Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Measuring the Impacts of Existing Artificial Optical Radiation at 3 Sites: A Pilot Study of Military, Student, and Older Adult Housing Communities
EPA Grant Number: SU834732Title: Measuring the Impacts of Existing Artificial Optical Radiation at 3 Sites: A Pilot Study of Military, Student, and Older Adult Housing Communities
Investigators: Hebert, Paulette , Asojo, Abimbola , Eckhoff, Anna , Peek, Gina , Chaney, Sylvia , Zhang, Xiaofei
Institution: Oklahoma State University , University of Oklahoma
EPA Project Officer: Page, Angela
Phase: I
Project Period: August 15, 2010 through August 14, 2011
Project Amount: $10,000
RFA: P3 Awards: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability Focusing on People, Prosperity and the Planet (2010) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development , P3 Challenge Area - Sustainable and Healthy Communities , P3 Challenge Area - Air Quality , P3 Awards , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
The intended outcome is the informed choice of sustainable lighting by housing community stakeholders
The objectives were:
- to document and evaluate existing lighting and optical radiation effects in housing community field settings and to compare these to recommendations and standards.
- to increase housing community stakeholders’ awareness of sustainable versus unsustainable lighting products’ specification, operation, and disposal;
- to increase housing community stakeholders’ awareness and knowledge of the impacts of optical radiation – visual and biological;
- to determine barriers to housing community stakeholders’ future adoption of sustainable lighting for housing through surveys;
- to explore effect of age and housing community group type upon perceptions of safety and security relative to lighting through surveys; and
- to develop and present educational materials to stakeholders and the public regarding optical radiation‘s visual and biological impacts.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
Outputs included: surveys of housing community residents: college students, older adults, and adults in military families. AutoCAD (computer model) drawings documenting the existing exterior lighting at ten sites, documentation of existing lighting source types, documentation of existing horizontal and vertical site light levels and sky quality, and comparisons of observed and recommended lighting levels for horizontal and vertical light levels for building exteriors were also produced.
Additionally, an abstract has also been submitted to and accepted by the Sustainable Development and Planning 2011 Conference (to be held in Wessex, England in July, 2011with open access. A full paper is in development for the associated peer-reviewed journal.) Other journal articles and conference presentation proposals relevant to housing stakeholders are in development. The professionally produced and edited students-inaction video is also in its final stages of development and editing. This video will be posted in a streaming broadcast and also shown at the NSDE. Eight powerpoint presentations were produced by groups of students in the sustainability course to document their participation in the field studies. These were presented in class to sixtyseven undergraduate and graduate students, and three of these presentations have been selected for display at NSDE. A research poster for the NSDE has also been created.
Outcomes include that over one hundred and fifty undergraduate students and graduate students, representing five different courses, participated in some aspect of the current study. Phase 1 has involved or is anticipated to involve a total of four disciplines: interior design, apparel design, merchandising, and landscape architecture during the research period. Participants’ field study observations occurred from October 2010 through December 2010.
Field studies occurred at ten sites in two U. S. States in the mid-west and examined military, older adult, and student housing units. Measurements of lux and ultraviolet light, in both the horizontal and vertical exterior planes; and sky quality measurements; were taken. Light source spectra were identified.
All sites showed some signs of artificial optical radiation, some on or near housing unit fenestration. Most of the housing sites had “dark surroundings” however, one site had “bright surroundings.” All sites’ exterior buildings’ surfaces’ reflectance values were found to be “dark”. All sites’ average illumination averages were below industry flood lighting recommendations but most sites fell within the levels recommended for security lighting and exceeded safety lighting recommendations.The ultraviolet measurements at all sites were found to be 0. Sky quality measurements across student housing sites ranged poor to fair. Few sites exclusively utilized unshielded exterior fixtures. The light source most often found at the sites was fluorescent. The second most identified was incandescent.
Surveys were administered from October 2010 and will continue through March 30, 2011. Data are still being coded and analyzed, however, to date a total of one hundred and sixty housing residents, living in two U.S. States in the mid-west, aged 20 to 96, from military, older adult, and university student communities took part as respondents.
The majority of the ninety-two college student respondents indicated that outdoor lighting had entered into their windows at night. Most of this group had installed window treatments to control light inside their housing units. Despite problems with artificial optical radiation night-time intrusion, few respondents were willing to talk with a property owner or other person in authority. Nearly half of the college students reported that they could not see the Milky Way at night from their residential community. Results weighed in almost equally as to whether unshielded fixed were used outdoors at these locations. A number of students perceived the exterior lighting at their residence as too bright. The majority of students perceived that the lighting near their home is good for both walking and driving. Almost half of the students queried do not worry about tripping, falling, or hitting obstacles outside. Results indicate the majority of student respondents were not concerned about the possible health effects of artificial light exposure at night. Results reveal that light coming in through windows did not disturb the students’ sleep. Conversely, most of the student respondents are concerned about the possible health effects due to ultraviolet light exposure.
Conclusions:
This study tested a new methodology and substantially contributed to new knowledge in the areas of artificial optical radiation, housing communities, and sustainability. The study found evidence of light pollution and unsustainable lighting at the student housing sites and some industry recommendations had not been followed. Students expressed concerns about artificial optical radiation but had not personally taken action at their own housing sites. However, this research is somewhat skewed towards the current residents of Oklahoma and Colorado. The survey participants and field study sites were selected through non-randomized convenience sampling. Therefore, results from this study cannot be generalized.
A national study with additional field study sites and survey participants is needed. Additionally, focus group interviews targeted towards sustainable lighting product development and promotion would allow for more influence on housing stakeholders. The creation of education tools for housing stakeholders is also anticipated to increase the use of sustainable lighting in housing communities in the future.
Supplemental Keywords:
measurement methods, decision makingThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.