↓ Skip to main content

Artificially lit surface of Earth at night increasing in radiance and extent

Overview of attention for article published in Science Advances, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 6,881)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
231 news outlets
blogs
25 blogs
twitter
942 tweeters
facebook
22 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
11 Google+ users
reddit
4 Redditors
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
300 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
356 Mendeley
Title
Artificially lit surface of Earth at night increasing in radiance and extent
Published in
Science Advances, November 2017
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.1701528
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher C. M. Kyba, Theres Kuester, Alejandro Sánchez de Miguel, Kimberly Baugh, Andreas Jechow, Franz Hölker, Jonathan Bennie, Christopher D. Elvidge, Kevin J. Gaston, Luis Guanter

Abstract

A central aim of the "lighting revolution" (the transition to solid-state lighting technology) is decreased energy consumption. This could be undermined by a rebound effect of increased use in response to lowered cost of light. We use the first-ever calibrated satellite radiometer designed for night lights to show that from 2012 to 2016, Earth's artificially lit outdoor area grew by 2.2% per year, with a total radiance growth of 1.8% per year. Continuously lit areas brightened at a rate of 2.2% per year. Large differences in national growth rates were observed, with lighting remaining stable or decreasing in only a few countries. These data are not consistent with global scale energy reductions but rather indicate increased light pollution, with corresponding negative consequences for flora, fauna, and human well-being.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 942 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 356 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 356 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 59 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 16%
Student > Master 54 15%
Student > Bachelor 48 13%
Other 26 7%
Other 48 13%
Unknown 64 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 76 21%
Environmental Science 68 19%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 25 7%
Engineering 24 7%
Physics and Astronomy 11 3%
Other 60 17%
Unknown 92 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2611. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 June 2021.
All research outputs
#1,498
of 18,368,557 outputs
Outputs from Science Advances
#17
of 6,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39
of 424,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Advances
#1
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,368,557 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,881 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 119.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.