My controversial idea — but perhaps an increasingly necessary one: what if illuminated billboards were taxed for light pollution, with the revenue directed toward environmental restoration and mitigation projects?
Artificial light at night remains one of the least regulated forms of pollution in Australia, despite growing evidence of its impact on wildlife, ecosystems, human health and our ability to experience natural darkness. Digital billboards are a particularly visible example — bright, persistent and commercially driven sources of artificial light operating deep into the night.
The challenge is economic. Councils can generate significant advertising revenue from outdoor media, so without stronger legislation around light pollution and brightness limits, it seems unlikely the expansion of illuminated advertising will slow anytime soon.
That’s why a light pollution offset model is worth discussing.
Imagine if highly illuminated advertising carried an environmental levy based on brightness, operating hours or ecological impact. Those funds could support dark sky protection, wildlife conservation, lower-impact lighting upgrades and environmental education.
We already recognise carbon emissions as an environmental cost. Perhaps it’s time we started recognising the loss of darkness that way too.
