San Francisco is proposing to fine office buildings that leave their lights on all night unnecessarily. While voluntary programs would make everyone happier, sometimes a bit of regulation is needed to force people to do what they should be doing anyway.

I agree that it is ridiculous that having interior lights on the 24th floor of an office building is wasteful. Critics of the proposed law can argue that the companies must pay their energy bills, so additional fines aren't needed. But electricity prices haven't been high enough to merit bottom-line attention, and the cost that we all pay in greenhouse gas emissions also needs to be considered.

If businesses and homeowners eliminated wasteful energy use during the off hours (and had more passive solar lighting during the daytime), energy demand and prices could go down. Yes, we build coal and natural gas plants primarily for peak power, but solar could fill some of that void if power is not needed at night.

I've thought to myself many times about the waste of interior lights and neon signs that burn all night at businesses. I understand the need for exterior lights for security purposes, but shouldn't motion detectors and alarm systems be sufficient to deter criminals?

Ideally companies would turn off those lights voluntarily, but all night lights continue to burn. A carbon tax or carbon cap would convince people to pay more attention, so folks who want to avoid that happening should start turning off the lights now.

(Photo Andreas Gronski, via Wikimedia Commons)