Physicist, Amateur/Professional Astronomer of over 45 years standing. Pharmacologist. Lecturer and reader in physics, astronomy and the history of mathematics since 1958. Lecturer in toxicology. Extra mural lecturer for University of London 1960-70; University College of Wales 1986-90. Practical astronomer—special interests and research: binary systems, comets and the aurora. Concern with dark sky issue since 1955—contributions to Geophysical Year (1957) light pollution and air pollution. Papers on pollution from aircraft condensation trails etc. (1967-2002). Currently working on high altitude atmosphere research from Orkney, U.K. CfDS Rep. for Orkney since 1992.

  I shall restrict my submission in the main to recent observations from my base here in Orkney.

  I first visited Orkney in 1970 in order to establish a site for auroral observations. I took up full-time observations in Orkney in 1989. Previously I had worked abroad and in Mid-Wales (1970-1989).

  The inquiry has the remit: Light Pollution and Astronomy. I should like to broaden this heading by pointing out the overall problems of light pollution not just from the specialist viewpoint of the astronomer. The loss of darkness has far reaching significance to all species which have become diurnal in habit evolved over millions of years. The 24-hour all light culture has significant repercussions in many areas.

  From a purely aesthetic point of view, all should have the right to experience dark and, on a clear night, have the perspective of an unpolluted night sky.

WALES 1970

  The site was above the village of Tre'r ddol, 10 miles NE of Aberystwyth.

  The observatory was situated 550 ft. OD with a clear view across Cardigan Bay and north to the horizon bounded by Cader Idris and the Aran Mountains.

  Nearest towns Machynlleth (eight mile); Aberystwyth (10 miles).

  In 1970 only three street lights were visible from the village of Penal (seven miles NNW).

  There was a night glow from (sodium vapour) from both towns mentioned. The villages along the Dyfi Valley from Bow Street to Machynlleth had minimal lighting causing no perceptible glow from the observatory (nearest village Tre'r Doll—one mile).

CHANGES SINCE 1970

  Expansion of the town of Aberystwyth and its environs leading to considerable increase in sky glow reaching to an elevation of 30 degrees as seen from the observatory.

  Increase lighting in the town of Machynlleth—increase northern glow.

  Expansion of the villages in the Dyfi Valley and massive expansion of the hamlet of Penrhyncoch leading to glow along a S-E front as seen from the observatory.

  NOTE: At Penrhyncoch the Plant Breeding Station employing lighting (white light) all night.

WALES 1998

  At the time of departure from Wales (1998) serious astronomical observation had become almost impossible not so much from light pollution (the effects of which can be partially overcome from an instrumental point of view) but due to high altitude civil and military aircraft activity producing condensation trails which quickly spread to overcast the otherwise clear sky. [In addition, the intensive use of rural Wales for low flying (down to 250 ft) and ultra low flying (down to 100 ft) by the military caused major problems.]

  (Sample photographs—not printed).

ORKNEY 1970

  The great feature of Orkney in 1970 was its freedom from light pollution except within the near location of the two principle towns, Kirkwall and Stromness.

  The observatory is situated on Rousay, some 12 miles north of Kirkwall. Light pollution from Kirkwall was insignificant in 1970 and remained so for the next 15 years.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN ORKNEY LEADING TO INCREASE LIGHT POLLUTION

  1.  Expansion of the main town of Kirkwall.

  Two main factors:

(a)  Street lighting and civil amenities including the Pickaquoy Leisure Centre now equipped with floodlighting for after dark outdoor facilities.

(b)  Establishment and expansion of the nearby Hatston Industrial Estate and the nearby new jetty for larger ferries.

  2.  Expansion of the town of Stromness.

  3.  Expansion of other clusters in housing close to Finstown.

  4.  The general scattering of new dwellings throughout the Orkney Mainland.

  5.  Harbour installations and the new jetties on all islands.

  The new jetties have brought sodium lighting to even the smallest islands such as Egilsay and Wyre. The lighting makes no attempt to keep light down (within the past three years the OIC has adopted a dark sky friendly lighting approach which has shown benefit in the parking areas at new schools). However, lighting at jetties remains a problem since the lamps are readily misaligned in strong gales.

  6.  Fish farms. On-shore installations now sport sodium lighting which remain switched on throughout the night, ostensibly for safety reasons. In very few instances is any regard given to pollution.

  7.  Excessive light from shipping and oil rigs. Most of the latter are situated well away from land. However, support vessels (tugs etc) sometimes moor close to the islands and these are invariably lit up excessively.

  I cite a personal instance of a marine support tug which has a standby mooring eight miles from the observatory. This vessel produces almost as much light pollution as the entire lighting from the town of Kirkwall!

  My inquiries have been met with such statements as "the crew are asleep below decks"! For identification and safety purposes such lighting is way beyond any sensible requirement.

  8.  Private lighting. Porch lights are invariably left on until residents retire for the night. Whereas once people sought to conserve energy expenditure by turning off lighting not actually required at the time, most residents on this island appear indifferent to the cost of lighting the night with their porch lights and rooms where curtains remain open. A few residents have even bought decommissioned street lighting heads and mounted these on their outside walls.

  Some private individuals point out that their efforts to restrict light pollution seem worthless against the general backdrop of commercial and civic developments. It is an argument one finds increasingly difficult to question.

THE EFFECTS

  In 1970 from the Island of Rousay it was possible to observe the Milky Way from horizon to horizon. Now (2003) only occasionally may one enjoy this spectacle and then only when the Milky Way is positioned away from intersecting the horizon along the southern horizon. Locally lighting from the small huddle of houses at the pier (the pier lighting itself and lights on the visitor centre) all contribute to make a substantial local glow whenever their is the slightest mistiness in the air.

  It takes only a small number of sodium lamps to give rise to glow. A little under two miles distant at the fish farm north of here, a glow is visible on some nights from just three sodium lamps!

  My general observation would be that unless people are directly concerned to keep the night skies dark their interest in preventing light pollution is virtually non existent.

THE FUTURE

  What is giving me greatest concern is the proposal to site a large container port complex in Scapa Flow by the island of Flotta. Such a complex, if it is ever to come to fruition, will form a major industrial intrusion into Orkney's rural landscape. Since the port would be operational 365.25 days in each and every year there is bound to be massive light pollution from the area in the winter months.

  One faces a dilemma here which takes me outside my remit, namely, the justification for such development in an area where the tourist "industry" sells its product as "rural".

  Résumé. The greatest visual impact from the point of view of the human eye arises out of the vast use of sodium vapour, a region of the spectrum to which the eye is most sensitive. The introduction of broad spectrum lighting, even when it is shielded (so as not to shine directly skyward), has not the advantages that might be expected. This is due to a higher reflectivity coefficient from surfaces generally. (Reflection from road surfaces, for example, can result in more light being "thrown" skyward than would be the case from sodium vapour of equivalent emission flux.)

  The introduction of cut off lamps (variously described as "dark sky" friendly) for road lighting has to be welcomed, though its evolvement is far slower than one would like.

  The area of security lighting is major problem since the efficacy of such systems is itself in dispute. What is difficult to countenance is the expanding recreational activities which result in floodlighting. In Orkney one is only too aware whenever this facility is in use at Pickaquoy 12 miles away in Kirkwall. It is perhaps unreasonable to complain of such activities when limited to a small area—a stadium, for example, but the gross illumination of golf courses is something which, if taken to extremes, makes a mockery of any dark sky effort in other areas.

CONCLUSION

  A national lighting policy which finds it "cheaper" to dissipate vast quantities of energy into the night sky when most of the population is asleep is both crass and economically suspect. The general perception is that "light is a right" and that there is nothing to be gained by curbing excessive lighting.

  There needs to be stronger legislation to control light pollution from industrial, civic and private sources. However, as an educationalist, I have always maintained that the closest cooperation is best gained through education itself. People in general may not be converted to astronomy (I hesitate to say "overnight") but a general understanding of the wider detriment will, I think, encourage people to take a more responsible attitude to light pollution.

9 April 2003