Impaired Perception in Driving and Sports
Prof. Peter Heilig graphically demonstrates why the
neuro-physiological effects of DRL and HID Xenon lights
can contribute to accidents.
This article published last month in the Austrian Police
magazine "Rundschau Polizei Sport" provides the expert
medical and ophthalmological evidence we need to send to
politicians, lawmakers and auto manufacturers advising
that they could be held legally liable for any a
accident where blinding by DRL or HID Xenon vehicle
lights are cited as a factor.
We have sent a copy to
Transport Minister Norman Baker appealing him to prevent
the EU DRL law being implemented in February 2011.
If the Austrian Parliament can ban DRL on 01 January
2008 in defiance of the EU then surely the UK Government
can follow suit.
To give more impetus to our appeal, please send a copy
to your MP asking them to annul the laws that permit
auto manufacturers to use dangerous blinding DRL and HID
The United Kingdom Independence
Party have proposed an eminently sensible Transport
Policy which supports a Thames Estuary Airport
and firmly opposes Daytime Running Lights - see
Ireland's Road Safety
Authority proposing to introduce DRL - see
DaDRL response to Irelands DRL consultation
Also see this excellent
submission by Write to Ride's Dr. Elaine Hardy and
This well researched document indicates that there is
little difference in accidents between DRL using Sweden
and the UK and Ireland's proposals for DRL will affect
vulnerable road users
EU: All 736 MEP's lobbied to
annul the Dangerous DRL law.
UK: DaDRL join forces with Ken
Perham a London Taxi Driver to campaign against
night-time headlight glare particularly from Xenon High
Intensity Discharge Lights
Poland: Report from DADRL
Poland indicates an 6% increase in fatalities since DRL were
introduced 17 April 2007:
This report from DADRL Bulgaria indicates an 8.1% increase
in fatalities since DRL were
introduced for only 33% of the time from November 2006:-
Bulgarian parliament is about to vote mandatory lights
against Daytime Running Lights!
know, since 2006 we are ought always to have switched on
headlights from 1st November to 1st March (4 months per
lights are not allowed, they are not recognized as
daytime running lights. (For example, I've got a fine
for using parking lights instead of my too-bright
too-much-energy-consuming full-power low-beam head
the number of "saved lives" by this stupid law:
2002 – 959
2003 – 960
2004 – 943
2005 – 957
2006 – 1043
dead (mandatory low-beam head-lights on)
2007 – 1006
dead (mandatory low-beam head-lights on)
2008 – 1059
dead (mandatory low-beam head-lights on)
parliament is about to pass a low to mandate lights on
all the time, 365/7/24.
There is no
specification about the maximum levels of brightness and
the idiots who for the sake of "be seen" use their
high-beams on full power and their fog-lights during the
daytime will continue doing their arrogance.
There is no
specification about what is a daytime running light and
what is not. Everything which is not Audi LED DRL is
considered as a light not bright enough as low-beam,
therefore is a violation of the law.
mandatory lights what's next? All time running horn?!
Austria: since Daytime Running
Lights were banned on 1 January 2008, less accidents for
road users have been reported:
minus 5% fatalities
minus 25% biker-accidents
Die Zahl der Unfälle, Verletzten und getöteten
Verkehrsteilnehmer auf Österreichs Straßen war in
den ersten neuen Monaten des Jahres 2006
geringer als im selben Zeitraum des Vorjahres. Die
Statistik Austria verzeichnete um vier Prozent weniger
Verkehrsunfälle (29.274) und um drei Prozent weniger
533 Verkehrsteilnehmer wurden getötet, das entspricht
einem Minus von cht Prozent.
Den höchsten Rückgang meldete die oberösterreichische
Polizei: 700 Unfälle und 900 Verletzte weniger wurden
registriert. Auch im Burgenland, der Steiermark und Wien
ging die Anzahl der Unfälle im Straßenverkehr zurück.
representations to the European Commission Transport
Commissioner from DaDRL UK, DaDRL USA, European
Pedestrians, Cyclists and Motorcyclist Organisations the
European Industry Commissioner has mandated Daytime
WP29 committee have also ignored our representations and
increased the light intensity from 400cd to 800cd and
finally in June 2007 to a dazzling 1,200cd.
make the perpetrators of dangerous DRL legally liable
for their actions
Guenter Verheugen Vice President of the European Commission
Marcin Gorzkowski Chairman of UNECE WP29 Lighting
academic reports used to justify DRL have been
discredited - see DRL Studies
Austrian Parliament winds up 2007 session
Vienna. The Austrian parliament on Thursday held its
final plenary session of the year.
On Wednesday 12 December 2007
formal approval was given to a wide range of
legislation. The bills included ….
“an end to the
required use of headlights during daylight hours”
headlight dipped beam Daytime Running Lights
FEMA press release
The European Commission (EC) has decided not to call for the
use of daytime dipped-beam headlights in Europe. This means
that the point of view of motorcyclists and other vulnerable
road users has finally been taken into account.
As announced by Mr. Zoltan Kazatsay, Deputy Director General
of the DG TREN during the 4th ACEM Annual Conference held on
Tuesday 20 November 2007, the EC proposal to harmonise the
use of daytime dipped-beam headlights in Europe has been
Intensity Discharge headlights cause chromatic aberration -
effects of Daytime Running Lights
Sign the new Prime
Minister's petition to prevent misuse of headlights at
years on - another request to Volvo Cars UK to stop
importing cars with dangerous daytime headlights
due to increased accidents to pedestrians, cyclists and
motorcyclists in Austria and Bulgaria
request to Volvo to desist 12 Sept 2007
Volvo refusal 21 Sept DaDRL
DaDRL issue of facts and figures 02 Oct 2007
9/11/2007 - a bad day for proponents of Daytime Lights -
their arguments collapse
The Austrian Transport and Interior Ministers to
request Parliament to ban daytime running lights
Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT)
"Lights on the day" will soon be history :
Transport minister Werner Faymann and Minister of the
Interior Gunther Platter announced on Tuesday 11
September 2007 their intention to
place an appropriate request before parliament. For
the resolution a study, which certifies "light on the day"
in bright sunshine has a diverting effect, is
2007 Statistics increase in accidents since the introduction
of Daytime Running Lights:
The chart side bars are Austrian states
Tote = deaths
Verletzte = injuries
Unfalle = accidents
The overall increase in accidents for Austria due
to DRL is +12.2% (OST = Osteriech)
324 subjects died +17%
Note the disproportionate
increase to vulnerable road users since the
introduction of DRL:
Cyclists 2,814 accidents + 43 %
Motorcyclists 1,400 accidents + 46% fatalities + 51%
Sent: 18 September 2007 01:49
From DADRL Poland
Subject: Another bloody set of numbers from Europe
I have another set of numbers from
(based on FIA report) They introduce the statistics for
victims of death for car accidents on European roads (first
six months of this year), mainly for those countries require
SPAIN - decreased number of death bringing accidents down by
13%! No DRL required during all year!
ITALY - decreased number of accidents by 4,3%. DRL are
required only outside of the cities. But Italy's got a lot
of multi-lane freeways. On
these roads head-on accidents can't happen. I don't have to
mention that Italians always have beautiful weather (I've
been there twice). (editors note: Italy may ban DRL due to
Austria's DRL ban)
DENMARK and FINLAND - a tragedy! 40% (!!!) more dead people
on the roads this year. DRL are mandatory for many years. So
you can imagine how many people have lost their lives in
countries due to daytime the headlights - not only in 2007.
SWEDEN - increased number of tragic accidents by 7,3%.
Sweden does not even need a comment.
POLAND - according to FIA 17,4% more dead people on the
roads this year. I have exposed the situation in Poland so I
don't have to comment this case. (http://bezswiatel.ath.cx/
CZECH REPUBLIC - since Summer 2006 DRL are required the all
year 24/7. Increased number of deaths on the roads almost
just like in Poland by 17% !
SLOVENIA - DRL are required outside of the towns like in
Italy. Increased number of accidents by 12%.
I heard that DRL WILL BE required in Germany Summer 2008!
What the heck is wrong with these people?
Have they completely lost their minds?
Vulnerability and Risk Emergence in
Complex Traffic Scenarios by
University Professor Peter Heilig
Disturbance of the equilibrium of the
smooth flow in complex traffic scenarios can be compared
with some rather thoughtless human eco-system-interactions
in the past. Minor changes may provoke catastrophes and
sequences of undesired irreversible failures ('global
dimming', climate change, etc.).
'Natural' brightness distribution
within visual fields being just one of some prerequisites
for the driver's optimized sight, attention and perception.
Any accentuation or 'over'-accentuation of stimuli would
cause unequal distribution of attention. Consequently some
'accentuated' traffic-relevant objects' Daytime Running
Lights (DRL) catching more attention than the less
conspicuous objects or 'weaker' traffic participants are
creating interference factors thereby disturbing a
delicately balanced vulnerable stability. The occurrence of
traffic-accidents is probably not reflecting the true
potential of induced hazard. 'Near misses' and the
avoidance of crashes by preventive driver-reactions just in
time may falsify the attempts of expert-evaluations and
The signalling effect of DRL
functioning as distracter is only one factor causing
imbalance and a kind of non-equilibrium. Side impact- and
rear end crashes are indicating the effect of 'imbalance of
attention' by accentuating the front of vehicles exclusively
(in some countries).
attempts to increase the conspicuity of pedestrians and
cyclists have failed.
Reflecting materials appear to be
ineffective in connection with DRL. The illumination of
bicycles suffers from systematic misconception: With
decreasing daylight intensity, front and rear vehicle lights
attract the attention of other traffic participants; however
cyclists are hard to observe and to detect against a
darkening background. The average bicycle illumination does
not protect at all against the risk of (fatal) side
Deaths in mixed traffic are avoidable:
blinding glare caused by the bluish High Intensity Discharge
(HID) headlights can be observed with increasing frequency
since the introduction of the experiment (Licht am Tag) in
Austria. Additionally headlight misalignment and road
undulations cause momentary dazzle.
Usually more factors than one are
multiplied before the catastrophe of a traffic accident:
sometimes a harmless (probably superfluous) traffic sign
could be just one distraction too much and provokes
cognition failures (overload of the visual short term
The Times 29
'Sign crime’ revolt hits councils Road
clutter is now safety hazard' -
comment DRL is also visual clutter
Telegraph June 30 2007
"Deaths of child pedestrians in Britain
rose by 13 per cent last year and child pedal cyclists by 55
per cent, according to the Department for Transport's
national statistics on road casualties. The increase was
denounced as "disastrous" by the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Accidents."
This is what
RoSPA said about DRL in February 2007:
is that if cars are fitted with Daytime Running Lights, then
there is much concern that the conspicuity of other road
users without DRL will suffer. The risk is that when
drivers are making observations and looking out for other
road users, that drivers will search for the DRL on other
vehicles rather than surveying the whole scene and spotting
vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians.
“This is a
serious concern as research has shown that ‘looked but
failing to see’ errors contribute to 23 per cent of
unimpaired drivers’ accidents during daylight, and a more
recent report identified that 32 per cent of all accidents
were caused when road users ‘failed to look properly’.
Cyclists are at a risk of suffering a serious injury if hit
by a car and so being spotted by other road users is
important to a cyclist’s safety.
counter argument would be that DRL may make it easier for
cyclists to spot cars, enabling them to plan an ‘escape
route’ to prevent an accident if the car were to pull out,
it does not address the issue of drivers making poor or
incomplete observations and failing to spot a cyclist.
‘looked but failing to see’
differentiation by University
Professor Peter Heilig :
'traffic relevant object' (TRO) being less
conspicuous than Daytime Running Lights (DRL) caused
moving light stimuli in the peripheral parts of
visual fields are catching drivers' attention -
provoking eye movements -'failing to see'.
less conspicuous TRO's may become sub threshold
stimuli for the visual system because of reduced
'signal to noise ratio' compared to accentuated or
'over-accentuated' TRO's (DRL) - again -'failing to
3) PERCEPTION and
RECOGNITION: 'Overload' of visual short term memory
(VSTM) and disturbance of cognitive processes within
visual pathways and visual centres may cause
peculiar phenomena*: The image of an especially
vulnerable TRO (child at pedestrian crossing)
appears focussed and 'crystal-clear' (with
sufficient contrast) at retinal level, the visual
signal travelling undisturbed along visual pathways,
though the visual memory disappeared virtually
because of capacity (VSTM) and other functional
deficits (cognitive processes) caused by overload
(DRL) 'seeing but not perceiving, recognizing'
(seemingly 'empty pedestrian crossing').
Headlights, misaligned or not can cause retinal
adaptation problems, prolonged retinal recovery time
(following light 'stress' - 'Macula Stress Test'),
especially in elderly or old drivers - worst case
scenario: 'Disability Glare'.
GIST of the scene: Complex highly dynamic traffic
scenarios require subtle and sophisticated analysis
within very short periods of time and adequate
reactions without delays. 'Overaccentuated spots'
(DRL) within the (360°) field of required constant
attention and alertness cause irritation, deficits
and disturbance of the extremely vulnerable
equilibrium. Higher complexity: 'Failed to see, to
perceive, to recognize, to pay attention, outside
the borders of he visual field, sub threshold
Blindness, Sustained Inattentional Blindness, Change
Blindness, Motion Induced Blindness (Michael Bach's
Computer Simulation), Repetitive Blindness etc.
(Result of electrophysiological and magnetic
resonance (MRI) examinations in the fields of
sensory physiology, cognition psychology and brain
research demonstrate and prove these functional
Professor Peter Heilig
University of Vienna 11 July 2007
analogy to Clinical Studies (FDA) results* like the
ones described above (and prognosticated) should
cessation of 'experiments' like DRL in Europe (and
worldwide). Continuation of DRL (in spite
of better knowledge) appears to be worse than the
'Omission of the Obligation of Protection' becoming
more and more a topic of interest in law and
a number of European countries
Austrian Ophthalmologic Society bans daytime
running lights -
Accentuating one group of 'traffic-relevant objects' makes
all the other objects less conspicuous - worst case - they
might turn into sub-threshold stimuli hence escaping
attention - to be overlooked .....
Road-safety figures The Times 11 May 2007
Figures for road deaths were almost unchanged last year.
There were 3,150 deaths in 2006, down by 1.6 per cent on the
previous year, according to figures published by the
Department for Transport.
Deaths and serious injuries
among cyclists rose to 2,420, the highest for four years.
of a message from DaDRL Bulgaria
January 2007 was the bloodiest one here in Bulgaria over
past 10 years! - since mandatory DRL law
is no evidence, that DRL has increased safety on our roads.
Bulgarian fatalities since 1990:
Data from the Bulgarian Commission of
Road Safety, published at the Police's press center since
the introduction of DRL:
Extract from the Royal
Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) “Care on the
“RoSPA’s view is that if
cars are fitted with Daytime Running Lights, then there is
much concern that the conspicuity of other road users
without DRL will suffer. The risk is that when drivers are
making observations and looking out for other road users,
that drivers will search for the DRL on other vehicles
rather than surveying the whole scene and spotting
vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians.
“This is a serious concern
as research has shown that ‘looked but failing to see’
errors contribute to 23 per cent of unimpaired drivers’
accidents during daylight, and a more recent report
identified that 32 per cent of all accidents were caused
when road users ‘failed to look properly’. Cyclists are at
a risk of suffering a serious injury if hit by a car and so
being spotted by other road users is important to a
“Although the counter
argument would be that DRL may make it easier for cyclists
to spot cars, enabling them to plan an ‘escape route’ to
prevent an accident if the car were to pull out, it does not
address the issue of drivers making poor or incomplete
observations and failing to spot a cyclist.
Notable responses to the
EC consultation paper
which debunk the EC
case for Daytime Running Lights:
FEPA Federation of European Pedestrians Associations
- dangers to Pedestrians
CTC Cyclists Touring Club
- dangers to Cyclists
ECF European Cyclists Federation and ETRA European Twowheel
- dangers to Cyclists and Motorcyclists
Action Group UK - dangers to
- "countries that use DRL = NO benefit"
FEMA Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations
- dangers to
DaDRL UK Drivers against Daytime Running Lights UK
- Why the EC proposal
of mandatory motorcar daytime running lights
DaDRL USA Drivers against Daytime Running Lights USA
- Flawed study methodology
National Motorists Association USA
"any person, vehicle, animal, or object
without DRL becomes less conspicuous"
Medical Evidence against Daytime Running Lights
- reduced hazard perception - "change
UK Government Department for Transport -
summary of submission to EC against DRL
Safe Speed: Brussels plan threatens British lives
The Times Friday, 13 Oct 2006
The Times today reports that Roads Minister Ladyman is
'losing the battle' to prevent EU meddlers from imposing
'daytime running lights' on all motorised vehicles across
Europe - including the UK.
Safe Speed believes that daytime running lights would
increase the dangers experienced by vulnerable road user
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "It is completely obvious to us
that making motorised vehicles more visible also makes
pedestrians, cyclists and motorbike users relatively - and
dangerously - less visible."
"I am certain that adoption of this rule would increase
casualties amongst pedestrians, cyclists and motorbike
users. We must not allow Eurocrats to have such effects on
"EU harmonisation may be a good idea - but NEVER at the
expense of British lives."
"We must not trust Brussels with our road safety policy - we
must do whatever it takes to protect British road users."
Notes for editors
The Safe Speed campaign provides free web space to the UK
branch of 'Drivers Against Daytime Running Lights (DADRL)
and has done for many years.
About Safe Speed
The Safe Speed road safety campaign is primarily the work of
engineer-turned road safety analyst Paul Smith.
Since setting up Safe Speed in 2001, Paul Smith, 51, an
advanced motorist and road safety enthusiast, and a
professional engineer of 25 years UK experience, has carried
out over 10,000 hours working on the campaign with well over
5,000 of those hours researching the overall effects of
speed camera policy on UK road safety. In addition to those
10,000 hours, Paul has funded to campaign to the tune of
To whom it may
My name is Harry Jennings and I am a police officer in IL. I
have been a police officer since '98 and I am one of the
most highly trained officers in my area.
I would like to take a minute to express my professional
opinion on daytime running lights. They are a distraction to
many drivers and affect glare.
There is no benefit to DRL. They only add to the expense of
the vehicle and create yet another maintenance issue.
Please, reject any DRL requirement and allow the marketplace
to decide if such devices are worth the price.
welcomes on behalf of it’s motorcar driving members the
announcement by M. Jacques Barrot, Vice-President of the EC
to the official
Belgian Press Agency, Belga on Thursday 5 October 2006
that full power dipped headlights are not to be used
DaDRL UK issue a response to the EC Consultation Paper
Why the European Commission's proposal of mandatory motorcar
daytime running lights is wrong (full 28 page)
(short 5 page version)
This has been submitted to the EC Directorate General for
Energy and Transport and prominent members of the
European Parliament and Committee on Transport & Tourism with
the covering letter:
thought that you might be interested in our response to the
commission’s Consultation Paper and enclose a
statement of position and short facts.
On the basis of
flawed methodology, the Commission claim that daytime lights
can save lives yet Jacques Barrot cannot produce (DaDRL
request 31 March 2005) any concrete evidence of actual
reductions in accidents in the countries the already using
daytime lights. When introduced into the USA
We believe they
are a marketing gimmick with one group of drivers cocooned
in airbag cushioned impact resistant metal boxes trying to
gain pecuniary advantage over pedestrians, cyclists and
the environment, daytime lights increase the danger to
vulnerable less conspicuous road users, thus DaDRL are
opposed to their introduction. If the Commission really
wanted to improve European road safety, why don’t they
encourage all drivers to have regular eyesight and advanced
We hope that you
will consider our submission and form you own opinion on the
validity of daytime lights.
Roy Milnes DaDRL UK
Quarto format: Why the European Commission's proposal
of mandatory motorcar daytime running lights is wrong (full
28 page US) (short
5 page version US)
This posting from an American NHTSA
website in 2000 sums up what many feel about Daytime Running
8/13/00 5:58:58 PM
Colonel William Dumar Dumar
veteran and a long career in law enforcement I would like to
draw your attention to a peculiar irony in the use of drls.
As a way of extracting information from enemies and
criminals we used to put people in a bright room and then
shine a harsh light on them! And that was the most effective
technique we could find to cause the most discomfort in a
person, in effect it was torture. The reason it worked so
well is that bright glare increases stress level, produces
intense discomfort, and is in fact unbearable for any length
of time. The technique is now considered inhumane and is no
longer allowed. The effect of daytime running lights on a
driver is the exact same thing. You have turned the American
roadways into a torture chamber where the driver is forced
to endure glaring lights in front and behind him with no way
to escape. I think we are now beginning to see the effects
of this as I read these comments. Every year it seems their
are more and more cars with drls and they seem to be getting
even harsher and brighter. I would strongly urge whoever is
making the rules here to put an immediate end to the use of
all daytime running lights.
European Commission launch a Consultation Paper titled
Saving Lives with Daytime Running Lights (DRL) inviting
firstname.lastname@example.org by 17
November 2006. The EC undertake to publish all comments and
hold a meeting.
As August tends to be the low news silly season, to demonstrate what little regard a DRL
user has for vulnerable road users we sometimes get abusive messages
like this one from Grahame Hunt who runs the Volvo Club
From: Grahame Hunt [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 07 August 2006 23:46
Subject: RE: Volvo Cars A danger at any speed
You are just a pack of ratbags.
Please keep your stupidity to yourselves.
USA Motorcyclists Deaths increase
To combat this the USA's NHTSA has set up
funding for a solution see
23700 also see docket 4124 for over 800 complaints about DRL
Cyclists Deaths rise by 10% in 2005 and
18% in 2004 - Times 30 June 2006
"Cycling was the only mode of transport
with an increase in deaths up 10% to 148 in 2005 from 134 in
2004 which increased by 18% from 114 on 2003" see
Yamaha has developed a new
phosphorescent coating to make vehicles more visible in the
A thin, even layer of the glow-in-the-dark
film is applied to bumpers, engine covers and cowlings. Like
the phosphorescent materials used on watch dials, the
polymer in the film absorbs sunlight and then releases the
energy slowly at night to produce a soft glow.
is to make small, vulnerable vehicles safer to drive in
low-light conditions and the technology is due to be
launched on Yamaha’s ECO2 Electric Scooter. Cost will
be around $2,000 US approx £1,100.
If Yamaha can use this film on a
relatively inexpensive scooter if Volvo were really
concerned about safety why are they not using it?
Any 'overaccentuation' ie. DRL in a
visual field (especially moving bright stimuli) are
The eye is forced to fixate these
objects thereby distracting attention from less prominent
No 'scientific' study will be able
to disprove these facts. Change blindness, inattentional
blindness even inattentional amnesia, crowding phenomena,
multitask problems, interference of too many inputs worsen
the situation additionally.
Peter Heilig (see Health)
U.S. Traffic Deaths Reach 15-Year High
Date posted: 04-22-2006
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration said U.S. traffic deaths rose 1.3 percent
last year, despite record-high seatbelt use, while
motorcycle fatalities increased for the eighth consecutive
year, this time by 8 percent.
It's strange then that DRL
have had no benefits.
Burning headlamps during the
daytime can be expensive - bulb change costs of £120 are
quoted for VW/Audi cars - other popular new designs also
have a high cost.
2004, the latest year for which figures are available,
134 cyclists were killed on Britain’s roads, a rise of
18% on the previous year"
Vienna: In Austria
not only DRLs are being in use recently but also dipped
headlights are causing glare, discomfort and probably
driving disability for short periods in elderly drivers
(Macula-Stress-Test). DRL "Change
Blindness" linked to pedestrian death
Comment received from a driver:
lights over which I had no control
almost got me killed once.
> I despise
them for that and for the distracting
glare they present to my eyes and brain.
> I am in
the process of learning how to disable
DRL's on my car now. Thanks
for your work.
Energy Commissioner agrees decisions on intensity of
dedicated DRL need further consideration
(EU Energy Commissioner
and DaDRL response
30 Nov 05
A positive response from UK
Government. The Dft are
sceptical about the benefits of DRL and aim to ensure that glare
and energy use are minimised
(Response from Dft 10 Nov
Letter to Margaret Beckett about environmental
pollution from DRL affecting UK's target of 20% CO2 saving by
2010 and a letter to
Dft Road and Vehicle Safety Division asking for renewed action
to ban DRL (letter
to DTLR and Beckett 02 Nov 2005)
The Sunday Times Driving Magazine
publish a much shortened letter from DaDRL:
There is united opposition to daytime headlights from UK and EU
pedestrians, ramblers, cyclists, motorcyclists and driver
organisations. Increased safety is not
achieved by lighting a car up like a Christmas tree, putting
vulnerable road users at risk.
The EC are unable to provide any real
world accident reduction statistics (letter
to EU vice president 31 March 2005)
Osram GMBH CEO re dangers of Light@day product
New Scientist have published an article
Turned off by Daytime Driving Lights
well written and researched by Caroline Williams. It looks at both sides of the argument.
The publicity was beneficial, it
has generated more DaDRL supporters, a
good letter was sent by Mr. B.W.B.
and the comment received below is particularly poignant:
running lights on anything bigger than a
motorcycle are a monument to man's
Seeing a Volvo with headlights on in
dazzling sunlight confirms my suspicion that
the inventor was an idiot,
or so visually challenged that they deserve
sympathy and early retirement." - CJC
We are pleased and honoured to be able to add these prominent people and organisations to our list of campaign supporters:
The Royal Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals
Automotive Lighting announce a newly regulated 13 watt lamp for
use in dedicated DRL lamps with a maximum of 500cd - see Action Centre /
We are pleased and honoured to be able to add these prominent people and organisations to our list of campaign supporters:
ECF European Cyclists' Federation
Norman Baker Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary see famous
The Stockholm Environment Institute in Sweden are investigating the "Swedish Vision Zero road safety policy" for the DfT. Whilst the overall aims to improve road safety are commendable, DaDRL have responded because even their own graphics depict glare and the masking effect of DRL, Vision Zero being a very apt name.
If you wish, you can view this and comment on Vision Zero including Swedish DRL road safety policy in general at
traffic fatalities in the US increased slightly last year and
motorcycle fatalities increased again for the 7th year in a
been 7 years since the NHTSA opened the 4124 docket for DRL
The National Highway Transport Safety Authority (NHTSA) has denied a petition on docket 19529 for a DRL height exemption on the Toyota Lexus LX470 4x4 due to representations by DaDRL members. Previously the NHTSA has denied a DRL exemption on docket 11041 for the Toyota Celica.
Ford still do not normally provide DRL on their vehicles. General Motors vehicle sales are low, their stock price is at a 13 year low with bond ratings just above junk status.
This comment was posted 11 April on docket number 17243:
Please NHTSA, get with the highway safety program that you were hired for and order auto and truckmakers to quit with the daytime headlights.
All day long driving my truck, I can see vehicles WITHOUT headlights MUCH BETTER!! They do NO GOOD to help to be seen.
But they sure are a distraction and a hazard. Why in the world do trucks and buses need them on for?
As big as they are, you can see them a mile away. That really shows your lack of safety-savvy. I'll go along with the amber running lights,
but those damn headlights should be off till visibility warrants them on. TQ.
DRL: Situation in France. The French Government recommended on 30 October 2004 motorcar drivers nationally in France to use daytime lights outside towns
There is virulent opposition to this dictat: see
We have heard that the EU commission intend to mandate DRL within the next 18 months.
EU DRL information
is at http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/road/roadsafety/equipment/daytimerunninglights/index_en.htm
OSRAM Lighting are actively advising the use of daytime running lights in order to sell more gas guzzling tungsten halogen lamps at
. We have expressed our concerns to their Chairman Jürgen Radomski and we hope will respond favourably.
similar letter has been sent to Philips Mr. G. J. Kleisterlee President and CEO.
Letters have been sent to Jacques Barrot Vice-President of the European Commission and Commissioner for Transport, Andris Piebalgs EU Commissioner for Energy, Prime Minister Anthony Blair, Adrian Burrows DLTR UK, Mr Yoshiji Nogami UK Ambassador of Japan and Tony Juniper of Friends of the Earth.
Living Streets – The UK Pedestrians Association and the Federation of European Pedestrians Associations FEPA have kindly agreed to join our
alliance with the motorcyclists groups to combat the spread of DRL.
Critiques of EU reports IR3, IR4 and Final Report have been issued:
Critique of “Daytime Running Lights Final Report by TNO 2004”
This report summarises the flawed and inconsistent methodology used by the EU Commission and its experts to justify dangerous daytime running lights on an unwitting population. By Milnes DADRL UK (57kb pdf 7 pages)
Critique of the Methodology of IR3 How laboratory tests cannot replicate real life situations By Milnes DADRL UK (27kb pdf 2 pages)
The web page DRL Studies has been redesigned to list Pro DRL and anti DRL studied for ease of reference for press and Google.
Critiques of EU report IR2 Elvik Daytime running lights “A systematic review of effects on road safety” were issued to DTLR UK, EU Transport Commission and NHTSA USA
Critique of the Methodology of IR2: Daytime Running Lights - How data is misused and duplicated by Hardy MAG (199kb pdf)
Why the method of Elvik et al 2003 is unscientific; its findings unreliable; and its cost-benefit calculation baseless by Prower BMF (149kb pdf)
USA: The National Highway Transport Safety Authority (NHTSA) have docket number 17243 open for public comment on DRL glare.
To view or submit comments visit http://dms.dot.gov/search and type in docket number: 17243.
A good system of open government except the NHTSA are mysteriously dragging their feet on a ruling.
While it appears that NHTSA has withdrawn the 4124 docket, it's status remains open and people can still post comments to it but 17243 is the later docket.
There is also a ban DRL petition at
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/BANDRLs/petition.html This petition stands at #951
The Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations respond to the EU Daytime Running Lights Final Report
FEMA Comments on the Final Report on Daytime Running Lights Perlot 2005 (37kb pdf 2 pages)
When Motor Manufacturers
submit vehicles for the EPA Combined Average Fuel
Efficiency tests (or C.A.F.E.) used to determine official
fuel consumption, they are not required to use