Happy Hour challenge

 

We are at heart a wasteful society - and it seems that the intrinsic value of daylight is no exception. For large chunks of the year we often sleep when it is light and we are awake in the depths of darkness.

Such is the folly of modern society that our natural circadian rhythms and the balance between day and night have been brutally squeezed by modern electricity's triumph over the night. Bright lights are the norm and night is more of an optional experience.

Here in the northern hemisphere we are plunging headlong into days of less daylight and longer nights. And this Sunday our country will change the clocks by putting them back one hour, in what Sir Greg Knight MP describes as a “flawed annual ritual”.

According to Sir Greg the answer is to bring our waking hours more in line with the hours of daylight - rather than ‘waste’ daylight in the early morning when most of us are still asleep       

“Our current, self-chosen time settings mean that for most of winter days, people at work, college or school have little or no sunlit leisure time,” he says.

“The answer is to put our clocks forward an extra hour all year round and move to a system of Single/Double Summer Time (SDST).”

Evidence for the positive effects of shifting the clocks forward is mounting. Research indicates that any increase in road casualties during a darker morning rush hour in winter would be more than offset by a decrease in road casualties as a result of lighter afternoons.

Knock-on benefits of reduced electricity bills and improved health (less Seasonal Affective Disorder) in the winter, combined with a boost for the leisure and tourism on late summer days, mean that such a change has a growing band of champions.

Old arguments about milkmen and postal workers needing early-morning sunlight to carry out deliveries look exactly like what they are – arguments from when life was very different.

The National Farmers’ Union, at one time a staunch critic of any change, now says the reasons for farmers' past opposition to advancing the clocks have been “lost in history” (and probably modern technology).

A grassroots campaign is aiming to prove there is an alternative to dark winter afternoons – and at the same time raise awareness about the benefits to our health, the environment and economy of managing our time in a different way.

This weekend the Happy Hour challenge is encouraging people to discover for themselves the social and health benefits of SDST – for just a couple of days.

Chris Hayes, campaign co-ordinator, says: “As well as raising awareness about positive emotional well-being and freedom, this is also all about changing the way we do politics and policy; getting people to actually experience and try things out rather than debating abstract policy concepts.”

“We don't want to prescribe how people take on the challenge but ideally it is to leave the clocks alone on Sunday and spend all of that day and then next an hour ahead of everyone else (GMT+1),” he explained.

Rebecca Harris MP also supports SDST. “The Happy Hour campaign is a great way to show how people could benefit in a practical way from keeping an extra hour of light in the afternoons,” she says.

“Whether it's getting more exercise, sport and recreation or saving cash by using less artificial lighting it would clearly be of public benefit. And road safety organisations are adamant that more daylight in the late afternoon will save many lives and serious injuries.

“I hope the Happy Hour campaign will get more people thinking about how they would use an extra hour’s afternoon light and convince the political parties to commit to include it in their manifestos.”

Whilst the beauty of SDST is its ability to deliver much for little cost - the devil is in the politics. Happy Hour offers the chance to try it out in a fun way. So why not leave your watch on BST and give it a go?

Your body certainly won’t notice the difference for a couple of days. And while everyone else is complaining about how dark the afternoon has suddenly become you can enjoy an extra hour in the park or garden.


Blog photos by Clive Simpson. For more details see the Happy Hour website.  
You might also like - The End of Night and Fear of the Dark

Light of the world

Experts from around the globe gathered at Leicester’s De Monfort University in the UK this week to discuss ‘artificial light’ and how it is not only affecting the world we live in but is also increasingly helping define it.

The fact that light at night affects us adversely more than we might think is not something many of us give a second thought to - let alone consider it necessary to be discussed at an international conference.

But those at ALAN 14 - the second ‘Artificial Light at Night’ annual conference - had a significantly different take and highlighted a number of concerns that need to be taken seriously.

The scientists and researchers had travelled from the different parts of the UK, Ireland, the United States, Europe and Australia to present their findings on light-related topics and related research across the fields of health, biology, pollution, ecology, technology and design.

ALAN 2014 examined the use of artificial lighting at night in all its forms, as well as the spectrum of adverse effects that artificial light at - known collectively as light pollution - night may cause.

The theme coming through loud and clear is that society at large is barely beginning to recognising that such liberal and indiscriminate use of illumination is at a mounting cost to both the environment and ourselves.

Interestingly, an increasing number of scientific studies are now seriously questioning the long-held premise that humans are largely immune to the effects of artificial light at night.

Research is now confirming that artificial light - even in quite small doses - disrupts sleep, confuses circadian rhythms and impedes the production of the hormone melatonin.

All of which is bad news if the consequences of excessive exposure to light at night really do include an increased risk for obesity, diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Back in 2012 the American Medical Association (AMA) called for more research into the risks and benefits of occupational and environmental exposure to artificial light at night and for the introduction of new lighting technologies at home and at work that minimise circadian disruption.

Technological advances such as LEDs (light-emitting diodes) have improved the potential for better targeted lighting - but for now they are often brighter and more intrusive than the old lights they are replacing.

Much of our modern light - whether from TVs, computer screens, smart phones and electronic gadgets or from outdoor lighting of one form or another - is also ‘blue’ rich and so proves even more disruptive to the 24 hour biological process that regulates the body's functions.

According to conference organiser Prof Martin Morgan-Taylor, of the School of Law, De Montfort University, Leicester, and a Legal Advisor to the UK Campaign for Dark Skies, the physiological effects caused by lighting may be similar to noise.

"Admittedly, there are comparatively few studies as yet on the problems caused by lighting, but lights can and do wake people up, just as does noise," he said.

"Moreover, with light it appears that the subject does not need to be fully awakened to suffer the same negative effects as someone who has been deprived of sleep altogether."

This means that people's health can even be adversely affected by ‘security’ floodlighting and, what the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) refers to as, ‘light briefly turning on and off' during the night.

Prof Morgan-Taylor stated the research concerning cancer risks does not restrict itself to lighting that wakes the subject because risk factors are akin to the levels of night-time light entering a bedroom.

Paul Marchant, of Leeds Metropolitan University, questioned the widely held perception of ‘improved’ (brighter) lighting is always beneficial in reducing road accidents and crime.

The generic objection to this - based on the premise that light equals protection and darkness represents danger - is that we need all this light for safety and security, he said.

Such common belief goes a long way to explain why many supermarkets, petrol station forecourts and car parks, as well as our own driveways and yards, are lit more than ten times as brightly as they were just 20 years ago.

"In fact, the issue of light at night and safety is rather more complex, and there is little compelling evidence to support widespread such mis-assumptions," he said.

"Ever-brighter lights can, for example, actually diminish security by casting glare that impedes vision and creates shadows where criminals can hide."

Emma Marrington, CPRE Dark Skies campaigner and author of ‘Shedding Light’, a survey of local authority lighting policies, said some local authorities are taking steps in the right direction.

She said the research had revealed no evidence to support the fear that adjusting or dimming street lights impacted on public safety.

"We urge councils to do more to control lighting in their areas and ensure that the right lighting is used only where and when it is needed."

"We're not advocating changes where they're not appropriate - but why shine bright lights on residential streets, quiet roads and open countryside throughout the night when they are not needed?"

The consistent theme emerging from ALAN 14 was that there are many different aspects to artificial light at night and the effects on our well-being, ecology and life in general are only just beginning to be understood.

We will, no doubt, continue to tinker with the natural world and all its variances, and the exponential growth of artificial light in our homes and across the planet shows now time of dimming yet.

In the meantime, conferences like ALAN will gradually produce evidence in an attempt to redress the balance.

And one day there may come a time of new enlightenment - when we release that at certain times of the day we need dark more than light.


The conference was hosted by Leicester De Montfort Law School, De Montfort University, and co-organised with the EU COST Action LoNNe (Loss of the Night Network) in association with the International Dark Sky Association. My thanks to Martin Morgan-Taylor and Katie Scott.

The Age of Miracles

Karen Walker-Thompson's novel ‘The Age of Miracles’ is not an obvious literary award winner though it is a compulsive read and contains a number of interesting themes and challenging ideas - all introduced as the result of the phenomenon of Earth’s rotation slowing.

My previous blog ‘How fragile we are’ looked at the novel’s apocalyptic catastrophe theme - the dire consequences to all life on Earth as a result of the planet’s rotation gradually slowing and therefore extending both day and night.

But there are more subtle implications also to be considered when looking at the effects exaggerated daylight and dark hours might have on the normal working of our own bodies.

Midway through the book at the beginning of chapter 17, Thompson-Walker writes: "Two thousand years of art and superstition would suggest that it is darkness that haunts us most... but dozens of experiments conducted in the aftermath of the slowing revealed that it was not darkness that tampered most with our moods - it was light."

The implication, though not the cause, of night turning into day is not a million miles from the theme adopted by The Lighthouse Keeper for two of this autumn’s blog essays - ‘Fear of the dark’ and ‘Blinded by the night’.

It is now well-established by the medical profession that working through the night and the influence of light after dark can affect our circadian rhythms and long-term health and well-being in significant ways.

In his 2012 paper ‘Light Pollution, Nuisance and Planning Laws in the UK’ Martin Morgan-Taylor, principal lecturer in law at Leicester’s De Montfort University, states that artificial lighting is known to cause "some fairly obvious negative effects on human health and well-being" - in as much as floodlighting or illuminated advertising hoardings may disturb sleep by shining in bedroom windows.

"Indeed, it may be thought that sleeplessness may cause only temporary or negligible problems, but medical research is increasingly linking artificial light at night with some serious health effects, such as cancer and depression," he says.

"Other research indicates that artificial light at night may general disrupt human circadian rhythms."

In addressing the question of why this might by the case, Prof Morgan-Taylor pins the likely cause on what is known is that ‘white’ or ‘blue rich’ lighting, which mimics natural daylight and is being increasingly used at night.

"This type of light particularly suppresses the production of a circadian rhythm hormone called Melotin, so disturbing circadian rhythms," he states. Melotin is believed to be a powerful anti-oxidant that helps to ward off some human cancers.

"In other words, an avoidable exposure to ‘white/blue rich’ light at night may increase a person’s susceptibility to some cancers - and we are increasing our use of this form of lighting at night," he adds.

In ‘The Age of Miracles’ the world at large is thrust into ever-lengthening days and nights as Earth slows gradually from its standard 24 hour rotation.

At first the consequences are manageable, more of an inconvenience, but as the daylight hours stretch into periods of 30 and then 40 hours, and likewise the night, the effects on daily life become ever more pronounced and difficult. 

The terminator dividing day from night across Earth as seen
from the International Space Station.

The novel takes the concept of our bodies adapting to unnatural light patterns to a whole new level - but in considering current light pollution levels across the developed world (in England it increased by 24 percent between 1993 and 2000) the extrapolation is valuable.

The first chapter of Genesis in the Bible states that God ‘divided the light from the darkness’, which in Biblical terms can be viewed as both symbolic as well as being a statement about the natural environment. In essence we need them both because light allows us to see and darkness gives us an opportunity to sleep.

By lighting our neighbourhoods, towns and cities to excess and flooding our yards with unnecessary light we are wasting energy and undoubttedly contributing to climate change. In a more subtle way we may also be tampering with the laws of nature - and perhaps even creation itself. 

Blinded by the night

Winter sunset over the Solent from Portsdown Hill - Clive Simpson

It is hardly surprising to learn that in our modern, consumer-driven culture we are using far more light during the hours of darkness than we actually need.

But what is not generally recognised in our liberal use of illumination is the mounting cost to both the environment and ourselves.

An increasing number of scientific studies are questioning the long-held premise that humans are largely immune to the effects of artificial light at night.

And our own eyes, if only we opened them long enough in a metaphorical sense to see the bigger picture, would surely agree.

Research indicates that artificial nocturnal light - even in quite small doses - disrupts sleep, confuses circadian rhythms and impedes the production of the hormone melatonin.

All of which is bad news if the consequences of excessive exposure to light at night really do include an increased risk for obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Technological advances such as LEDs (light-emitting diodes) have certainly improved the potential for better targeted lighting - but they are often brighter and more intrusive than the old lights they are replacing.

And much more of this modern light - whether from TVs, computer screens and electronic gadgets or from outdoor lighting of one form or another - is rich with blue wavelengths and most disruptive to the 24 hour biological process that regulates the body's functions.

In effect, blue light sends subtle messages to our brain that night is over – or in a basic, primal way that morning's blue sky has returned and that the day has begun - quite the opposite signal we need in the middle of the night.

Two years ago the American Medical Association (AMA) called for increased research into the risks and benefits of occupational and environmental exposure to artificial light at night and for the introduction of new lighting technologies at home and at work that minimise circadian disruption.

According to Prof Martin Morgan Taylor, of the School of Law, De Montfort University, Leicester, and a Legal Advisor (Lighting) to the UK Campaign for Dark Skies, the physiological effects caused by lighting may be similar to noise.

In his paper ‘Light Pollution and Nuisance: The Enforcement Guidance for Light as a Statutory Nuisance' he says: "Admittedly, there are comparatively few studies as yet on the problems caused by lighting, but lights can and do wake people up, as does noise.

"Moreover, with noise it appears that the subject does not need to be fully awakened to suffer the same negative effects as someone who has been deprived of sleep altogether."

As a result, people's health could be adversely affected by the floodlighting and what the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) refers to as ‘light briefly turning on and off' during the night.

Prof Morgan Taylor states the research concerning cancer risks does not restrict itself to lighting that wakes the subject but the risk factor is akin to the level of night-time light entering the bedroom.

"The glare from overly bright lighting can also cause further problems, for although the iris may contract to cut down the amount of light entering the eye, the scale of the glare from floodlighting can cause momentary blindness and pain," he says. "This is particularly an issue for the elderly, as the muscles controlling the iris do tend to become less efficient with age."

On a personal level, while we seldom leave our interior lights bare, most of our outdoor lighting remains unshielded – indiscriminately sending light straight into the sky, into our eyes, and into our neighbours' bedrooms.

The relatively simple act of adjusting or shielding outdoor lights by installing or retrofitting lamp fixtures that direct light downward to its intended target represents our best chance to control light pollution.

The generic objection to this - based on the premise that light equals protection and darkness represents danger - is that we need all this light for safety and security.

This common belief goes a long way to explain why many supermarkets, petrol station forecourts and car parks as well as our own driveways and yards are lit more than ten times as brightly as they were just 20 years ago.

In fact, the issue of light at night and safety is rather more complex, with little compelling evidence to support widespread assumptions.

For example, ever-brighter lights can actually diminish security by casting glare that impedes vision and creates shadows where criminals can hide.

The ‘World Atlas of the Artificial Night Sky Brightness', a series of computer-generated maps from satellite data that depict the extent of light pollution across the globe, were created by Italian astronomer Fabio Falchi and illustrate the point nicely.

Today, or to be correct, tonight, we have levels of light hundreds and thousands of times higher than the natural night time level – and light pollution is currently rising by an average of 20 per cent a year.

So this evening, before you flood the yard or your front drive with brilliant light, consider for a moment the opposite side of the day. Would we tolerate, with the same kind of indifference, attempts to modify the daytime by lowering light levels a hundred or a thousand times?

------------------------------------
If you enjoyed this Lighthouse Keeper essay by Clive Simpson looking at the impact of artificial light at night in our modern world please recommend or Tweet the link - Blinded by the night. The title is derived from ‘Blinded by the Light', a song written and originally recorded by Bruce Springsteen and widely known through the 1976 chart-topping version recorded by Manfred Mann's Earth Band.

Here comes the sun

It went largely unreported by the general media but late into the night of 22 November the UK's Daylight Saving Bill cleared another hurdle.

Parliament granted what's called a 'money resolution', procedural geekery but crucial for it to move ahead, which means it is now with a committee of MPs to thrash out the fine details over the coming weeks.

Business minister Mark Prisk stated the Government will support the bill - proposed by Conservative MP Rebecca Harris - aimed at moving Britain's clocks forward by an hour all year round so long as amendments to the legislation are agreed.

Evidence for the positive effects of shifting the clocks forward by an hour has mounted in recent years, with the latest academic research showing that the change could save over 80 lives and at least half a million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions every year.

Knock-on benefits of reduced electricity bills, improved health and a boost for the leisure and tourism sector mean that lighter evenings now have a wider range of supporters than ever.

From tourism trade bodies to road safety campaigners, and from sporting organisations to serving government ministers, a new and diverse movement for lighter evenings is growing day by day.

Meanwhile opposition to the change is melting. Today, the old arguments about milkmen and postal workers needing early-morning sunlight to carry out deliveries look exactly like what they are – arguments from the 1970s.

The National Farmers Union, which had been a vocal critic of earlier proposals, recently announced that the reasons for farmers' past opposition to advancing the clocks had been ‘lost in history'.

With the next big Parliamentary vote just around the corner, the 10:10 Lighter Later campaign I stepping up its efforts to argument right across the UK by funding coalition meetings in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Its £5,000 fund target for the next phase was surpassed in just a few days and Lighter Later is now hoping to raise £7,500 to support its lobbying efforts.

Daniel Vockins, 10:10's campaign manager, said: "This is an idea whose time has come. All we need now is one big push from the British public.

"We commissioned research into a whole host of policy measures through which government could rapidly and painlessly reduce UK emissions. Reforming daylight savings hours came out top because of its substantial energy savings and a whole host of co-benefits."