Position on Light Pollution in Singapore

[Fuzzball]

Hi all

Recently, I decided to write to NEA to find out what is their position on light pollution and how are they addressing this issue. It seems that this issue is not even on their radar and there are not even caps to stop the increase of LP.

I have put up the email and also NEA response for your comments

I do not know if by writing to NEA is the most effective way of addressing the issue but I thought this might get some message across, however small it might be.

Thanks and your comments appreciated.

------------------- Original Message -------------------
From: Peter Lim
Received: 21/11/2013 11:46 PM
To: Contact NEA; National Environment Agency
Subject: Light Pollution

Hi NEA

I was just wandering what is NEA stance on light pollution in Singapore?

A scan of the NEA website anti pollution link does not put light pollution as a form of pollution. As a amateur astronomer in Singapore this has been issue for me as through the years we are losing more and more of our nighttime sky and our children are not even able to see beautiful night skies anymore.

Light pollution also affects areas such as:

1) Energy waste
2) Affects on animal and human health and psychology
3) Disruption on eco systems.
4) Affects on our night sky.
5) Affects atmospheric pollution
6)city dwellers are disoriented by light clutter and glare.

I would like to know if there are plans by NEA to curb light pollution as a area of concern as around the world and many major states there are ordinance and laws to protect the night sky. Organizations such as International Dark Sky Association (IDA) are also fervently pushing for wiser dark skies policies in various countries.

I have attach two National Geographic link to impress upon the fact that these are major concerns around the world and we should do something about it.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/ ... pollution/
http://kids.nationalgeographic.com/kids ... pollution/

Thanks and appreciate your time.

A concerned Citizen

Peter LIm
-------------------------------------------

Dear Mr Lim

Thank you for your email dated 21 November 2013.

We have verified with our officers and currently there is no regulation to cap light levels in Singapore.

Thank you once again for your suggestions.

Regards,

Ruby Haron
Contact Centre
National Environment Agency

[Mariner]

The NEA is more concerned about Mozzies than the light pollution. Dark skies dun earn much money for the Government anyway.

[antares2063]

I have to say , that is a very well worded letter/email , Peter, kudos to you for making the effort to sound out the issue of out diminishing skies ..

but too bad the NEA response is so short

Regards,
Junwei

[Fuzzball]

Thanks Antares. Even though the response from NEA was short and non-consequential. The point was to get a message across. It still takes folks like us who love the night skies to continue our concerted effort!

Mariner, yes NEA is definitely focus on mozzies..and rightly so (I just recovered from dengue so I appreciate the effort they put:). I just hope that they give the light pollution issue some heads up too...as too much lights also attract mozzies, right?

[Mariner]

Perhaps NEA might not be the best agency to approach for the light pollution issue. Majority of the light pollution are, in my opinion, from (in no particular order):

Golfcourses (URA?)
Street lights (LTA)
Housing estates (HDB)
Park lighting (NParks)

I suspect it would take a concerted effort to bring about a concensus to reduce this problem. As I pointed out earlier, solving light pollution is not a revenue generating exercise so the government will not take it seriously. The best way to bring this across is probably to point out the energy wasting practices and cost saving alternatives that can bring about a reduction in light pollution. I believe the International Darkskies Association have some tips on these on their website.

How I miss those blackouts.....

[weixing]

Perhaps NEA might not be the best agency to approach for the light pollution issue. Majority of the light pollution are, in my opinion, from (in no particular order):

Golfcourses (URA?)
Street lights (LTA)
Housing estates (HDB)
Park lighting (NParks)

I suspect it would take a concerted effort to bring about a concensus to reduce this problem. As I pointed out earlier, solving light pollution is not a revenue generating exercise so the government will not take it seriously. The best way to bring this across is probably to point out the energy wasting practices and cost saving alternatives that can bring about a reduction in light pollution. I believe the International Darkskies Association have some tips on these on their website.

How I miss those blackouts.....

Hi,
May be should email URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY instead of NEA.

Anyway, I read in newspaper sometime ago that there are incentive for lighting up the building in CBD and Marina Centre... I do a search and found that the scheme is called "Lighting Incentive Scheme for Developments in the Central Business District (CBD) and Marina Centre"... I hope this does not make those building at the CBD and Marina Centre to any how install lighting and making the light pollution from bad to worst.

Have a nice day.

[Fuzzball]

Hi Wei Xing

Thanks. I would probably do just that. But I think the spin will be to position that we are not against lighting per se, but to encourage the right government organizations to put more thought into proper lighting that will keep lights directed to the ground and shaded.

The effort continues..