Mad Science
As reported on Andrew Sullivan's blog, Inhabit.com has an article about Taiwanese researchers who made the leaves of trees glow by implanting nanoparticles of gold in them. The research is intriguing, but the article is very badly written. Here's my comment (we'll see if they actually publish it):
“…it could also greatly reduce light pollution in major cities.”
I’m a professional lighting designer and this statement makes no sense. The way to reduce light pollution is to aim the source at the task, e.g.; all the light from a street light should aim down. It seems laughable to assert that all the leaves will point in the same direction.
I wonder if they meant that self-illuminated trees would require no power and thus prevent the pollution created in generating electricity to power conventional street lights? Perhaps, but that is not what "light pollution" means.
“…it could also greatly reduce light pollution in major cities.”
I’m a professional lighting designer and this statement makes no sense. The way to reduce light pollution is to aim the source at the task, e.g.; all the light from a street light should aim down. It seems laughable to assert that all the leaves will point in the same direction.
I wonder if they meant that self-illuminated trees would require no power and thus prevent the pollution created in generating electricity to power conventional street lights? Perhaps, but that is not what "light pollution" means.