Light pollution. Was: Exterior House Lighting

Welcome people.
Nice little discussion group you got here.
I found the particular subject listed above by doing a google search.
It struck a subject that I have been thinking about for a while.
So I will post my opinion.
My opinion is a little off topic with the original post,
so I will start a new topic.

Please forgive me if I look like I am trolling.
If you think I am, then please ignore this post.

Warning.. This is only my opinion!
Please don't take offense at it.
Goodness knows, it always seems like someone
takes offence at something.
I am just trying to give an opinion from the other side.

I live in an area that has no laws governing lighting types
or designs.

I live 20 miles from the nearest large city.
That being Bloomington Indiana .
And that large city would be considered a small town
by California standards.
I have lived here all my life, and the only
real neighbors I have is the gray wolves and coyotes.
Their particular mentality is something
you have to get accustomed to.
If you are confronted by a wolf on a path,
there is a few things you do NOT do.

So, in regard to outdoor lighting, I am quite fond of it.
You appreciate it when you are working outside at night,
and there is forest in all directions.

I see where people come from,
that want light pollution to be controlled.

But I have seen some laws in a few states
(like new Mexico) that step over the line.
I am perfectly fine with the idea of pointing the
light to the ground, and not shining any into the sky.
But
They put laws on the type of light source that you can use
in the outdoor lights, not just the type of light fixture you use them in.

I am sorry, but you should be able to use any type
of light in the light fixture you want to.
If you are paying the electric bill.
If I want to use a 1Kw carbon arc that generates
the same amount of light as a 50W incandescent bulb,
So be it.
As long as the light is controlled,
and not shining on other people's property, or the sky.

Just because I drive a car that gets 40M/G, doesn't
mean that I should try to outlaw SUV's that consume more fuel
than a tractor trailer loaded With 40 tons, pulling a hill.
As long as the vehicle meets the DOT regulations,
I have no complaint with what they drive.

I feel that the type of light you use on your property
is the same thing.
As long as I pay the bill, it is no one's business.
One of the things that gets me is they allow HPS and MH,
But they ban MV??????????????

If you was wanting to be astronomer friendly, you would
ban all non monochromatic light sources.
If you allow HPS and MH, why single out MV?

Yes, MV is the least efficient at producing light of the HID bulbs.
But some people compare MV lamp efficacy to incandescent lights.
There is really no comparison thought.
The efficiency is about three times greater on average.

And yet, they isolate them from the other "White light" source.
That being metal halide.
Which is only two times better, at best.
And that is getting down to such low usages that
maintenance cost can wipe out any electrical savings
you may get with operating MH bulbs.

The only time MH bulbs stand out from MV is
in color critical applications, and large wattages.

When you get to small wattages,
MH bulbs get more expensive to run from year to year.

At are electric rate of $0.05 a KWh.
A 100W MV light consumes $22 of power a year.
The bulb will need changed every five years.
It will take $2 a year, on average, to replace a $10 light
A 70W MH light will consume $15 of power a year.
The bulb will need changed every two years.
It will take $10 a year, on average, to replace a $20 light

The price of replacing the bulbs more often will wipe out
any money you save on electricity, plus some.
That isn't including time, equipment, and other stuff used in
changing the light, and getting the replacement light.
And it doesn't include the environmental impact of producing,
and disposing of the MH bulb which contains about as much
mercury as the MV bulb.
People keep forgetting that a MH bulb is just a MV bulb
Spiked with halides.

I would almost bet that the energy used to produce the
extra HID replacement lights for small MH fixtures
will be more than the energy saved by those fixtures.
It takes A LOT OF ENERGY AND RAW FUEL to produce a HID light.
Just go to a glass foundry,
and you will see how much energy in put into every ounce of glass.

All the above,
and the fact that I can not tolerate a Sodium light source.
A gray wolf is almost impossible to spot under a LPS light, and
is hard to see under a HPS source.
A clear MV light is leaps and bounds above a HPS light.
A DX MV light is in a whole other class.

So, the only choices lighting around the barn are MV, and MH.
And the one I will chose is mercury vapor.
It provides the safety, and it is cheaper to run,
and more environmentally friendly in the long one.
It may be in a full cut off fixture,
but it will still be a MV light.

IF they ever try to ban MV bulbs as an outside light source around here,
I will attack the law on that basses.
It is producing landfill, and wasting energy in the name of conservation.
The people that made the law, can't see past the advertised figures,
to see the real environmental impact that the equipment has.

They should stick to regulating light pollution,
and keep their nose out of regulating energy efficiency.
It is none of their business.

If you have to force someone to save money,
I have to ask, is it really saving money?

That is my opinion, nothing more, nothing less.
I will withdraw my self from the group now.
If I stay, I will get caught up in a flame war.
And that is something I didn't come here to do.
And I ask other people to please not make this a flame thread.
All i wanted to do was state my opinion.
Good day, and best wishes.