Air taxi Captain reported BLM is unsafe; especially during nighttime operations; due to the non-standard lighting system and lack of a visual guidance system such as a PAPI or VASI.

Narrative

Please review and address the multiple safety threats listed below for BLM. We observed and dealt with these threats on a recent flight and in my opinion they pose significant and increased operational risk specifically during nighttime operations at this airfield.At issue is the combination of a non-standard lighting system AND no visual vertical guidance system in the form of a PAPI or VASI. This greatly impacts in a very negative way the visual cues we rely upon to affect and maintain a stable and correct approach path to touchdown during the visual portion of an approach. It's important to note and bears emphasis that the term non-standard" in reference to the lighting is non-specific and conveys no useful information to flight crews other than that the lights are non-standard. What do non-standard threshold lights look like? What do non-standard runway edge lights look like and at what intensity will they be since they're fixed on one setting and not PCL? Answer: We'll find out when we get there? Bottom line: Inadequate and/or poor lighting systems are simply unacceptable!I looked extensively but could not find a single representative example of any other airport we currently operate into at night that has non-standard edge lights; non-standard threshold lights; and no visual vertical guidance system. Not a single one!Specific threats runways 14/32 listed below. Our approach and landing was to Runway 32 with an 18-knot crosswind component.No VASI or PAPI installed (14/32). Non-standard runway edge lighting and is not PCL; has one intensity only. Non-standard threshold lights (32). Non-standard runway markings (32). Non-standard runway width: 1st 575 feet Approach End of Runway (AER) (32) is 85 feet wide; then 100 feet wide for the remainder. Additionally; the notes in the chart display are inadequate; vague; and make no mention of the non-standard lighting system and the lack of a PAPI or VASI (not installed).Suggestions: Please re-evaluate this airport's suitability for safe nighttime operations given these threats. Suggest a team fly this approach to Runway 32 at night to assess/confirm these concerns. Secondly; a team should review and re-assess owner convenience vs. increased risk at these lesser equipped airfields. There comes a point where the increased risk far outweighs any perceived convenience. BLM for nighttime operations is such an example.Suggest daytime use only and prohibit nighttime operations until airport is brought up to current and acceptable standards with lighting and markings; etc. Consider ZZZ as an alternative. Airfield has standard lighting and markings; IAPs; and a PAPI to both usable runways."