|
Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 08, 2008, 11:51:28 pm It isnt enough taxpayers pay for wasteful and inefficient choices for streetlights, but trying to "revitalize" an area by shining intense lights straight up into the sky to create a glowing dome over the city is environmentally and financially out of touch.
The electricity to pay for this in perpetuity could have gone for fire and police service, schools, pools in the summer (and so on) but instead goes to subsidize the utility's off-peak electrical generation. "They are already beams of light crisscrossing the Brady and Blue Dome Districts. Now the PAC is also a little brighter. Mayor Kathy Taylor is serious about spotlighting downtown Tulsa." http://www.kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=142706 "I think it really shows the energy and the revitalization that we're seeing downtown, really on every street corner and street,” said Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor. A new lighting display is in place to showcase the Tulsa Performing Arts Center. It includes more than two dozen, 150 watt metal halide lights. It takes a few minutes for them to warm up when they are first turned on, but when they do, Tulsa's mayor hopes they will attract people to downtown like moths to a flame. "The lighting up downtown brings it to life. It encourages people to come down and visit those areas that are alive with light and alive with people,” said Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor. It's all part of the mayor's effort to keep downtown from turning into a ghost town at night. Last summer, she launched a campaign to encourage Tulsans to eat at downtown restaurants. The mayor says the latest showcase is just another piece of the puzzle that will culminate with the opening of the BOK Center, next fall. "The more that can be done downtown. The more things like this. The more amenities will really help us as we open the BOK Center, but it will really help all of downtown,” said BOK Center General Manager John Bolton. Mayor Kathy Taylor says the efforts are already translating into more interest downtown and she says she believes the momentum will continue to grow. I would hope that enough movers and shakers see this for the shallow extravagance that it is, and take a more responsible approach with our tax dollars. Tulsa-sized cities like Tucson, for example, have shown that outrageous light-polluted landscapes are not synonymous with prosperity, and that streets are safer and more alive with people when the lights actually shine on the streets instead of into people's eyes or up into clouds. This is the complete opposite direction a responsible administration should be heading, but given recent examples of how the priorities seem to be on finding new sources of funding rather than taking control of wasteful spending, I guess this sort of foolish shortsightedness is just Tulsa's current business model. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: CoffeeBean on January 09, 2008, 01:34:27 am Tucson is unique due to the observatories, a fact legitimizing the concern over light pollution:
Tucson Night Skies (http://"http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Currents/Content?oid=oid%3A68227") Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: TheArtist on January 09, 2008, 09:16:37 am Ummmm, There arent any buildings in downtown Tucson TO shine lights on and they have these great mountains around them to look at.
I think Boston Avenue may look quite nice. This will add a nice touch near one end. The streetlights, hopefully wont be too bright and will look nice along with the new streets and sidewalks. The new park on Boston Ave will look very nice. Hopefully some of its features and the fountains will be lit up a bit. And the new TCC building on Boston will be a snazzy new, contemporary addition as well that should have some nice lighting features and even outdoor visual screens that have lighting and images projected on them. I dont mind lighting as long as its not glaring. The new lights on the PAC do not look too bright in the pics. Will have to go and take a look. The right kind of lighting downtown, tastefully done and to add interest and beauty, and even a little excitement, could make it a more attractive place to be in the evenings. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: sgrizzle on January 09, 2008, 09:30:05 am (http://kotv.com/newsimages/640/41431e7f-5dc0-4aa8-81c7-1b85c0a8f3b0.jpg)
(http://kotv.com/newsimages/640/e98b6477-7ad0-425e-878c-02149927faaf.jpg) It kinda looks cool since it is actually lighting the building. I never got the sky spotlights though... Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: cannon_fodder on January 09, 2008, 09:43:32 am I like well light spaces. I've never been in a vibrant urban location that was not well light. In fact, the lack of lighting between the Blue Dome and Brady is a complaint of mine as those two close districts are not really joined (a little dim between them). I hope it looks as good as they think it will.
I also hope they took pains to reduce the electrical usage (LED lights or whatever) as it does seem a bit wasteful. But in a city the size and locale of Tulsa - light pollution is a bit of a joke. You'd have to be 20+ miles outside of Tulsa to go a decent observation of the sky... this isnt going to contribute seriously to the problem caused by the other 200,000 buildings. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: swake on January 09, 2008, 11:39:21 am It looks great, it's a good improvement. Now let's get rid of the surrounding ugly surface parking.
Wasn't there a plan for a new parking garage in that area with some funding in the 3rd penny? Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 09, 2008, 12:00:27 pm quote: I like well lighted spaces, too, and wish we did a better job at it, but as long as our idea of 'lighting experts' are the people who sell electricity were just going to continue to pay more money for less quality. quote: The effect is cumulative, and though we dont have much say over 200,000 other buildings we ought to have some say in those that drink heavily from the public funds well. At the very least, the city should be setting a better example than this. Also, these are not LED's, but rather 4 KiloWatts (350,000 Lumens) of Metal Halide aimed straight up (roughly the equivalent of eight double-sided billboards lit throughout the night). Im not saying we shouldnt light downtown, but for this money we could light a lot more downtown a lot better. Give this some thought -- how safe do you really feel when there are bright pools of light surrounded by huge areas of darkness? How much safer are you when those lights shine in your eyes to the point that you cant see around them? Now imagine what it would look like of all that light were out of your eyes and on the streets. For starters, you would need to generate a lot less (since you wont be paying for the light shining at useless angles) and can start spending that extra money on things the city actually needs. Tucson is just one of many examples of communities that dont allow light to be wasted skyward. They originally did it for the observatories but soon discovered that lighting streets instead of clouds cut their utility bill by millions, and actually made it easier to see on the streets. Yes they have skyscrapers but they exercise more care in how their lit: (http://www.cartermorey.com/images/az-tucson-v74_74093.jpg) Lastly, if shining lights up into the sky is among the current leaderships best plans for attracting people downtown, the word "lame" just doesnt do the scheme justice. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: In_Tulsa on January 09, 2008, 12:00:57 pm I like it. They should do this to more buildings downtown.
Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 09, 2008, 12:13:50 pm quote: Would you like it better if the lights were at the top shining down and cost half as much? ...maybe contributing a little light to the surrounding sidewalk and streets instead of going into space? Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: sgrizzle on January 09, 2008, 12:25:40 pm quote: Doesn't look as good to me.. (http://www.scottmgrizzle.com/lightsdown.jpg) I believe artistically it is supposed to be more awe-inspiring drawing your eyes up than down. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dayzella on January 09, 2008, 03:59:42 pm I empathize with the "monetarily and environmentally wasteful" point. But I also think that lights are exciting. The lighting effect on the building is both architectural and waymarking. Someone not in town could walk down the street from a parking lot or garage, see those lights, and feel instantly reassured that they were headed the right way.
I hope they turn the lights into red and green stripes for the holidays. I hope they make them orange for Oklahoma football (did I get that right?) and pink for Breast Cancer Awareness month. I hope they figure out a way to make them blink, so for NYE the PAC can look like it is twirling. Twirl, PAC, twirl! edited to add ... Someone told me that the Exchange bank building used to broadcast weather forecasts viaby a system of colored lights on the tower (http://"http://www.tulsahistory.org/learn/sites/site80.html"). I think that is awesome and I'm sorry I missed that time period in Tulsa. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: FOTD on January 09, 2008, 04:36:02 pm quote: It was the Old NBT Building now refered to as 320 S. Boston. I recall the days it was THE bank downtown and when you walked in they had lots of tellers and it had that rich feel to it. Anyway, the top did signal the weather condition. Before the age of screwing up television programs. I love twirlers.....and light shows. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: TheArtist on January 09, 2008, 06:22:48 pm Aaaactually Tucson does not have any skyscrapers. You could argue that the 1 tallest building is one simply because it is the tallest. But in most circles a skyscraper is a building that is 500' or more. Its not uncommon for your average condo or apartment building to be that tall in many cities these days. The Philtower for instance would be considered an average "highrise", not a skyscraper. Unless it were the tallest building in the area and dominated the buildings around it. But that would kind of be desperate in this day and age. I enjoy getting on the "SkyscraperPage Forum" and they definitely hold to the 500'minimum. Its the buildings over 1,000' that get the attention these days. And now there are buildings under construction in a number of cities around the world that will be over 2,000'.
From Wikipedia... "A loose convention in the United States and Europe now draws the lower limit of a skyscraper at 150 meters (500 ft).[1] A skyscraper taller than 300 meters (984 ft) may be referred to as supertall. " Tulsa has 4 skyscrapers at the lower end of the height range. OKC just barely makes it with 1. Tucson 0. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dayzella on January 10, 2008, 09:38:29 am I meant to bring the camera with me today so that I could take a pic of the PAC. When the lights came on last night at dusk, it really looked very grand. The effect of the lights is very theatrical - like pot lights at the foot of a stage.
The old fashioned street lights along the sidewalk of 3rd Street were installed yesterday, too. At lunchtime the glass tops were on the ground and by dusk they were on the lamps. They are not the looming freeway sodium lamps, but are the old-fashioned, faux gaslight, black wrought iron kind - about 14 feet in height and light foot traffic area, not the sky. The pedestrian streetlights are spaced closely enough together so that there are not black holes in the light path. It is a very grown up city look. I'll try to get a pic of it tomorrow :) Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 10, 2008, 10:31:37 am quote: Those are commonly called "Acorns" and the reason they are so closely spaced is that they only put about 30% of their light on the ground at angles useful to human vision, so you need about three times as many fixtures to match the illumination provided by the more common "Cobra"-style lights downtown. Acorns are good at shining light in every direction except down, and at 13-14 feet a lot of high-intensity light is at eye-level, which produces more glare than useful illumination. That wasnt a problem at the turn-of-the (previous) century when this style fixture had more moderate light sources inside. Buying three times as many fixtures just to end up with poorer illumination is not exactly the best investment we could be making, but we seem to be wooed by shiny things and not concerned with how the city spends money. Now, when the pools cant afford to open this summer the kids can go hang out under all the Acorn lights all night. Leadership with a vision. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dayzella on January 10, 2008, 12:32:25 pm quote: It's true. I like shiny things. Tell me more about what the city will buy that is shiny next. Christmas is a long way off, and I need some sugarplums to think of when heading to bed. Do you ever walk around downtown, patric? Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: PonderInc on January 10, 2008, 02:29:43 pm quote: I hate acorn lights even more than I hate Bradford Pear trees full of starlings...and agree with Patric's analysis that all they achieve is blinding drivers and pedestrians. I was recently in DC, and walked around by the reflecting pool between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial. They've installed hundreds of bright, acorn lights all around the area...and what I noticed was how dangerous it was to walk through the park. You couldn't see the ground in front of you because of the glare (like when you're walking at night and get blinded by oncoming car lights...all you can see are the headlights) and there was no way to tell if anyone was lurking nearby b/c the glare made it impossible to see into the shadows. Amazingly poor lighting choice....And depressingly ubiquitous. Do any of the decision-makers ever walk or drive at night? Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dayzella on January 10, 2008, 04:08:15 pm I lived with the "Acorn" lamps in Chicago. They have a real presence when you walk past them. The same "Acorn" lamps are lining much of Hillcrest and the Heights in Little Rock.
I'm not up on my urban planning words, but the wrought iron and shape of them make a street seem more friendly - like the scale is put back to something people sized instead of fitting only for spaceship monsters. And from what I can see, Current Tulsa is designed for the later, not the former. I'll go read up on Acorn lamps pros and cons on the web. I do need a new hobby. But I think sometimes looking for the perfect gets in the way of recognizing the good. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dsjeffries on January 10, 2008, 04:14:39 pm I noticed the lights from my apartment some nights before I left for Italy (three weeks ago) and it took about a minute before I was completely sure it was the PAC because it had never been lit before... I think it looks nice, and it looks much better than it does in the daytime. A renowned architect might have designed it, but it is still one of the ugliest buildings in downtown... a true product of the 70s.
However, the acorn lights are absolutely terrible. I don't understand why TU has installed so many, and I can't see why the City thinks they're attractive, effective or safe! Acorns are for the squirrels :-P quote: I don't think metal makes things feel friendlier... The only reason these poles feel friendly is because they're similar to what were used in the 1950s. There are several alternatives to the acorn which are of the same scale, and (gasp!) focus the light down onto the sidewalk where it should be. Acorns do nothing but cast glare and increase the chances of a pedestrian getting hit by a car. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dayzella on January 10, 2008, 04:37:49 pm quote: I agree with you that the old fashioned feel is part of their appeal. And I agree, too, that the PAC is not a pretty thing when standing on its own. If there are alternatives that are attractive and everything I <b>like</b> about the lamps but that direct light down instead of around and out ... why are the acorns so ubiquitous? Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: TheArtist on January 10, 2008, 07:18:14 pm quote: They seem pretty in concept. But suck in reality. Read of some city just a while back that after they had filled their downtown with them suddenly realized they sucked lol and are now spending literally millions removing them. They look nice in renderings. They look nice during the day. For one thing people think they are nostalgic. They remind them of old timey, main street america. But those old lights were different. I have seen similar ones in Europe, originals not modern replacements. They are often frosted or even painted on the inside. They may also have lower wattage in them as well. This serves to make them not as harsh as the ones we have. So at least that presents us with a few possibilities to improve what we are now putting in. But the most important reason people put them in is this.... The average person likes the "idea" of them. This idea overrides the reality that they are actually harsh and unattractive. Even though softer versions of these lights would be better. They dont have the examples to compare. They "look pretty" on one level and in our imagination and so they get put in. But then when they are in place they subconsciously make a place unattractive. We dont go where the lights are harsh and end up going where the lights are softer. Nobody consciously registering why they are choosing one place over another. Because they dont realize what is going on, the idealization of these lights ensures that they continue to be installed. Until a certain point when there are so many it becomes "glaringly" obvious it was the wrong thing to do. We are not there yet. Once you mention how the lights are too harsh and point it out to people. They realize it. But the city is going on the fact that most people do not realize it, yet, so they keep installing them because the people who dont yet know any better keep saying they are pretty and they want them. What may happen is that we fill our city with the things to the point that the harshness is no longer avoidable, is so obvious that the average person then becomes aware... when its too late, and THEN realize it was a mistake and we spend a lot of money to turn around and fix this new problem we have created. For those who see what is happening, its like watching a disaster unfold in slow motion. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: TheArtist on January 10, 2008, 08:26:41 pm Some quotes I have found from other cities about harsh lights and specifically acorn lights that are improperly illuminated.
" Lower lighting casts less of a shadow and makes pedestrians more visible. She said the City’s acorn lights are prismatic and cause glare. They are not fullcut-off and it is a problem. Businesses and residents must bring all lights into compliance within 3 years. Don Kaltschmidt said when he got on the committee he thought they had a good diverse group. He asked the group what they were trying to accomplish and they educated him to the problem of glare and night glow. He said he wished he knew about this before he built his lot and he would have done it right the first time. In his old dealership they had a lot of vandalism, but they’re not having problems at the new lot. The ordinance is common sense—it saves energy and cuts off glare. He said the full cut-off lighting is a good idea. He talked to other business people and it was well received. It will cost him about $60/pole to retro-fit his current lights." An example from a university campus... In addition to improving crosswalks and pathway safety, the lighting in these multi-use intersections and along campus paths needs to be carefully planned. Currently, four acorn lights mark each crosswalk, but effectively only create more glare. From the driver's perspective one has just entered a city boulevard from a dark rural area, inciting drivers to speed up. Improvement in lighting is needed at these crosswalks, perhaps in the form of more directed lighting. This lighting must be carefully planned, because overly bright lighting is equally dangerous. When an area is very bright, it then becomes difficult to see outside of those areas of bright light into the darker areas around where pedestrians may be travelling. In the absence of bright light, vision may be limited, but it has “no sharp or definite boundary.”xxiiiInappropriate lighting plagues many businesses and institutions that invest in extensive outdoor lighting systems. Intuition suggests that outdoor lighting is for safety and therefore the brighter the better. However, as many schools, businesses, and individuals have discovered, bright lights can actually decrease safety. Many attributes of inappropriate lighting are apparent on the Middlebury College campus. For example, there could be better designed, down-directed lighting fixtures to replace the standard acorn fixtures. All light that is not aimed at directly at the ground is wasted light.xxivThis wasted light is not only inefficient, but also unsafe because light directed up from the ground hits pedestrians in the eyes, creating glare, and requiring eyes to constantly readjust to bright lights. This glare creates zones of intense brightness and deep shadow, thus providing a place for assailants to hide and wait for nighttime pedestrians.xxvOur eyes are versatile, but can only adjust to one light level at a time, and the period of time during adjustment is known as “transient adaptation.” When contrasts between brightly lit areas and dark shadows are more pronounced, eyes experience a temporary period of blindness. When bicycles and pedestrians share a path at night, visibility is paramount for avoiding accidents. Eyes can operate quite well at night, but when bright lights are installed the ability of our vision to adapt to the low light of nighttime is diminished. Tests for glare and over-lit areas should be conducted to more effectively and safely light the campus. Preventative action including safe, efficient, and location-specific lighting should be taken to avoid accidents as the campus becomes more pedestrian." http://home.epix.net/~ghonis/damon.htm One city is looking at options to try and reduce the glare of their acorn lights. Dark-sky compliant: with Lunar optics, glass shades (this will reduce upward glare toward the sky) House-side shields if/as needed: 90, 120, or 180 degree shades (this will prevent glare on houses) 13’ pole with holophane Granville fixture (type and height) 50 watt high pressure sodium (HPS) –the mellow yellow light (bright enough, but not too bright) Asymmetrical glass, type VII, IESNA Cutoff Another example... "We are on a three-year program of retrofitting city lights," said Hailey public works superintendent Allan Stowell. "We will replace 20 new heads this year." The lights, many of which can already be seen on Main Street, are more down cast with lower values. "It is also a public safety issue," Shay said. With the old "acorn" lights, there was a wide circle of darkness directly under the street lamps where light was most needed. The new lights offer a better use of the resource. The reason they have those acorns is because they look like hometown USA. They used to be incandescent lamps, not high-intensity-discharge lamps," Pauley said. "They look like hometown USA in the day, but at night you get blown away. Hailey has budgeted about $50,000 over three years to convert the city lights so they have a shade, said Diane Shay, city planner. Another example.... couldnt save the pics it was on a pdf and I dont know how to save pics. But basically the lights look exactly the same during the day. They are still acorn lights, but because of how they are designed, shielded acorn lights versus unshielded, they light the areas completely differently. Changes in East Hampton, NY After many complaints about glare from their unshielded streetlights, the Village of East Hampton, NY set about replac-ing all of their existing “acorn” lights. The Village has replaced all 150 unshielded 250-watt high pressure sodium (HPS) fix-tures with 150-watt HPS shielded fixtures from Pennsylvania Globe and Gaslight. As shown in the before and after photos on the right, the new “Parklane” fixtures deliver more light to the street and sidewalk, and less light sideways and upward, and thanks to an opaque cap, limit glare and uplight.... They feature a clear glass globe, opaque cap, and shielded design. Says Susan Harder, “not only is there no glare and plenty of light on the ground, but the new lights have made our Village beautiful at night—and now we can see the stars!” I could go on and on... Apparently many places, like Tulsa, also once thought the Acorn Lights were a good idea. But now you see them trying to fix the problem that was inadvertantly created by them. There are solutions, but I would think it would be wise to install the right kind of lights in the first place rather than have to go back and spend extra money and effort later after we have created a lot of ugly. They can still be "pretty" Acorn Lights, but ones that are designed differently and or have the appropriate shielding and bulbs inside. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 11, 2008, 11:56:23 am quote: That was so well put -- And I hadnt made the connection with Acorns and Bradford Pear trees as the defaults for uninspired architecture. (Backgrounders for newer readers: http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5575 and http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5642 ) The real value of "Acorn" streetlights is in the daytime when you can actually appreciate their nostalgic, ornate design. All that vanishes at night when they attempt to use a light within that's too intense to have at eye-level. When you consider that between 2003 and 2006 the cost to light our streets doubled, (http://"http://www.cityoftulsa.org/OurCity/Mayor/energy.asp"), all bad outdoor lighting has done for us is just cost money and make downtown less inviting with all the added glare. Thank you, DTU, for not listening. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: carltonplace on January 14, 2008, 01:46:49 pm Why would you need to take out the fixtures and replace them. Couldn't you just remove the "prismatic" glass shade and install one that was shielded and reflected the light down to the street?
Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: TheArtist on January 14, 2008, 01:57:15 pm Yes, surely there is some kind of fix that you can put inside the glass that would focus the light down more and you could use more energy efficient, lower wattage bulbs. Get something with a more golden glow versus pale white. If they dont have something I could surely invent something lol.
Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: In2neon on January 15, 2008, 01:23:24 am Does anyone here know the brand and model # of the acorn fixtures installed in downtown?
Many major mfgs. now have "sky friendly" acorn fixtures with reflectors already built in or as an option.... Most major mfgs show fixtures with model #s and options on the web... A nice mix I saw in downtown Dallas recently was metal halide acorns for looks, along with a conservative number (only enough to offset the acorns lack of throw to get into the middle of the street) full cutoff high mounted METAL HALIDE streetlights to increase the lumens only on key areas of the street.... It was nice to see a downtown nicely lit in well thought out and planned white light.... it was refreshing until we got back to parts of downtown that had old sodium and it seemed oppressive to look around in orange light... Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 15, 2008, 01:01:00 pm quote: The prismatic refracting glass can be replaced with clear glass, but the light source would still have to be tucked under the top cover to shield it's glare from view. Most (but maybe not all) "modern" Acorns cant be modified this way and have permanent, vertcally-mounted lamps. Your options would be to replace the high-intensity source with something more to scale with their historical counterparts, propably by using Compact Fluorescent to replace the Metal Halide horrors, or, buy a better 'antique-style' fixture that is specifically designed to reduce glare and use less power to provide the same amount of useful illumination. The first option (known as a 'Dual System') showcases the beauty of "antique" fixtures by taming the intensity down to the point where you can actually look at it at night, while the job of providing sufficient, uniform street ilumination is done by high-mounted, shielded Cobra-head fixtures. In a city center, it would look something like this: (http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1116161/street_elements.jpg) The second option involves buying the types of shielded fixtures we probably should have been buying all along, since the city planners seem intent on having one fixture doing too many jobs (and doing them poorly). Better choices in this instance would have been what Atoka, OK installed in it's historic district, (http://www.aal.net/sections/products/promenade/html/promenade.html) or the type of fixtures TheArtist mentioned, at http://www.pennglobe.com A PDF explaining how it works: http://www.pennglobe.com/pdf/penntrol.pdf) but these are ony two examples of many from a large number of competitive makers. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 15, 2008, 01:44:53 pm quote: According to Downtown Tulsa Unlimited's "Downtown Street Furniture Standards". the glare bombs we currently *must* use are the AEP-supplied Holophane "Washington"- style Acorn. quote: Lighting manufacturers hawk Metal Halide as "white" light to lure customers into switching over from Sodium, but if you look at it, Metal halide is Blue and casts a cold, garish and uninviting pallor over a landscape. Not the best choice to get people interested in "warming up" to an area (and worse when it's glaring in your eyes). Some of it's appeal is the fact that it appears cleaner or newer than the golden yellow Sodium were used to, but the downsides of MH are half the lamp life (meaning twice the maintenance to replace lamps), less efficiency than Sodium (less lumens-per-watt) and the tendency of blue light to scatter in the atmosphere at a rate about four times more than warmer colors (the source of most of the "Sky Glow" you presently see). The Dual system you are describing would have been better designed without Metal Halide as lamp source in the Acorns. Hopefully they also realized that you can reduce wattages when using the high-mounted Full-cutoff fixtures, as well, since the excess wattage would have represented the glare and waste you presently see from Tulsas' streetlighting. Rather that fight over how fast police can raise revenue, we should really be looking at ways to reduce our present wasteful practices. Bad streetlights represent millions of dollars each year, and the price only goes up with each new project installed. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: dsjeffries on January 15, 2008, 10:25:49 pm quote: Here are a few examples of light fixtures that still give a nice 'feel' that you've mentioned, but which are also certified "Night Friendly", are International Dark Sky Assoc. approved, and have full cutoff optics, which means the light is directed toward the ground, making it safer for pedestrians and automobiles and reducing energy waste... (http://www.antiquestreetlamps.com/products/Verona/Verona_only/VeronaSeries.jpg) (http://www.aal.net/sections/products/promenade/images/application_images/promenade_app_3.jpg) (http://www.aal.net/sections/products/civic_lantern/images/CL_app1.jpg) (http://www.aal.net/sections/products/providence/images/application_images/providence_app_1.jpg) There are even Arts & Crafts-style lights, like this: (http://www.aal.net/sections/products/artscrafts/images/application_images/artscrafts_app_3.jpg) Of course, you have wonderful alternatives to the traditional acorn, like these: http://www.pacificlighting.com/web/gallery/decorative.html As you can see, there are SEVERAL better alternatives to these acorns... To learn some more about the issue of light pollution, glare, etc..., I'd direct you to http://www.darksky.org Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on January 16, 2008, 12:07:26 am quote: Some things to watch out for in the provided examples: Photo #2 shows an eye-friendly fixture in a non eye-friendly configuration -- frosted glass instead if clear -- which defeats the purpose of having the lamp tucked under the fixtures top. The frosted glass itself then becomes the source of glare. Go with the clear glass option instead. Photo #3 is another good fixture configured with a bad option -- the reflecting "bell" under the lamp casts light sideways and into your eyes. You can order this fixture without that option. GE is another maker who's product line could be either junk or joy just by knowing what to look for. See if you can spot the difference: GE Salem (pdf) (http://"https://secure.ge-lightingsystems.com/gels01/productcentral/htmls/2_5_322_catalog_394.html") ..but yes you're right, there are so many better options to the cookie-cutter Acorn glare-bomb that our local utility stocks. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on February 11, 2008, 02:29:17 pm I love the quote in the Whirled today from John Scott, director of the PAC:
quote: "Stand out more" by "getting in line"? Sounds like were working hard to be mediocre. quote: People dont get a "warmer, more welcoming feel" from cold blue lights. Metal Halide is blue. That's the sales department talking. quote: Not so efficient when you compare metal halide's Lumens-per-Watt numbers to other sources, or consider MH's shorter operating life (which results in more expensive maintenance). Damn, we sure know how to spend money. quote: Change that to "...PAC has listened to nothing but positive comments..." but isnt talking about who is going to pay the electric bill. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: FOTD on February 11, 2008, 02:54:30 pm I think the PAC looks awesome all lit up.
The cost seemed inexpensive in light of the quality reflected. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: Steve on February 12, 2008, 09:10:24 pm quote: I think so too FOTD. They don't have to use the lights every night of the year, just during events. One downtown Tulsa building I would love to see the exterior lights restored is the old PSO headquarters at 6th & Main. That building was built and designed to showcase exterior lighting, with a multitude of exterior lights that have been dark for years. Historic accounts say the building was lit with white lights during the off-seasons, and lit with colored lights during holidays. I think this is a building currently owned by that Kanbar group. Restoring the exterior lighting would really show off the great art-deco architecture. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: FOTD on February 12, 2008, 10:47:55 pm quote: I think it should be turned into a public middle school. PSO needs to be in a warehouse to show they know how to manage their costs. Same thing for the Tulsa Club becoming a high school. They could have a swim team. Maybe handball. Magnet schools at that. Best teachers in the state. And only those living in and around downtown qualify to send their kids there. Residents would flock to the area. Retail would follow. To hell with the drill heads. Create a residential area in the east end to support the new schools. Make the Hartford building an elementary magnet school. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: EricP on February 13, 2008, 10:07:25 am quote: [:O] Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: sgrizzle on February 13, 2008, 10:12:50 am quote: You can kick every PSO employee out of 6th and Main.. all none of them. You're talking about two different buildings. He is correct about Kanbar owning the 6th&Main building. Title: When Moths Fly into the Flames... Post by: patric on February 13, 2008, 02:42:59 pm quote: It's sort of the equivalent of watering your lawn by turning on a faucet and hoping enought water runs across the yard to do some good (on it's way to the storm drain). Lighting buildings isnt he problem, it's doing it sloppily (and sending the message that our fiscal responsibilities are just as haphazard) that is the problem. This administration's 2007 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan found that the cost of municipal outdoor lighting doubled between 2003 and 2006 (mostly due to the "acorn" streetlight fad) and yet we still continue to install wasteful lighting unchecked. We may not yet have a meaningful ordinance to address this, but I would have at least hoped we had enough people with vision to see that were only creating problems for the next generation. |