Re: Toronto going for the light pollution award

On Dec 5, 10:52 am, Chris L Peterson <c...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 07:23:34 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

The construction of huge, blazing building side sized LED and other
lighted displays is disgusting. The one at Dundas and Yonge produces
so much light, it is near daylight on the street. And these mother-
f------ politicians (liberal leftist bastards on Toronto Council) are
the ones allowing this while hectoring the average person to "reduce
their carbon footprint."

Light pollution is wasted light. A giant sign in an urban area serves a
function, and that function depends on producing light. It isn't a
source of pollution (depending on the design, of course, which should
still limit light in directions where there is no audience).

Why don't you take a look at it before you make judgements on it?
There IS not shielding on these things, none of them, that is the
point. They are flush with the sides of buildings. In addition, (if
you are a desert dweller) light is "piped" high into the air by any
moisure content in that air so even shielding isn't totally effective.
.

Quantcast