When was the last time you stood under the naked skies and gazed at the stars? How often does this happen to you? Let me guess, not too often? Why?

Among other reasons,our skies have turned into a haze of light. And the stars? We don’t see them anymore, at least not so often.

This is due to Light Pollution – any type of artificial light that shines outward and upward instead of downward, where it is actually needed. One might wonder how could this be pollution and how serious could it be, but it is an increasingly growing problem, whose real consequences we are only beginning to understand.

Nowadays, the night skies over most of the developed world, especially the USA, Europe and Japan, are a cloud of light. In fact, people in about a third of the USA, half of Europe and all of Japan cannot see the Milky Way at night.

Clearly, humans are not nocturnal creatures, but our desire to modify our surroundings and transform the natural state of things is a little frightening. By altering the natural day-night circle, we are changing more than we initially wanted.

Light pollution is greatly affecting animals’ reproduction, feeding and migration.

Birds, for example, react to light as metal to magnet. They tend to gather around light objects and fly in circle around them. This has become an issue, since we have thousands of brightly lit skyscrapers, that attract birds in a flying circle until they drop down with exhaustion. In addition, birds use light and darkness for guidance in their migration. Normally, longer days are associated with opportunity for feeding and longer nights are associated with winter time. When we light up the night sky, we fool the populations of birds into thinking there is a longer day. Consequently, they are able to feed more and reach the needed amount of body fat quicker. Thus, they leave for they migration route sooner than required for their survival. The real problem is that birds would leave before cold weather has set in and come back the following year before the warm weather has created good living conditions for their populations.

Yet another example, of how light pollution affects birds is their singing in unusual times.

Sea turtles also suffer the effects of light pollution. The female sea turtles naturally look for dark beaches to lay their eggs. Their hatchlings are then born with the instinct to move towards the reflective (therefore, brighter) surface of the water. However, the brightly lit cities and/or highways behind the beach line confuse the little hatchlings, who end up traveling towards that brightness and never reach the water, their natural habitat. In Florida, alone, the number of hatchlings that survive decreases with hundreds of thousands each year.

Frogs and toads are species with nighttime breeding rituals. Very often, the ponds and swamps they inhabit are located near bright lit highways or cities, so that these little earthlings never have the darkness necessary for their breeding practices.

Other examples of how our light pollution affects living forms are the many nocturnal creatures that feed in the darkness of the night. For those, it is increasingly difficult to find the darkness, so crucial for their survival. Insects, we all have notices, tend to cluster around streetlights. Therefore, it is increasingly difficult for nocturnal bats to feed and their populations suffer.

While one might not be particularly worried about the life of a frog, or a bat, in this case we are talking about whole populations of specie, whose numbers are decreasing because we have decided to modify the natural world and order of things. Needless to say, change in a single species can initiate a number of other changes in the biosphere. These changes might eventually affect us in a way we would not like. Maybe we ought to consider the big picture. After all, we are earthlings as well and we are also affected by the same natural principles that guide birds and toads.

The change and constant rotation of the day and the night governs our Circadian rhythms. In humans, the Circadian rhythm lasts approximately 24 hours and directs sleep and waking, core body temperature and hormonal levels.

Recent research (Kloog et al.) indicates that excessive exposure to artificial light at night may be a risk factor for breast cancer in women. These studies do not imply causation, only correlation, but they certainly demonstrate there are many things we do not understand yet. Our human species has evolved in a world where a day was followed by a night. All of a sudden, people were forced to work night shifts or simply live amidst the bright neon cities. Who knows how our bodies will react to this sudden change? What are we experimenting with? Is it not ourselves?

I would be an advocate of the bright night if we actually needed the light. Most of the time, however, this is not the case. Often, it is simply useless, aimless lighting! Office buildings with no businesses open during the night certainly do not need all their cubicles brightly lit, do they? The office building right next to my apartment building shines bright 24 hours, every day of the year, without a single soul inside. Who needs all of this light? And why waste all of this electricity? This is not only useless, this is bothering me and all the other people who cannot make their bedrooms dark enough to get a good night’s sleep.

One would think that in these hard times of economic and environmental challenges we would be more cautious not to waste as much energy. Yet, we indulge in our wasteful habits and cast light where we don’t even need it. The International Dark-Sky Association claims that about a third of outdoor lighting is wasted due to ineffective light fixtures. In the USA alone, the annual cost for wasted/ misdirected light costs $10 billion. This is a very simple equation – wasted light is wasted energy and money.

Replacing the fixtures in public spaces with dark-sky-friendly fixtures can surely be a strain on the budget. Between 2002 and 2005 the Canadian city of Calgary has replaced its older, drop-lens streetlights with flat-lens night-sky friendly fixtures (Brad Scriber, Nightlight Savings Time). This enormous project of replacing 37, 000 lights was a major investment. But with $1.7 million in annual energy savings, the project is expected to pay for itself by 2012.

“Of all the pollutions we face, light pollution is perhaps the most easily remedied“

~Verlyn Klinkenborg, The National Geographic

There is a lot we can do!

We can update existing fixtures with new designs that reduce glare and focus light on the ground, instead of outwards and upwards. When buying light fixtures we can look for the light-fixture seal of approval by the International Dark-Sky Association. We can install motion-activated lights for parks, parking lots, building and so on. Switch off the lights when we don’t need them! Try to eliminate aimless lighting! Care! Begin to change our habits and not waste! And step by step we might all be able to see the stars again.

Until then, starry nights will be “rare and exotic skyscapes for many” (Tamie R. Smith). If you would like to plan a dark-sky vacation, these are the spots that offer excellent conditions for stargazing: Death Valley National Park, California and Nevada; Natural Bridges National Monument, Utah; Cherry Springs State Park, Pennsylvania; Acadia National Park, Maine.

That is correct, these days, we need a National Park with its laws and regulations in order to gaze at the stars. I am quite sure, our ancestors did not envision the problems we are having today.

Have a starry night!

The movie “The Impact of Global Warming” was a convincing portrayal of the numerous effects that Global warming can have on our planet. Even more, the movie demonstrates that some of the issues are already unfolding, ready to claim their victims. After investigating threatening phenomena from different corners of the world and raising the flags in Africa, Alaska, USA, Ethiopia and Bangladesh, the documentary grasps immediate attention and asks for solutions and alternatives.

Fishing is a central part not only of Alaska’s cultural background, but also of its economy. However, the movie reports that “the times of plenty seems to be over”, especially as far as salmon is concerned. A local fisherman shares with disappointment: “Big fat salmon is gone.” The temperature of the water has risen with 0,6^oC and while this may not seem a lot to us, it is significant for fish in certain regions. This causes the tradition to gradually fade and stands for the economic difficulties as there is reported decline in salmon catch by one tenth.

Still enjoying the beauty and wilderness of Alaska, the crew of this documentary cannot but show us that many areas of the forests are diseased because of the insect Spruce Beetle. Normally, the creature would be seen in much warmer areas, but now, because of the onset of global warming, it is eating Alaska’s forests. Besides, now the insects are capable of reproducing much faster because of the temperatures (which appear to be ultimate for its survival).

Next, the cameras’ focus moves to Montana, US – probably the most untouched and pristine region in the whole United States that is known for having many glaciers. However, many of the glaciers are now lost for good. A retrospect from the last 150 years reveals that about one half of the pure glaciers are now gone. Seeing fewer and fewer glaciers is easily explained by the higher average temperatures, especially in the summer season. Looking at the same photograph points, but in different time periods, one can see the huge ice masses gradually disappearing…A sad fact indeed.

Yet, it is not only the wilderness, but also the highly populated beaches and coastal areas that suffer the effects of global warming. Many areas are at risk of being

severely flooded. In case of a hurricane, the cities get easily under water. In addition to this, there is even more erosion and in more rapid rates. The documentary interviews people whose homes got flooded and almost destroyed. As the movie points out, trillions of dollars in real estate only are at risk, primarily because of the effects of global warming.

Afterward, the movie tells the story of Bangladesh, a highly populated area of mainly farmers and people who have no other place to go. The huge amounts of rainfalls and flooding only add more pain and misery to the life of the poor population that does not have the means to fight the hazards of nature. Of course, while the most highly developed nations are responsible for the emissions of C₂O in the atmosphere, it is the poor nations that have to pay for it first, with the highest of price – human life.

The movie, next, points out that global warming does not only have environmental impacts, but also affects our health, as well as the health of our children, who are the most vulnerable part of the human population. Nowadays we are witnessing an asthma epidemic that claims more and more victims and that seems to be related to pollution and higher amounts of C₂O in the atmosphere. In addition, global warming encourages very dangerous pests and bacteria to conquer more and more new territories. In this way, Etiopia was, quite recently, attacked by a Malaria epidemic. Such cases could be severe, considering that the local population does not have immunity for the disease and has hardly ever expected such an enemy to attack. This, the authors of the movie remind us, is not confined in Africa only, but is a general phenomenon.

The “Impact of Global warming” really makes us realize the fact that global warming is not only universal, but it is also all-inclusive. Just like a cancer on our planet, it affects each and every one of us and is quite capable of reaching every field of human activity and, therefore, should never be underestimated, ignored or denied as the burning issue and main challenge of our time.

View This Poll

Eight Millennium Development Goals cont…

Step Seven: Ensuring Environmental Sustainability

If there is one thing that we should not estimate in dollar value, it is our environment and natural resources that, by definition, are gifts from nature, but are vulnerable and exhaustible as well. Sadly, the World Bank making the equation “No coral reefs = No fish = No income”. Fish is also being attacked by many different enemies: the growing appetite of the growing population of the planet and the polluted water of the World Ocean. Near coral reefs one can see boys with missing limbs – the casualties of home-made bombs to catch fish. In this case, can we easily put our finger on who is the real victim, as fishing is vital in the poor regions of the world. The result of having our oceans polluted is not as simple as “No fish = No income”, because in addition to this, 3 million people die prematurely each year from water borne diseases. The World Health Organization (WHO) also reports that 1 million people die, each year, from urban air pollution and respiratory infections; diarrhea and malaria cause almost 20% of the deaths in developing countries.

Environmental issues go hand in hand with producing and consuming energy, and the growing ‘power hunger’ of societies. As oil supplies are almost exhausted and the price of natural gas is increasing, we rely mainly on coal to satisfy our growing demands for energy. In general, coal-burning power plants consume 25 tons of coal each minute, having turbines that produce more than 3 000mega-watts of electric power and sending a vast ocean of steam into the atmosphere. Of course, significant amounts of damaging substances are emitted in the process, including sulfur dioxide (the main cause for acid rains) and mercury. Such plants supply The United States with half its electricity producing as much climate-warming carbon dioxide as America’s trucks, planes, cars and buses combined. Lester Lefkowitz, a journalist for the National Geographic, comments: “America’s taste for bigger houses, along with population growth in the West and air-conditioning-dependent Southeast, will help push up the U.S. appetite for power by a third over the next twenty years. And in the developing world, especially China, electricity needs will rise even faster as factories burgeon and hundreds of millions of people buy their first refrigerators and TVs. Much of that demand is likely to be met with coal (according to data from the Department of Energy).”

Global warming and the Green House Effect are already alarming issues and yet, of all fossil fuels, the most widely used – coal – produces the most carbon dioxide per unit of energy. The most obvious question one may ask is “Isn’t there a way to reduce the amount if C₂O emitted during the burning of coal?” Of course, scientists have already provided a solution for that problem. Julio Friedmann who studies carbon dioxide management at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory explains: “Right now, if you took a plant and slapped a carbon-capture device on it, you’d lose 25 percent of the energy. Needless to mention, few companies will be willing to reduce the amount of energy they produce and even fewer governments will encourage loosing sources of power in the name of Environmental sustainability. Steven Vick, the general manager of the Wabash power plant, in southwestern Indiana, claim to be “The cleanest coal-fired power plant in the world.” Vick explains the company is using a “technology that’s set up for total C₂O removal.” Basically, what this method does is inject carbon dioxide deep underground and seal it away from the atmosphere, so that it can no longer cause any harm. However, many scientists argue that this may still be an enormous threat for people , as we do not know enough about the effect of burying C₂O underground. Yet, William Rosenberg of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government says: “The fact that it’s proved in Indiana and Florida doesn’t mean executives are going to make a billion-dollar bet on it”. As to enforcing laws in order to preserve the environment, U.S. utilities are still allowed to freely emit as much carbon dioxide as they wish. I wonder how this lack of governmental participation is in accordance with The Eight Millennium Developmental Goals, under which The United States signed their approval? And still we have plenty of time to resolve this issue, as with today’s rates of consummation, we have enough amount of coal to last for the next 250 years. In the meantime, people, like journalist Lester Lefkowitz, will continue discussing “The Coal Paradox – We can’t live without it. But can we survive with it?” while owners of coal-burning power plants, like Angeline Protogore, say gratefully “This is why we’re making all the power” when entering their air-conditioned offices.

The more expensive nuclear reactors are the other main source of energy today, but it is also a most controversial issue that has been argued upon in the course of the last twenty years. More than twenty years ago, before dawn on April 26, 1986, the Chernobyl’s Nuclear Power Plant’s number four reactor exploded, becoming one of the most tragic accidents in human history. Thirty people died in the blast, among the fire flames or were exposed to lethal radiation. But this was only the beginning, because the fallout, 400 times more radioactive than the Hiroshima bomb, triggered an epidemic of thyroid cancer in adults and, especially, children. Normally, the disastrous accident also caused enormous economic losses for Ukraine. Although the families of the victims received compensations, no one can make up for the genetic and psychological damage that has been done and that still causes suffering.

People in Pripyat, the nearest to Chernobyl’s reactor town, were evacuated in the same day and given iodine pills, but the population of nearby Belarus did not receive pills for another week. Political agendas kept people from learning the truth about the explosion and the contamination of the region, so children were drinking milk from cows that have been eating the radioactive grass. That is why, the 230 “excessive” deaths in the 1990s from leukemia, other cancers and heart diseases are blamed upon the Chernobyl crisis. The radioactivity was so powerful, that even under the concrete-and-steel sarcophagus, the remnants of the reactor still hold a threat. One may argue that today we are better prepared to meet an accident of any kind accordingly. Many scientists argue that a “nuclear renaissance” will help preserve the environment while meeting our demands for electricity. Charles Petit, a journalist, reminds that members of the Congress support the idea of embracing the atom again. If we do so, and there is another accident, will the administration take all the responsibility? Will it give people iodine pills immediately, or will it wait for a week?

Being attracted by nuclear industry’s pros, many countries rush into building nuclear reactors. France already owes 78 percent of its energy due to nuclear power. India alone has 15 nuclear reactors already at work and eight more are under construction. Baldev Raj, director of the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, clearly states his credo: “If you have a way to make electricity, then we say, make as much as you can.” Still, however, no one can advocate a worst case scenario.

The debate seems to be going in circles while global dimming and warming have never been that alarming.

Humanity is waking up to unite and work for achieving a better future for all of us. In the year 2000 the organization of the United Nations came up with “The eight Millennium Developmental Goals” to guide us in out actions in the near future. This blueprint has been agreed to by the world’s leading developmental institutions and all countries. The target date of this Brave Project is the year 2015.

The eight Millennium Development Goals are:

1. To eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.

2. To achieve universal primary education.

3. To promote gender equality and to empower women.

4. To reduce child mortality.

5. To improve maternal health.

6. To combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.

7. To ensure environmental sustainability.

8. To develop a global partnership for development.

Kofi Annan, the Secretary-general of the United Nation, prompted people that “we must start now. And we must more than double global development assistance over the next few years. Nothing less will help us achieve the Goals.” Nine years have passed since the goals have been clearly formulated. However, does it happen that we ask ourselves “How much did we achieve?” and “Where will we be in 2015?” The 2005 report of the United Nations states that poverty is falling and progress has been made against hunger. Also, efforts have been made to make sure that children in sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Asia and Oceania are receiving “a high-quality education”. The report reads “the gender gap is closing” and “death rates in children under age 5 are dropping”. Yet another thing we have to be extremely proud of is that “some progress has been made in reducing maternal deaths in developing countries, but not in the countries where giving birth is most risky.” As to Goal 6 in the plan for development, it is stated that yet “there is no cure for AIDS, and prevention efforts must be intensified in every region of the world if the target is to be reached.” In ensuring environmental sustainability we did not have huge success, as “most countries have committed to the principles of sustainable development. But this has not resulted in sufficient progress to reverse the loss of the world’s environmental resources. Achieving the goal will require greater attention”. The mere fact that there is “The United Nations Millennium Declaration” is enough to show we have already developed some global partnership that we can feel proud of. Nine years have passed, and all we have are vague statements that have only one message – we need not lose all hope yet, someone, out there, is working on those issues; someone out there probably cares, so that humanity may eventually face 2015 with pride – we have achieved the Millennium Development Goals.

After all, we have six more years until the onset of the target-date and, we all know, anything may happen in six years. Setting highly challenging goals for oneself is, undoubtedly, motivating, but when the subject of consideration is millions of people all over the world we need to be a little more realistic, rather than romantically-ambitious. Are our good intentions just another paradox in our times?

Let us track our progress…