[cubefox]

> That's possible, and directed/shielded lighting is commercially available.

Given the size of the site (over 3000 hectares), even lights purely pointed at the ground will still create large amounts of bounce lighting. The ground reflects light up in the sky.

[ungreased0675]

It’s possible to go more restrictive than shielded lights. What if all outdoor lights must be turned off from 9pm to 5am? If the conditions were something like that, would the developers still want to build?

[justlikereddit]

Have you ever seen a heavy construction site involving land preparation? Like a new road being built?

Dust everywhere. Backhoes with 360 light coverage that makes a lighthouse envious. Trucks, trucks everywhere! Floodlights! String lights! Crane lights! Temporary light poles! Service lights! Warning lights! A dictionary of lights!

Can they work in the dark without producing so much dust? Can a tiger be a vegan?

Also the development is part wind power, this alone causes wake turbulence. So even if regulation demanded complete blackout after sunset on the penalty to of death the observational quality is still permanently degraded.

[II2II]

I suspect the real concern is there would be a push to relax the restrictions once the industrial facility has been built. Astronomical observatories have faced such problems in the past, to the point where research goals had to be fundamentally altered or where they ceased to be research facilities.

That said, if the goal is to reduce the lighting to the point where it has no impact, one has to ask: what is the point of having lighting at all? I suppose lighting could be restricted to indoor use only, but most commercial operations will expect some outdoor lighting.