DST (2018)

[20160805]

I thought Spain (and the rest of mainland Europe) normally used 24-hour time.

Yes, it's that. However I follow regional customs for time and date, and as such here I use 12-hour and month/day instead of my usual 24-hour and day/month. Using my default, sunset time here is 21:41 CEST.

Quite a few Americans use 24-hour, and will write day-month. It's military custom. Not standard for the US, but I wouldn't worry about using American customs if it's not normal for you. Just use whatever you normally would. I bet more than 90% of us understand 24 hour and day-month order.

As one of those Americans who uses 24-hour time and writes the day before the month, I approve this message.

Currently at my location, it is 06:10 on 22 June 2018.

[tradephoric]

But that's not what we are considering.

Err, who's the 'we' here? Clearly you, but this conversation wasn't about the two year-round options debate. And other than 20160805 moaning that the sunsets are currently too late, and me pointing out that you are still are of the view that daylight before waking is wasted and you can't do anything outside after dark, it seems to only be you that has been discussing this in the last couple of days.

The "we" are the state legislators who are proposing year-round DST in America most notably Florida.  Going to year-round DST could really help reduce energy consumption if extended through the winter months due to the reduced lighting cost in the evening and potential reduced heating costs.  Regardless of what your previous conversations were about, you don't agree that extending DST through the winter months could potentially reduce energy consumption in America when compared to the current status quo?  All i hear from you is energy savings from DST has been 'debunked' but those research papers looking at the energy savings from "summer DST" can't be applied to potential "winter DST" energy savings.   Two very different things.

To really get this economy pumping, Trump should push Congress to amend the Uniform Time Code Act of 1966 to make the DST period permanent.  Little Marco would be happy! 

[jeffandnicole]

But that’s not what we are considering.

Err, who's the 'we' here? Clearly you, but this conversation wasn't about the two year-round options debate. And other than 20160805 moaning that the sunsets are currently too late, and me pointing out that you are still are of the view that daylight before waking is wasted and you can't do anything outside after dark, it seems to only be you that has been discussing this in the last couple of days.

The "we" are the state legislators who are proposing year-round DST in America most notably Florida.  Going to year-round DST could really help reduce energy consumption if extended through the winter months due to the reduced lighting cost in the evening and potential reduced heating costs.  Regardless of what your previous conversations were about, you don't agree that extending DST through the winter months could potentially reduce energy consumption in America when compared to the current status quo?  All i hear from you is energy savings from DST has been 'debunked' but those research papers looking at the energy savings from "summer DST" can't be applied to potential "winter DST" energy savings.   Two very different things.

To really get this economy pumping, Trump should push Congress to amend the Uniform Time Code Act of 1966 to make the DST period permanent.  Little Marco would be happy! 

How does this affect those using electric in the morning hours?  It would appear that it would change the morning sunrise of approaching 7:15am in January to 8:15am, causing a lot more people to utilize lights in the morning that now don't need to.

[tradephoric]

How does this affect those using electric in the morning hours?  It would appear that it would change the morning sunrise of approaching 7:15am in January to 8:15am, causing a lot more people to utilize lights in the morning that now don't need to.

Year-round DST would minimize the total minutes Americans are awake in darkness when compared to standard-time.  It goes without saying that the less minutes Americans are awake in darkness during the winter, the less lighting they would need to use.

[english si]

The "we" are the state legislators who are proposing year-round DST in America most notably Florida.

So, not the "we" of people talking in this thread? OK then, at least you understand that people might be able to talk about other things related to DST in this thread.

you don't agree that extending DST through the winter months could potentially reduce energy consumption in America when compared to the current status quo?

No, I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the energy saving reasons why summer DST was bought in have been debunked as ineffective. Of course, because you seem to think the thread revolves around you, and what you are talking about, you would want to steer me onto that discussion - this time a little bit nicer than "we aren't talking about that", where the we is a bunch of people not in the room!

Well OK, then. Let's talk about the year-round DST proposals and energy saving. Given both winter and summer savings are both 'we can reduce lighting and heating costs in the evening by making them lighter', I find the assertion that they somehow very different as one coming from insecurity and blind ideology. Jeffandnicole raises an obvious point about dark mornings that the we-want-light-evenings-in-mid-winter crowd totally ignores as they are either so idiotic as to think that mornings wouldn't get darker, or because they don't want to think about the negative effects in mornings ruining their dreams of December al fresco dining without a light.

Year-round DST would minimize the total minutes Americans are awake in darkness when compared to standard-time.  It goes without saying that the less minutes Americans are awake in darkness during the winter, the less lighting they would need to use.

How many times does it have to be said! Morning pre-waking daylight isn't wasted - it's very much needed as part of the sleep cycle!

I'd imagine those anti-SAD sun-mimicing lamps that simulate dawn an hour or something before someone needs to wake up, in order to deal with the problem that (even on standard time) there's isn't enough light in the mornings in mid-winter at northern latitudes, use a lot of electricity.

[kalvado]

But that's not what we are considering.

Err, who's the 'we' here? Clearly you, but this conversation wasn't about the two year-round options debate. And other than 20160805 moaning that the sunsets are currently too late, and me pointing out that you are still are of the view that daylight before waking is wasted and you can't do anything outside after dark, it seems to only be you that has been discussing this in the last couple of days.

The "we" are the state legislators who are proposing year-round DST in America most notably Florida.  Going to year-round DST could really help reduce energy consumption if extended through the winter months due to the reduced lighting cost in the evening and potential reduced heating costs.  Regardless of what your previous conversations were about, you don't agree that extending DST through the winter months could potentially reduce energy consumption in America when compared to the current status quo?  All i hear from you is energy savings from DST has been 'debunked' but those research papers looking at the energy savings from "summer DST" can't be applied to potential "winter DST" energy savings.   Two very different things.

To really get this economy pumping, Trump should push Congress to amend the Uniform Time Code Act of 1966 to make the DST period permanent.  Little Marco would be happy!

THere is little change - and I heard different opinions about significance of that change - in energy consumption from just before to just after time change. That is one solid fact we have. Savings are based primarily on the fact that people are awake during more daytime hours and are not using lights (saving A) and maybe work/walk outside in daylight instead of doing energy-intensive things indoors (TV) - that is Saving B.
If duration of daylight is such that people are awake both during sunrize and sunset - Saving A is not realized. Winter also suppress Saving B.
Heating - I fail to actually see how that would work at all.

[tradephoric]

Time change makes ballot
https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/2018/06/21/time-change-makes-ballot-internet-privacy-may-not/724241002/

It looks like the California DST measure will make it on the ballot in November.  If approved by voters, this will be the first step in making DST permanent in California.  Florida has already approved a bill to make DST permanent in their state.  These are two of the most populous states in the nation.  There's going to be pressure on Congress to act and amend the Uniform Time Code Act of 1966 if legislators of these large populous states keep pushing for it.

[jeffandnicole]

How does this affect those using electric in the morning hours?  It would appear that it would change the morning sunrise of approaching 7:15am in January to 8:15am, causing a lot more people to utilize lights in the morning that now don't need to.

Year-round DST would minimize the total minutes Americans are awake in darkness when compared to standard-time.  It goes without saying that the less minutes Americans are awake in darkness during the winter, the less lighting they would need to use.

By how many minutes?

And I note you say 'minimize the total minutes Americans are awake in darkness'.  However, that's not an effective statement.  It would be how many total minutes *households* are awake in darkness.  If in the morning Hubby is awake but Wifey is asleep, the house will still have the same amount of lights on unless hubby walks around in total darkness.

Also, since a lot of people are awake in the affected portion of the morning, the 'minimizing' is extremely small.  Very small.  In fact, because people tend to be out and about in the early evening, there could actually be a negative effect as more people are home in the morning and out in the evening, reducing the need to have lights on in the house when they're not home.

[kalvado]

And I note you say 'minimize the total minutes Americans are awake in darkness'.  However, that's not an effective statement.  It would be how many total minutes *households* are awake in darkness.  If in the morning Hubby is awake but Wifey is asleep, the house will still have the same amount of lights on unless hubby walks around in total darkness.

Honestly speaking, I minimize  light (and noise) while she's asleep. I can brush teeth with a nightlight, and I will turn lights in the shower off before opening the door. I would light up a lot a room if I was alone. same in the kitchen, if I go to work on her day off:  minimum lighting - open microwave door provides enough light  to find a spoon for yogurt and make a cup of tea.  You can bet on full illumination otherwise. Fine print: that probably uses MORE energy since microwave has incandescent bulb - while overheads are LEDs...

[tradephoric]

Well OK, then. Let's talk about the year-round DST proposals and energy saving. Given both winter and summer savings are both 'we can reduce lighting and heating costs in the evening by making them lighter', I find the assertion that they somehow very different as one coming from insecurity and blind ideology.

There is a clear difference.  During the summer, most people are trying to cool their homes and the sun extending later into the evenings is working against them.  People crank up their AC to keep cool and you don't see energy savings during the summer.  OTOH, during the winter most people are trying to heat their homes, and extending daylight later into the evenings is providing an extra hour of natural heat... after all the sun is a natural heating source.  In the morning, the sun won't come up till later with winter DST, but a lot of people who are sleeping at 7:15 AM (ie. winter standard time sunrise scenario) will still be sleeping at 8:15 AM (ie. winter DST sunrise scenario), especially during the weekends.  During the weekdays, many people will have already left home for school or work by 7:15AM which is before the sun would have risen in many places running standard time.  The point is a lot of people in the morning aren't necessarily looking to heat their homes at 7:15AM-8:15AM... they are either still sleeping or have already left for work/school.  It can be 57 degrees in the house during the day when a house is vacant... people just want it a comfortable 70 degrees when they are actually there (ie. the evenings).  Having later daylight into the evenings will naturally help heat people's homes, and potentially cut down on their heating bills during the winter. 

Jeffandnicole raises an obvious point about dark mornings that the we-want-light-evenings-in-mid-winter crowd totally ignores as they are either so idiotic as to think that mornings wouldn't get darker, or because they don't want to think about the negative effects in mornings ruining their dreams of December al fresco dining without a light.

You really think standard time in the winter would minimize lighting usage versus permanent DST?   The analysis below requires some reasonable assumptions to be made (schedules of late and early risers), but it's clear that permanent DST would minimize the minutes Americans are awake in darkness during the winter.  Analyzing the data, you can see that there is more awake in darkness minutes during the morning under winter DST (as J&N points out in his comment), but it's more than offset by the reduction in the awake in darkness minutes during the evening hours. 

[kalvado]

Well OK, then. Let's talk about the year-round DST proposals and energy saving. Given both winter and summer savings are both 'we can reduce lighting and heating costs in the evening by making them lighter', I find the assertion that they somehow very different as one coming from insecurity and blind ideology.

There is a clear difference.  During the summer, most people are trying to cool their homes and the sun extending later into the evenings is working against them.  People crank up their AC to keep cool and you don’t see energy savings during the summer.  OTOH, during the winter most people are trying to heat their homes, and extending daylight later into the evenings is providing an extra hour of natural heat during the evenings… after all the sun is a natural heating source.  In the morning, the sun won’t come up till later with winter DST, but a lot of people who are sleeping at 7:15 AM (ie. winter standard time sunrise scenario) will still be sleeping at 8:15 AM (ie. winter DST sunrise scenario), especially during the weekends.  During the weekdays, many people will have already left home for school or work by 7:15AM which is before the sun would have risen in many places running standard time.  The point is a lot of people in the morning aren’t necessarily looking to heat their homes at 7:15AM-8:15AM… they are either still sleeping or have already left for work/school.  It can be 57 degrees in the house during the day when a house is vacant… people just want it a comfortable 70 degrees when they are actually there (ie. the evenings).  Having later daylight into the evenings will naturally help heat people’s homes, and potentially cut down on their heating bills during the winter. 

Heat loss is approximately proportional to temperature difference. If you want to maintain more or less the same temperature profile during the day for all clock settings, integral heat loss is not dependent or relative timing shift. Except, maybe, if you would open window and let some fresh air into the room at warmer point of time.
It makes sense to allow home to cool down while nobody is there - it reduces temperature differential hence heat loss. However, that doesn't change total heat loss due to sooner/later start, unless you assume work day becomes longer or shorter.

[bugo]

My point is that it is silly to fuck everybody's schedule up twice a year by one hour. It lowers productivity and is harmful to health, especially for those of us who have sleep disorders. There are no tangible benefits to it and many disadvantages to changing everybody's schedule twice a year. It is obsolete and there is no reason to do it in 2018. None.

[jeffandnicole]

And I note you say 'minimize the total minutes Americans are awake in darkness'.  However, that's not an effective statement.  It would be how many total minutes *households* are awake in darkness.  If in the morning Hubby is awake but Wifey is asleep, the house will still have the same amount of lights on unless hubby walks around in total darkness.

Honestly speaking, I minimize  light (and noise) while she's asleep. I can brush teeth with a nightlight, and I will turn lights in the shower off before opening the door. I would light up a lot a room if I was alone. same in the kitchen, if I go to work on her day off:  minimum lighting - open microwave door provides enough light  to find a spoon for yogurt and make a cup of tea.  You can bet on full illumination otherwise. Fine print: that probably uses MORE energy since microwave has incandescent bulb - while overheads are LEDs...

I don't have a master bath  , so I can go in the far-away bathroom and turn everything on without disturbing anyone.  We do have LED lighting in both over the bathroom tub and in kitchen which no doubt helps on electricity reduction.

But then I come in the bedroom and turn the light on and shut things louder than I should.  She's gotten used to it and will sleep thru it all! lol

[vdeane]

There is a clear difference.  During the summer, most people are trying to cool their homes and the sun extending later into the evenings is working against them.  People crank up their AC to keep cool and you don't see energy savings during the summer.  OTOH, during the winter most people are trying to heat their homes, and extending daylight later into the evenings is providing an extra hour of natural heat... after all the sun is a natural heating source.  In the morning, the sun won't come up till later with winter DST, but a lot of people who are sleeping at 7:15 AM (ie. winter standard time sunrise scenario) will still be sleeping at 8:15 AM (ie. winter DST sunrise scenario), especially during the weekends.  During the weekdays, many people will have already left home for school or work by 7:15AM which is before the sun would have risen in many places running standard time.  The point is a lot of people in the morning aren't necessarily looking to heat their homes at 7:15AM-8:15AM... they are either still sleeping or have already left for work/school.  It can be 57 degrees in the house during the day when a house is vacant... people just want it a comfortable 70 degrees when they are actually there (ie. the evenings).  Having later daylight into the evenings will naturally help heat people's homes, and potentially cut down on their heating bills during the winter. 

Speak for yourself.  I need it cold when going to sleep, so I turn the heat down about an hour before going to bed, but I wake up feeling like I'm freezing (well, when I go to work I do; this is less of a problem on the weekends since I can wake up more in line with my circadian rhythm and my body warms up on its own) and one of the first things I do each morning is turn the heat up (or raise the temperature on the AC in summer).

I'm not sure who these people are that get to sleep in even on week days, but lucky them.  I have to get up at 6 during the week, and I imagine most people who work for a living have to be up by 7 at the latest.  As for those who are already out the door by 7:15, well, I would never tolerate a home/work situation that would regularly require that of me.  I'll do it for conferences and stuff and road trips that are only once in a while, but not as a matter of routine.

I wouldn't be surprised if you're a morning lark stuck dealing with a bunch of night owls (which is most unusual; it's generally the other way around) trying to adjust the sun to better match the hours you've been forced to deal with, and I'm sure I've stated how I'm sick of larks setting everything up to suit their preferences at the expense of owls.

So, to summarize, you want me to get up half an hour earlier in the winter so I can compensate for the extra ice scraping effort from sunrise being an hour later, adding an additional hour and a half of darkness when I've already so groggy it takes a herculean effort just to get out of bed and potentially increase my electricity bill if I'm forced to get a SAD lamp just because you want to eat dinner outside while watching people do summer activities on the beach and aren't organized enough to make the time changes less inconvenient.

It's bad enough they ruined Halloween by moving the DST change date.  Now people want to make the whole of winter more inconvenient because some people in unusually warm climates want to pretend it's still summer.  Perhaps we should ask Spain how their "permanent DST" works out from them.  From what I've heard, not well.

Honestly, we'd probably all deal with this better if we embraced the seasons, adjusted our bedtime accordingly on the Saturday before the time change rather than have the hour add/subtract from our sleep, and return our obsessions to the parclo B4 interchange.

My point is that it is silly to fuck everybody's schedule up twice a year by one hour. It lowers productivity and is harmful to health, especially for those of us who have sleep disorders. There are no tangible benefits to it and many disadvantages to changing everybody's schedule twice a year. It is obsolete and there is no reason to do it in 2018. None.

My sleep disorder actually makes it easier to deal with the time change.  Because I'm always swinging my sleep/wake times wildly between the weekend and work week and am only up 12-14 hours on Saturdays regardless (and 12-13 hours Sundays; meanwhile, I'm usually up 18-20 hours Fridays, and 16-17 hours Monday-Thursday), in that respect, the week of the time change is little different than any other week.  If I could set any schedule, free from the constraints of both society and the Earth's rotation, I'd probably be awake 22-24 hours and sleep for 10-12.

[J N Winkler]

I'd imagine those anti-SAD sun-mimicing lamps that simulate dawn an hour or something before someone needs to wake up, in order to deal with the problem that (even on standard time) there's isn't enough light in the mornings in mid-winter at northern latitudes, use a lot of electricity.

I have heard of wattages of 300 W and even 500 W, but that information dates from about fifteen years ago before CFLs and now LEDs became affordable.  It is now at least technologically possible to have a SAD lamp with high light output and low power consumption.

I don't buy HVAC-related energy savings arguments in regard to any DST option in the case of well-insulated houses where heating and cooling are both thermostatically regulated.  It is the same number of heating/cooling degree days regardless of where the occupants are in their daily schedules.  Letting temperatures float during the day in an unoccupied house does not really save energy overall since the energy that is saved while the occupants are away is expended restoring the regulated temperature when they return.  The way to save energy on HVAC is to implement full passive heating and cooling, not to play with the clock.

Lighting-related arguments at least make more sense at a conceptual level, but even there I think the real effect of DST is effectively buried in statistical noise because schedule creep effects (resulting from the inability of probably a majority of the population to stick to consistent sleeping schedules) over time eclipse the effects of a twice-yearly time change.

[kalvado]

\
So, to summarize, you want me to get up half an hour earlier in the winter so I can compensate for the extra ice scraping effort from sunrise being an hour later, \

I really don't know what you can do with a car for half an hour. 15 minutes usually is about right after a foot of snow, including getting to a plowed road.  otherwise it is 5 minutes or so.

[vdeane]

\
So, to summarize, you want me to get up half an hour earlier in the winter so I can compensate for the extra ice scraping effort from sunrise being an hour later, \

I really don't know what you can do with a car for half an hour. 15 minutes usually is about right after a foot of snow, including getting to a plowed road.  otherwise it is 5 minutes or so.

That ice can be stuck on really, really hard if there was a big freeze that morning, and the scraper always has a zillion streaks, requiring me to go over the same areas multiple times, especially considering that in winter sunrise would be after I leave for work, whereas now the latest sunrise at least half an hour before (I leave around 8:10-8:15).  In some ways snow is easier, since if I turn the car on the front defroster will usually have the windshield ice starting to melt by the time I have the roof, rear, and sides done (having a heavy duty snow brush that can reach across the whole car is really handy; now if only heavy duty ice scrapers that didn't leave a million streak marks were a thing that existed).  Now, 5-10 minutes is more normal, but I don't do very well on any offset from my normal routine that isn't an even half hour; the mental math required to sync the clock to the normal routine and keep myself on track is too much effort that early in the morning, and you never know; I really did have it take a half an hour once, on a Saturday afternoon no less, as a result of a deep freeze and/or freezing rain.

I think I was going to mention this earlier and forgot, but I don't drink coffee (which I think was mentioned somewhere in this thread), and even if I did, I wouldn't be able to get to it until my routine is half over.

[tradephoric]

It's bad enough they ruined Halloween by moving the DST change date.  Now people want to make the whole of winter more inconvenient because some people in unusually warm climates want to pretend it's still summer.  Perhaps we should ask Spain how their "permanent DST" works out from them.  From what I've heard, not well.

You make it sound like only a narrow swath of people live in unusually warm climates that would enjoy the later sunsets after work during the winter.  It doesn't sound too unusual for Americans to enjoy pleasant weather during the winter when roughly 92 million people live in the southern states/areas listed below:

Texas = 25,145,561
Southern California = 23,800,500
Florida = 18,801,310
Georgia = 9,687,653
South Carolina = 4,625,364
Louisiana = 4,533,372
Alabama = 4,779,736
Mississippi = 2,967,297
New Mexico = 2,059,179

[7/8]

Almost 800 replies, wow! Personally I'm pro-DST. It's a good balance between earlier winter mornings and late summer nights. I personally don't think changing clocks twice a year is a big deal, but apparently people think otherwise .

An interesting fact that I don't think has been mentioned yet:
In Europe, the time zones all change at the same UTC time to maintain a consistent 1 hour difference between time zones. Meanwhile in North America, the time zones change at 2:00 am local time which changes the time differences briefly.

[vdeane]

It's bad enough they ruined Halloween by moving the DST change date.  Now people want to make the whole of winter more inconvenient because some people in unusually warm climates want to pretend it's still summer.  Perhaps we should ask Spain how their "permanent DST" works out from them.  From what I've heard, not well.

You make it sound like only a narrow swath of people live in unusually warm climates that would enjoy the later sunsets after work during the winter.  It doesn't sound too unusual for Americans to enjoy pleasant weather during the winter when roughly 92 million people live in the southern states/areas listed below:

Texas = 25,145,561
Southern California = 23,800,500
Florida = 18,801,310
Georgia = 9,687,653
South Carolina = 4,625,364
Louisiana = 4,533,372
Alabama = 4,779,736
Mississippi = 2,967,297
New Mexico = 2,059,179

I doubt the push for year-round DST is unanimous, so it would be a subset of the third of the country described, or, paraphrased, "some".

[Duke87]

I don't get the obsession with "it must be daylight to do anything other than sit at home watching TV".  I for one personally enjoy how my Saturday evenings are dark in the winter!  It's fun to drive down the road seeing all the businesses illuminated by their lights.  Having it be light out at 7-8 pm in late January/February would be weird and feel too much like summer.

That's fine if your preferred activity is driving down the street. Not so much if it's playing sports, hiking, skiiing, etc.

That said yes - moving the daylight later in winter would have the benefit of avoiding time changes twice a year while still keeping later sunsets in summer, but I'm not sure how much it actually helps otherwise.

Ultimately the real problem is that that, in middle latitudes, the days in winter are just too damn short. And there's no fixing that, all you can do is move closer to the equator... or migrate to the opposite hemisphere.

I'm not sure who these people are that get to sleep in even on week days, but lucky them.  I have to get up at 6 during the week, and I imagine most people who work for a living have to be up by 7 at the latest.  As for those who are already out the door by 7:15, well, I would never tolerate a home/work situation that would regularly require that of me.

I know who these people are! I'm one of them. It's been a couple weeks since the last time I got out of bed before 9:30.

In my case, I work from home, so I have an above average level of flexibility with what my hours are and I can be at my computer working within 5 minutes of getting out of bed if I need to be. Meanwhile I work with a significant number of people who are located in Central or Pacific time, so while usually no one really notices or cares that I'm not online until almost 10 AM Eastern, I've been on too many conference calls that run until 6 or 7 PM to count.

Now, I know my situation is an unusual one, but plenty of other examples of people who get to sleep late on weekdays are people in service jobs whose shifts are later. My grandfather spent many years as a police officer working from 6 PM to 2 AM, for example. He would be sleeping from ~3 AM to 11 AM to accommodate that.

Honestly, we'd probably all deal with this better if we embraced the seasons, adjusted our bedtime accordingly on the Saturday before the time change rather than have the hour add/subtract from our sleep

Except it doesn't really work that way. If I try to go to bed an hour earlier to prepare, I will simply find myself laying awake in bed for an extra hour because, blasted circadian rhythms, they won't let me go to sleep when I'm not especially tired and they say it's not yet time. So when DST begins I lose an hour of sleep because I pretty much have to. The only way to make the adjustment is to force myself to wake up earlier and then use the resulting fatigue to start getting myself to go to sleep earlier.

As much as I'd prefer it to be different, the unfortunate reality is that forcing myself to be awake when I'm tired is a lot more feasible than forcing myself to sleep when I'm not. And this isn't just me - this is the normal way the human body works.

When DST ends, I may wake up early Sunday morning but my schedule will fairly quickly slide back forward because, well... I find it naturally wants to do that. Which is also fairly normal - studies have shown that when you deny people access to sunlight or any indication of what time of day it is, most of them will tend to follow a roughly 25 hour cycle. Our internal programming is idealized for living with 25 hour days, we're able to keep regular schedules in the 24 hour days we actually have here on Earth only because daily exposure to the sun forces our internal clocks to continually adjust.

This is also part of why adjusting to time changes when traveling west is a lot easier than adjusting to time changes when traveling east.

[Eth]

Georgia = 9,687,653

Yes, we're definitely pining for another hour of sunlight in the afternoon to enjoy our January temperatures in the 40s and 50s. Sorry, we're still not interested in your product.

[jeffandnicole]

It's bad enough they ruined Halloween by moving the DST change date.  Now people want to make the whole of winter more inconvenient because some people in unusually warm climates want to pretend it's still summer.  Perhaps we should ask Spain how their "permanent DST" works out from them.  From what I've heard, not well.

You make it sound like only a narrow swath of people live in unusually warm climates that would enjoy the later sunsets after work during the winter.  It doesn't sound too unusual for Americans to enjoy pleasant weather during the winter when roughly 92 million people live in the southern states/areas listed below:

Texas = 25,145,561
Southern California = 23,800,500
Florida = 18,801,310
Georgia = 9,687,653
South Carolina = 4,625,364
Louisiana = 4,533,372
Alabama = 4,779,736
Mississippi = 2,967,297
New Mexico = 2,059,179

Of those, how many are seniors and others that tend to get up earlier and are done their daily activities earlier, and would prefer the sun rising earlier rather than later?

Of those, how many are babies and toddlers that are too young to barely walk or won't be utilizing an extra evening hour in a meaningful way?

Once you start whittling down the population that actually would want the hour of sun in the evening rather than the morning, then it's nowhere near the 92 million in those states that would want that "pleasant weather" in the evening.

[vdeane]

Except it doesn't really work that way. If I try to go to bed an hour earlier to prepare, I will simply find myself laying awake in bed for an extra hour because, blasted circadian rhythms, they won't let me go to sleep when I'm not especially tired and they say it's not yet time.

Yeah, that's me every single night of the year.  Unless I'm particularly sleep deprived, I won't be tired at anything resembling a reasonable bedtime (if I'm well-rested it actually takes me at least 24 hours to get to that point!), so it always takes me at least an hour to fall asleep.  Plus, since I usually go to bed on Fridays and Saturdays between 12 and 2, even going to bed an hour earlier is still later than during the week.  It also helps that my Aspergers leaves me with a perception of time that is complete junk at best, with the result that between sunset and sunrise I'm ruled by the clock, and my body has no way to know the difference between "2 hours after sunset", "midnight", and "half an hour before dawn"... except for the clocks, which I already changed that afternoon.  The same factors that make it so much harder to wake up on dark winter mornings also make it very easy for me to adapt to the time changes (or at least hide the effects in the same issues I always have).

Of those, how many are seniors and others that tend to get up earlier and are done their daily activities earlier, and would prefer the sun rising earlier rather than later?

Now I'm wondering if the push for year-round DST might be motivated by seniors.  People tend to become more larkish as they get older, with their preferred schedule shifting earlier and earlier.  However, once retirement hits, they have a luxury those of us who work for a living don't: they can live by the sun, not the clock, at least most of the time.  Perhaps they want to change the clocks so that activities happen more in line with their preferred schedule?  Consider tradephoric's example of needing to eat dinner before sunset... it sounds silly at first, but maybe not if you're old enough that you really do get tired shortly after the sun sets.

[bugo]

I don't care if we go to year-round daylight saving time or standard time, as long as they pick one and stick with it. Changing the clock twice a year sucks, and whoever thought it was a good idea should be tarred and feathered.