light control.
But all of us lighting guys need to be friendly towards others. If we are going to insult THEM.....then we are as bad as them. It doesn't exactly help fight in negative way.......I give credit to IDA for the light control problem....which is a fact.....but the false thing is...."MV is a problem" that is false....its just the fact most of the light polluting fixtures happened to be MV at the time of 1988.....what they needed to do was shield all existing fixtures, no matter what type or source of light. But for new fixtures should have light control. And consider improvement of light design but still have quality of refractor design.....
Yeah it like that DSA likes to look at stuff superficially, like how they assume MV is bad just based on the name and the fact that they were the most common light source in bucket lights which are glary by design.
The MV ban also didn't do anything to solve lighting pollution, it actually made it worse. I've noticed lighting pollution has actually gotten alot worse in the last 3 years since the ban, utility companies and consumers have turned to high pressure sodium lights and some metal halide ones also which both contribute to most of the lighting pollution.
Well your area uses all drop lens Alex.....Where I live the county I live has more HPS but mostly FCO....and pollution isn't too bad here....we still have a lot of mercs too.....merc pollution seems more purplish to the sky...
Yes Joe you are totally correct......IDA doesn't want to admit that clear mercs are 2nd easiest....even better than HPS! I think it's because there was too many clear merc buckets...I donno......something is really odd about IDA on this....
Login
It's bad enough I've stopped photographing street lights in Holbrook, MA because these General Electric M250R2 FCOs have taken over the old Mercury Vapor luminaires that used to be used in Holbrook, MA.
The IDA should really be focusing more on light fixture designs instead of what source to use....because...if they try to fight more about MV, the companies will just start making MH inside fixtures that IDA hates....and MH inside buckets are worse than a MV inside a bucket actually! They just need to face the facts and not go overboard and consider more consersive ways like shielding MV fixtures by providing free shield installations, help out companies improve reflector designs instead of working hard to get rid of light source and forcing others to remove their MV fixtures. They should be in more friendly perspective and respect people if they prefer MV, keep the MV just help find ways to improve the light control.
But all of us lighting guys need to be friendly towards others. If we are going to insult THEM.....then we are as bad as them. It doesn't exactly help fight in negative way.......I give credit to IDA for the light control problem....which is a fact.....but the false thing is...."MV is a problem" that is false....its just the fact most of the light polluting fixtures happened to be MV at the time of 1988.....what they needed to do was shield all existing fixtures, no matter what type or source of light. But for new fixtures should have light control. And consider improvement of light design but still have quality of refractor design.....
That's my two cents!