Aliza Brown, Sarah Caldbeck & Will Hubbuch

Dr. Osborn

WRD 204-008

18 October 2019

Summary

As defined in the Brundtland Report, “Sustainable development is development that

meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet

their own needs” (Brundtland Commission 41). Our report focuses on the topic of light pollution,

which refers to artificial lighting at night, and how the University of Kentucky is addressing the

negative effects of light pollution on campus.

To gain a better understanding of UK’s light pollution initiatives, we interviewed Britney

Ragland, an Energy Engineer at the UK Utilities and Energy Management Department. Other

primary research collected was the measure of light intensity data at various locations on campus

using a light meter. We also investigated the financial and environmental impacts of light

pollution through secondary research using scholarly, peer-reviewed journals.

When collecting light intensity data, we recorded observations of the surrounding

environment such as direction of the light, the type of light used, and several other key factors

that might affect the readings. The same person held the light meter each time at the same height

to allow for more consistent results.

Through our process of research and data collection, we conclude that the University of

Kentucky is not actively seeking to reduce light pollution on campus. Instead, the university is
 2

indirectly reducing light pollution for financial gain rather than environmental awareness and

does not see the issue as urgent.

Light Pollution and Sustainability on Campus

Light pollution is not something we normally think about but can have adverse financial

and environmental consequences. The University of Kentucky does not prioritize light pollution

as an urgent issue on campus. There must be a shift towards a more sustainable solution when it

comes to night lighting so that environmental consequences, as well as financial loss due to

energy waste, can be minimized more effectively.

Environmental Effects of Light Pollution

Research has been done to prove the various negative effects of light pollution on the

environment and how artificial lighting is damaging to plants and wildlife. The internal circadian

rhythms of animals have been studied under various environments where light pollution is

prevalent. The relationship between daytime and nighttime animals has undergone several

noticeable changes since light pollution has been studied. According to a study on biodiversity,

“Daytime feeders might extend their activity under illumination, thus increasing predation

pressure on nocturnal species” (Hӧlker 681). As a result, nocturnal species are threatened by the

actions of those who control the lighting across campus. The indirect effects of putting up a
 3

streetlamp or leaving lights on in closed public buildings overnight just goes to show how little is

done to prevent damage to ecosystems.

Upon asking Britney Ragland if any environmental research had been done by the

university on light pollution’s impact on wildlife, she stated that the utilities department did not

see the issue as urgent or relevant enough to spend time and money researching (Ragland).

Before the issue of light pollution on campus can be addressed, there needs to be an overall

acknowledgement that light pollution is creating significant environmental problems and should

be controlled as soon as possible.

Financial Effects of Light Pollution

Leaving lights on when they are not needed is an obvious waste of energy as well as

money. More energy must be produced to account for the wasted energy from light pollution.

The magnitude of the financial loss due to light pollution is quite astonishing as described by a

global economic report:

“In the United States, roughly 6% of the 4.054 million megawatt hours (mwh) of

electricity produced are used for outdoor lighting and an estimated 30% of this is wasted

as light pollution. This translates into 72.9 million mwh of electricity needlessly being

generated at a cost of $6.9 billion a year” (Gallaway 659).

There is much work to be done to reduce light pollution so that energy no longer has to be

wasted at such an outrageous rate.

 4

Although the University of Kentucky is slowly replacing pre-existing halogen lights with

LEDs each time a new construction project occurs, these projects do not happen fast enough for

the light pollution to be drastically reduced. In our interview with Britney Ragland, she explained

that UK’s main motive for switching to LEDs was because it is a much cheaper option with

higher energy efficiency. She mentioned that the university is not overly concerned about the

effects of light pollution other than the fact that financial savings are more of a long-term priority

rather than an urgent issue (Ragland).

Methods

For our primary research, we measured the light intensity in foot-candles near different

buildings around campus at night. We visited 11 locations in total, and at each location, we took

data at the highest traffic area, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.​ Blue dots represent locations where data was collected.

We began collecting data just after sunset, starting at 7:30 PM and finishing at 8:30 PM.

At each location, we measured the light intensity by holding the sensor upward and the light
 5

reflecting off the ground by holding the sensor upside down. The light sensor was held at arm’s

length in front of us around 48 inches off the ground. The raw data is shown in Table 1.

Additionally, we answered three questions about each location:

​ oes the light source use LEDs? ​LEDs give off white colored light compared to the
1.​ D

yellow colored light from halogen bulbs.

​ oes the light source point towards the ground? ​The light source is angled below the
2.​ D

horizontal plane and minimal light escapes upward from the bulb housing.

3.​ I​ s the light source necessary? ​The light source is necessary for safety, and any decorative

light is minimal.

Kentucky has exterior lighting standards that specify the types of bulbs, types of lighting,

and lighting levels that can be used on campus. The standards depend on the type of location.

Buildings, sidewalks, and parking lots all have different codes. We compared the lighting data

we collected to their standards. Additionally, we calculated percentages for the responses to the

three questions.

Results

The findings from this study suggested that the University of Kentucky is taking steps to

replace all of the lighting with energy efficient lighting such as LED lights, however, the driving

reason for this change is not to reduce light pollution but rather to reduce the financial costs of

utilities. In fact, some of our efforts to reduce energy costs is worsening the light pollution on

campus. After speaking with Ms. Ragland about the university’s steps to reduce light pollution,

we learned that there were no steps being made to directly impact the amount of light pollution
 6

on campus but instead changes were being made to campus lighting to reduce our energy impact

overall. An example of this is the move to replace all of our lighting with LED lighting to

minimize energy costs and to maximize energy efficiency. Out of the eleven places that we

measured data from on campus, only two did not have LED lighting, as illustrated in the graph.

As we learned from our preliminary research, while LED lighting is more energy

efficient than normal light bulbs, they emit blue light, a type of light that can damage

light-sensitive cells in the retina. The wavelength of blue light is so small (under 500 nm) that

most sensors today cannot pick up light from LEDs, suggesting that our data from the Amprobe

may be lower than the actual amount of light in the area.

Another factor we considered in our data was if the light was directed towards the

ground, or if the light was able to emit radially outwards in all directions. According to Ms.
 7

Ragland, UK is taking steps to turn project lights towards the ground, not from a light pollution

point of view but rather a financial viewpoint. Our data from the eleven places we measured is

graphed below. Almost ¾ of the light that we measured was directed fully towards the ground, a

positive step to reducing the light pollution on campus.

Projecting light towards the ground instead of letting the light emit in all directions is

energy efficient, financially stable and environmentally clean. Several cities in the US that have

recognized light pollution as a real environmental threat are aiming lights towards the ground,

which makes cities safer by focusing more light in a smaller area and minimizing the harmful

effects of the reflection of light in the atmosphere. UK is taking the right steps in this sense by

controlling the direction of the lights, even if the goal is not directly aimed at reducing light

pollution.
 8

To summarize our findings, we measured the light intensity of all eleven places in

foot-candles using a light meter. Our data is shown below. The more light the sensor measured,

the larger the number of foot-candles.

Applications

While UK is taking steps to reduce the carbon footprint and become more

environmentally friendly, light pollution on campus is still an issue that is not being addressed as

fully as it should be. Besides the changes mentioned in our results, there are various ways that

light pollution can be reduced.

Outdoor lights on campus stay lit constantly throughout the night, even when they are not

being used. It is understandable that some lights must stay on due to safety, however the quantity
 9

of light emitted all night long is unfavorable for the environment. To combat this, motion sensors

on nonessential outdoor lights can help UK reduce the electric bill as well as reduce the amount

of artificial light reflecting into the atmosphere.

Changing the color of the lights is also a tactic that many cities are using to combat light

pollution. Red light is the most commonly used as it has the least environmental impact and does

not disrupt the migration patterns of birds and bats. However, red lights on the UK campus may

not be the best idea socially, so orange is the next best color to reduce light pollution. Our eyes

contain photosensitive cells that are highly sensitive to blue light (shorter wavelengths) and least

sensitive to red light. Red and orange colors have the longest wavelengths of any color on the

spectrum, thus are mostly ignored by our eyes and are the least disruptive to our natural circadian

rhythm.

As UK is situated in a large city, it is impossible to get rid of all of the light, in fact it may

be impossible to reduce the light pollution by half due to neighboring houses, factories, towns

and schools. UK is only a small part of the larger picture, however, we should still do our part as

a major campus to promote awareness about this invisible type of pollution.

Conclusion

For future light pollution studies, it may prove beneficial to visit the same locations in

which data was originally collected in order to gauge the reduction of light pollution in those

areas. The collection of data could be an ongoing study to determine how energy efficiency and

light pollution has been managed over the years.

 10

In addition, the old data may need to be replaced due to varying conditions between sites.

There were many different surfaces upon which the light was reflected. The ground material at

some sites was concrete or brick while other data collection sites were grass or dirt-covered

areas. These differences in ground material would have resulted in different light reflective

values. In order to address this issue, the light meter could just point upwards instead of both up

and down. Another solution would be to normalize the data so that differences in ground material

are accounted for when presenting the results.

Overall, the UK’s Utilities and Energy Management Department is taking steps in the

right direction to reduce light pollution. With a sustainable focus in mind, the department is

replacing old halogen lights with new, more efficient, and economically viable LEDs as well as

actively measuring and adjusting light intensity across campus for mainly financial and safety.

However, the department is not currently focused on reducing environmental effects of light

pollution across campus.

 11

References

Brundtland Commision. “Our Common Future.” World Commission on Environment and

Development, 1987, pp. 1-300. ​http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf​.

Hӧlker, Franz et al. “Light Pollution as a Biodiversity Threat.” ​Trends in Ecology & Evolution,

vol. 25, no. 12, 2010, pp. 681-682.

https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.uky.edu/science/article/pii/S0169534710002211​.

Gallaway, Terrel et al. “The Economics of Global Light Pollution.” ​Ecological Economics​, vol.

69, no. 3, 2010, pp. 658-665. ​https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.10.003​.

Ragland, Britney. Personal Interview. 4 Oct. 2019.