On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:04:27 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 14/03/2013 11:21, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:13:06 +0000, Martin Brown
wrote:

--snip--

Switching off lights after midnight is a clear electricity saving
provided that their contract allows it and is not a pay per stalk deal.

But is likely to result in an increase in crime and road accidents.
I'll bet they haven't costed this.

Fear of the dark is a serious problem. City dwellers confuse being
dazzled by the glare of strong directional lights with "good" lighting.
Shopping centre advertise their presence with a light dome and it works.

There is no evidence to suggest that turning off street lamps late at
night affects either crime rates or road accidents. Criminals using
torches in the dark draw attention to themselves.

There is plenty of evidence that shows effective street lighting
reduces crime. See, for example, Home Office Research Study 251
Effects of improved street lighting on crime: a systematic review
David P. Farrington and Brandon C. Welsh

Cars have headlights and most drivers are smart enough to use them.

But effective streetlighting does also help to reduce the number of
accidents and their severity.

A friend of mine used to work for a council. When they costed up
everything they found that it would not actually save any money so the
plan was abandoned.

Presumably that was the outcome they were hoping for. Do nowt.

Wrong. It was a case where the experts were allowed to do their job
without politicians interfering.

Politicians just love policy based evidence and will invent it to suit
whatever hair brained scheme they are trying to foist on the public.

Like switching off the street lighting?

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?