Light pollution is increasing rapidly and there are now few parts of the United Kingdom that are not affected by it. The Norfolk Society wishes to support the British Astronomical Association and the Campaign for Dark Skies in their efforts to reduce light pollution and therefore limit the detrimental effects it has on astronomy.

  The Norfolk Society also urges the Science and Technology Committee to look at the other ways in which light pollution adversely affects society, most notably with regard to its impact on the tranquillity and character of the rural landscape.

A.  WHAT IS LIGHT POLLUTION?

1.  Sky glow

  Light pollution includes sky glow, that awful orange/pink glow that overhangs much of the developed world nightly. This of course affects astronomers very directly by limiting the number of places from where they can study the heavens. It also presents a serious obstacle to anyone who wishes to view the wonder, beauty and mystery of the night sky.

  Because Britain is such a heavily urbanised country sky glow is an almost universal problem. There are very few parts of the United Kingdom from which sky glow is not visible at night. It is estimated that 55% of the UK population cannot see the Milky Way from where they live.

  It is particularly disturbing that many British children have never seen the grandeur and beauty of the night sky in anything like its purest form. A wonderful experience, which has been enchanting and puzzling human beings since long before the dawn of civilisation and which has inspired to many artists and scientists, is denied to them. What damage are we doing if we allow present levels of light pollution to persist?

  Sky glow reaches out and covers large areas of countryside and in so doing it threatens what has long been seen as a basic distinction between what is urban and what is rural. Darkness at night is one of the things which defines countryside and makes it so different from towns and cities. Light pollution adversely affects the tranquillity and character of the rural night.

2.  Glare

  Glare is the uncomfortable brightness of a light source, particularly when viewed against a darker background. It can potentially be dangerous, eg as when encountered by a driver.

  Its affect on rural tranquillity and landscape character can be enormous. Street lighting and security lighting can alter the visual aspects of a whole landscape. A deserted moorland can be illuminated at night by motorway lights. A rural landscape's horizon is often interrupted by security lights. These all detract from the beauty of the natural environment.

  Even one dusk-to-dawn sodium light, located otherwise in a dark landscape, can have an enormous urbanising influence. Because such lamps are often visible over great distances at night, for example in Norfolk the lights of Poringland can be seen from points south of Hardwick Airfield—a distance of eight to 10 miles, they introduce a suburban atmosphere deep into the heart of the countryside. There are very few parts of rural lowland England from which a sodium light is not visible at night.

3.  Light trespass

  This involves light spilling beyond the boundary of the property on which the light is located sometimes shining through windows and curtains of adjacent properties. This can cause a nuisance which may provoke extreme distress. While laws exist to control noise pollution no laws apply to the nuisance caused by light pollution.

4.  Wastage of energy

  Light pollution represents wasted energy resulting from light shining where it is not wanted or needed. As the great majority of that wasted light is made by burning fossil fuels at power stations, not only does this diminish scarce energy resources, but it also contributes to an increase in air pollutants which may cause acid rain and harm human health. There is also an increased production of carbon dioxide associated with this wastage. The gradual build up of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere traps heat, changes climates and raises sea levels.

5.  Impact on wildlife

  The Institution of Lighting Engineers, a group of professionals who earn their living in the lighting industry, say in their Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Light Pollution: "All living things adjust their behaviour according to natural light. Man's artificial light, which is now powerful enough to turn night into day, can create stress and confusion. If not properly controlled obtrusive light could present serious physiological and ecological problems not just for the present but for future generations."

  There is an increasing and disturbing amount of evidence about the negative effects that artificial lighting has on plants and animals. Much of this evidence is summarised in a publication produced by the Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre (edited by Alan R Outen) and the Science and Technology Committee should study this report carefully.

  A recent study revealed that artificial lighting may be responsible for an increased incidence of breast cancer in night workers.

  Artificial lighting upsets natural patterns and rhythms and much more research needs to be carried out into its potential harmful effects.

B.  LIGHT POLLUTION IN THE EASTERN REGION—CHANGES FROM 1993 TO 2000

  For all the reasons given above light pollution needs to be tacked as a matter of urgency. There is no denying the fact that it is increasing at a remarkable rate—as revealed by the two coloured maps of the eastern region which are included with this submission (not printed see CPRE publication "Night Blight").

  A quick study of these maps, one for 1993 and the other for 2000, reveals a large increase in light pollution over this seven year period. The area coloured light blue (moderate light pollution) has expanded at the expense of the area coloured blue (low light pollution). In Norfolk the light blue area now covers 51% of the county whereas in 1993 it covered only 35%. The blue area, over the same period, has reduced from 48% to 33%.

  In 2000 the Eastern England region has only 5% of its total area experiencing skies free from light pollution (down from 6% in 1993).

  Please study these maps and the attendant statistical sheet closely. This kind of satellite mapping not only enables light pollution to be measured it also enables quantifiable targets for the reduction of light pollution to be set.

  NB. Since settlement lighting tends to show as blobs and road lighting takes a linear form the main explanation for the general increase in light pollution (as shown on these two maps) must be the increased usage of security lighting in rural environments. This is the only type of lighting that permeates every corner of the landscape.

  Much of this security lighting is provided by unshielded dusk-to-dawn sodium lights. They are an ugly and urbanising influence in the rural landscape. Tackling the problems caused by this type of lighting should be a major priority of the Science and Technology Committee.

C.  SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

  1.  The first key question that your committee is considering relates to the impact that light pollution has on UK astronomy. The Norfolk Society need not add in extra input on this point because all the relevant details will have been supplied to you by the BAA (CfDS). Suffice to say that we endorse wholeheartedly the views of the BAA on this matter.

  2.  The second question asks if current planning guidelines are strong enough to protect against light pollution. They clearly are not, because, as revealed so dramatically on the enclosed maps, the problem is getting worse at an ever increasing rate.

  3.  The third question asks whether planning guidelines are being applied and enforced effectively. The problem here is that not all local authorities have planning guidelines specific to light pollution and even those authorities that do cover the issue in their local plans find it very difficult to enforce regulations against determined opponents.

  South Norfolk Council, which does have PPG guidelines regarding outdoor lighting in its local plan, has experienced great difficulty enforcing light pollution controls over an oil depot located in the Tas Valley west of Long Stratton. This company has a large number of unshielded high pressure sodium lights on its site which are on top of high columns and they are visible for many miles along a beautiful river valley. This is but one example of a common situation where even when a council has laudable light pollution guidelines it is unable to enforce them.

  It is not sufficient to rely on guidelines alone. Norfolk County Council have just defined environmental lighting zones in an attempt to protect dark rural landscapes. However the control that they exercise is limited to lights provided by the county council. Their policy does not extend to security lighting or to parish council lighting—except in an advisory capacity. They do not have the legal power to influence decisions made by private firms or by locally elected councils. If there is to be any genuine reduction in light pollution then joined-up policy is essential and this must be backed by legislation which gives local authorities the power to enforce their policies where necessary.

  There have been some improvements in some areas where the Highways Agency has fitted full cut off lights but this is only having a limited effect and the good work is being undone by the continued use of unshielded lights by private firms, farmers and others in the countryside. A local example of this is the Gillingham roundabout near Beccles where the Highways Authority have installed fully shielded lights on a roundabout but where the garage and restaurant adjacent to the roundabout, both recently constructed, are lit by unshielded lamps.

  These kinds of problems can only be resolved by making all exterior lighting subject to planning permission and by ensuring that all local authorities have proper guidelines in place to deal with the problem of light pollution. Minor details of a house, eg the colour of its tiles, are often (quite rightly) subject to planning permission yet they have an effect that is limited visually to a small area, whereas external lights, which may be visible for many miles, are currently not subject to planning permission.

  Not only do local authorities need legally enforceable planning policies on light pollution but they also need to ensure that all the departments and agencies of the authority acknowledge and respect the light pollution policies of that authority. The police need to give crime reduction advice which is sympathetic to the problem of light pollution. Those responsible for school security need to be aware of the impact, particularly in rural areas, that unsympathetic and poorly shielded security lights can have.

  Exterior artificial light needs to be defined as a potential pollutant and it should be viewed as a statutory nuisance in a similar way to noise pollution.

  4.  The next question raises the issue as to whether light is measurable in such a way as to make regulations legally enforceable.

  Light can be measured in a number of ways and the maps provided with this submission are based on measurements from space, which as already mentioned, could be used to provide targets for local authorities regarding reductions in light pollution. For example Norfolk could be set a target to increase the blue area to its 1993 level—ie 48% of the land surface—by the year 2010.

  With regard to individual lights and groups of lights a good measure of their polluting power is the distance over which they are visible at night. Fully shielded lights cannot be seen over a great distance and their suburbanising effect on the countryside is more limited than unshielded lights. So the distance that a light is visible from its source could be a measure that is used to enforce regulations.

  Regulation could also involve defining power limits for exterior lights, particularly in rural areas. The Government's crime reduction website is highly critical of high glare security lights. It argues that they cast deep shadows, disturb neighbours and probably fail to deter crimes.

  The Norfolk Society also suggests a qualitative method for deciding whether exterior lighting is appropriate in a rural location. If lighting in an area makes that place less rural by night than it is by day then that lighting is inappropriate for that location.

  5.  On the issue of whether further controls on the design of lighting are necessary we agree wholeheartedly with the BAA. All outdoor lighting, particular when used in rural areas, ought to involve the use of full cut off shielded lights—except of course for applications like airport runways. Poorly shielded lighting should gradually be eliminated from the United Kingdom with rural areas being given priority. Incidentally this would provide a great boost to the lighting Industry by generating a demand for new lamps to replace old, inefficient and poorly shielded lights.

  It would also be desirable if the light source itself was entirely white. Most outdoor lighting is currently either low pressure sodium (orange) or high pressure sodium (pink). Of course it is these light sources that create the greatest sky glow. White light sources, like metal halide, as they become more energy efficient should be used to replace sodium bulbs. To most people, especially in rural areas, white lights are less offensive to the eye.

D.  CONCLUSIONS AND VIEWS OF THE NORFOLK SOCIETY

1.  On the need to limit the number of lights in the rural landscape

  The problem of light pollution cannot solely be solved by changing lighting design, important as this is. In rural areas the character of the night time landscape can only be preserved if there are fewer lights and if they are used less often. As a general rule lights should only be on when needed and they should only be provided where they are needed.

  Currently dusk-to-dawn lighting predominates in outdoor lighting applications. Often it is cheaper to leave lights on rather than switch them off because the social costs of lighting (light pollution, energy wastage and climate change implications) are clearly not represented in the private costs to individuals and businesses who use the lighting.

  Privatised electricity companies, anxious to maximise profits and to keep generating stations functioning effectively, are keen to sell as much electricity as possible and they often sell electricity more cheaply overnight then during the day—a clear conflict between market forces and the needs of the environment and the desirability of conserving energy.

2.  On the alleged relationship between lighting and crime reduction

  One of the main reasons given for the provision of street lighting and security lighting is a widely held view that lighting does reduce crime levels. However evidence on this issue is far from conclusive.

  The latest Home Office Crime Prevention Unit's systematic review of research into the question of the impact of street lighting on crime (2002) was based on 13 separate studies in the USA and UK and although it concluded that improved lighting did lead to reductions in crime closer analysis of the studies, included in this survey, shows things are far from clear cut. The US studies were based in Atlanta, Milwaukee, Portland, Kansas City, Harrisburg, New Orleans, Fort Worth and Indianapolis. The UK studies were based in Dover, Bristol, Birmingham, Dudley and Stoke on Trent. While the five UK studies seem to indicate a link between improved street lighting and crime reduction the eight US studies were less conclusive in their findings and only three found lighting to be effective as a crime reduction measure. Four concluded that lighting improvements were not effective at reducing crime levels and one study showed that the case for lighting was unproven.

  Overall these findings are clearly far from conclusive, and, especially because all the studies were urban based, they should be treated with a healthy dose of scepticism when it comes down to deciding on lighting policy for rural parts of Britain.

  Other Home Office studies have reported that street lighting has little or no impact on crime levels.

  Very few studies regarding the impact of lighting on crime have been carried out in rural areas. In 1992 West Sussex a study by the local authority concluded that rural lighting, far from reducing crime figures, actually probably contributed to an increase in crime levels.

  What really encourages burglars to commit crimes is lack of occupancy. Bright, badly positioned security lights advertise over great distances the very premises they try to protect and often reveal the presence of property of interest to the burglar. This is particularly true of rural farmyards where no one is around to view what is happening under the lights anyway and all the lights do is aid the burglar in his work—revealing entry points and places to hide. Furthermore the vast majority of burglaries occur during the hours of daylight—the presence of light is clearly not a deterrent.

3.  On the environmental impact of lighting

  The environmental impact of lighting, when it is proposed as a solution to safety and security issues, should always be considered and lighting solutions applicable and desirable in urban areas should not automatically be transplanted into the countryside.

  Dr. Sohail Hussain, a Home Office researcher into issues relating to crime reduction, acknowledged in his publication "Cutting Crime in Rural Areas—A Practical Guide for Parish Councils" that street lighting, while being an obvious and usual crime prevention measure in urban environments, was a measure that often did not suit rural villages. He points out that what is wanted and needed in an urban environment is often unwanted in a rural community. He also makes the very valid point that there are crime prevention measures that rural communities can take, because of their close sense of community, that are denied to larger settlements.

  This recognition of the importance of appropriateness to place and settlement size of various crime prevention measures is important and all people who are responsible for instigating crime prevention measures should consider the environmental consequences of their proposals and be prepared to consider alternatives when the solution offered, eg lighting, may be environmentally damaging.

4.  On the importance of unlit villages

  The majority of small and medium sized villages in Britain are unlit. These villages are an essential part of the character and landscape of Britain and their dark status is often jealously protected by their inhabitants. When street lighting was discussed for Hempnall, a village in South Norfolk, it was opposed by a large majority of local inhabitants—for every individual in favour there were 20 against. This is a typical viewpoint throughout rural Britain. Lights suburbanise a settlement more than any other human feature.

  While many urban dwellers fear the dark, and their fear of crime is accentuated by an absence of lights, this is not the case for the majority of the rural population. A recent survey by South Norfolk Council showed that 66% of residents had little or no concern about crime in their locality and an encouraging 92% said they would not let it (crime) interfere with their lives (including after dark activities).

  Those who seek the alleged safety and security of lights have an ever increasing number of places in which they may choose to live. It is important to preserve the freedom of choice for those who wish to enjoy the rural night fully. Unlit villages deserve protection as an integral part of rural Britain.

5.  On lighting historic buildings

  While historic buildings can benefit from artificial lighting much of this lighting is often far from subtle and is in many cases unsympathetic to the structure.

  Certainly the millennium project that was aimed at illuminating church towers was unnecessary and a waste of money. In many cases it resulted in ugly lighting schemes unwanted by the local population.

  The hours when historic buildings are illuminated should be restricted in order to allow the wonderful kind of experience reported by a CPRE member from Norfolk to occur. This member says, "There is nothing more beautiful than a darkened church spire silhouetted against a full moon." If historic buildings are lit every night all night then the impact of such lighting very rapidly subsides. Far better for it to be an occasional "son et lumiere" experience.

6.  On road lighting

  It is undesirable for there to be an increase in the total mileage of lit roads in the countryside. Where necessary other road safety measures should be considered, for example solar-powered studs, as an alternative to lights.

  The ribbon development of road lights weaving their way through the countryside tend to carve tranquil dark rural landscapes into segments. Security lights in-fill the areas between the roads and in this way light pollution spreads throughout the countryside.

7.  On urban street lighting

  The Norfolk Society does not wish to deprive urban and suburban dwellers of their street lights in order to reduce light pollution. In urban areas lit streets are clearly desirable. However over time, as street lights come up for renewal, older unshielded lights should be replaced by full cut-off lights—hopefully using a white light source. Only through this approach will the sky glow of the towns and cities be reduced.

  When the older lights are replaced it is important that they are not recycled and re-used. At the moment some of the old polluting lights seem to find their way on to farmers' markets where they can be bought cheaply. They are then fitted to farm buildings. This hardly represents good practice and rather negates the good work achieved by fitting full cut-offs.

8.  On the need to address all sources of light pollution

  The growing trend towards using lights in gardens needs to be monitored carefully and if necessary the legislation that is required to effectively control light pollution will need to be applied to such lighting. It is important that all the sources of light pollution—road and street lighting, home and garden lighting, industrial and commercial lighting, sports and recreation lighting, buildings and monuments lighting and all forms of security lighting—are covered by legislation aimed at limiting the negative effects of lighting.

  If the right legislation to control light pollution is put in place manufacturers of outdoor lighting will adjust their products to comply with legal requirements. As mentioned previously measures aimed at reducing light pollution will provide good business opportunities for lighting manufacturers as polluting lights are replaced by better designed full cut-off lamps.

  Protecting the character and quality of the rural landscape is central to CPRE philosophy and combating the impact of light pollution on rural areas is very important to all CPRE members, including those of us in the Norfolk Society. This is a very visible issue which is increasingly attracting public attention. We look to the Science and Technology Committee to take a decisive stand and in so doing influence government policy for the benefit of astronomers and lovers of the countryside alike.

  The CPRE anti light pollution campaign, backed by the BAA, is to be launched on 9 May under the title "Night Blight". It has aims and objectives that will only be achieved with the aid of government legislation. The matter is very much in your hands.

April 2003