Streetlight LED Conversion

[danbrotherston]

I believe converting all the city's streetlights to LED (at least, Region, Kitchener, and Waterloo, I recall specifically) was approved.

Do you know if the contracts were signed?  This cargo container like box appeared in the parking lot off the spur line trail, one box is labeled "aevitas lamp recycling program" and the other "altrade industrial".  Could these be related? 

   

[JoeKW]

Hopefully they do the responsible thing and not boost light output.

[clasher]

Some Alltrade sea-cans have been sitting in the lot near Waterloo City Hall for a while... wondered what project it was for. I've seen them doing work at the cement plants and steel mills.

[notmyfriends]

I know it's American, but hopefully they've followed some sort of similar advice
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/new...hting.page

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/21/health/led...ights-ama/

[tomh009]

In general, it should not be necessary to boost output (exceptions exist, but then there are probably also places where the output can be reduced).

I'm not so much convinced, though, that the colour temperature of street lights is such a huge factor for human sleep patterns.  For indoor lighting (to which people are exposed to for much longer periods of time) it might be more important. 

And there is less light pollution. From CBC's article:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-...-1.3410658

Besides saving the city money, the LED street lights may also have other benefits, says Chapman.

"Cities that have deployed LED street lighting have found that because they're so much more focused, they reduce the amount of urban sky glow.

"So there are people actually in the city of Los Angeles, where they've deployed LED street lighting, where they can actually see the stars again in the middle of the city, which is quite exciting," said Chapman.

[timc]

Hopefully they do the responsible thing and not boost light output.

Why is that the responsible thing? The light output on some streets is really quite low.

[JoeKW]

My point was that a lot of places are opting to boost light output since the cost per lumen goes way down with LED. I'm not suggesting that poorly lit areas remain poorly lit. I know I wasn't clear, sorry about that.

[Canard]

I absolutely love the new LED streetlights along the new Weber St. grade sep.

[notmyfriends]

In general, it should not be necessary to boost output (exceptions exist, but then there are probably also places where the output can be reduced).

I'm not so much convinced, though, that the colour temperature of street lights is such a huge factor for human sleep patterns.  For indoor lighting (to which people are exposed to for much longer periods of time) it might be more important. 

And there is less light pollution. From CBC's article:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-...-1.3410658

Besides saving the city money, the LED street lights may also have other benefits, says Chapman.

"Cities that have deployed LED street lighting have found that because they're so much more focused, they reduce the amount of urban sky glow.

"So there are people actually in the city of Los Angeles, where they've deployed LED street lighting, where they can actually see the stars again in the middle of the city, which is quite exciting," said Chapman.

That part in the quotes is very anecdotal and you can find many articles suggesting the opposite is happening in places wrt light pollution. Again this just says proper and thorough research before implementation is required.

[BuildingScout]

That part in the quotes is very anecdotal and you can find many articles suggesting the opposite is happening in places wrt light pollution. Again this just says proper and thorough research before implementation is required.

I actually researched this a while back. Light pollution goes down substantially with LED lighting. There are two reasons: (1) LED light is more focused and (2) the lamps can be placed lower down, this leads to higher level of lights at ground level with reduced leak upwards.

[notmyfriends]

That part in the quotes is very anecdotal and you can find many articles suggesting the opposite is happening in places wrt light pollution. Again this just says proper and thorough research before implementation is required.

I actually researched this a while back. Light pollution goes down substantially with LED lighting. There are two reasons: (1) LED light is more focused and (2) the lamps can be placed lower down, this leads to higher level of lights at ground level with reduced leak upwards.

This can be true, if you do it right. The opposite has been seen in some places.  The experience of the residents of Davis California should factor into what is implemented elsewhere.   To #2, surely they won't be replacing all the lamp posts in the city with lower ones.  There is a lot of information out there (including a statement from the AMA which I presume to be some kind of expert on medical issues, more so than me), and studies that have looked into glare and other consequences of poor installation. All I'm saying is I hope they are doing appropriate research to implement it correctly.  I don't think that's an unreasonable ask for something that will impact almost every outdoor space in the Region.

[tomh009]

The statement by AMA was just a statement, I could not find any reference to a study there, either. Disappointing for AMA, but they are not really a research organization anyway.

Poor implementation will always be poor, regardless of technology.

[BuildingScout]

I actually researched this a while back. Light pollution goes down substantially with LED lighting. There are two reasons: (1) LED light is more focused and (2) the lamps can be placed lower down, this leads to higher level of lights at ground level with reduced leak upwards.

This can be true, if you do it right. The opposite has been seen in some places.  The experience of the residents of Davis California should factor into what is implemented elsewhere.   To #2, surely they won't be replacing all the lamp posts in the city with lower ones.  There is a lot of information out there (including a statement from the AMA which I presume to be some kind of expert on medical issues, more so than me), and studies that have looked into glare and other consequences of poor installation. All I'm saying is I hope they are doing appropriate research to implement it correctly.  I don't think that's an unreasonable ask for something that will impact almost every outdoor space in the Region.

Not sure where you are going with this. The opposite has not been seen in some places. The Davis Caifornia case was simply placing LED lamps that were too bright which are to be replaced with less bright LED lamps. This mistake could equally have happened with sodium lights, if you place ones that are too bright. I also don't understand why you think the lamp post needs to be replaced to bring the light down.

By the way, the reason I looked into this was because the sodium lamp industry tried to start an astroturf campaign in NY/NJ back when they were in the process of approving the switch to LED. At the time I had no opinion on which option was better, so I went and looked it up. Turns out LED lamps are far superior and the campaign was all falsehoods and fear-mongering.

p.s. in the end Davis was a success story because they replaced the led lights with even lower wattage thus increasing the expected  savings and further reducing light pollution.

[clasher]

In Elliot Lake they've replaced lights with led bulbs and driving at night is much nicer in my experience. The night sky up there is usually pretty visible but the light from the led seems to only light up the road.

[GtwoK]

I always love driving on the 85 around the University interchange at night. The LED lighting makes everything so much nicer!