On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 23:24:23 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 22:27:20 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 1/21/2014 10:15 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/21/2014 10:09 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 21:45:51 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:


Nationally I'm sure there are many in the same situation. I don't
pump my own water and I heat with
natural gas. But so do millions of other who figure into the 'US
average'.

Those must be the ones who "use 30% of their electricity on lights"
(or whatever number you want to use.

I would also believe it is city thinking that most people have nat gas
coming to their house. When I was in Maryland, the gas line stopped
about 10 miles outside the beltway going South.
They may have expanded that by now.



I think you've missed something Gregg. Where did natural gas come into
the discussion?

Also, nobody said anybody uses 30% of their electricity on lights.
I offered a stat that said *13%* of residential electricity is used for
lighting.


He doesn't need lighting. He has good night vision. I guess he doesn't
get the point that some of us need light to see at night and welcome the
savings LED lighting affords us.

I don't need light when I am not there.
I guess you missed that part.

If you insist on lighting up empty rooms and the perimeter of your
house when nothing is there. I guess you are pitching in to use a more
efficient light source but you are still polluting the sky with
unwanted light.

http://pollutionfacts.org/content/light-pollution-facts

When we were at Bryce Canyon, the park rangers put on a presentation of star gazing at night in the
park. Leading up to the telescope viewing was an indoor slide show. They had several slides to show
how the light pollution has been working its way across the western US from California. I'd never
thought of it, but that show made a big impression.