Boyce, P. R. (2010). Review: The Impact of Light in Buildings on Human Health. Indoor and Built Environment, 19(1), 8–20.
Abstract: The effects of light on health can be divided into three sections. The first is that of light as radiation. Exposure to the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared radiation produced by light sources can damage both the eye and skin, through both thermal and photochemical mechanisms. Such damage is rare for indoor lighting installations designed for vision but can occur in some situations. The second is light operating through the visual system. Lighting enables us to see but lighting conditions that cause visual discomfort are likely to lead to eyestrain. Anyone who frequently experiences eyestrain is not enjoying the best of health. The lighting conditions that cause visual discomfort in buildings are well known and easily avoided. The third is light operating through the circadian system. This is known to influence sleep patterns and believed to be linked to the development of breast cancer among night shift workers. There is still much to learn about the impact of light on human health but what is known is enough to ensure that the topic requires the attention of all those concerned with the lighting of buildings.
|
Sweater-Hickcox, K., Narendran, N., Bullough, J., & Freyssinier, J. (2013). Effect of different coloured luminous surrounds on LED discomfort glare perception. Lighting Research and Technology, 45(4), 464–475.
Abstract: Recently, there has been increased interest in energy-efficient lighting as energy resources become higher in demand. Anecdotal evidence suggests that certain populations believe light-emitting diodes (LED) produce more glare than traditional technologies. This may be due to a number of factors such as spectral power distribution (SPD), source luminance, or beam intensity distribution. A study was conducted to assess the effect of different SPDs on the perception of discomfort glare from an LED source. For the range of conditions evaluated, the presence of any luminous surround significantly reduced the perception of discomfort glare from the LED array. The blue luminous surround reduced discomfort glare perception significantly less than the white or the yellow luminous surrounds. The implications for solid-state lighting systems are discussed.
|
Davies, T. W., Duffy, J. P., Bennie, J., & Gaston, K. J. (2014). The nature, extent, and ecological implications of marine light pollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 12(6), 347–355.
Abstract: Despite centuries of use, artificial light at night has only recently been recognized as a cause for environmental concern. Its global extent and ongoing encroachment into naturally lit ecosystems has sparked scientific interest into the many ways in which it may negatively affect human health, societal attitudes, scientific endeavors, and biological processes. Yet, perhaps because sources of artificial light are largely land based, the potential for artificial light pollution to interfere with the biology of the ocean has not been explored in any detail. There is little information on how light pollution affects those species, behaviors, and interactions that are informed by the intensity, spectra, and periodicity of natural nighttime light in marine ecosystems. Here, we provide an overview of the extent of marine light pollution, discuss how it changes the physical environment, and explore its potential role in shaping marine ecosystems.
|
Shillo, R., & Halevy, A. H. (1982). Interaction of photoperiod and temperature in flowering-control of Gypsophila paniculata L. Scientia Horticulturae, 16(4), 385–393.
Abstract: Long day promotes flowering of Gysophila paniculata L cultivar ‘Bristol Fairy’. Repeated treatments with GA3 or GA4 + 7 in short days did not promote flowering. The long photoperiod is effective only at relatively high temperatures. At night temperatures below 12°C, the plants remain vegetative even in long days. Efficient artificial lighting is from incandescent lamps at 60–100 lux. Fluorescent lighting (Cool-White) is not effective. Lighting of 4 hours as a night-break or at the end of the night were equally effective, but 4 hours lighting as a day-extension was less effective. Whole-night lighting promoted flowering more than any of the 4-hour lighting regimes. Cyclic lighting of one third light in each cycle promoted flowering to the same extent as continuous lighting. Light intensity during the day has a decisive effect on flower production.
|
|
Johnson, A., Phadke, A., & de la Rue du Cann, S. (2014). Energy Savings Potential for Street Lighting in India. Lawrence Berkely National Laboratory report, .
|
