Durham's light saber: not so powerful, is the Force?

The newest addition to Durham's skyline, the Jaume Plensa light sculpture "Sleep No More" -- or as fellow local blogger Michael Bacon christened it, Durham's light saber -- drew some opposition after its announcement this fall.

As you'll recall, a small group of local skywatchers opposed the concept from its announcement, forming a group and getting some press attention for their concerns over the light pollution impact on the night sky, a topic that's reared its head in Durham around street light discussions as well.

One of the group's founders, Mark Gibson, decided to check out the light saber on its first night for himself, and found that the impact wasn't so bad, simply because of, well, all the other light pollution we have in the Bull City:

I had to drive to Durham to see the Bridge to the Sky myself. As I got closer to Durham, I kept looking at the horizon to see if I could see the light. I finally saw it when I was in downtown Durham. I don’t think the citizens got the spectacular sculpture they were wanting. It may have been the overpowering interior lights in the building shining to the outside or the stadium style lights at the site of the sculpture. Or could the blue light caused the sculpture to loose the effectiveness of the light. I took out my Sky Quality Meter (SQM) and took some readings. 11.22 at the sculpture site. 15.01 at the field in front of theThe reading on the street where I parked was 10.04. As I drove home I wanted to see if I could see the light from the Airport Observation Deck. I stopped by and could not see it. I got a reading of 18.22 there. Since all the other street lights the city has overpowers this 7,000 watt light bulb it should raise a flag to the citizens that they need to see why the waste so much light.

Gibson's findings mirror my own; I've seen the light, say, on Duke's East Campus (where it looks more like a bat-signal calling some caped crusader to the scene), or driving towards downtown on 147 (eastbound, there's a point where it neatly aligns with the steeple of the Duke Memorial United Methodist Church.) But it hasn't been broadly viewable throughout the sky, for instance.

So this chapter in the public discourse comes to a close -- though Gibson's larger point about light pollution, in Durham and in other cities, remains. Several local neighborhoods have had intensive debates about the value of streetlights, a discourse I don't expect to see end any time soon.

H/t Indy Weekly for the photog.

Comments

[bb]

Mark has a lot of great things to say. I just wish he (and so many others in this internet age) would take the time to write in complete sentences and proofread what they write. It lends a lot more authority and professionalism to the discourse. I almost didn't have the patience to get through the particular comment Kevin quoted.

[eah919]

Nice Yoda-style headline.

[David McMullen]

Saturday night, with a bit of haze in the air and some high, thin cirrus, I could see the beam from the sculpture when I looked for it. It was interesting to see how it lit up the cirrus - the very faint beam suddenly became much more visible. If I'd had a sextant, I'd probably have been able to estimate the height of the cloud cover pretty closely. It would also be pretty handy if you were lost in Durham and needed to orient yourself.

Of course, I have no real need to know the height of the cloud cover over the city, and I don't often need a navigational beacon to help me find downtown Durham at night.

[Michael Bacon]

It strikes me that this sculpture would be a lot cooler looking if we in fact reduced the generalized light pollution around the city. Downtown, with Ambacco's moving bull, the SunTrust tower's sign lighting, the ballpark, and everything else, will probably always be a center of light pollution, but you'd think we could get it down elsewhere in the city.

Just a simple resolution that all new street light fixtures installed around the city should be designed to restrict upward light pollution would make a big difference.

[Natalie]

I can see it every night it's on from my front porch.

I remain commited to the original sentiment that it is rather annoying and a waste of electricity rather than something that is beautiful, thought provoking or interesting.

[RWE]

Durham's lighting ordinance is actually fairly tough. It restricts "non-directional" lights to 15' in height, and "directional" fixtures (which emit no light above a horizontal plane) to 30' in height. There's also a stipulation that accent lights shall be "located aimed or shielded to minimize light spill into the night sky."

Lighting for recreation and events in the Downtown Tier and the University College zoning districts are specifically exempted from these rules though, which explains the Plensa sculpture and the East Campus field hockey lights.

Duke Energy's old school "cobra head" street lights don't meet the current ordinance, and are probably the worst source of glare and light pollution. Maybe Duke will replace them when they bury all the power lines. I'll hold my breath.

[Emily]

I saw it a week or two ago while driving home on W Club. I for one did find it beautiful, thought provoking, and interesting. On that overcast night it looked like a flower in the sky - a long stem difusing multi-level petals into the cloud cover. Perhaps in time it'll lose it's novelty, but right now myself and my family are enjoying it.

[AR]

Count me in the "beautiful, thought provoking, and interesting" camp. I like it!

[Justin]

I was/am thrilled about this statue coming to Durham because to me it very much signifies that we are the creative capital of the State.

As for the light pollution, it is not just a local problem. The only places you can go in the US to get a reasonably unfettered view of the night sky are on top of a mountain or in the middle of the desert.

With that said, I would love to see some sort of regulations against upward-shining lights to reduce the problem.

[Chris]

it's kinda weak.