It is currently Sat Dec 04, 2021 11:51 pm

All times are UTC






Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 264 posts ] 


Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 1:08 am 
Offline
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 12:48 am
Posts: 6227
Images: 1729
That would explain why, when I cycled to Darlington and it had gone dark on the final stretch from Northallerton, I could see the massive skyglow from 'the toon'.

It's never truly dark in Newcastle... the skies are orange, and so too are a lot of the people!

_________________
Tesco brings all the mums to the yard...
and they're like "do you have your club card"
Image


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:27 am 
Offline
Member
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:31 pm
Posts: 610
Images: 36
It's a shambles really, they will probably end up getting replaced by LEDs before long like the Sapphires on the Western Bypass. What needs to be remembered is that most of that PFI was done from 2005 - 2010 when the only light source available and used be councils was SON, still doesn't excuse 150W lamps! Meanwhile over the border all side roads are going LED and very dim! Sunderland is the same SON bowled Iridiums everywhere, but if I'm right in thinking they're PFI started before Newcastle's even.

North Tyneside is starting a programme to dim lights but I'm not sure if 150W Arcs are used here too.

Still tell me PFI that won't end up with a greater consumption of energy. All the ones I've seen will.


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2014 12:50 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:27 pm
Posts: 1733
Images: 200
Well, it's not true that SON was the only light source available in 2005. Southampton started using ceramic metal halide since 2001 and started rolling out in a bigger way in 2003, and started using CFL in 2004. West Sussex was using CFL back in 2000. Whilst ceramic metal halide never achieved much popularity in PFIs for cost and technology reasons, excluding CosmoPolis which has achieved high populatity, compact fluorescent has been popular in PFIs because it is cheap. Staffordshire used compact fluorescent in its PFI before the Newcastle and North Tyneside PFI started.

Some of the earlier PFIs let the company running the job have too much of a free reign over lighting, and councils invested little effort into specifications. This is why earlier PFIs tended to feature unpainted galvanised columns, SON lanterns and conventional ballasts. It took a few years for lessons to be learnt, with councils providing more thorough specifications and better hardware being installed.

Newcastle and North Tyneside weren't the worst in terms of hardware specified, it's merely the fact that they opted for such high wattages which flew in the face of British standards and everything every other council in the country did. Can anybody understand how they came to use 150W lamps at 6m mounting height, when most councils at the time only used 70W? It's like somebody said "hey, money is no option". It's not as if column spacings are any greater either.


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:40 pm 
Offline
Member
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:31 pm
Posts: 610
Images: 36
The sky glow surrounding the Newcastle area should have decreased, all the Arcs used in the PFI were either curved glass or cutoff. All SOX is now gone and nearly all SON is too from Gateshead. Newcastle still holds a stock of nearly full SON as does South Tyneside, North Tyneside, Sunderland. A good chunk of Sunderland's is  deep bowled Iridiums, many where they are not necessary.


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:12 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:27 pm
Posts: 1733
Images: 200
Scott15 wrote:
The sky glow surrounding the Newcastle area should have decreased, all the Arcs used in the PFI were either curved glass or cutoff. All SOX is now gone and nearly all SON is too from Gateshead. Newcastle still holds a stock of nearly full SON as does South Tyneside, North Tyneside, Sunderland. A good chunk of Sunderland's is  deep bowled Iridiums, many where they are not necessary.


That is not true. Light pollution caused by light coming directly from the lantern is one thing. A considerable amount of light pollution is caused by light reflecting off the road surface. You only have to look at aerial imagery of London from several years ago where the full cut off SON lit sections of the M25 are more visible from space at night than the sections lit by MA60s.


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 03, 2014 11:19 am 
Offline
Member
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:31 pm
Posts: 610
Images: 36
The bulk of Newcastles lighting was SON anyway before the PFI with large numbers of Vectras, ZX3s, MRL6s, GEC turtles. Even in the residential areas Beta79s,  ZX1s, and smaller wattage Vectras were used. So I would say the greater proportion of the lighting was SON anyway. The last SOX lit main  road I can remember was Scotswood road which was widened to dual carrigeway around 2006. Nearly all major routes in Newcastle are fitted with black A2000s installed around 2000.


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 9:57 pm 
Offline
Founder
Random avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:17 pm
Posts: 1679
Images: 32
This Gamma 6's fate lies with solar-powered installations


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:38 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:27 pm
Posts: 1733
Images: 200
Carrying on from the LED discussion on the Nobel Prize thread:

GreatNorburyStDepot wrote:
I suppose the main view I have on the LED story is, whether the search for the high power, high efficiency white LED is pushed on by the following needs. (Nb: I'm not into any of that "conspiracy theory" stuff).

The current push for LED technology is a good idea because it will:

1. Conserve the Earth's finite resources or

2. Reduce the demand for electricity and thus reduce CO2 emissions or.

3. Reduce the demand for electricity, thus causing redundant assets to be closed and providing real savings for generators, due to reduced overheads which could be passed on to consumers in the form of lower bills or.

4. Reduce demand for electricity, allowing redundant assets to be closed and providing real savings for generators, due to reduced overheads which could be passed onto shareholders in the form of higher dividends or.

5. Provide a valuable and intellectually controllable technology, which could in theory be licensed to LED manufacturers - like GM bio-technology.


Unfortunately I cannot see LED generating any power savings on a global scale. History has proven that the more efficient lighting becomes the brighter and more widespread it becomes.

Take UK councils. When streets were lit with mercury and tungsten, you may have found 250W mercury lamps on main roads and 100W tungsten lamps on side roads. What about the present day? You may find that these same main roads are lit with 150W SON and the side roads with 70W SON. Power saving? Yes, if it weren't for the fact that there are more columns at closer spacings now, plus more roads are lit as main roads than in the past, and roads that were previously unlit are now lit. There is also the present day. Now that LED is being introduced councils are starting to move away from the recent policy of reintroducing part night lighting and switch offs. Whilst that is a good thing in many places, there are a number of roads and motorways which don't actually need lighting which are now less likely to be reviewed and have lighting removed. Funny how the number of motorway lighting switch offs has slowed down since the introduction of LED.

It is also all well and good showing evidence of how LED technology is more energy efficient, but how is it in practice? For example, some of the recently relit main roads in Southampton have Philips Luma 1s, which with their maximum LED configuration run at 180W. These are mounted on columns which could have potentially had 140W CosmoPolis lamps fitted, which have a lower circuit wattage than 180W. Or another example, the Highways Agency replaced some Philips MA60s, 180W SOX with a circuit wattage of about 230W, with Luma 3s, maximum LED configuration with a power consumption of 446W. The new lighting is very good, but then again it should be at nearly double the power consumption!


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:39 pm 
Offline
Member
Random avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:13 am
Posts: 106
Images: 9
Location: Sheffield, South Yorkshire
Quote:
Unfortunately I cannot see LED generating any power savings on a global scale. History has proven that the more efficient lighting becomes the brighter and more widespread it becomes.

Take UK councils. When streets were lit with mercury and tungsten, you may have found 250W mercury lamps on main roads and 100W tungsten lamps on side roads. What about the present day? You may find that these same main roads are lit with 150W SON and the side roads with 70W SON. Power saving? Yes, if it weren't for the fact that there are more columns at closer spacings now, plus more roads are lit as main roads than in the past, and roads that were previously unlit are now lit. There is also the present day. Now that LED is being introduced councils are starting to move away from the recent policy of reintroducing part night lighting and switch offs. Whilst that is a good thing in many places, there are a number of roads and motorways which don't actually need lighting which are now less likely to be reviewed and have lighting removed. Funny how the number of motorway lighting switch offs has slowed down since the introduction of LED.

It is also all well and good showing evidence of how LED technology is more energy efficient, but how is it in practice? For example, some of the recently relit main roads in Southampton have Philips Luma 1s, which with their maximum LED configuration run at 180W. These are mounted on columns which could have potentially had 140W CosmoPolis lamps fitted, which have a lower circuit wattage than 180W. Or another example, the Highways Agency replaced some Philips MA60s, 180W SOX with a circuit wattage of about 230W, with Luma 3s, maximum LED configuration with a power consumption of 446W. The new lighting is very good, but then again it should be at nearly double the power consumption!


It's a very good point - around my parts, I've seen lots of new installations of the Philips/WRTL Stela Wide with 52 LEDs. These units are rated at about 70w (give or take, depending on losses). Thing is, they're often replacing 35 and 55w SOX lanterns. Yes they have higher gear losses but it still doesn't add up to the 70w used by the LEDs. In some cases, column spaces are increased so over a long stretch, the savings may be more noticeable but in a lot of cases, there is this common assumption that just sticking LED lanterns on poles is enough to see substantial savings.

The same principle applies to any light source really - rather than just the lamp and ballast losses, there's photocells/CMS to think about, column spacing and height and then the actual light levels. In my opinion, switching from SOX or SON to any white light source would require a slight drop in brightness (which would be negligible to the human eye anyway) combined with low-lux photocells and greater spacings to produce a considerable saving.


Top
 Profile  Personal album 
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:23 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:21 pm
Posts: 316
Images: 0
To put it bluntly, the streetlighting in the UK nowadays is in a mess. This is not to denigrate those who work in this public service, however the fact remains that like a lot of public services, the provision of street lighting has become a victim of local politics, risk assessments, PFIs, fashion and a more demanding general public, some of whom believe that all-night public illumination is a human right.

Have you noticed how every urban regeneration scheme always seems to include new street lighting, often at a level which is inappropriate for the area and always using the same commonplace equipment. This lighting "gluttony" seems to be the rule, especially if the funding is not primarily from the local taxpayer.

The rot started a fair while ago. Understandably, many members of Ukastle regret the phase out of SOX and mercury, (with their classic "survivors") in favour of these trendy lighting schemes. When the reasons for doing so (higher energy efficiency, CCTV coverage, running costs, CO2 etc) as outlined already in this topic struggle to add up (ie the new lamp uses even more energy or gives less light than its predecessor) there must be other reasons behind the shift.

Sometimes, I think it would be better if streetlighting was dimmed out to a minimal level. People these days walking down the street obviously don't need to look where they're going - far too busy looking down at their smart-phones!

_________________
"I can't think what you want to go to London for, you won't find any better lampposts there..."
L.S. Lowry. 1887-1976.


Top
 Profile  
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 264 posts ] 

All times are UTC



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests



Search for: