Gallery of Lights
Lamps => Modern => Topic started by: bryantm3 on May 22, 2013, 05:56:37 AM
-
i thought it might be interesting to list cities that still use mercury vapour lamps en masse for streetlighting— this isn't for the stray one that got missed during the HPS install in a large city.
here in georgia, there must've been some kind of dumb pork-barrel bill passed in the 90s to give business to local lighting companies, because every city and county, no matter how remote, has installed 100% HPS lights. however, as soon as you pass into bordering states, such as south carolina, north carolina or alabama, you see a mixture, and occasionally you'll find a town that has a large section that still uses mercury vapour lights. the most towns i see that still use MV lights are in alabama, and after a recent trip into alabama i saw two mid-sized cities that still use mercury vapour lighting around their downtown areas: gadsden and anniston. gadsden uses DX lamps around their entire downtown area, except for the main street which has newer lights, i believe they may be MH. the whole city seems a lot more calming at night, more nighttimey if that makes any sense. anniston uses DX lamps exclusively also.
i had a question about the new LED lamps for those who've had them installed around them. are the new LED lamps coloured like DX mercury lamps, is it like the old days again? or is the light coloured more like MH lamps? how does it affect the night sky?
-
There are LEDs in parking lots here and they look more like MH lamps IMO. Glarey white light, though LEDs are dimmer than the HIDs they replace IMO. In smaller parking lots they're popping up left and right, especially in gas stations and car dealerships. Parking lots with tall shoeboxes like at malls, WalMart, Target, JC Penny's, Sears, etc here are still PSMH though. .
I don't like LEDs. They're too glarey, the light is too directional (not enough light is cast around the fixture, rather there's a spot light shining on the ground below the pole and that's it), most installations are not as bright as the lighting systems they replaced, they are a rip off with the price they sell for, they aren't interchangable among manufacturers, and finally, the manufacturers are straight out LYING about LEDs. They are no more efficient than the HPS and PSMH fixtures out on the roads today and lights out there today have replacable universal parts unlike LEDs which you need to buy an exact part from the same manufacturer. and no doubt prices will be much higher since each company makes their own parts instead of everyone making interchangable parts.
It's for the same reason I don't like apple computers. they aren't 100% compatable with PCs, yet all PCs no metter the manufacturer, are fully compatable with each other just like HIDs. Want a different light source or wattage? Change the ballast and keep the fixture. want more memory on your PC? you can install more memory.
-
LOL I'm a Mac user...IMO PC stands for "Piece of Crud" but I do like the fact that they're compatible with each other.
IMO almost ANYTHING is better than that orangish-pinkish light of HPS that finds it's way into every nook and cranny...MV, induction LED, and MH seem much more peaceful and less invasive at night IMO...especially MV and induction, and to a lesser degree, LED and MH- they're a bit glary for my taste.
-
yeah i agree about the HPS color being horrible. did you know the DSA wants LEDs with more red in the specturm used for street lighting? >:( this means orangey colored LEDs lol. seems like manufacturers aren't complying thankfully lol
-
i don't know about the DSA doing that, but i know that on the georgia coast, the sea turtle conservationists are advocating using LEDs that look like LPS lights. personally i think it's kind of pointless the way that they did it on saint simons— they added about 20 more lights than were already there and made the pier a bright orange nightmare!
i get the DSA people for the most part, wanting to have the night back. there are some places that are overly illuminated, like here in atlanta we have a CDC building that has a 1000 watt HPS light that literally shines sideways into the forest, it doesn't even cover the parking lot. however i think some of their requests are unreasonable, like instituting curfews for lighting. why would we need lights in the daytime?
back to the LED issue, there are some pictures online that look really nice, almost like MV fixtures, of LED lamps. however, i haven't seen them in person so i can't vouch for them. but seeing them makes me think that maybe we'll get the old school moonlight glow back to our streets at night.
torrence, CA:
(http://dl.ledtronics.com/ImagesAll/Victor-St3_web.jpg)
ann arbor, MI:
(http://www.gabreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/6a011278fc3ec328a40120a94b7ae6970b-800wi.jpg)
philadelphia, PA:
(http://www.leotek.com/images/productpages/GC_before_after.png)
-
Hmm the LEDs in the pictures look more like MH then MV to me...
-
LED looks more like a clear MH in a FCO light to me. /DX MV has a greenish hue and diffused soft light that LEDs don't have.
-
IMO LED and clear MH look too glary, but MV and induction have a nice "Moonlight" feeling to them.
I agree with the Dark Sky's point of view; look at the light pollution above major cities! But still, they shouldn't BAN certain light sources or fixtures. Just don't make those "Yardblaster" type security lights anymore and replace them with floodlights using the same lamp type- there goes a huge chunk of residential light pollution! Now make all new streetlights FCO- there's another chunk. Improve glary billboard lighting- there goes even more light pollution! And maybe even turning off some lights late at night? I see some places are doing that already.
Just my opinion...banning MV isn't the answer IMO.
-
Clear MH with a drop lens ain't that bad actually, it's clear MH with a FCO flat glass that's glary.
I believe DSA already wants to promote cutoff and shielded fixtures but for some reason they still have a anti white light agenda (dosen't like MV, MH and white LED for some reason).
Turning off lights late would be a liability most places would not want to carry. If someone got injured or robbed while the lights were off they would mostly likely sue the city for shutting off the lights early...
-
well floodlights are just as bad as yardbasters... Light "pollution" doesn't hurt the environment, it's just light shining upwards. If you want to see the stars then don't live in downtown! Simple as that! If you care more about seeing the stars than you do being able to see at night then that's your problem IMO. To me, the whole light pollution thing is a bunch of bull. It's not pollution, its just reflected light off of objects on the ground. If you light an FCO light in your basement and shine it at the ceiling, light will be reflectred off the ceiling and light the floor too. Just like with outdoor lights. Even if you use FCO lights, the sky will still be lit since light reflects off of objects. Just like with the walmarts here. They all use FCO shoboxes but you can see those parking lots from another galaxy because light is reflected off the ground.
glare to the driver is a legit problem unlike the sky being lit at night. So properly controlling lights is a good thing if done for the right reasons. Banning a light source is as pointless as banning bottled water like some Massachusetts towns are doing.
-
The Dark Sky Mafia only cares about their own comfort rather than the common good, we're losing our lighting choices to these bullies who have no regard for the impact their stubborn stance has on other parties, even if it creates hardships for everyone else. I'm tired of hearing their nonsense.
-
you guys are barking up the wrong tree— the DSA didn't want to ban mercury vapour. in fact, they like clear mercury vapour because it only has three spectrum lines to filter out, therefore it's ideal for astronomy. the reason mercury vapour was banned was because of the energy bill in 2005, since they are less efficient than other HID light sources— it doesn't specifically ban MV, but bans based on efficiency. i suspect the purpose behind that was that the lighting companies were losing money since MV fixtures were so cheap. all you have to have is one guy in congress and he can slip it in a 2,000 page bill and no one will know a thing until the bill is passed— the same thing happened recently when suddenly it became legal to serve people horse meat in canned goods again.
the DSA doesn't care about efficiency, they just want less light and workarounds for existing light. that's why they like LPS and clear MV lights the most— they have very few spectrum lines, meaning they only emit three specific colours that are very easy to filter out:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/HG-Spektrum_crop.jpg)
(http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/images/thumb/a/a8/LP_sodium_spectrum_4338-2.jpg/180px-LP_sodium_spectrum_4338-2.jpg)
the reason for the FCO lights versus drop lenses is so it doesn't shine in other people's windows and whatnot. however, there's no reason you can't have a diffusing lens with a FCO light. hell, they've got FCO lights around atlanta from the 60s (a variant of the M400— they were converted to sodium vapour but the shape is still intact) that appear to have diffusing lenses.
the #1 thing is the brightness issue. back when we had MV lights, it was typical to have 100 watt MV lights on residential streets, and a maximum of 400 watt MV on the busiest freeways. in the name of efficiency, they switched to HPS, but they converted them directly based on wattage, so we saved no electricity at all, and now the streets are twice as bright. now people are used to the bright lights, and they're making them even brighter with LEDs. you know what one of the top results for "LED street lights" on google is?
this:
(http://thelosangelesbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/streetlight-500-x-332.jpg)
they use that as a marketing image! like that's the optimal, or advanced, or even good!
if you don't think that's overkill, i don't know what to say. a certain amount of light increases security and safety for pedestrians and drivers, but if you keep increasing the light, you get less and less return in terms of security and safety, but you have a ton of negative side effects. look at that picture— what a nuisance! if that was near my house i don't know what i'd do. there's no reason a street needs to be lit up much more than this:
(http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000ALsb.hngTyk/s/860/860/Fphoto-36199403-3MD.jpg)
you can see everything that's going on, but the light isn't invasive and you can still see the stars.
-
i think the LED picture they had a longer exposer to allow more light so it appears brighter than it does in reality. however, i think you could remove every other pole and that road would still be lit above what's needed. that thing is as bright as a nascar race track!lol
in my area, when the old 100W MV lights were installed many of the houses here today didn't exist so now the 100W HPS is needed. Personally i find 50W HPS too dim for street lighting. 70 or 100W HPS is better.
-
here we have 250 watt HPS lights for residential areas and 400 watt or higher for commercial areas. it's nuts.
-
In Providence we have 250W lights on residential roads but I'd hate to call them "residential". I mean, yeah there are houses but it's urban and definetly ghetto. The main roads in Providence were originally 400W MV, then 250W HPS but recently the 250W HPS lights have been getting upgraded to 400W HPS lights.