You've done everything you can to conserve energy in your house -- purchased the latest Energy Star appliances, insulated your walls, and turned your thermostat down to 68. But the next thing you know, your kids are leaving lights on in rooms they aren't occupying. Or staring into the refrigerator for minutes on end while all the cold air escapes through the open door. Or nudging the thermostat higher when you aren't looking. How can you convince your kids to help, not hinder, your efforts to cut down on energy usage?

Knowledge is Power

Your children can't make the effort to save energy if they don't know how. Help them start building good habits early, and make sure they’re aware of simple ways they can help lower the utility bills:

To save electricity:

To conserve water:

To keep your heating and cooling bills low:

What if They Don't Wanna?

Of course, every parent knows that telling your kid to do something doesn't mean it's going to happen. The trick is to get them to buy in. While one reason to conserve energy is to save money on your utility bills, children have a habit of taking mom and dad's money for granted, so that might not be your most persuasive argument.

Instead, try teaching them about how human reliance on fossil fuels is harmful to the environment -- but they can help make a difference. If your children have particular interests, like animals, you can tie the themes together -- tell them they can help protect animal habitats by doing their part to conserve energy.

Another trick is to give them a green light to correct you if you make a mistake like leaving the water running. That gives the kid some fun responsibility, and encourages them to be vigilant about your behavior -- which increases the likelihood they will be about their own.

Check out the Energy Star Kids program for more ideas on how to persuade your kids and get them excited about conservation, and for child-tailored activities to increase their knowledge and motivation. And remember, the best way to teach your kids how to conserve is to set a good example by doing it yourself.

I have a great deal of interest in digital photography, but my life is as crazy as anyone else’s. My son, family, and work keep me busy from dawn to midnight every day. I’ve never had time to cultivate any photography skills, even though I’ve always been very interested, sitting on the edge of my seat, if you will, for a chance to take some digital photos in order to learn a little about how capturing light can create astonishing works of art.

My interview with Matthew Danser had given me my long sought “excuse” to try out some photography techniques. But it also required that I put in an honest effort. The thought in the back of my head: These photos are going to suck. Probably a lot. And they will most likely be seen by the thousands of people who visit this blog monthly. Second gulp.

But I’m the kind of person so riddled with ADHD that even my paranoia about being judged on a mass scale can only last about three minutes before the audacity to try anything resurfaces and action is taken. So here’s what happens when a total amateur who has no idea what he is doing tries to “Paint with Light.”

A one-dollar flashlight from – you guessed it – the Dollar General. One dollar. Even. Gotta love it. Especially since it’s all I could afford, seeing as how I’m still paying off the aforementioned Nikon that I bought to take photos of our baby son. (True, a million pictures have been taken of him during his first year-and-a-half on Earth. However, 999,999 of those photos were taken with an iPhone. Go figya.)

THE PLAN, STAN:

The plan was to wait until it was dark in the apartment and do some light painting. I knew that I could use the Shutter mode on my camera to set it to take exposures of up to thirty seconds. I saw that my camera also had an option for bulb release, so, invoking Danser, who recalls how his girlfriend had to hold down the button on his camera for a full thirteen minutes, I determined that if I asked really nicely, I might be able to persuade my wife to hold down the trigger to get exposures longer than thirty seconds. Otherwise, thirty seconds was my window of time to do all the light painting I could.

I started off pretty timidly. I had seen photos online in which people used long exposures to create squiggly lines. The most popular examples are pictures of traffic at night, headlights and tail lights streaming, giving you a sense of the fluid motion of busy intersections. You’ve also seen those nature pics in which streams and rivers and clouds and stars become gauzy with movement because of long exposures.

But what I really like about Danser’s work is the use of color. The effect of running inside the hut and popping off red-gelled flashes shown at the beginning of this blog post (Matthew Danser! And happy lightpainting, everyone!

38 million people in the U.S. that has migraines or study published in a 2016 issue of Brain shows that green LED lighting reduced pain intensity by 20 percent. In the study, “Migraine photophobia originating in cone-driven retinal pathways,” researchers at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center set out to test whether or not colors can affect photophobia and migraine intensity. Photophobia is sensitivity to light and can be associated with pain and migraine exacerbation. Findings in a previous study fueled the motivation for this study. In the earlier study, the researchers found that blind participants experienced increased migraine pain when exposed to blue light.

Sixty-nine participants with migraines were part of the most recent study. Researchers studied the effects that exposure to white, blue, green, amber, and red low-intensity light had on their pain. Blue and red light were the worst—increasing pain by 18-19 percent. White and amber increased pain by 15 percent. Green was the only color that reduced pain.

Another green-light study found that exposure to low-intensity light from green LEDs reduced chronic pain and migraine severity. In this study, eight participants with fibromyalgia or migraines were given a green LED strip light, and five were given a white strip. Participants were asked to use their strips nightly for one to two hours for 10 weeks. Participants with green LEDs reported a 40-50 percent drop in pain.

The study was so successful for some that they asked to keep their green LED strip lights; they continue to use them in addition to or in place of medicine. In a study was published in a 2017 issue of Pain. The University of Arizona study, “Long-lasting antinociceptive (pain blocking) effects of green light in acute and chronic pain in rats,” found that rats experienced an increased tolerance for thermal and tactile testing methods. These tests measured how long it took for the rats to withdraw their paw when exposed to heat or pricked with a filament. Testing was completed under green or white light. The researchers found that after eight hours of green LED light exposure for five days it took much longer for rats to withdraw their paws. Effects of the green LEDs lasted for four days.

Rajesh Khanna, UA associate professor of pharmacology and senior author of the study, reports that, “While the pain-relieving qualities of green LED are clear, exactly how it works remains a puzzle. Early studies show that green light is increasing the levels of circulating endogenous opioids, which may explain the pain-relieving effects.”  In a UA article, “(Exogenous) Opioids, while having many benefits for managing pain, come with serious side effects.” These medications can also be addictive.

Researchers in this study are not advising people to stop their medications without speaking with a professional. However, it is possible, as in Lesneski’s case, that green LED lighting could eliminate the need for them in the future. “We need safer, effective and affordable approaches, used in conjunction with our current tools, to manage chronic pain,” Ibrahim said.

Millions of dollars can be saved every year in every major or little city in this country and those around the world. This sounds like a newspaper headline but it is the actual hard truth. The amount of energy necessary for street lighting is massive. For example, Britain needs about 1900 gigawatt hours for street lighting alone, which yields 3 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions which could all be avoided and greatly reduced. Imagine cutting that down to 20%. Can it be done? Of course it can, LED street lights have been proved to have that effect.

With the economic crises, cities have started to switch off lights to save up on the electricity bill. This is one of the many solution proposed. Unfortunately, LED street lights were not proposed and that is a major mistake.  There are installation costs you might say. Well, sometimes there are, but these are equal to zero based on savings achieved over time. It means not seeing the whole picture because the lighting systems now used on the streets needs extensive costly maintenance while LED street lights will need almost none.

This is not a small fact. Maintenance means dozens of monthly salaries and costs with equipment and cars. This is only for one city but imagine the positive effect of this at a country scale or even a global scale. It will actually make a difference. In addition, these LED lamps are retrofit so there are not additional costs on that. Simply when one light burns out it should be replaced with an LED which reduces your costs by not having to fully replace your lights entirely.

There have been cases when the LED obvious benefits are:

The list can surely go on. Most people get stuck on the price but at such a big number of Street Light LEDs needed any dealer will be more than happy to negotiate a solution for the whole city so the costs will be lower than normal. In addition, the provider will stick around with advice and consultation.

In the end, it is just a matter of putting ideas into practice. Only this way we will manage to create a better world.