At 02:16 PM 11/19/98 -0800, Sandra C. Andersen. wrote:
>In the Friday(11-13) Seattle Times, page B5, there was an article abbout
>testing the "Celebration" bridge lighting. The East side of the Fremont
>Bridge and the West side of the Aurora Bridge will be the test sites. The
>initial cost for the whole project will be $1.2 million, plus $50,00 a year
>to maintain the lights and pay for the power.

A couple of our bridges "benefit" from such lighting, as well. The
Morrison isn't too annoying, a handful of floods through different
filters giving a prismatic effect.

The Hawthorne, though, is lit by strings of (inefficient) incandescent
lamps. Not only do these use a comparatively large amount of juice
for the amount of light produced, but they burn out. Think about your
home and how often at least ONE light burns out, then think about several
thousand bulbs. The result is that there are always gaps in the lights
so not only is it wasteful of electricity (though on the global scale
of things it truly is insignificant) but the missing lights make the
effect tacky.

So, if you can't convince them that the electricity and $50,000 a year
and $1.2 million initial expense isn't worth it, at least try to
convince them to make it look decent.


- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net