10.23.2014  |   | Subscribe  | Contact us

All News & Blogs

E-mail Alerts

Cost of 'progress': Noise, light pollution


Date published: 2/26/2013

Cost of 'progress': Noise, light pollution

Recently, I have taken up the hobby of nature recording, and noticed that there seems to be a large amount of traffic noise in this area. Well, it makes sense, given how much traffic we have, but it just doesn't seem "right" (I don't know what other word would suffice).

From my house, I can hear the rumble and thin scream of Interstate 95 most nights, and noise from other roads, as well.

I know I live in a rapidly sprawling--I mean developing--city with massive suburbs surrounding, so I suppose it wouldn't be a surprise to anyone who didn't take such a nerdy (deep interest) in recording nature sounds.

When I did, I found it to be shocking and somewhat repulsive. Excessive noise is a kind of pollution, verified and listed, yet it seems nothing is done about it.

Pollution comes in many forms, and this area seems to be expanding in light, noise, and sight pollution as it grows larger from an influx of population.

It would be nice if City Council would keep in mind the side effects of growth, which, like any good thing, there can be too much of at times. Ditto with light pollution. Drive out U.S. Route 17 south to Port Royal and you'll see what I mean. The brown-yellow glow of high-pressure sodium lamps and weird-ish purple-blue tint of mercury vapor obscure all but the brightest stars.

Not my idea of a nice sight, but it's the cost of progress. But is it "progress," really, when we lose so much?

Will Thornton

Fredericksburg