CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Amateur Astronomy in the UK
1. We conclude that there is convincing
evidence that many professional astronomers benefit from the valuable
input made to professional astronomy by the observations of amateurs.
(Paragraph 23)
2. We believe that
amateur and professional astronomers have played a valuable role
in the introduction of young people into science. As Sir Patrick
Moore commented "the amateur [astronomer] of today is the
professional researcher of tomorrow". (Paragraph 27)
The study of Astronomy in the UK
3. Astronomy in the UK plays a valuable
part in supporting the work of professionals, engaging young people
in science, and producing astronomers and physicists through UK
universities. It is not good enough that PPARC and the Department
for Education and Skills had to pay for young people in schools
to "book time" on overseas telescopes to see the night
sky as it should be. (Paragraph 32)
4. Pupils should be
able to study the night sky at school primarily with the naked
eye or through a telescope rather than via a computer and the
internet. (Paragraph 33)
5. There seems to
be an acknowledgement within Government that Space is a good way
to engage young scientists, but there is little real support for
schools to use observing facilities in this country. The Department
for Education and Skills should be supporting efforts to make
the night sky available to all. We regret that it is not doing
so at present. (Paragraph 34)
6. We regret that
PPARC and the Government have adopted a defeatist attitude towards
light pollution and astronomy in the UK. There are substantial
numbers of amateur astronomers, astronomy undergraduates and postgraduates
and professional astronomers observing in the UK. Amateur and
professional astronomers have undertaken a dual role of showing
and explaining the night sky to students, pupils and the general
public, whilst campaigning for the last ten years to prevent further
degradation of the night sky. It is time they receive support
from PPARC and the Government. (Paragraph 40)
7. There is a real
opportunity of using the enthusiastic astronomy community to increase
the numbers of school pupils taking astronomy and continuing into
physics. PPARC and DfES together should bring to bear more pressure
on ODPM and DEFRA to find a way to protect the skies, particularly
around those observatories who work with local schools. (Paragraph
41)
What is light pollution
8. Reducing the amount of electricity
used to provide safe and effective levels of lighting for homes,
streets and public buildings must be a priority for the Government.
(Paragraph 55)
9. The adverse effects
of light pollution on energy consumption are both undisputed and
a source of much disquiet and annoyance for large parts of the
population. The Government fails to take the issue seriously and
does not consider light pollution in its full context - with its
effect on everyone. (Paragraph 57)
Evidence of deterioration
10. We are disappointed by the inconsistent
approach by the Government on the issue of light pollution. We
hope that the more realistic attitude adopted by Lord Rooker is
the true reflection of the Government's approach. The Government
should not dismiss the compelling evidence of the satellite images
of the United Kingdom, which clearly show an increase in light
pollution in both rural and urban areas. (Paragraph 67)
Not just a UK problem
11. Those who have spent a lifetime
studying the night sky have charted its deterioration and have
now joined forces with environmental campaigners, astronomers
in other countries, and also with those members of the general
public, increasing in numbers, who have experienced the adverse
effects of the increasingly badly lit environment. We are in no
doubt that light pollution is getting worse. We recommend that
the Government acknowledge this fact and give a commitment to
taking serious action to tackle this problem, as other governments
have proved it is possible to do. (Paragraph 70)
The need for lighting
12. We consider that whilst the role
of efficient and well positioned street lighting in reducing accidents
has been proven, the evidence relating to the correlation between
lighting and crime is not conclusive. This link is outwith the
remit of our inquiry, but is an area that merits further research.
We look forward to seeing what new evidence the Government has
received on the role of lighting in the reduction of crime when
its good practice guidance "planning out crime" is published
later this year. However, we believe that the impact of lighting
on crime should be only one of a number of factors that is considered
in the determination of Government policy on lighting. (Paragraph
74)
Street lighting
13. We welcome the fact that both
the Department of Transport and the Highways Agency have given
due consideration to the issue of light pollution. The Highways
Agency has shown forward thinking in its gradual replacement of
luminaires, and in giving environmental considerations top priority.
It should be congratulated for its work with the lighting industry
and with the Department for Transport's Lighting Board, to improve
the efficiency of lighting throughout the UK. It should continue
to work with local authorities to "spread the word"
about light pollution and the benefits of High Pressure Sodium
lighting. We look forward to viewing the results of various research
projects into the effect of light pollution that the Agency has
contributed to. (Paragraph 82)
14. The Government
must act now to ensure that every local authority about to invest
in new street lighting is well informed of the properties of modern
luminaires and the issues of light pollution. If the Highways
Agency, backed by the Department of Transport, has taken a policy
decision to use high pressure sodium lighting, with full cut off
and shallow bowl luminaires in its own replacement of street lighting,
then the Government should issue clear guidance to local authorities
that these types of lighting are believed to be the most suitable
lights available at this time. British Standards codes of practice
and guidance should be updated accordingly. (Paragraph 88)
15. Firm guidance
and direction must come from the Government on this issue. Relying
on piecemeal guidance, published some years ago, to inform important
local decisions such as the replacement of the street lighting
systems is not an acceptable attitude from the Government which
is spending £380 million on this project. (Paragraph 89)
16. Local authorities
which have not already invested in new lighting must be strongly
advised to install High Pressure Sodium lighting, the design of
which should be shallow bowl or fully cut off lighting as appropriate.
Local authorities should also be required to follow ILE and CIE
guidelines when deciding where to install Full Cut Off lighting,
with an obligation to protect observatories, dark rural areas
and parkland within their jurisdiction. (Paragraph 90)
17. We remain unconvinced
that modernising street lighting alone will bring significant
energy savings, but with pressure from Government, the lighting
industry will respond to the need to provide more energy efficient
and less light polluting luminaires. Whilst energy saving targets
are important, the Highways Agency and local authorities must
ensure that luminaires under their control only direct light where
it is needed in order to start a trend in the reduction of light
pollution. (Paragraph 91)
Other main causes
18. It is clear that there are significant
potential energy savings to be made in the area of security lighting
by reducing the amount of light pollution emitted from them. (Paragraph
94)
19. Whilst it is possible
to angle 500w security lights correctly, we consider that for
normal domestic purposes, they are energy-inefficient and liable
to cause a nuisance. (Paragraph 96)
20. Whilst it is commendable
that retailers have considered the issue of light pollution, leaflets
inside the packaging of security lights will not alert customers
to the benefits of a less powerful light before they decide which
security light to buy. Providing the Institution of Lighting Engineer's
Guidance on security lighting, or a version thereof, alongside
the displays of security lighting would greatly assist the customer.
However, it will not prevent incorrect installation of lights.
Only legislation either banning the sale of 500w lights as security
lighting, or the designation of light as a potential statutory
nuisance will ensure that householders suffering from their neighbour's
overspill of light have a remedy: we favour the control of obtrusive
light through statutory nuisance legislation. (Paragraph 98)
21. Those responsible
for floodlighting buildings and sports facilities and those companies
lighting car parks should consider whether there is any need for
lighting after 11pm or midnight. We recommend that, when giving
planning permission to plans for new buildings with floodlighting,
new floodlighting systems or new car parks, local authorities
should impose conditions relating to the type of lights that are
appropriate, how they should be positioned and the timing of the
lighting to ensure it is not obtrusive to those around it and
that it does not contribute to energy wastage. (Paragraph 103)
Current government guidance on light pollution
22. We recommend that the Government
update "Lighting in the Countryside" to take into account
its relevance to urban authorities and, bearing in mind the imminent
investment by local authorities into street light replacement,
republish and circulate the document accordingly. (Paragraph
108)
Planning guidance
23. Planning guidance on light pollution
to local authorities lacks coherence and force. Light pollution
is not tackled head on in any PPG. The response from the local
authorities to those seeking protection from light nuisance is
uneven and usually unhelpful. (Paragraph 116)
How local governments can use the current guidance
to prevent light pollution
24. There are too many local planning
authorities which have not taken the issue of light pollution
seriously and have not included light pollution in their local
plans. The Government must take steps to rectify this. It should
have a clear policy on when Full Cut Off lighting should be used,
and we recommend that this policy is communicated to local authorities.
(Paragraph 123)
The need for a new PPG on light pollution
25. The Government should create a
new Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) on Light Pollution as soon
as possible and ensure that all local authorities are made aware
of their obligation to include lighting in their local development
plans. Local authorities must be obliged to request lighting schemes
from those seeking planning permission for new developments, or
changes to existing schemes. Lighting schemes must only include
lights that do not shine above the horizontal. The new PPG should
refer local authorities to the Institution of Lighting Engineers
"Guidelines for the Reduction of Light Pollution" and
the Department for the Environment's "Lighting in the Countryside"
and publications by the International Commission on Illumination
for further guidance. (Paragraph 127)
The shortfalls on current planning guidance and
implementation
26. The Government should afford special
protection to observatories, for the same reasons that the UK
Government supports the protection of UK funded observatories
in the Canary Islands. Local authorities should be obliged to
consult on planning applications for developments in the vicinity
of observatories, which should be able to object if the development
is likely to affect their observations. Observatories would be
able to register with their local authority for protection, showing
their active membership or links with local schools as evidence
of their importance to the community. (Paragraph 133)
27. We disagree that
light pollution is less serious than the issue of Leylandii. Light
pollution is not only detrimental to the science of astronomy,
but it is wasteful of energy and causes distress to many individuals.
(Paragraph 136)
Can light pollution be subject to statutory enforcement?
28. We conclude that the problem of
light pollution can be alleviated without the need for scientific
measurement of sky glow. Sky glow is just one of three types of
light pollution, the cause of which is well known, and is clearly
visible - particles in the air and light shining above the horizontal.
Light shining above the horizontal should be tackled directly
by controls on the direction, position and type and duration of
lighting, guidance on which should be included in the PPG on light
pollution we have recommended. (Paragraph 145)
29. Light trespass
and glare affects astronomers, but it can also affect us all.
We are persuaded by the evidence that light trespass is measurable
and controllable. We recommend that obtrusive light should be
made a statutory nuisance. (Paragraph 146)
How other jurisdictions have legislated against
light pollution
30. Other countries have used restrictions
on the type and duration of lighting permissible in an attempt
to control light pollution. Measurement of light emission is only
used in the most heavily regulated areas. We believe that the
Government should monitor the situation in the UK carefully over
the next five to ten years. Should the creation of a statutory
nuisance of light, a separate PPG for light pollution and enhanced
guidance to local authorities on the issue of light pollution
not produce a reduction of the current levels of skyglow, the
Government must consider adopting similar legislation to other
countries, to control the types of outside lighting used, and
to ensure that no outdoor lighting shines above the horizontal.
The Government must recognise, as other countries have, that the
night sky needs protecting. (Paragraph 153)
Conclusion
31. We consider that the astronomical
community in this country is a particularly strong one and that
it should be encouraged by the Government. Amateur astronomers
not only support major professional projects through day to day
observations, but also donate much of their time to introducing
the general public and young people to the night sky, astronomy
and through that initial interest, very often into a physics career.
(Paragraph 156)
32. If we are to
invest heavily in observatories abroad, we must also invest in
the young scientists of today who will work in La Palma, Hawaii,
Australia and Chile in the future. It is worth protecting the
night sky for the use of astronomy pupils and students, amateurs
and professional astronomers alone. However, Professor Sir Martin
Rees provided an analogy when he pointed out that we may not all
be ornithologists but we would miss the song birds in our gardens.
(Paragraph 157)
33. The Government
may not consider the effect of light pollution on astronomy in
the UK to be a pressing issue, but amateur astronomers have taken
on the issue on behalf of those who mourn the loss of the night
sky, not only astronomers but also the general public, and those
affected by the unwelcome intrusion of light. If the Government
accepts this Report's recommendations it will start the process
of reducing light pollution. In 20 years time it might then be
possible for young people studying astronomy to see the Milky
Way in the UK night skies once more. (Paragraph 158)
|