There's a very good chance there could be just ONE MORE set of time changes:
https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/03/time-for-a-change-us-senate-agrees-to-make-daylight-savings-permanent.html
In before lock, I'm highly in favor of this measure given the extra hour before sundown would make my winters hugely more palatable.
I'm really in favor of Year Round "Half DST/Half ST" as in, Central Time offsets -5.5 year-round from GMT, as opposed to -6 during CST and -5 during CDT/now
Eastern Time would be -4.5 year-round; Mountain Time -6.5 year-round. Pacific Time -7.5 year-round
It'll never happen
Year-round DST won't be a good solution, either. Working outside sucks when both the start and end of the day are in darkness. At least with Winter Standard Time, you can get your stuff down in the morning hours with daylight
I think this might prompt the bulk of Indiana that's on Eastern time to switch to Central.
In South Bend for example, Eastern time + daylight saving = 9:08 sunrise on December 21 and that's just messed up. 8:08 is already late.
I feel like I'm in the minority in liking DST. Keeps the morning's from being too dark in the winter, and also reduces a wasted hour of early morning sun in the summer. The time changes don't bother me since I suck at sleeping anyway and almost all my clocks update automatically. My only complaint is I would prefer a few more weeks of Standard Time since I feel the sunrises are too late in late March and late October on DST.
What of Arizona and Hawaii? Mountain Daylight Time is observed in the Navajo Nation but nowhere else in Arizona. Hawaii doesn't observe DST at all, and doesn't need to.
The sun setting at 9:30 PM in the Phoenix, Tucson, and Yuma areas, where it's 110 degrees during the day, is an absolute non-starter. It was tried and it failed in 1967. Keep our time zone the same, and just call it Pacific Daylight Time.
Have the governments of Canada and Mexico been consulted, or weighed in, on this proposal? They would need to be consulted, as part of keeping North America mostly in synch without oddball time changes at borders. That could slow down the process.
As suggested above, some jurisdictions might want to change time zones in response to "permanent DST".
I do not understand why anyone thinks this is a good idea. As with everything else in life, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Here in the DC area, sunrise around Christmastime is at around 7:25 and sunset is around 16:46. You get up in the dark and you commute home (or get off work) in the dark. If we were on DST at that time of year, sunrise would be at 8:25 and sunset at 17:46. So it would be even darker when you get up and it would still be dark when you commute home (or get off work), meaning there would be no benefit whatsoever to DST. The effect would be aggravated further north, of course, due to the days being shorter, and it would also be aggravated in the western portions of time zones due to the later sunrises there (South Bend would see sunrises later than 9:00 in December, for example).
Permanent standard time would be less objectionable on the whole except that sunrise in the DC area around the first day of summer would be at 4:43 if we were on standard time. On the whole, I think I'd regard that as less problematic than 8:25 sunrises during the winter because things like blackout curtains, which are common in Alaska, can be very effective (as I found in Alaska!).
Really, I find all the whining to be a generally silly fad that crops up twice a year and then disappears for a few months. Changing the clocks is not a big problem at all and I haven't heard anyone come up with a better solution on the whole for the issue of the solar day not corresponding to what our society wants it to be. Sure, one solution might be for society to adjust our schedules for different times of the year, but there is almost no chance of that ever happening.
Ideally, the idea would be to adjust societal expectations and scheduling based on sunlight rather than trying to adjust the clocks based on societal expectations. But that'll never happen. In theory, I can set my own hours. Suppose we had permanent standard time with 4:40 sunrises and 19:37 sunsets in June. If I wanted to get up at 5:00, start work at 6:00, and sign off at 15:30, in theory I could do that–but the problem would come if my boss didn't want to change his schedule in that way. If he continued to sign on at 8:00 and sign off at 17:30, what are the chances I'd be able to sign off at 15:30? About zero. He'd always have something else to be done in the afternoon and I'd just wind up making more work for myself.
(Ms1995hoo just had a very negative reaction to the idea of getting up earlier and going to bed earlier. But it seems to me if sunrise and sunset were an hour earlier, the whole point would be to adjust our schedules and societal expectations. Instead, our current system manipulates time to fit what society wants the clock to be.)
And I don't work retail or similar. The chances of retail adjusting business hours for different times of the year are nonexistent.
It all depends on what side of the time zone you're in and how skewed it is with respect to solar noon (which most US and Canadian Time zones are).
See Alaska.
I think we should shift the clocks by 12 hours twice a year. Keep everyone on their toes.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 15, 2022, 08:14:08 PM
Really, I find all the whining to be a generally silly fad that crops up twice a year and then disappears for a few months. Changing the clocks is not a big problem at all and I haven't heard anyone come up with a better solution on the whole for the issue of the solar day not corresponding to what our society wants it to be.
There are documented increases in strokes and heart attacks the first week after time changes. Personally, it takes me a week to get used to waking up at what is essentially an hour earlier. Fortunately for us, our dog is not like others in that it doesn't mind getting fed an hour later. Many dogs have a real hard time adjusting.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2022, 08:36:07 PM
I think we should shift the clocks by 12 hours twice a year. Keep everyone on their toes.
And do it at different times every year with little to no warning.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 15, 2022, 08:39:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 15, 2022, 08:14:08 PM
Really, I find all the whining to be a generally silly fad that crops up twice a year and then disappears for a few months. Changing the clocks is not a big problem at all and I haven't heard anyone come up with a better solution on the whole for the issue of the solar day not corresponding to what our society wants it to be.
There are documented increases in strokes and heart attacks the first week after time changes. Personally, it takes me a week to get used to waking up at what is essentially an hour earlier. Fortunately for us, our dog is not like others in that it doesn't mind getting fed an hour later. Many dogs have a real hard time adjusting.
Every year the base I work at expects me to put our safety training related to the hazards of the DST transition. I don't dispute the statistics they cite but the notion that I'm expected to helicopter parent grown adults outside of my four walls is silly.
Quote from: LilianaUwU on March 15, 2022, 08:43:29 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2022, 08:36:07 PM
I think we should shift the clocks by 12 hours twice a year. Keep everyone on their toes.
And do it at different times every year with little to no warning.
All right, everyone, BEDTIME. NOW.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2022, 08:47:14 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on March 15, 2022, 08:43:29 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2022, 08:36:07 PM
I think we should shift the clocks by 12 hours twice a year. Keep everyone on their toes.
And do it at different times every year with little to no warning.
All right, everyone, BEDTIME. NOW.
(Holds flashlight under bedsheets, reads Archie comic book)
My brother sent a message observing that permanent DST is almost as idiotic as the universal DH.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 15, 2022, 08:56:56 PM
My brother sent a message observing that permanent DST is almost as idiotic as the universal DH.
Is there a way we could combine the two somehow?
My only problem with this is that they're changing it permanently to daylight savings time, instead of standard time.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 15, 2022, 07:49:55 PM
What of Arizona and Hawaii? Mountain Daylight Time is observed in the Navajo Nation but nowhere else in Arizona. Hawaii doesn't observe DST at all, and doesn't need to.
Changing
when DST is doesn't affect who observes it and who doesn't. DST was already extended back in 2007, don't forget. This would be just like that, except there would be zero days in between the end and start dates.
Quote from: oscar on March 15, 2022, 08:00:24 PM
Have the governments of Canada and Mexico been consulted, or weighed in, on this proposal? They would need to be consulted, as part of keeping North America mostly in synch without oddball time changes at borders. That could slow down the process.
Were they consulted prior to the extension in 2007?
Mexico and the USA have different DST schedules to this day. I have an upcoming trip planned to Mexico, and the entire trip will be within the central time zone, yet my destination will nevertheless be one hour behind local time here in Wichita; this is because the USA has already switched to DST but Mexico will not have switched yet. In fact, back in 2010, I was in Mexico during the US time change; we did not change our clocks at the border on the way down, but we changed them at the border on the way back.
Between 2007 and 2010, sister cities along the US-Mexican border had different DST schedules. Starting in 2010, the border zone in Mexico uses the same DST schedule as the USA, while the rest of Mexico is still on the old schedule. A proposed bill to adopt the US schedule nationwide failed to pass in the Mexican congress a few years ago.
Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2022, 09:16:25 PM
Quote from: oscar on March 15, 2022, 08:00:24 PM
Have the governments of Canada and Mexico been consulted, or weighed in, on this proposal? They would need to be consulted, as part of keeping North America mostly in synch without oddball time changes at borders. That could slow down the process.
Were they consulted prior to the extension in 2007?
Canada is in line with the United States regarding start and end dates.
Quote from: 1 on March 15, 2022, 09:19:57 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2022, 09:16:25 PM
Quote from: oscar on March 15, 2022, 08:00:24 PM
Have the governments of Canada and Mexico been consulted, or weighed in, on this proposal? They would need to be consulted, as part of keeping North America mostly in synch without oddball time changes at borders. That could slow down the process.
Were they consulted prior to the extension in 2007?
Canada is in line with the United States regarding start and end dates.
But not all provinces and territories adopted the current schedule at the same time:
2005 – NB, PEI, PQ, ON
2006 – NS, AB, BC, NWT, YT (since rescinded)
2007 – NL, NU
Never – SK
That doesn't sound like a coordinated effort to me at all.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623/all-info
I for one think the Bloodhound Gang got it right when they said "you are inclined to make me rise an hour early just like Daylight Savings Time". To that end, I'm not looking forward to being forced to become even more of a morning lark against my will (my natural inclination is to be a night owl, but unlike many owls apparently, I work a normal "9-5" office job). Or to having to wait 10 minutes for the car to warm up and defrost the ice in winter. Or to no longer being able to see the Christmas lights in my neighborhood (as sunset will now be at least half an hour after I get home every single day of the year).
In any case, we tried this already in the 1970s. It was quickly abandoned. Is there any reason to believe things are different now?
Quote from: bm7 on March 15, 2022, 09:15:53 PM
My only problem with this is that they're changing it permanently to daylight savings time, instead of standard time.
Exactly. In the event this bill passes as is, it would leave Arizona (except the Navajo nation) and Hawaii an hour behind everyone else for the whole year. The most likely outcome of this is that these two states would spring forward one last time (after not doing so for decades) to be in sync with the rest of their timezone.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 15, 2022, 07:42:05 PM
I think this might prompt the bulk of Indiana that's on Eastern time to switch to Central.
In South Bend for example, Eastern time + daylight saving = 9:08 sunrise on December 21 and that's just messed up. 8:08 is already late.
Yeah, a few years ago I was in the Detroit area right after the the March spring forward, and it was still pretty much dark at 8 AM. I thought it was bad here, that was borderline absurd.
Yawn.
Wake me up when anything about this actually happens.
Or doesn't happen.
Or partially happens.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 15, 2022, 09:10:34 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 15, 2022, 08:56:56 PM
My brother sent a message observing that permanent DST is almost as idiotic as the universal DH.
Is there a way we could combine the two somehow?
The games will still be 9 innings in regulation, from the 2nd thru the 10th inning. The 7th inning stretch will occur in the middle of the 8th inning.
If this does actually pass, I bet some time zone lines might start moving east to compensate as states on the western edges of time zones decide they don't like the super late sunrises in winter.
Arizona is effectively PDT already, so might as well make that official
Indiana could move to CDT, and honestly should be in the Central time zone anyway
Southwest Idaho might shift to PDT
etc...
I wonder if, in the long term, the rise in remote work (and the corresponding reduction in commutes) will have any effect on popular opinion?
I think we're just too tall a country, with our population too spread out north to south, to have a solution that will satisfy everyone. (a country like Canada is "taller", but its population is highly compressed in one band of latitude)
That said, some back-of-the-envelope math says around half of our population is within 3 degrees latitude of New York. With permanent DST, on the shortest days of the year civil twilight would begin at 7:47, so if you have a "typical" job (i.e., 9am start), unless your commute is over an hour it's going to be in daylight. Another 35% or so live within 3 degrees latitude of Dallas, where the situation is similar or even less pronounced.
I recognize that many millions of people do not work a 9-5 job. I also recognize that a lot of students start earlier than this (I was one of those), but that trend seems to be receding as well.
Finally, I recognize that there are significant metros north of these latitudinal bands (Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Detroit, Boston) but it only seems to total about 10% of the population.
I guess I'm wondering just what percent of the population would actually be negatively impacted by permanent DST, versus the number who might benefit from it? We get a lot of anecdotes, but not a lot of data.
Quote from: ozarkman417 on March 15, 2022, 10:09:28 PM
In the event this bill passes as is, it would leave Arizona (except the Navajo nation) and Hawaii an hour behind everyone else for the whole year. The most likely outcome of this is that these two states would spring forward one last time (after not doing so for decades) to be in sync with the rest of their timezone.
Hawaii might be more concerned about staying in synch with non-DST Asian trading and tourism partners, and not hassling them with even a one-time adjustment for Hawaii.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 15, 2022, 08:14:08 PM
I do not understand why anyone thinks this is a good idea. As with everything else in life, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Here in the DC area, sunrise around Christmastime is at around 7:25 and sunset is around 16:46. You get up in the dark and you commute home (or get off work) in the dark. If we were on DST at that time of year, sunrise would be at 8:25 and sunset at 17:46. So it would be even darker when you get up and it would still be dark when you commute home (or get off work), meaning there would be no benefit whatsoever to DST. The effect would be aggravated further north, of course, due to the days being shorter, and it would also be aggravated in the western portions of time zones due to the later sunrises there (South Bend would see sunrises later than 9:00 in December, for example).
Pretty much agreed. The whole concept of DST makes sense if you want daylight distributed as evenly as possible when the days are shorter, and more evening daylight (while avoiding extremely early sunrises) in the summer.
The biggest issue is the actual switch, which already occurs at about the most convenient time possible (of course not for everyone, but for about the most people possible). Also, we now have phones/computers/etc. which switch times automatically, so it's almost impossible to forget or not know it happened.
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2022, 09:56:06 PM
... Or to no longer being able to see the Christmas lights in my neighborhood (as sunset will now be at least half an hour after I get home every single day of the year).
Yeah, dark winter evenings are very much a part of winter. Winter evening commutes wouldn't be the same if it was always light out. And you can't really say the same thing about the morning because in the evening, you're already awake. Waking up, going through your morning routine, and driving to work while it's pitch black out is much harder than driving home in the dark. Morning daylight is just integral to the entire day/night concept in a way that evening light just isn't. How can you even call it "morning" if you're already at your office/warehouse job working before seeing the light of day?
Another thought I had: how will the Spanish-language countdown work on Dick Clark's New Years Rockin Eve with San Juan and Times Square in the same time zone? AST and EDT are basically the same thing, after all.
Quote from: DTComposer on March 15, 2022, 10:36:31 PM
...I recognize that many millions of people do not work a 9-5 job. I also recognize that a lot of students start earlier than this (I was one of those), but that trend seems to be receding as well.
Because most workdays are 8 hours *plus lunch*, there's actually very few "9 to 5" jobs. And based on commutting patterns, I'd venture to say most jobs start at 8 or earlier.
There's been a few schools that are starting later, but nothing that really signifies a trend.
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2022, 10:52:18 PM
Another thought I had: how will the Spanish-language countdown work on Dick Clark's New Years Rockin Eve with San Juan and Times Square in the same time zone? AST and EDT are basically the same thing, after all.
It was a poorly attempted gimmic anyway. Almost no one will miss it.
There's no perfect solution that will please everyone, since people's preference is largely based on their own personal lifestyle and even their location within a particular time zone, and we're applying a man-made construct with man-made division lines to a natural phenomenon.
For example, I would never support permanent standard time because I like the sunsets between 8 PM and 9 PM that go from mid-April to September in Minnesota.
All for it. #DSTYearRound.
I'll take dark mornings in the winter and the Sun setting later than 4 p.m. over depression-inducing "standard time" (5 months out of the year is somehow "standard").
Time to bug my rep in Congress...
One thing they could do about the ST/DST issue is promote moving south for more sun in winter, since it seems like the vast majority of the population is ignorant of the fact that the sun hours don't vary as much farther south. It's the kind of thing that people want a government solution to when there really isn't one.
Strongly opposed. DST in the winter means it doesn't get light until after people are at work or at school. Seeing some light outside it part of what wakes people up. They can force themselves awake when it's still pitch dark if necessary, but they're still half asleep, slow reaction times, poor judgement. Less happy, too. The thing is, we tried this one year. In 1974 we changed to DST at the beginning of January. People hated it. Congress was deluged with mail asking for it to be changed back and did, as soon as they were back from winter recess.
I'm confused. Why is daylight savings such a sensitive topic on this forum? I've been here for 5 years and still don't know.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 15, 2022, 11:05:11 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on March 15, 2022, 10:36:31 PM
...I recognize that many millions of people do not work a 9-5 job. I also recognize that a lot of students start earlier than this (I was one of those), but that trend seems to be receding as well.
Because most workdays are 8 hours *plus lunch*, there's actually very few "9 to 5" jobs. And based on commutting patterns, I'd venture to say most jobs start at 8 or earlier.
Fair point on the lunch, but this also feels anecdotal. Based on (pre-COVID) commuting patterns here (San Francisco/Silicon Valley), my anecdotal experience is 8:30am (or later) is the average start time. The difference in ridership on the 7am and 8am Caltrain from San Jose to San Francisco was considerable; and the freeways heading into the downtowns or the tech campuses were relatively clear until 8:15, then they were slammed. But again, I just data, not anecdotes, so here's some data:
To somewhat support your point, BLS statistics from 2015 say 52% of the workforce were at their job at 8am. But that doesn't mean start time - that 52% includes people who started at midnight, 3am, etc. - people whose commute would be in the dark no matter what. The number goes up to 66% at 9am.
Next, the American Community Survey from 2014 puts the median start time for a job at 7:55, also somewhat supporting your point (a majority, but not "most"). But FiveThirtyEight's analysis of that data shows a great deal of those earlier start times are in industries that aren't tied into the business day, but into the solar day, such as agriculture or the military. Would it be that if daylight is an hour later, then they'd just start an hour later? Also, 7:55 is the median start time for all jobs, including jobs that start outside of the "standard business day" (whether you call that 8-5, 9-6, or some variant thereof), and jobs that have shifting start times. I'd be interested in the median start time for jobs that start between, say, 7:30am and 9:30am?
Census data for 2019 says the average commute was 27.6 minutes (again, all jobs).
Federal Highway Administration data for 2017 says 43% of the workforce has the ability to shift their start times.
And of course, all of this is pre-COVID. But if I were to make some sort of stab, I would say 15% of the workforce is commuting between 6:45 and 7:45, can't change that commute time, and they would be negatively affected by permanent DST (i.e., commuting pre-daylight) for an additional eight weeks each year.
So would that outweigh the potential benefits of permanent DST, which I would argue are largely socially-based (i.e., shopping/dining/errands/friends and family/entertainment)? How does that change as we move more and more to a information and service economy, and as post-COVID trends increase the number of remote and "non-traditional" work arrangements?
Personally, I don't mind the early sunsets in November and December, when the holidays keep activities and social energy going into the evening; but I find January and February to be dreary and would welcome another hour of light at the end of the day (especially to give my kid more time for out-of-the-house activities), and I really enjoy the later sunsets of DST.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 16, 2022, 12:20:23 AM
I'm confused. Why is daylight savings such a sensitive topic on this forum? I've been here for 5 years and still don't know.
It's political, and it's one area where the Federal government should NOT go.
Because of latitude and longitude differences, each state should be able to decide what it wants to do, based on the needs of its own people. Here in Arizona, we don't need to be on Mountain Daylight Time because it would get too hot in the evening, with sunset at around 9:30 PM. Other states further north might want something different because their hours of daylight are longer in the summer and shorter in the winter. They should be able to determine that for themselves. And then there's Hawaii, where daylight time is an irrelevancy.
Bottom line: Congress needs to butt out, repeal the Federal Uniform Time Act, and let the states determine what they need.
Evening light benefits far more people than morning light. If the schools are a problem, then they should start later in the day (which is massively beneficial to kids and teens anyway).
I can deal with a 9 am sunrise if it means a 5 pm winter sunset (instead of 4 pm).
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 16, 2022, 12:29:51 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 16, 2022, 12:20:23 AM
I'm confused. Why is daylight savings such a sensitive topic on this forum? I've been here for 5 years and still don't know.
It's political, and it's one area where the Federal government should NOT go.
Because of latitude and longitude differences, each state should be able to decide what it wants to do, based on the needs of its own people. Here in Arizona, we don't need to be on Mountain Daylight Time because it would get too hot in the evening, with sunset at around 9:30 PM. Other states further north might want something different because their hours of daylight are longer in the summer and shorter in the winter. They should be able to determine that for themselves. And then there's Hawaii, where daylight time is an irrelevancy.
Bottom line: Congress needs to butt out, repeal the Federal Uniform Time Act, and let the states determine what they need.
What we had before standard times were created in the 1800s was a mess. You could ride to the next town and be a few minutes later or earlier or anything up to an hour. I wouldn't want to go back to a patchwork quilt like it was then, not even at the state level - although I'm fine with individual states being able to exempt themselves from DST if they want.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 16, 2022, 12:29:51 AM
Bottom line: Congress needs to butt out, repeal the Federal Uniform Time Act, and let the states determine what they need.
Nah, there needs to be some sort of oversight. Look at Indiana - for many years, they were a mess of which counties were Central, which were Eastern, and which did or didn't observe DST. It was hard enough to keep track of the various changes happening within one state - imagine keeping track of what 50 states are doing with their time zones, affecting millions more people.
Also, if you aren't careful, you could easily end up with unworkable time differentials if each state were left to its own devices. Say Nevada decided to take a Phoenix-like approach thanks to the very hot summers down in Vegas where most of the population lives, and the whole state observes year-round PST. California and Utah, due to their milder climates and preference for later sunsets, observe year-round PDT and MDT respectively. All of a sudden you've created a situation where you lose an hour by going
west to CA, and
2 hours by going east to UT. Which seems like a really bad idea, although it is kind of fun to think about as it does bring West Wendover into the picture - I wonder if they'd still stay on Utah time or if they'd split the difference in such a scenario.
Quote from: US 89 on March 16, 2022, 12:54:02 AM
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 16, 2022, 12:29:51 AM
Bottom line: Congress needs to butt out, repeal the Federal Uniform Time Act, and let the states determine what they need.
Nah, there needs to be some sort of oversight. Look at Indiana - for many years, they were a mess of which counties were Central, which were Eastern, and which did or didn't observe DST. It was hard enough to keep track of the various changes happening within one state - imagine keeping track of what 50 states are doing with their time zones, affecting millions more people.
The trouble with Indiana back when I grew up there was that they had Fast Time and Slow Time, where some counties observed DST and some didn't, combined with being a split Eastern/Central time zone state. Slow time meant that it took people in those areas an hour and a half to watch 60 Minutes. :)
QuoteAlso, if you aren't careful, you could easily end up with unworkable time differentials if each state were left to its own devices. Say Nevada decided to take a Phoenix-like approach thanks to the very hot summers down in Vegas where most of the population lives, and the whole state observes year-round PST. California and Utah, due to their milder climates and preference for later sunsets, observe year-round PDT and MDT respectively. All of a sudden you've created a situation where you lose an hour by going west to CA, and 2 hours by going east to UT. Which seems like a really bad idea, although it is kind of fun to think about as it does bring West Wendover into the picture - I wonder if they'd still stay on Utah time or if they'd split the difference in such a scenario.
Nevada is economically tied to California more than it is to Arizona. They will be joined at the hip to whatever California does.
I propose legislation requiring a substantial reduction in the angle of the earth's rotational axis. That would take care of a lot of these problems so we could finally stop arguing about it.
Quote from: wxfree on March 16, 2022, 01:28:29 AM
I propose legislation requiring a substantial reduction in the angle of the earth's rotational axis. That would take care of a lot of these problems so we could finally stop arguing about it.
:sombrero: :D :)
Don't say that too loud. Some Congresscritter just might propose it.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 16, 2022, 01:36:34 AM
Quote from: wxfree on March 16, 2022, 01:28:29 AM
I propose legislation requiring a substantial reduction in the angle of the earth's rotational axis. That would take care of a lot of these problems so we could finally stop arguing about it.
:sombrero: :D :)
Don't say that too loud. Some Congresscritter just might propose it.
Well, one of them did suggest changing the Earth's orbit earlier this year to combat climate change...
Thought these threads were NOT ALLOWED on this forum. I think it would have been better to take it elsewhere.
Anyway. I kinda support it and kinda do not. Here in Pitt County elementary school goes to school at 7:30AM while for middle and high schools it's 8:30AM. School start times might need to be adjusted to reflect this change. It would be a disaster to see elementary schoolers getting up so early in the dark.
Tolbs
Been waiting for this for far too long. The time change screws up my circadian rhythms every time (posting this at 242 AM is proof).
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 16, 2022, 12:20:23 AM
I'm confused. Why is daylight savings such a sensitive topic on this forum? I've been here for 5 years and still don't know.
It's one of those things where every possible argument for or against it was written by 1979 and people just get stuck in a loop saying the same stuff over and over again.
https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=46831&p=1198722
Here's a DST thread on a totally different forum. It is identical to any of our DST threads, just with different usernames.
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 12:08:57 AM
Strongly opposed. DST in the winter means it doesn't get light until after people are at work or at school. Seeing some light outside it part of what wakes people up. They can force themselves awake when it's still pitch dark if necessary, but they're still half asleep, slow reaction times, poor judgement. Less happy, too. The thing is, we tried this one year. In 1974 we changed to DST at the beginning of January. People hated it. Congress was deluged with mail asking for it to be changed back and did, as soon as they were back from winter recess.
Sounds like the problem is the squeaky wheel getting the grease.
Wonder what would happen if there was a nationwide referendum on it to see how many people are for getting rid of changing the clocks.
Like I said, I will definitely take the darker mornings for a later sunset in the winter. Here in the Northeast, standard time is just dumb.
Changing clocks sucks
Permanent standard time sucks for the eastern parts of time zones
Permanent DST sucks for the western parts of time zones
The best solution is to implement DST but shift time zones to the east.
In the meantime, couldn't we agree for when DST should start and end? Right now the time this forum displays to me is one hour ahead my actual hour, because Summer Time (as DST is known in Europe) hasn't started yet, and won't do so until March 27. In the meantime the clocks are misaligned, and thus at Big Rig Travels I quote Steve's time, my time, and the times resulting from applying the nominal time difference, which are one hour off the actual observed times.
However I'm already in a place with de facto DST year-round, and even double DST during the time it is in force. We have adapted to this weird time, so while at first it seems we do things too late in reality we do them at the same time as the rest of the World when the difference between solar and clock times are accounted for. So, the solution is simple: scrap time zones and use solar time :sombrero:. Use UTC to keep things in different places on sync.
Quote from: Rothman on March 16, 2022, 06:53:44 AM
Wonder what would happen if there was a nationwide referendum on it to see how many people are for getting rid of changing the clocks.
Like I said, I will definitely take the darker mornings for a later sunset in the winter. Here in the Northeast, standard time is just dumb.
Most people would be in favor of not having to change clocks. The question is what time we should settle on, which isn't as clear cut.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on March 16, 2022, 08:49:35 AM
In the meantime, couldn't we agree for when DST should start and end? Right now the time this forum displays to me is one hour ahead my actual hour, because Summer Time (as DST is known in Europe) hasn't started yet, and won't do so until March 27. In the meantime the clocks are misaligned, and thus at Big Rig Travels I quote Steve's time, my time, and the times resulting from applying the nominal time difference, which are one hour off the actual observed times.
However I'm already in a place with de facto DST year-round, and even double DST during the time it is in force. We have adapted to this weird time, so while at first it seems we do things too late in reality we do them at the same time as the rest of the World when the difference between solar and clock times are accounted for. So, the solution is simple: scrap time zones and use solar time :sombrero:. Use UTC to keep things in different places on sync.
This is one of those things where Europe does something and then expects America to follow suit. But regarding the DST issue specifically, I don't think Europe really has a convincing argument for getting America to change to European rules. America had DST first, and has been consistent with it for longer, and when Europe implemented DST they had the opportunity to use the same rules as America but they chose not to.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 15, 2022, 08:39:51 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 15, 2022, 08:14:08 PM
Really, I find all the whining to be a generally silly fad that crops up twice a year and then disappears for a few months. Changing the clocks is not a big problem at all and I haven't heard anyone come up with a better solution on the whole for the issue of the solar day not corresponding to what our society wants it to be.
There are documented increases in strokes and heart attacks the first week after time changes. Personally, it takes me a week to get used to waking up at what is essentially an hour earlier. Fortunately for us, our dog is not like others in that it doesn't mind getting fed an hour later. Many dogs have a real hard time adjusting.
General argument is that those are the people on the brink of a problem anyways, so they would have the same thing within a few weeks, if not days, even if the clock didn't change.
Which is a less than great situation as well, but not as tragic as "many people are dying because of it"
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 16, 2022, 02:52:45 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 16, 2022, 12:20:23 AM
I'm confused. Why is daylight savings such a sensitive topic on this forum? I've been here for 5 years and still don't know.
It's one of those things where every possible argument for or against it was written by 1979 and people just get stuck in a loop saying the same stuff over and over again.
https://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=46831&p=1198722
Here's a DST thread on a totally different forum. It is identical to any of our DST threads, just with different usernames.
Problem of any issue which affects everyone, population is divided and not inclined to compromise, but there has to be a single solution for everyone (well, maybe not across the country - but definitely locally, e.g. within large metro area like NYC)
So whatever happens there will be those unhappy.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 07:09:23 AM
Changing clocks sucks
Permanent standard time sucks for the eastern parts of time zones
Permanent DST sucks for the western parts of time zones
The best solution is to implement DST but shift time zones to the east.
There will still be east edge and west edge of the zone. Half an hour zones may be a solution, but the can of worms is sizeable. Lake Ontario size or so
China has their whole nation on Beijing time. Imagine the mess that makes since China is larger than the USA.
Rick
I don't believe Europe had any expectation that the United States would move our change dates to match theirs. Not everything is about us. Europe just picked days that seemed to work best to them.
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 10:28:50 AM
I don't believe Europe had any expectation that the United States would move our change dates to match theirs. Not everything is about us. Europe just picked days that seemed to work best to them.
I believe we did match theirs until we changed in 2007. We're the ones at fault.
Quote from: nexus73 on March 16, 2022, 10:27:34 AM
China has their whole nation on Beijing time. Imagine the mess that makes since China is larger than the USA.
Rick
It doesn't matter if locality can more or less choose what "9 to 5" means for them.
Having that shifted to "7 to 3" or "10 to 6" doesn't make much difference beyond changing signs if that aligns with sun better. Requires some level of coordination, but nothing impossible. Set school starting time to match.
One of DST transition issues is that public-facing offices are expected to maintain hours throughout the time shift with little flexibility - and my feeling some policies are set from headquarters without too much local input.
Quote from: 1 on March 16, 2022, 10:36:39 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 10:28:50 AM
I don't believe Europe had any expectation that the United States would move our change dates to match theirs. Not everything is about us. Europe just picked days that seemed to work best to them.
I believe we did match theirs until we changed in 2007. We're the ones at fault.
We did not match theirs. Most or all of Western Europe has changed on the last Sunday in March since 1981 (prior to then, it was a hodgepodge). Prior to 1987, the USA switched on the last Sunday in April, which meant we had almost exactly six months on DST and six months off. In 1987, we switched to the first Sunday in April, so still a week later than Europe. Then in 2007 we switched to the current system.
Quote from: thenetwork on March 15, 2022, 07:31:02 PM
There's a very good chance there could be just ONE MORE set of time changes:
https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/03/time-for-a-change-us-senate-agrees-to-make-daylight-savings-permanent.html
I started to say, "actually, there will be two more time changes," then I saw your use of the word "set" and that's correct.
We'd go back to standard time in November, then change to permanent DST next March.
I'm definitely all for this.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 07:09:23 AM
Changing clocks sucks
Permanent standard time sucks for the eastern parts of time zones
Permanent DST sucks for the western parts of time zones
The best solution is to implement DST but shift time zones to the east.
No, no, a thousand times no. I like being on the western edge of the Eastern Time Zone, and have never liked going into the Central Time Zone. If my county gets pushed to CT, that effectively negates the extra evening hour of daylight achieved through permanent DST.
I don't care about late sunrises. My waking time on work days is determined by an alarm clock, not by sunlight. All I do in the mornings is get up, get ready, and drive straight to work. I don't care if it's still dark when I get there. I do like having daylight after work, and it not being dark by the time I finish running errands (such as going to the store) before going home.
Everyone has their own preferences, but that's mine.
FWIW, I had no issues adjusting to the time change this year. I felt better-rested on Monday than I have in a long time.
Is there anyone who actually thinks DST got better after it got extended in 2007?
And I don't mean "it's better because it's closer to year-round DST"! I mean actually preferring the new dates over the old dates from a practical standpoint, preferring the latest sunrise being in October, preferring to lose an hour of morning daylight just after it starts to get light out again, preferring 7-8PM sunsets in March when it's still too cold (in many areas) to do anything outside.
If there is anyone, I'd like to hear their perspective.
Quote from: hbelkins on March 16, 2022, 11:23:46 AM
I don't care about late sunrises. My waking time on work days is determined by an alarm clock, not by sunlight. All I do in the mornings is get up, get ready, and drive straight to work. I don't care if it's still dark when I get there. I do like having daylight after work, and it not being dark by the time I finish running errands (such as going to the store) before going home.
You've brought this up before and I can't get my head around the idea that daylight has no impact at all on one's ability to wake up. Have you not been affected
at all by the time change this past weekend? Felt the least bit more tired in the morning, or the least bit more awake in the evening?
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 12:36:18 AM
What we had before standard times were created in the 1800s was a mess. You could ride to the next town and be a few minutes later or earlier or anything up to an hour. I wouldn't want to go back to a patchwork quilt like it was then, not even at the state level - although I'm fine with individual states being able to exempt themselves from DST if they want.
There's little difference between those two things, or between them and what's being proposed.
As I understand it, states will still be allowed to opt in or out of DST. Therefore, a trip down I-95 could have one driving through a patchwork quilt of opt-in and opt-out states. That's true now, and it would be true if this were to pass. I'm not saying it's all that
likely, because states generally want to be somewhat in sync with their neighbors (for example, Kansas has already expressed that they would work with Missouri before making any decisions if this bill passes), but I do think it would be
more likely in the hypothetical future than it is presently. The reason I think it's more likely if this passes is that different states will have different reactions to the legislation.
Here are some extreme dawn/dusk times depending on if permanent standard time or permanent DST was observed. What example seems more egregious?
If Boston observed permanent 'standard time' during the longest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 03:32/19:59
If Detroit observed permanent DST during the shortest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 08:24/19:02
Remember that phase in your life when you would sleep in till noon (ie. teenage years)? Even if the country observed permanent DST and you lived in a northern city on the western edge of a timezone during the dead of winter, that teenager would still be wasting about 3.5 hours of daylight. Now remember that phase in your life where you would always get up at 3:30AM? Yeah, me neither.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 11:35:20 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 16, 2022, 11:23:46 AM
I don't care about late sunrises. My waking time on work days is determined by an alarm clock, not by sunlight. All I do in the mornings is get up, get ready, and drive straight to work. I don't care if it's still dark when I get there. I do like having daylight after work, and it not being dark by the time I finish running errands (such as going to the store) before going home.
You've brought this up before and I can't get my head around the idea that daylight has no impact at all on one's ability to wake up. Have you not been affected at all by the time change this past weekend? Felt the least bit more tired in the morning, or the least bit more awake in the evening?
I haven't felt anything like that this week. But what I do feel in the morning when the alarm clock goes off is the "ohhh shit, is it time to get up already?" groaning feeling due to the dark mornings. I have a substantially easier time getting up in the morning when it's already lighter outside. No doubt the fact that the dark mornings also coincide with the colder weather is part of that, of course–who likes getting up from a nice warm bed on a cold morning? (This morning our cat was scratching at our bedroom door and meowing loudly at least half an hour before the clock went off. I thought about just getting up but decided I didn't want to reward her because that would just encourage her to do it again tomorrow.)
We turned in at 11:00 Saturday night and got up at 8:00 Sunday morning, so we got a full eight hours' sleep that night. I think the people who complain must be people who stay out late.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 11:26:59 AM
Is there anyone who actually thinks DST got better after it got extended in 2007?
And I don't mean "it's better because it's closer to year-round DST"! I mean actually preferring the new dates over the old dates from a practical standpoint, preferring the latest sunrise being in October, preferring to lose an hour of morning daylight just after it starts to get light out again, preferring 7-8PM sunsets in March when it's still too cold (in many areas) to do anything outside.
If there is anyone, I'd like to hear their perspective.
I can't say I prefer the current schedule, but I also can't say I think the old schedule was significantly better. It doesn't make a huge difference in the scheme of things. I did note one practical benefit to the current schedule in the societal sense: Easter and Passover can never coincide with the time change under current law because the latest date on which the clocks can go ahead is March 14, but the earliest possible dates for Passover and Easter are March 21 and 22, respectively. I certainly remember various Easter Sundays over the year when we were at mid-morning Mass and half the congregation showed up an hour late. In the scheme of things, I don't consider that sort of thing a major reason to fix the time change when it is now, but I do think from a societal standpoint there's some benefit to avoiding having it coincide with major observances of that sort.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 11:38:36 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 12:36:18 AM
What we had before standard times were created in the 1800s was a mess. You could ride to the next town and be a few minutes later or earlier or anything up to an hour. I wouldn't want to go back to a patchwork quilt like it was then, not even at the state level - although I'm fine with individual states being able to exempt themselves from DST if they want.
There's little difference between those two things, or between them and what's being proposed.
As I understand it, states will still be allowed to opt in or out of DST. Therefore, a trip down I-95 could have one driving through a patchwork quilt of opt-in and opt-out states. That's true now, and it would be true if this were to pass. I'm not saying it's all that likely, because states generally want to be somewhat in sync with their neighbors (for example, Kansas has already expressed that they would work with Missouri before making any decisions if this bill passes), but I do think it would be more likely in the hypothetical future than it is presently. The reason I think it's more likely if this passes is that different states will have different reactions to the legislation.
I looked at the Senate bill last night and it appears to me to say that only the states and territories that currently opt out of DST will be able to opt out of the new system. Here is the link to the text. (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623/text) The key text is down at the bottom under "State Exemption":
Quote"(b) Standard time for certain states and areas.–The standard time for a State that has exempted itself from the provisions of section 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260a(a)), as in effect on the day before November 5, 2023, pursuant to such section or an area of a State that has exempted such area from such provisions pursuant to such section shall be, as such State considers appropriate–
"(1) the standard time for such State or area, as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section; or
"(2) the standard time for such State or area, as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section as it was in effect on the day before November 5, 2023." .
Teenagers would love permanent DST as they constantly sleep in till noon. The sun has already been up for 3 hours by the time they wake up anyways. At least permanent DST would limit the amount of daylight they waste.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 11:45:39 AM
Here are some extreme dawn/dusk times depending on if permanent standard time or permanent DST was observed. What example seems more egregious?
If Boston observed permanent 'standard time' during the longest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 03:32/19:59
If Detroit observed permanent DST during the shortest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 08:24/19:02
Remember that phase in your life when you would sleep in till noon (ie. teenage years)? Even if the country observed permanent DST and you lived in a northern city on the western edge of a timezone during the dead of winter, that teenager would still be wasting about 3.5 hours of daylight. Now remember that phase in your life where you would always get up at 3:30AM? Yeah, me neither.
I believe the times you list are incorrect. Sunrise in Detroit on the shortest day of the year is currently at 7:58 and sunset is at 17:02, so they would be at 8:58 and 18:02, respectively, on DST. Sunrise in Boston on the longest day of the year under the current system is at 5:07 and sunset is at 20:24, so they would be at 4:07 and 19:24, respectively, on standard time.
That doesn't necessarily change the validity of your conclusion.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 12:00:47 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 11:45:39 AM
Here are some extreme dawn/dusk times depending on if permanent standard time or permanent DST was observed. What example seems more egregious?
If Boston observed permanent 'standard time' during the longest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 03:32/19:59
If Detroit observed permanent DST during the shortest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 08:24/19:02
Remember that phase in your life when you would sleep in till noon (ie. teenage years)? Even if the country observed permanent DST and you lived in a northern city on the western edge of a timezone during the dead of winter, that teenager would still be wasting about 3.5 hours of daylight. Now remember that phase in your life where you would always get up at 3:30AM? Yeah, me neither.
I believe the times you list are incorrect. Sunrise in Detroit on the shortest day of the year is currently at 7:58 and sunset is at 17:02, so they would be at 8:58 and 18:02, respectively, on DST. Sunrise in Boston on the longest day of the year under the current system is at 5:07 and sunset is at 20:24, so they would be at 4:07 and 19:24, respectively, on standard time.
That doesn't necessarily change the validity of your conclusion.
I checked it myself. tradephoric seems to be including some time when the sun is below the horizon but it's still partially light.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 07:09:23 AM
Changing clocks sucks
Permanent standard time sucks for the eastern parts of time zones
Permanent DST sucks for the western parts of time zones
The best solution is to implement DST but shift time zones to the east.
The best solution is to go to the average of DST and Standard time (e.g. Eastern = UTC-4½) and shift the lines a bit to the east.
In a prior DST thread, I shared this map:
(https://preview.redd.it/4hqnzxvlarj61.jpg?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=a0278bbd124e6a30be595c85a1454a4b633ee87e)
It's my attempt to draw time zones that minimize the perceived error in daylight vs. hour on the clock (e.g., minimize the frequency of "going to school" in the dark, minimize "wasted daylight" in the early morning hours, etc.), without splitting Nielsen TV markets, but allowing some wiggle room for the tendency of certain problem areas to be more problematic due to a local desire to be on the same time as someplace else (e.g. Detroit being in the same time zone as most of the rest of the LP of Michigan; or where to draw the boundary between Central and Mountain time through Texas.)
If you try to keep to whole-hour offsets from UTC, you end up with San Francisco and Los Angeles being in different time zones, and Washington DC and NYC being in different time zones, if minimizing daylight vs clock error is the objective.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 12:00:47 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 11:45:39 AM
Here are some extreme dawn/dusk times depending on if permanent standard time or permanent DST was observed. What example seems more egregious?
If Boston observed permanent 'standard time' during the longest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 03:32/19:59
If Detroit observed permanent DST during the shortest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 08:24/19:02
Remember that phase in your life when you would sleep in till noon (ie. teenage years)? Even if the country observed permanent DST and you lived in a northern city on the western edge of a timezone during the dead of winter, that teenager would still be wasting about 3.5 hours of daylight. Now remember that phase in your life where you would always get up at 3:30AM? Yeah, me neither.
I believe the times you list are incorrect. Sunrise in Detroit on the shortest day of the year is currently at 7:58 and sunset is at 17:02, so they would be at 8:58 and 18:02, respectively, on DST. Sunrise in Boston on the longest day of the year under the current system is at 5:07 and sunset is at 20:24, so they would be at 4:07 and 19:24, respectively, on standard time.
That doesn't necessarily change the validity of your conclusion.
I was specifically looking at dawn/dusk times as opposed to sunrise/sunset times. The argument is often how dangerous it would be for kids to walk to school when the sun doesn't rise till after 9AM in the winter. But with dawn starting 30 minutes earlier, kids walking to school at 8:30AM still wouldn't be walking in pitch darkness.
Quote from: 1 on March 16, 2022, 12:04:54 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 12:00:47 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 11:45:39 AM
Here are some extreme dawn/dusk times depending on if permanent standard time or permanent DST was observed. What example seems more egregious?
If Boston observed permanent 'standard time' during the longest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 03:32/19:59
If Detroit observed permanent DST during the shortest day of the year...
Dawn/Dusk: 08:24/19:02
Remember that phase in your life when you would sleep in till noon (ie. teenage years)? Even if the country observed permanent DST and you lived in a northern city on the western edge of a timezone during the dead of winter, that teenager would still be wasting about 3.5 hours of daylight. Now remember that phase in your life where you would always get up at 3:30AM? Yeah, me neither.
I believe the times you list are incorrect. Sunrise in Detroit on the shortest day of the year is currently at 7:58 and sunset is at 17:02, so they would be at 8:58 and 18:02, respectively, on DST. Sunrise in Boston on the longest day of the year under the current system is at 5:07 and sunset is at 20:24, so they would be at 4:07 and 19:24, respectively, on standard time.
That doesn't necessarily change the validity of your conclusion.
I checked it myself. tradephoric seems to be including some time when the sun is below the horizon but it's still partially light.
Seriously.
Dawn ≠ Sunrise
Dusk ≠ Sunset
Fair enough. I indeed wasn't paying close enough attention and overlooked the use of "dawn" and "dusk." (Certainly there are a lot of people on the road who think the law saying your headlights must be on beginning at sunset instead means "after dusk" ....)
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 12:20:14 PM
(Certainly there are a lot of people on the road who think the law saying your headlights must be on beginning at sunset instead means "after dusk" ....)
I don't think most states actually require that.
Quote from: Uniform Vehicle Code, Millennium Edition
ARTICLE 11 – LIGHTS AND OTHER LIGHTING EQUIPMENT
§ 12-201 – When lighted lamps are required
Every vehicle upon a highway within this State at any time from a half hour after sunset to a half hour before sunrise and at any other time when, due to insufficient light or unfavorable atmospheric conditions, persons and vehicles on the highway are not clearly discernible at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead, shall display lighted head and other lamps and illuminating devices as respectively required for different classes of vehicles, subject to exceptions with respect to parked vehicles, and further that stop lights, turn signals and other signaling devices shall be lighted as prescribed for the use of such devices.
Edited to add: I may be mistaken about state laws. The first one I actually checked (Illinois) doesn't include the "half hour" bit, and actually requires them from sunset to sunrise.
Count me on the side that opposes this. Sunlight in the morning makes a big difference when getting up. It seems stupid to have to wake up at a normal time when it's still dark out. And for the record, I am almost always on the eastern end of a time zone.
Changing clocks twice a year isn't that bad. People just whine about it for a bit and then get adjusted and move on.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 12:00:15 PM
Teenagers would love permanent DST as they constantly sleep in till noon. The sun has already been up for 3 hours by the time they wake up anyways. At least permanent DST would limit the amount of daylight they waste.
Not something we should encourage in my opinion. I do not plan to let my future children stay in bed that late. I get sleeping in, but that's ridiculous.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 12:27:21 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 12:20:14 PM
(Certainly there are a lot of people on the road who think the law saying your headlights must be on beginning at sunset instead means "after dusk" ....)
I don't think most states actually require that.
Quote from: Uniform Vehicle Code, Millennium Edition
ARTICLE 11 – LIGHTS AND OTHER LIGHTING EQUIPMENT
§ 12-201 – When lighted lamps are required
Every vehicle upon a highway within this State at any time from a half hour after sunset to a half hour before sunrise and at any other time when, due to insufficient light or unfavorable atmospheric conditions, persons and vehicles on the highway are not clearly discernible at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead, shall display lighted head and other lamps and illuminating devices as respectively required for different classes of vehicles, subject to exceptions with respect to parked vehicles, and further that stop lights, turn signals and other signaling devices shall be lighted as prescribed for the use of such devices.
I don't know what any state other than Virginia requires. It's the law here that headlights be used from sunset to sunrise, although as a practical matter an intelligent driver should be using them before sunset, regardless of what the statute might say, due to the sun glare that can make your car invisible to oncoming traffic.
Put me in as part of the "don't care" crowd. I hear many people in support of it are tired of changing their clocks twice a year, but frankly, it doesn't matter to me.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 12:33:08 PM
I don't know what any state other than Virginia requires. It's the law here that headlights be used from sunset to sunrise, although as a practical matter an intelligent driver should be using them before sunset, regardless of what the statute might say, due to the sun glare that can make your car invisible to oncoming traffic.
Yep. I edited my original reply, as I was unaware until now just how few states apparently match the UVC's wording on this point.
I was taught 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise, just like the quote kphoger posted. But that may have changed.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 12:40:10 PM
I was taught 1/2 hour after sunset to 1/2 hour before sunrise, just like the quote kphoger posted. But that may have changed.
That's accurate for New York.
Quote from: The New York State Senate
Consolidated Laws of New York
CHAPTER 71 – Vehicle & Traffic
TITLE 3 – Safety Responsibility; Financial Security; Equipment; Inspection; Size and Weight; and Other Provisions
ARTICLE 9 – Equipment of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles
§ 375 – Equipment
2. (a) Every motor vehicle except a motorcycle, driven upon a public highway during the period from one-half hour after sunset to one-half hour before sunrise or at any other time when windshield wipers are in use, as a result of rain, sleet, snow, hail or other unfavorable atmospheric condition, and at such other times as visibility for a distance of one thousand feet ahead of such motor vehicle is not clear, shall display:
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2022, 12:30:04 PM
Changing clocks twice a year isn't that bad. People just whine about it for a bit and then get adjusted and move on.
Studies have been done that show pretty serious health impacts following the DST shift. I'm just curious though, if they did decide to do away with the time changes, would you prefer permanent standard time or permanent daylight saving time in this country?
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 11:38:36 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 12:36:18 AM
What we had before standard times were created in the 1800s was a mess. You could ride to the next town and be a few minutes later or earlier or anything up to an hour. I wouldn't want to go back to a patchwork quilt like it was then, not even at the state level - although I'm fine with individual states being able to exempt themselves from DST if they want.
There's little difference between those two things, or between them and what's being proposed.
As I understand it, states will still be allowed to opt in or out of DST. Therefore, a trip down I-95 could have one driving through a patchwork quilt of opt-in and opt-out states. That's true now, and it would be true if this were to pass. I'm not saying it's all that likely, because states generally want to be somewhat in sync with their neighbors (for example, Kansas has already expressed that they would work with Missouri before making any decisions if this bill passes), but I do think it would be more likely in the hypothetical future than it is presently. The reason I think it's more likely if this passes is that different states will have different reactions to the legislation.
If you look at the map of solar day, there is a pretty well defined zone where moving clock makes sense - and that is somewhere between 40 and 60 degrees latitude.
So I expect every state north of NYC and most of Canada to seriously consider DST, and states south of NYC may happily opt out.
Biggest uncertainty would be exactly in I-95 megalopolis cluster, from Boston to DC. If there is a divide, and where it would be, may be the most interesting question.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2022, 12:30:04 PM
Changing clocks twice a year isn't that bad. People just whine about it for a bit and then get adjusted and move on.
Studies have been done that show pretty serious health impacts following the DST shift. I'm just curious though, if they did decide to do away with the time changes, would you prefer permanent standard time or permanent daylight saving time in this country?
Think about it in such a way: astronomic time is solar noon = 12.00, timezone division makes it 11.30 AM to 12.30 PM. You get roughly equal amount of sun before and after that time (may change at edge of timezones, and due to earth orbit being more complex than a circle).
Now, our schedules are nowhere close to symmetric around 12. Proverbial 9-to-5 assumes getting up at 7 AM give or take, back home by 6 PM, personal time 6-10PM, with actual mid-day around 2-3 PM.
It varies by state. In Utah, it is also a half-hour after sunset to a half-hour before sunrise:
Quote from: Utah Code 41-6a-1603. Lights and illuminating devices -- Duty to display -- Time.
(1) (a) The operator of a vehicle shall turn on the lamps or lights of the vehicle on a highway at any time from a half hour after sunset to a half hour before sunrise and at any other time when, due to insufficient light or unfavorable atmospheric conditions, persons and vehicles on the highway are not clearly discernible at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead.
Looking quickly at a handful of neighboring jurisdictions, it looks like NV and WY have the same law, while ID, CO, AZ are sunrise-to-sunset states.
Heck, I wouldn't mind us going to worldwide UTC ('Zulu'/Military) time instead and adjust our personal schedules accordingly. No semi-annual clock changes, everyone yells "Happy new year!" at the same time and no time zone confusions. Instead of it now being 1:20pm (1320) Central Daylight Time (UTC -5) as I post this, it would be 1820Z.
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on March 16, 2022, 02:20:26 PM
Heck, I wouldn't mind us going to worldwide UTC ('Zulu'/Military) time instead and adjust our personal schedules accordingly. No semi-annual clock changes, everyone yells "Happy new year!" at the same time and no time zone confusions. Instead of it now being 1:20pm (1320) Central Daylight Time (UTC -5) as I post this, it would be 1820Z.
:nod:
Mike
Simple problem: midnight GMT is somewhere during workday in San Francisco and Tokyo, so date would change mid-day. would be a huge mess with "your appointment is on Tuesday 00.15 GMT - and that was 24 hours ago!
Not to mention religious things tied to date or day of week, like Sabbath or Lent.
Yes, I am fully aware that when time zones sere first set up in the USA it was a totally private endeavor that was undertaken so that intercity rain schedules would work.
Mike
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 02:26:33 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 16, 2022, 02:20:26 PM
Heck, I wouldn't mind us going to worldwide UTC ('Zulu'/Military) time instead and adjust our personal schedules accordingly. No semi-annual clock changes, everyone yells "Happy new year!" at the same time and no time zone confusions. Instead of it now being 1:20pm (1320) Central Daylight Time (UTC -5) as I post this, it would be 1820Z. It's why all ships in the USNavy operate on 'Z'.
:nod:
Mike
Simple problem: midnight GMT is somewhere during workday in San Francisco and Tokyo, so date would change mid-day. would be a huge mess with "your appointment is on Tuesday 00.15 GMT - and that was 24 hours ago!
Not to mention religious things tied to date or day of week, like Sabbath or Lent.
0900Z Wednesday in San Francisco is the exact same time as 0900Z Wednesday in Tokyo.
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on March 16, 2022, 02:32:22 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 02:26:33 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on March 16, 2022, 02:20:26 PM
Heck, I wouldn't mind us going to worldwide UTC ('Zulu'/Military) time instead and adjust our personal schedules accordingly. No semi-annual clock changes, everyone yells "Happy new year!" at the same time and no time zone confusions. Instead of it now being 1:20pm (1320) Central Daylight Time (UTC -5) as I post this, it would be 1820Z. It's why all ships in the USNavy operate on 'Z'.
:nod:
Mike
Simple problem: midnight GMT is somewhere during workday in San Francisco and Tokyo, so date would change mid-day. would be a huge mess with "your appointment is on Tuesday 00.15 GMT - and that was 24 hours ago!
Not to mention religious things tied to date or day of week, like Sabbath or Lent.
0900Z Wednesday in San Francisco is the exact same time as 0900Z Wednesday in Tokyo.
:nod:
Mike
Once upon a time I was boarding... not sure if it was a bus or a train, it was a while ago - with 00.10 (12.10AM) departure, and someone was turned down since they had their ticket for the previous day. They thought they were departing on Wednesday as their ticket said - without realizing that they actually arrived to the station Wednesday evening for a Thursday early morning departure.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 12:59:41 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2022, 12:30:04 PM
Changing clocks twice a year isn't that bad. People just whine about it for a bit and then get adjusted and move on.
Studies have been done that show pretty serious health impacts following the DST shift. I'm just curious though, if they did decide to do away with the time changes, would you prefer permanent standard time or permanent daylight saving time in this country?
If I had to choose one or the other, I'd rather have permanent standard time. I can sacrifice it being so bright out later if it means it's easier to wake up.
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 01:04:01 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 11:38:36 AM
Quote from: kkt on March 16, 2022, 12:36:18 AM
What we had before standard times were created in the 1800s was a mess. You could ride to the next town and be a few minutes later or earlier or anything up to an hour. I wouldn't want to go back to a patchwork quilt like it was then, not even at the state level - although I'm fine with individual states being able to exempt themselves from DST if they want.
There's little difference between those two things, or between them and what's being proposed.
As I understand it, states will still be allowed to opt in or out of DST. Therefore, a trip down I-95 could have one driving through a patchwork quilt of opt-in and opt-out states. That's true now, and it would be true if this were to pass. I'm not saying it's all that likely, because states generally want to be somewhat in sync with their neighbors (for example, Kansas has already expressed that they would work with Missouri before making any decisions if this bill passes), but I do think it would be more likely in the hypothetical future than it is presently. The reason I think it's more likely if this passes is that different states will have different reactions to the legislation.
If you look at the map of solar day, there is a pretty well defined zone where moving clock makes sense - and that is somewhere between 40 and 60 degrees latitude.
So I expect every state north of NYC and most of Canada to seriously consider DST, and states south of NYC may happily opt out.
Biggest uncertainty would be exactly in I-95 megalopolis cluster, from Boston to DC. If there is a divide, and where it would be, may be the most interesting question.
I can say that the divide would involve New Jersey. I grew up not far from a province line ;)
I'm all for the change...I'm just wondering and hoping that it will be implemented properly...seems like something out of Minority Report.
I think standard time all year would be better.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
It would be if everyone could agree how to re-implement it properly. But I have a slight preference for DST year-round since moving south.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 16, 2022, 03:48:07 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
It would be if everyone could agree how to re-implement it properly. But I have a slight preference for DST year-round since moving south.
Standard time year round and DST year round are essentially the same thing, just using different time zones as a base.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned this before. The primary issue before state legislatures and Congress over the past 25 years or so has been that the Average Joe would like to retain standard time, whereas farmers need daylight savings during the Summer months. My wife just shared that a local church recently posted a story about someone she knew that recalled getting up at 2AM in order to milk the cows and collect eggs before breakfast, all in time to get breakfast cooked and cleanup done before sunrise. That was probably in eastern North Carolina, whereas in the mountains of West Virginia you only needed to get up by 3AM to do the same. (Of course, in some parts of West Virginia you still can't see daylight for a while).
Assuming that these farmers still aim for 8 hours of sleep, they've got to head off to bed about 6PM/7PM. It's no wonder that farmers like the extra hour from DST.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 03:49:03 PM
Standard time year round and DST year round are essentially the same thing, just using different time zones as a base.
Except everyone isn't going to suddenly shift to a new time zone. So they aren't the same thing.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 03:56:30 PM
farmers need daylight savings during the Summer months.
Bullshit. Farmers work whenever the sun is up, no matter what time their clock says it is.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 03:56:30 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned this before. The primary issue before state legislatures and Congress over the past 25 years or so has been that the Average Joe would like to retain standard time, whereas farmers need daylight savings during the Summer months. My wife just shared that a local church recently posted a story about someone she knew that recalled getting up at 2AM in order to milk the cows and collect eggs before breakfast, all in time to get breakfast cooked and cleanup done before sunrise. That was probably in eastern North Carolina, whereas in the mountains of West Virginia you only needed to get up by 3AM to do the same. (Of course, in some parts of West Virginia you still can't see daylight for a while).
Assuming that these farmers still aim for 8 hours of sleep, they've got to head off to bed about 6PM/7PM. It's no wonder that farmers like the extra hour from DST.
Dirt Roads, are you sure about all that? Everything I've read says farmers generally dislike DST, in part because the animals obviously don't know the time has changed and still expect to be fed/slopped/milked/whatever at the same time regardless of what time we think it is.
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 02:26:33 PM
Simple problem: midnight GMT is somewhere during workday in San Francisco and Tokyo, so date would change mid-day. would be a huge mess with "your appointment is on Tuesday 00.15 GMT - and that was 24 hours ago!
My primary hobby is amateur radio, where almost everything is expressed in UTC. You get used to accounting for differences of when the calendar changes vs the perceived day local time.
For example, when discussing the start time of this evening's mini-contest, we would describe it as "0300 UTC Thursday (Wednesday evening in the US)". After a while, it becomes second nature.
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 02:26:33 PM
Not to mention religious things tied to date or day of week, like Sabbath or Lent.
Fortunately, for at least the Abrahamic religions, religious observances are traditionally defined by sunset or sunrise, and therefore are not impacted by whether one uses local time or UTC.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 04:02:55 PMDirt Roads, are you sure about all that? Everything I've read says farmers generally dislike DST, in part because the animals obviously don't know the time has changed and still expect to be fed/slopped/milked/whatever at the same time regardless of what time we think it is.
I think that farmers dislike time changes because their animals don't observe it. Whether they prefer DST or Standard Time devolves to many of the same concerns that non-farmers have.
I've never known a farmer who decided his work schedule based on what numbers the little hands on the wall clock were pointing to.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 04:19:00 PM
I've never known a farmer who decided his work schedule based on what numbers the little hands on the wall clock were pointing to.
NY is considering applying standard worktime rules to farm workers - hours/day, /week, overtime pay etc.
But basically time on the clock is only needed for coordination with other people - be it that everyone at worksite at the same time, or in an armchair for TV show.If you need to coordinate with the sun, then you can go with "1 hour before sunrize" regardless of any numbers.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 16, 2022, 04:11:55 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 02:26:33 PM
Simple problem: midnight GMT is somewhere during workday in San Francisco and Tokyo, so date would change mid-day. would be a huge mess with "your appointment is on Tuesday 00.15 GMT - and that was 24 hours ago!
My primary hobby is amateur radio, where almost everything is expressed in UTC. You get used to accounting for differences of when the calendar changes vs the perceived day local time.
For example, when discussing the start time of this evening's mini-contest, we would describe it as "0300 UTC Thursday (Wednesday evening in the US)". After a while, it becomes second nature.
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 02:26:33 PM
Not to mention religious things tied to date or day of week, like Sabbath or Lent.
Fortunately, for at least the Abrahamic religions, religious observances are traditionally defined by sunset or sunrise, and therefore are not impacted by whether one uses local time or UTC.
Don't expect average person to get used to that mess easily.
And Sabbath is linked to sunset times on Friday and Saturday. What would happen if (when) sunset is at 00.00 GMT, for example? Or there may be no sunset on Friday to begin with, for example.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 04:19:00 PM
I've never known a farmer who decided his work schedule based on what numbers the little hands on the wall clock were pointing to.
I think the point is that the farmer essentially has to continue to work on a standard time schedule while the family has to live on DST and that's where the inconvenience comes in.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 04:19:00 PM
I've never known a farmer who decided his work schedule based on what numbers the little hands on the wall clock were pointing to.
I think the point is that the farmer essentially has to continue to work on a standard time schedule while the family has to live on DST and that's where the inconvenience comes in.
If we're talking summer, farmer most likely works in the field way more than anyone on a schedule anyway.
It does become relevant if, for example, the farmer participates in local farmers' markets or similar.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
If the nation was on permanent standard time, the sun would set during the summer solstice in Mexico Beach, Florida at 6:45PM. If you were visiting Florida on summer vacation, would you want the latest sunset in a Florida beach town to be 6:45PM? I don't think it's entirely coincidence that the lead sponsor of the Sunshine Protection act is a Senator from Florida. There is basically a 0% chance that Marco Rubio would have supported a bill that promoted year-round standard time and year-round standard time is never going to happen in this country.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 04:19:00 PM
I've never known a farmer who decided his work schedule based on what numbers the little hands on the wall clock were pointing to.
I think the point is that the farmer essentially has to continue to work on a standard time schedule while the family has to live on DST and that's where the inconvenience comes in.
I'dd second the part with farm animals. Dairy farmers hate DST beacause their cows do not observe it.
Mike
The other great thing about this issue is it acts as a litmus test for who can comprehend simple concepts. New York Magazine would lead you to believe that Marco Rubio is trying to end Daylight Saving Time when in actuality he is trying to make it permanent. People want to get rid of the time changes, not Daylight Saving Time... but the lazy media just lump these two concepts together as if they are the same thing. They may not fully comprehend what they are even reporting on... sad to say.
(https://i.imgur.com/cNnNsmH.png)
All this talk about sunrise times/morning daylight seems to assume that you live in an area where there are always clear skies in the morning.
I know some people are moaning that winter DST means no daylight until 9AM.
Hell, I've lived in parts of the country where in the winter time, the clouds were so thick in the morning that you'd be driving with your headlights on or your indoor lights on until 10AM because it looked so dreary dark outside.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 16, 2022, 12:29:51 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 16, 2022, 12:20:23 AM
I'm confused. Why is daylight savings such a sensitive topic on this forum? I've been here for 5 years and still don't know.
It's political, and it's one area where the Federal government should NOT go.
Because of latitude and longitude differences, each state should be able to decide what it wants to do, based on the needs of its own people. Here in Arizona, we don't need to be on Mountain Daylight Time because it would get too hot in the evening, with sunset at around 9:30 PM. Other states further north might want something different because their hours of daylight are longer in the summer and shorter in the winter. They should be able to determine that for themselves. And then there's Hawaii, where daylight time is an irrelevancy.
Bottom line: Congress needs to butt out, repeal the Federal Uniform Time Act, and let the states determine what they need.
Imagine New York and New Jersey being on different times. Time should be handled federally, or even in coordination with other countries (Canada).
Quote from: 7/8 on March 15, 2022, 07:44:53 PMI feel like I'm in the minority in liking DST. Keeps the morning's from being too dark in the winter, and also reduces a wasted hour of early morning sun in the summer.
I'm coming around to this.
I've tended to be pro year-round standard time: there's not enough light in winter this far north to 'save' an hour of light from an already unpleasantly dark morning to 'use' while people are still at work in the evening, and in summer there's such an excess of daylight (and there's a few weeks without formal night - it's just twilight) that its a much of a muchness where it is.
But around this time of year (and 6 months from now), there's enough light in the morning to lose an hour (sunrise at 0712 instead of 0612),
and there's enough sunlight in the evenings that an hour extra gives you time to do something with it (1806 sunset today in London, without Summer Time) that you otherwise wouldn't.
I've become less opposed to changing the clocks because of this: a 7am sunrise is price worth paying for a 7pm sunset (ie DST in early March / early October). But a 9am sunrise is not a price worth paying for a 5pm sunset (ie DST in December/January).
Pfft. People who complain about dark mornings ruin the world.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 11:02:28 AMPrior to 1987, the USA switched on the last Sunday in April, which meant we had almost exactly six months on DST and six months off.
I really don't get the offset. I can understand the 7 months on/5 months off that Europe does (its closer to 8/4 in North America), but it's not centred around the sun.
Taking the European dates - last Sunday in March is about the same time as the equinox, give or take a week. But the last Sunday in October change is a month later than the equinox, give or take a week. The US dates are similarly falling back about a month later wrt where the sun actually is.
Quote from: kalvado on March 16, 2022, 05:09:31 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 04:59:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 04:19:00 PM
I've never known a farmer who decided his work schedule based on what numbers the little hands on the wall clock were pointing to.
I think the point is that the farmer essentially has to continue to work on a standard time schedule while the family has to live on DST and that's where the inconvenience comes in.
If we're talking summer, farmer most likely works in the field way more than anyone on a schedule anyway.
This. I've never known a farmer whose family wasn't getting home from work/school wa-a-a-y before he was done in the field anyway. A farmer's family's life revolves around his schedule, not the other way around.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 04:02:55 PMDirt Roads, are you sure about all that? Everything I've read says farmers generally dislike DST, in part because the animals obviously don't know the time has changed and still expect to be fed/slopped/milked/whatever at the same time regardless of what time we think it is.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 16, 2022, 04:14:55 PM
I think that farmers dislike time changes because their animals don't observe it. Whether they prefer DST or Standard Time devolves to many of the same concerns that non-farmers have.
There have been attempts to permanently standardize the time year-round. This impact railroads and airlines (and perhaps Greyhound) more than any other business, because of the need to change the ways that long-distance schedules are synchronized. My understanding was that the main reason that the Congress couldn't agree on whether to adopt standard time permanently or daylight savings time permanently was due to the agricultural lobby. I do not know whether they were against one, the other, or perhaps both.
Disregarding the "animals don't observe it" part, I do think that many farmers have some of the same issues as non-farmers. We know two local cattle farmers, one of which operates on his own schedule and the other who operates a roadside stand and sells in a local farmers market. I suspect that they have totally different opinions on DST. But it won't change their farming habits, but rather allow them more/less access to other businesses during what they would call "bankers hours". Farmhands also tend to work on a clock schedule that is based on ST/DST rather than the solar-based farm schedule. Also, once-upon-a-time, many smaller farmers would operate school buses in addition to farming duties. Each of those subgroups see this differently.
Quote from: english si on March 16, 2022, 07:24:46 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 11:02:28 AMPrior to 1987, the USA switched on the last Sunday in April, which meant we had almost exactly six months on DST and six months off.
I really don't get the offset. I can understand the 7 months on/5 months off that Europe does (its closer to 8/4 in North America), but it's not centred around the sun.
Taking the European dates - last Sunday in March is about the same time as the equinox, give or take a week. But the last Sunday in October change is a month later than the equinox, give or take a week. The US dates are similarly falling back about a month later wrt where the sun actually is.
I heard 2 reasons.
1. power plant maintenance is a big thing about scheduling. Shifting times to minimize power consumption before and after peak seasons (cold winter and hot summer) is the factor. Although, with LED lights becoming standard, that should be less of a factor.
2. promoting more outdoor activities - hence DST centered at outdoor temperature, not the sun directly. Here we still have snow for spring equinox, but October is generally mild enough to be outdoors.
Quote from: thenetwork on March 16, 2022, 06:45:06 PM
All this talk about sunrise times/morning daylight seems to assume that you live in an area where there are always clear skies in the morning.
I know some people are moaning that winter DST means no daylight until 9AM.
Hell, I've lived in parts of the country where in the winter time, the clouds were so thick in the morning that you'd be driving with your headlights on or your indoor lights on until 10AM because it looked so dreary dark outside.
There's lots and lots of cloudy days here, but even on days of thick clouds it's noticeably brighter after the sun is up. Colors are visible and it helps keep the body's clock set.
I've noticed that on my walks, I can go without a flashlight 10 minutes after sunset if it's cloudy and 20 if it's clear. (This was near the winter solstice, in case it matters how fast the sun sets.)
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 07:32:00 PM
There have been attempts to permanently standardize the time year-round. This impact railroads and airlines (and perhaps Greyhound) more than any other business, because of the need to change the ways that long-distance schedules are synchronized.
Wouldn't the elimination of two time changes per year make synchronizing schedules easier, not harder?
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 07:32:00 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 04:02:55 PMDirt Roads, are you sure about all that? Everything I've read says farmers generally dislike DST, in part because the animals obviously don't know the time has changed and still expect to be fed/slopped/milked/whatever at the same time regardless of what time we think it is.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 16, 2022, 04:14:55 PM
I think that farmers dislike time changes because their animals don't observe it. Whether they prefer DST or Standard Time devolves to many of the same concerns that non-farmers have.
There have been attempts to permanently standardize the time year-round. This impact railroads and airlines (and perhaps Greyhound) more than any other business, because of the need to change the ways that long-distance schedules are synchronized. My understanding was that the main reason that the Congress couldn't agree on whether to adopt standard time permanently or daylight savings time permanently was due to the agricultural lobby. I do not know whether they were against one, the other, or perhaps both.
Disregarding the "animals don't observe it" part, I do think that many farmers have some of the same issues as non-farmers. We know two local cattle farmers, one of which operates on his own schedule and the other who operates a roadside stand and sells in a local farmers market. I suspect that they have totally different opinions on DST. But it won't change their farming habits, but rather allow them more/less access to other businesses during what they would call "bankers hours". Farmhands also tend to work on a clock schedule that is based on ST/DST rather than the solar-based farm schedule. Also, once-upon-a-time, many smaller farmers would operate school buses in addition to farming duties. Each of those subgroups see this differently.
Have any of you ever worked on a farm? I never really did, but I did spend time avoiding work on my uncles' farms during the summer when I was a kid. One uncle had a pig farm. One had a dairy farm. They both operated on a schedule that didn't change an hour for DST. Cows expect to be milked the same time every day. The pigs liked to be fed on a schedule and would become problematic otherwise, much like my cat.
I've also had several friends who grew up on farms. I don't recall any liking DST and some outright hated it. They all thought it was nothing more than a city thing which allowed city people to stay out later in the summer, especially those doing outdoor activities.
A rural resident who operates a roadside stand may be one of a family of farmers. But that's not farm work. That's self-employed retail.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 07:32:00 PM
There have been attempts to permanently standardize the time year-round. This impact railroads and airlines (and perhaps Greyhound) more than any other business, because of the need to change the ways that long-distance schedules are synchronized.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 08:13:46 PM
Wouldn't the elimination of two time changes per year make synchronizing schedules easier, not harder?
Any changes means software changes. Some companies simply adopt whatever time signal they get from their Internet provider (or for someone who shelled out the big bucks, the time signal that they get from NIST based on UTC - ergo, an atomic clock feed).
I think that the bigger issues would be related to whether some states, counties and perhaps other jurisdictions decide they belong in this time zone (new DST) or that time zone (old standard time). When I worked for the Chessie System, we solved that problem by avoiding Indiana time by saying that everything west of Little Washington was on St. Louis time and everything east was on Cincinnati time (I'm sure there were similar examples for the northern tier of Indiana).
But you are right on target. This should not be a big issue for railroads and airlines (and perhaps Greyhound). And they have the worst impact.
Quote from: Rothman on March 16, 2022, 07:18:08 PM
Pfft. People who complain about dark mornings ruin the world.
*
Ahem (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25884.msg2453121#msg2453121)*
Unless you are in Alaska.
Quote from: skluth on March 16, 2022, 08:47:34 PM
Cows expect to be milked the same time every day. The pigs liked to be fed on a schedule and would become problematic otherwise, much like my cat.
Which is why I can't believe how many articles have focused on the fact that farmers hated DST because it would "force the cows to be milked an hour later". I think that they meant to say an hour earlier, but they weren't paying attention. I've also seen this argument used for a reason that farmers were originally opposed to DST back in 1918. All of this milk smells spoiled to me.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 08:56:37 PM
Unless you are in Alaska.
What is that supposed to be a reply to? It doesn't answer the thread title, there's no question posited in the OP, and it doesn't make any sense in the context of the messages before yours.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 09:00:50 PM
Which is why I can't believe how many articles have focused on the fact that farmers hated DST because it would "force the cows to be milked an hour later". I think that they meant to say an hour earlier, but they weren't paying attention.
Depends on whether you're looking at it from the perspective of the clock or the cow.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2022, 09:07:34 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 08:56:37 PM
Unless you are in Alaska.
What is that supposed to be a reply to? It doesn't answer the thread title, there's no question posited in the OP, and it doesn't make any sense in the context of the messages before yours.
Was directed towards Rothman's post.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 08:55:33 PM
Quote from: Rothman on March 16, 2022, 07:18:08 PM
Pfft. People who complain about dark mornings ruin the world.
*Ahem (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=25884.msg2453121#msg2453121)*
I was complaining about the effect of springin forward. DST year round would eliminate the jolt. [emoji14]
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 03:49:03 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 16, 2022, 03:48:07 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
It would be if everyone could agree how to re-implement it properly. But I have a slight preference for DST year-round since moving south.
Standard time year round and DST year round are essentially the same thing, just using different time zones as a base.
The difference is whether you try to place solar noon around 12:00 give or take or around 13:00 give or take. Otherwise yes, AST is mathematically equivalent to EDT and so forth.
Ultimately we have this mess because we're an invasive species in mid-latitudes. Humans evolved in a tropical climate where you reliably get roughly 12 hours of daylight year-round. Our brains are thus arguably better suited for that, the fact that we tend to think the lack of daylight in winter sucks is indicative of the fact that perhaps we weren't meant to live at the latitudes we do and should move back closer to the equator.
But of course that's not happening, so we have to just manage short winter days as best we can... and, well, we can't actually optimize that either since people's schedules vary wildly. I love the idea of permanent DST since I'm not normally out of bed before 9:30, so this would give me an extra hour of sunlight in winter that I'm actually awake for. But I also acknowledge that for someone whose life routine requires they be out of bed at 7:00 this would absolutely suck.
As it exists, DST is an exemplary compromise: everyone hates it, but everyone hates it less than if the other side totally got their way. Indeed, this is the best argument I have for keeping things as they are: while no one likes biannual clock changes, I would far rather keep them than have year-round standard time, moving even more hours of sunlight from when I'm awake to when I'm asleep than is already the case. Proponents of year-round standard time, I imagine, would also often rather keep moving the clocks back and forth than stick them on DST permanently.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 12:18:48 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 16, 2022, 03:49:03 PM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on March 16, 2022, 03:48:07 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I think standard time all year would be better.
It would be if everyone could agree how to re-implement it properly. But I have a slight preference for DST year-round since moving south.
Standard time year round and DST year round are essentially the same thing, just using different time zones as a base.
The difference is whether you try to place solar noon around 12:00 give or take or around 13:00 give or take. Otherwise yes, AST is mathematically equivalent to EDT and so forth.
Ultimately we have this mess because we're an invasive species in mid-latitudes. Humans evolved in a tropical climate where you reliably get roughly 12 hours of daylight year-round. Our brains are thus arguably better suited for that, the fact that we tend to think the lack of daylight in winter sucks is indicative of the fact that perhaps we weren't meant to live at the latitudes we do and should move back closer to the equator.
But of course that's not happening, so we have to just manage short winter days as best we can... and, well, we can't actually optimize that either since people's schedules vary wildly. I love the idea of permanent DST since I'm not normally out of bed before 9:30, so this would give me an extra hour of sunlight in winter that I'm actually awake for. But I also acknowledge that for someone whose life routine requires they be out of bed at 7:00 this would absolutely suck.
As it exists, DST is an exemplary compromise: everyone hates it, but everyone hates it less than if the other side totally got their way. Indeed, this is the best argument I have for keeping things as they are: while no one likes biannual clock changes, I would far rather keep them than have year-round standard time, moving even more hours of sunlight from when I'm awake to when I'm asleep than is already the case. Proponents of year-round standard time, I imagine, would also often rather keep moving the clocks back and forth than stick them on DST permanently.
Just for the record, I like the biannual clock change. It's saying goodbye to winter and hello to spring, and hello to light a bit longer in the evening. Or goodbye to summer and hello to fall, and hello to restoring light while I'm getting up in the morning.
Regarding the comments about Alaska, that's a place where DST has little practical value because the summer days are so long anyway, but they observe DST for practical reasons relating to doing business with the rest of the country, especially the East Coast, in order to avoid increasing the time difference for most of the year,
Quote from: skluth on March 16, 2022, 08:47:34 PM
I've also had several friends who grew up on farms. I don't recall any liking DST and some outright hated it. They all thought it was nothing more than a city thing which allowed city people to stay out later in the summer, especially those doing outdoor activities.
My wife has several uncles and cousins who are farmers. They blamed DST on golfers. And didn't like it, especially the dairy farmers.
Quote from: skluth on March 16, 2022, 08:47:34 PM
Have any of you ever worked on a farm? I never really did, but I did spend time avoiding work on my uncles' farms during the summer when I was a kid. One uncle had a pig farm. One had a dairy farm. They both operated on a schedule that didn't change an hour for DST. Cows expect to be milked the same time every day. The pigs liked to be fed on a schedule and would become problematic otherwise, much like my cat.
....
Our cat doesn't seem to mind the clocks going ahead because it means she gets fed what is, to her, an hour earlier in the morning, and she never objects to being fed. We adopted her last November right after Thanksgiving and thus haven't seen how she reacts to the clocks going back, but I have a feeling she will like that a whole lot less because it will mean being fed an hour later. (Actually, this year it'll be worse than that for her because I expect to be out of town that week and my wife sleeps later than I do in the mornings.)
Quote from: Rothman on March 16, 2022, 07:18:08 PM
Pfft. People who complain about dark mornings ruin the world.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 08:56:37 PM
Unless you are in Alaska.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 09:26:40 PM
Was directed towards Rothman's post.
So only people in Alaska who complain about dark mornings don't ruin the world?
Or people in Alaska who complain about dark mornings ruin the world for everyone except those in Alaska?
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 12:18:48 AM
The difference is whether you try to place solar noon around 12:00 give or take or around 13:00 give or take. Otherwise yes, AST is mathematically equivalent to EDT and so forth.
Ultimately we have this mess because we're an invasive species in mid-latitudes. Humans evolved in a tropical climate where you reliably get roughly 12 hours of daylight year-round. Our brains are thus arguably better suited for that, the fact that we tend to think the lack of daylight in winter sucks is indicative of the fact that perhaps we weren't meant to live at the latitudes we do and should move back closer to the equator.
But of course that's not happening, so we have to just manage short winter days as best we can... and, well, we can't actually optimize that either since people's schedules vary wildly. I love the idea of permanent DST since I'm not normally out of bed before 9:30, so this would give me an extra hour of sunlight in winter that I'm actually awake for. But I also acknowledge that for someone whose life routine requires they be out of bed at 7:00 this would absolutely suck.
As it exists, DST is an exemplary compromise: everyone hates it, but everyone hates it less than if the other side totally got their way. Indeed, this is the best argument I have for keeping things as they are: while no one likes biannual clock changes, I would far rather keep them than have year-round standard time, moving even more hours of sunlight from when I'm awake to when I'm asleep than is already the case. Proponents of year-round standard time, I imagine, would also often rather keep moving the clocks back and forth than stick them on DST permanently.
And yet clocks as we know them were developed after humanity had already migrated to cold climates–and were, in many steps along the way, developed in those very cold climates.
But yeah, I frequently find myself cursing my long-ago ancestors for having migrated out of the tropics.
My theme song of late has become
Mirie it is while sumer i-last. It is perhaps the oldest extant complete secular song in the English language, and it bemoans the coming of winter.
Mirie it is while sumer i-last
with fugheles song.
oc nu necheth windes blast
and weder strong.
Ey ey what this nicht is long.
And ich with wel michel wrong
soregh and murne and fast.
Translation into Modern English:
Merry it is while summer a-last,
with fowl's song.
Oc now nigheth winter's blast,
and weather strong.
Hey, hey, what! this night is long.
And I with well-michel wrong
Sorrow and mourn and fast.
Making it more natural to our modern ears:
Merry it is while summer lasts,
with birdsong.
But now winter's blast draws near,
and weather strong.
Hey, hey! but this night is long.
And I, having been greatly wronged,
Sorrow and mourn and fast.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 16, 2022, 09:00:50 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 16, 2022, 08:47:34 PM
Cows expect to be milked the same time every day. The pigs liked to be fed on a schedule and would become problematic otherwise, much like my cat.
Which is why I can't believe how many articles have focused on the fact that farmers hated DST because it would "force the cows to be milked an hour later". I think that they meant to say an hour earlier, but they weren't paying attention. I've also seen this argument used for a reason that farmers were originally opposed to DST back in 1918. All of this milk smells spoiled to me.
I had this online "discussion" this week with someone...
Him: It was designed for children of farmers so they can work an extra hour harvesting the crops before going to school
Me: But DST results in a later sunrise, not an earlier sunrise.
Him: well you will think differently in the fall when the clock allows you to sleep one hour later or be in the field harvesting your bounty
Me (slightly confused): You mean when DST ended and we went back to standard time?
Him: no think of the Ukraine
At that point I realized there was no use to continue the conversation.
I've never known a farmer's kid who worked in the fields before going to class.
Quote from: webny99 on March 16, 2022, 11:35:20 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 16, 2022, 11:23:46 AM
I don't care about late sunrises. My waking time on work days is determined by an alarm clock, not by sunlight. All I do in the mornings is get up, get ready, and drive straight to work. I don't care if it's still dark when I get there. I do like having daylight after work, and it not being dark by the time I finish running errands (such as going to the store) before going home.
You've brought this up before and I can't get my head around the idea that daylight has no impact at all on one's ability to wake up. Have you not been affected at all by the time change this past weekend? Felt the least bit more tired in the morning, or the least bit more awake in the evening?
No. In fact, I felt better rested on Monday than I have in a long, long time.
We keep curtains closed in the evenings so you can't really see much sunlight coming in the windows in the mornings.
I don't really have a natural wake-up time. If not for the alarm clock, I would probably sleep until noon every day. Comes from having my sleep patterns disrupted when I was in college and we had to pull all-nighters putting the weekly campus newspaper out. Eight hours of sleep is not nearly enough for me. I function best on at least 10 hours of sleep.
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 10:45:44 AM
I've never known a farmer's kid who worked in the fields before going to class.
Maybe not out in the fields, but quite a few of them had morning chores to do before school. Harkening back to an older day perhaps ...
Here is a map looking at the number of days that see sunsets after 8:00PM. Areas shaded purple indicate 0 days of sunset past 8:00PM thoughout the year. Under the current status quo, only the states that observe standard time year round (Arizona & Hawaii), Florida's panhandle, and parts of Alabama never see sunsets past 8PM. If the country abolished DST, large swathes of the country would never see sunsets past 8PM.
(https://i.imgur.com/eAtmvjk.png)
The scenario is you live in California or the east coast, work till 5PM, struggle through traffic to get home by 6PM, make dinner for the family, eat, and by the time you are ready to relax it's 7PM. You now have less than an hour to do something leisurely outside before the sun sets (even during the longest days of summer). There's just way to much purple on that map if we abolish DST.
I know I've said it on the other threads, but... I don't care when the sun goes down. I care when the sun comes up.
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 02:03:27 PM
I know I've said it on the other threads, but... I don't care when the sun goes down. I care when the sun comes up.
Without DST, dawn would begin in Panama City, Florida as early as 4:12AM. They like to party in Panama City and the bars don't close till 4AM. The lights would quite literally come on to shut down the bars in Panama City if we didn't observe DST. On the flip side, the sun would set in Panama City by 6:47PM during the longest day of the year. Don't think the Florida tourist industry would ever get behind that.
tradephoric, you're using a strawman argument. Nobody is trying to get rid of DST in the summer. The two options are leave it the way it is or go to permanent DST.
Also, already said yourself that Boston currently has a dawn of 4:32 AM. It doesn't cause any issues.
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 09:31:45 AM
Quote from: Rothman on March 16, 2022, 07:18:08 PM
Pfft. People who complain about dark mornings ruin the world.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 08:56:37 PM
Unless you are in Alaska.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 16, 2022, 09:26:40 PM
Was directed towards Rothman's post.
So only people in Alaska who complain about dark mornings don't ruin the world?
Or people in Alaska who complain about dark mornings ruin the world for everyone except those in Alaska?
Yeah because they are NOT in the correct timezone. Everybody else would be like wtf is Alaska doing?
Quote from: 1 on March 17, 2022, 02:19:04 PM
tradephoric, you're using a strawman argument. Nobody is trying to get rid of DST in the summer. The two options are leave it the way it is or go to permanent DST.
You didn't read yesterday's Washington Post article then. After the Senate voted unanimously to make daylight saving time permanent, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine is arguing that permanent standard time would be better than permanent daylight saving time...
Sleep experts say Senate has it wrong: Standard time, not daylight saving, should be permanenthttps://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2022/03/16/daylight-saving-bill-health-effects/
Quote from: 1 on March 17, 2022, 02:19:04 PM
Also, already said yourself that Boston currently has a dawn of 4:32 AM. It doesn't cause any issues.
A 4:30AM dawn in a touristy beach town may be more problematic than a 4:30AM dawn in Boston. Plus if we get rid of DST, dawn in Boston would get moved up to 3:30AM. Now is that too early? When do bars in Boston close? Maybe congress needs to pass a law stating that dawn should not begin before the bars close!
^Thanks kphoger i read this text yesterday as well and didn't fully comprehend it. Does section (2) mean states will have till November 5, 2023 to decide if they want to observe permanent standard time and join Arizona and Hawaii?
I've floated the idea of shifting the time zone lines halfway over, and having four about equal-sized zones in the lower 48. They would range from UT-7 (PDT/MST) to UT-4 (EDT/AST). I can't figure out which zone to put greater Kansas City in, though.
I support permanent standard time
Quote from: tradephoric on March 17, 2022, 02:36:58 PM
Admittedly I'm not completely informed on how this new law would work if a state wanted to go to permanent standard time as opposed to permanent daylight saving time. I'm assuming other states could join Hawaii and Arizona in observing permanent standard time? Like i could never see a state like Massachusetts wanting to observe permanent standard time (again, 3:30AM dawn in Boston sounds insane)... but maybe a state like Michigan or Idaho would want to switch?
See below.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 11:52:15 AM
I looked at the Senate bill last night and it appears to me to say that only the states and territories that currently opt out of DST will be able to opt out of the new system. Here is the link to the text. (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623/text) The key text is down at the bottom under "State Exemption":
Quote"(b) Standard time for certain states and areas.–The standard time for a State that has exempted itself from the provisions of section 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260a(a)), as in effect on the day before November 5, 2023, pursuant to such section or an area of a State that has exempted such area from such provisions pursuant to such section shall be, as such State considers appropriate–
"(1) the standard time for such State or area, as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section; or
"(2) the standard time for such State or area, as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section as it was in effect on the day before November 5, 2023." .
The way I'm reading it, a state can exempt itself this year or most of next year, and it will still be valid. Am I misreading it?
Quote from: tradephoric on March 17, 2022, 02:36:58 PM
Admittedly I'm not completely informed on how this new law would work if a state wanted to go to permanent standard time as opposed to permanent daylight saving time. I'm assuming other states could join Hawaii and Arizona in observing permanent standard time? Like i could never see a state like Massachusetts wanting to observe permanent standard time (again, 3:30AM dawn in Boston sounds insane)... but maybe a state like Michigan or Idaho would want to switch?
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 02:42:50 PM
See below.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 16, 2022, 11:52:15 AM
I looked at the Senate bill last night and it appears to me to say that only the states and territories that currently opt out of DST will be able to opt out of the new system. Here is the link to the text. (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/623/text) The key text is down at the bottom under "State Exemption":
Quote"(b) Standard time for certain states and areas.–The standard time for a State that has exempted itself from the provisions of section 3(a) of the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260a(a)), as in effect on the day before November 5, 2023, pursuant to such section or an area of a State that has exempted such area from such provisions pursuant to such section shall be, as such State considers appropriate–
"(1) the standard time for such State or area, as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section; or
"(2) the standard time for such State or area, as the case may be, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section as it was in effect on the day before November 5, 2023." .
I looked at it again and my reading has changed very slightly. It's not just states and territories that have
already opted out, as I thought before. Rather, it's states and territories that either
have already opted out or will have opted out by November 5, 2023. I'm not sure what the chances are of anyone actually doing the latter part of that, so as a practical matter my prior statement may turn out to be an accurate reading. If a state or territory chose to opt out of DST between now and November 5, 2023, the new time law would not apply in that state. So, to use tradephoric's example, if Michigan or Idaho opted out of DST later this year, they would then stay on their current standard time–that is, their clocks would be one hour behind what they would be under the new law–when the new rule takes effect on November 5, 2023. (The reason for that date: It's the date on which the clocks would otherwise go back next year.)
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
Yes. Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
It would just redefine the new time as "standard time" for the respective time zones. In other words, Eastern Standard Time would be defined as UTC minus four, rather than UTC minus five as it is now.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
Yes. Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
That's not what I meant. I just meant that everyone on CT (Central Time, not Connecticut) would transition to permanent EST rather than permanent CDT. I think's dumb to no longer have any time called "standard".
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:06:52 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
Yes. Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
That's not what I meant. I just meant that everyone on CT (Central Time, not Connecticut) would transition to permanent EST rather than permanent CDT. I think's dumb to no longer have any time called "standard".
I get it now.
Now this is a graph to know when the sun rises and sets. I wouldn't want darkness at 6:45am tbh. That's my usual time of waking up. Mornings are already dark enough in the winter. No need to make them even
more darker.
https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/greenville-nc
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:09:59 PM
I wouldn't want darkness at 6:45am tbh. That's my usual time of waking up.
Better not move north, then.
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 03:11:42 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:09:59 PM
I wouldn't want darkness at 6:45am tbh. That's my usual time of waking up.
Better not move north, then.
Lived in New Jersey, and mornings are not that much different compared to here.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 03:11:42 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:09:59 PM
I wouldn't want darkness at 6:45am tbh. That's my usual time of waking up.
Better not move north, then.
Lived in New Jersey, and mornings are not that much different compared to here.
Because NJ is slightly east. I'm almost due north of Greenville, and it's dark at 6:45 for about 3-4 months of the year.
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 03:18:05 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 17, 2022, 03:11:42 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:09:59 PM
I wouldn't want darkness at 6:45am tbh. That's my usual time of waking up.
Better not move north, then.
Lived in New Jersey, and mornings are not that much different compared to here.
Because NJ is slightly east. I'm almost due north of Greenville, and it's dark at 6:45 for about 3-4 months of the year.
Another reason why Permanent DST should NOT be practiced.
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:06:52 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
Yes. Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
That's not what I meant. I just meant that everyone on CT (Central Time, not Connecticut) would transition to permanent EST rather than permanent CDT. I think's dumb to no longer have any time called "standard".
The proposed statute gets around that by calling the new time zones "standard time." People are referring to it as "permanent DST" now because it's the best way to analogize it to what we already know, but from a technical standpoint the bill just redefines standard time as one hour ahead of what it already is. In theory, nothing would be stopping Congress from then deciding to re-institute DST (on whatever schedule, doesn't matter) based on the
new standard time zones, such that Eastern Daylight Time would be UTC minus three because Eastern Standard Time would be UTC minus four.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
Yes. Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
Both of those states are split between Eastern and Central.
The problem with permanent DST is it messes up the time for the whole year. There's a reason why there's a standard time: If done correctly, time zones make it so that solar noon happens on average within half an hour of 12 pm local time. But because of daylight savings, the middle of the day gets pushed back an hour, which means in many places noon doesn't happen until after 1:30 pm! If that's made permanent, many places will never have noon occur within even an hour of 12 pm. You can see this illustrated well on this site: https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/oklahoma-city
In this example you can see that noon occurs in Oklahoma City during the winter in the range of 12:13 pm to 12:44 pm, pretty reasonable. But if daylight savings is permanent? It'll never happen before 1:13 pm and would happen as late as 1:44 pm!
Quote from: hbelkins on March 17, 2022, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
Both of those states are split between Eastern and Central.
I think that's what he meant. Basically:
Make it so the whole state–such as Indiana and Tennessee–in in one time zone.
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 04:40:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 17, 2022, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
Both of those states are split between Eastern and Central.
I think that's what he meant. Basically:
Make it so the whole state–such as Indiana and Tennessee–in in one time zone.
As long as Chicago is on a different time zone from Cincinnati and Louisville, that's going to be a problem. The northwestern counties are going to insist on being on the same time as Chicago and the southeastern counties are going to insist on being on the same time as Cincy and Louisville.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 17, 2022, 04:42:35 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 04:40:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 17, 2022, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 17, 2022, 03:02:09 PM
Make it so that the whole state is in one timezone such as Indiana and Tennessee.
Both of those states are split between Eastern and Central.
I think that's what he meant. Basically:
Make it so the whole state–such as Indiana and Tennessee–in in one time zone.
As long as Chicago is on a different time zone from Cincinnati and Louisville, that's going to be a problem. The northwestern counties are going to insist on being on the same time as Chicago and the southeastern counties are going to insist on being on the same time as Cincy and Louisville.
There are also states like Michigan where the western half of the UP is more economically tied to Wisconsin than the Lower Peninsula. Much like El Paso is more tied to New Mexico than the rest of Texas; they're even not on the Texas power grid (https://www.kut.org/energy-environment/2021-02-18/self-sufficient-and-upgraded-how-el-pasos-electric-grid-weathered-the-storm). Keeping the west parts of the UP and the West Texas Panhandle in their current time zones makes more sense than keeping their entire states together in one time zone.
Here is a cool interactive website that determines what percentage of daylight you soak in based on what time you wake up and what time you go to bed. Then it shows how many waking hours of sunlight you would lose throughout the year if DST was abolished.
https://qz.com/537672/how-much-daylight-does-daylight-saving-time-save/
I love the concept of this interactive site but there are a few major problems:
#1. The data assumes you are located in New York.
#2. They only compare permanent standard time to the current status quo. The site doesn't consider the effects permanent DST would have.
#3. It doesn't allow you to input a bedtime earlier than 9 p.m.
#4. Based on #3, it's impossible to actually lose waking hours of daylight assuming DST was abolished since in New York the sun never sets after 9PM (whether you are on DST or not). So essentially no matter what times you pick for waking up and going to bed, you are always going to gain hours of sunlight with DST (or at worst break even).
Quote from: bm7 on March 17, 2022, 04:29:39 PM
The problem with permanent DST is it messes up the time for the whole year. There's a reason why there's a standard time: If done correctly, time zones make it so that solar noon happens on average within half an hour of 12 pm local time. But because of daylight savings, the middle of the day gets pushed back an hour, which means in many places noon doesn't happen until after 1:30 pm! If that's made permanent, many places will never have noon occur within even an hour of 12 pm. You can see this illustrated well on this site: https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/oklahoma-city
In this example you can see that noon occurs in Oklahoma City during the winter in the range of 12:13 pm to 12:44 pm, pretty reasonable. But if daylight savings is permanent? It'll never happen before 1:13 pm and would happen as late as 1:44 pm!
Another downside indeed. See Nome Alaska.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 17, 2022, 03:06:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2022, 03:00:39 PM
If this does pass, then can we all at least just change time zones, rather than calling it DST?
It would just redefine the new time as "standard time" for the respective time zones. In other words, Eastern Standard Time would be defined as UTC minus four, rather than UTC minus five as it is now.
How about some new designation? EFT - Eastern Freedom Time, for example? Or Eastern Patriotic Time, maybe...
Quote from: tradephoric on March 16, 2022, 12:00:15 PM
Teenagers would love permanent DST as they constantly sleep in till noon. The sun has already been up for 3 hours by the time they wake up anyways. At least permanent DST would limit the amount of daylight they waste.
I actually wouldn't. I like waking up early because I'm more productive in the morning; it's just that I happen to be trapped in a body whose hormones like going to sleep and waking up late. I need to get more disciplined about going to bed earlier! :-D
Quote from: bm7 on March 17, 2022, 04:29:39 PM
The problem with permanent DST is it messes up the time for the whole year. There's a reason why there's a standard time: If done correctly, time zones make it so that solar noon happens on average within half an hour of 12 pm local time. But because of daylight savings, the middle of the day gets pushed back an hour, which means in many places noon doesn't happen until after 1:30 pm! If that's made permanent, many places will never have noon occur within even an hour of 12 pm. You can see this illustrated well on this site: https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/oklahoma-city
In this example you can see that noon occurs in Oklahoma City during the winter in the range of 12:13 pm to 12:44 pm, pretty reasonable. But if daylight savings is permanent? It'll never happen before 1:13 pm and would happen as late as 1:44 pm!
Have to ask the question: so what?
There is this common argument that DST is bad because it desynchronizes solar noon from clock noon... okay, but why is that bad? There is no cosmic law that the sun "should" peak in the sky approximately when the clock reads 12:00. Clocks are human inventions and the numbers on them are arbitrary.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 17, 2022, 02:26:43 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 17, 2022, 02:19:04 PM
tradephoric, you're using a strawman argument. Nobody is trying to get rid of DST in the summer. The two options are leave it the way it is or go to permanent DST.
You didn't read yesterday's Washington Post article then. After the Senate voted unanimously to make daylight saving time permanent, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine is arguing that permanent standard time would be better than permanent daylight saving time...
Sleep experts say Senate has it wrong: Standard time, not daylight saving, should be permanent
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2022/03/16/daylight-saving-bill-health-effects/
And here is why I ultimately expect this to go nowhere. The senate may have unanimously passed a bill about this while no one was paying attention, but once news of that broke the usual cacophany both for and against has erupted and the house will not be able to handle the matter in absence of said cacophany as the senate did. The ensuing debate will kill the bill for lack of consensus and that will be that.
Interesting map looking at the average bedtime by county. The further West you go in a time zone generally the later people go to bed.
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/bedtime-1024x737.jpg)
https://vividmaps.com/average-bedtime-by-us-county/
A great map created by Stefano Maggiolo looking at how out of sync the time zones are from solar time. Shaded green areas are too early, shaded red areas are too late. Throughout the entire world it's somewhat common place for time zones to creep west (ie. more shaded red areas).
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/solar-tiime-clock-time.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.poormansmath.net%2Fimages%2FSolarTimeVsStandardTime.png&hash=1e1ca6ba71ed9e040bdd7690052518129b331dd5)
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 06:20:44 PM
And here is why I ultimately expect this to go nowhere. The senate may have unanimously passed a bill about this while no one was paying attention, but once news of that broke the usual cacophany both for and against has erupted and the house will not be able to handle the matter in absence of said cacophany as the senate did. The ensuing debate will kill the bill for lack of consensus and that will be that.
These debates have already been taking place throughout the country. Nearly half of the states have legislation that would make DST permanent once the Sunshine Protection Act is signed into law (assuming it can pass through the house and lands on the President's desk). This is much different from the 1970s when year-round Daylight Saving Time was kind of just sprung up on everybody in the midst of the energy crisis. Even the Michigan house passed a bill to make DST permanent, and that's a Northern state on the far Western edge of a timezone - presumably a state that would be most impacted by "late winter sunrises". In the end i think you are drastically underestimating the pull the tourism industry has in Congress.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 17, 2022, 07:55:56 PM
In the end i think you are drastically underestimating the pull the tourism industry has in Congress.
Why would the tourism industry have a strong preference on this? Later sunrises and sunsets in winter going to make people take more winter vacations for some reason?
The darker the red, the more likely they will change the timezone if we were to go to Permanent DST.
Tbh, all of Maine should be AST. Just Maine. Other New England states are fine where they are imo.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 06:20:44 PM
There is no cosmic law that the sun "should" peak in the sky approximately when the clock reads 12:00.
That's exactly the argument against permanent DST. Since the numbers are social constructs, might as well make them at least somewhat meaningful for those that need or want to align the clock with the sun. Let everyone else change their schedule according to whatever social construct they think they should use. E.g. start school at 10 am if the clock is aligned with the sun but kids are still going to school in the dark.
I'm in the minority who prefer to change their clocks twice a year, because I love the large gap between winter and summer solstice sunset times.
Quote from: epzik8 on March 17, 2022, 09:02:25 PM
I'm in the minority who prefer to change their clocks twice a year, because I love the large gap between winter and summer solstice sunset times.
could happen do and that could be the best case scenario.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 17, 2022, 07:36:36 PM
A great map created by Stefano Maggiolo looking at how out of sync the time zones are from solar time. Shaded green areas are too early, shaded red areas are too late. Throughout the entire world it's somewhat common place for time zones to creep west (ie. more shaded red areas).
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/solar-tiime-clock-time.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.poormansmath.net%2Fimages%2FSolarTimeVsStandardTime.png&hash=1e1ca6ba71ed9e040bdd7690052518129b331dd5)
Honestly speaking, that is the least relevant map. We do not really need solar noon and clock noon to coinside, we need some convenient lineup of sun cycle to life and business cycle.
Quote from: kalvado on March 17, 2022, 09:17:41 PM
Honestly speaking, that is the least relevant map. We do not really need solar noon and clock noon to coinside, we need some convenient lineup of sun cycle to life and business cycle.
The maps were actually very relevant - it's in response to a few people who referenced that time zones are ignoring the fairly basic thought process that 'high noon' isn't really noon, and that midnight isn't really the middle of the night. The world is pretty much just making up time zones to be convenient to whatever system they want. We could make sunlight be all night long and darkness during the normal daylight hours if we wanted just by going to Daylight Octuple Time.
Individuals decide for themselves what life and business cycle is. Society has dictated over time that we generally work first, then do errands, play, and have family time later. But that doesn't work for everyone. There's people at the gym at 4am. There's people that work shifts such as 3pm to midnight that need to do their errands and appointments in the morning and around noontime. What the majority wants as daylight hours could change if the majority decided they'll rather play and do errands first, then worked.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 08:17:46 PM
Why would the tourism industry have a strong preference on this? Later sunrises and sunsets in winter going to make people take more winter vacations for some reason?
Here are the hours for Mall of America in Minneapolis:
Sunday: 11 a.m. — 7 p.m.
Monday — Thursday: 10 a.m. — 8 p.m.
Friday and Saturday: 10 a.m. — 9 p.m.
Point of showing this is people don't necessarily buy a lot of things early in the morning... if they did the most famous mall in America would likely open before 10 a.m. With permanent DST, people have a full hour longer of daylight during the winter months to be out and about buying things. While it's true the mall doesn't close once the sun goes down, there are plenty of reasons why someone might not want to be out past dark:
....maybe their eyesight is bad and they don't like driving at night.
....maybe they don't feel safe walking around at night.
....maybe it's frigidly cold when the sun goes down in Minneapolis and they'd rather retreat to their home.
Quite simply that extra hour of evening daylight encourages people to spend more money. In the case of Mall of America, it's not as if the barriers that prevent people from wanting to shop (ie. driving at night, walking at night, being out in frigid night temperatures) are just shifted around. When the mall opens at 10 a.m. it's been light out for hours in Minneapolis, even with permanent DST. The same arguments for Mall of America can be made for going out to restaurants. Maybe someone really wants to go out to Outback for a blooming onion at 7PM... but it's already dark out so they just open a can of Cambell's soup instead. Are you really going to have a booming economy if people are eating Campbell soup for dinner?
Incidentally, that map is a little dated. It looks like it was made when Russia was experimenting with permanent DST (really double DST, given that their regular time zones were already offset by an hour).
Assuming permanent DST happens and Canada follows suit, I wonder if Newfoundland will finally normalize itself into the Atlantic time zone rather than having its half hour offset. If the Maritimes went permanent DST, Newfoundland jumped forward by a half hour instead of a full hour, and Saint Pierre went permanent standard time, all of those places would be in one time zone, which would seem to be a lot simpler.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 06:20:44 PM
Have to ask the question: so what?
There is this common argument that DST is bad because it desynchronizes solar noon from clock noon... okay, but why is that bad? There is no cosmic law that the sun "should" peak in the sky approximately when the clock reads 12:00. Clocks are human inventions and the numbers on them are arbitrary.
It's not arbitrary, that's how people have always told time. AM means before mid-day, and PM means after. Noon is the point at mid-day, and midnight is as the name suggests, the middle of the night.
Would society collapse if we made the middle of the day be at 7 pm instead? No, but how would that make any sense?
Quote from: bm7 on March 17, 2022, 11:27:19 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 06:20:44 PM
Have to ask the question: so what?
There is this common argument that DST is bad because it desynchronizes solar noon from clock noon... okay, but why is that bad? There is no cosmic law that the sun "should" peak in the sky approximately when the clock reads 12:00. Clocks are human inventions and the numbers on them are arbitrary.
It's not arbitrary, that's how people have always told time. AM means before mid-day, and PM means after. Noon is the point at mid-day, and midnight is as the name suggests, the middle of the night.
Would society collapse if we made the middle of the day be at 7 pm instead? No, but how would that make any sense?
"We've always done it that way" is still an arbitrary reason, and... well guess what, it's not even a true statement. For one thing the very existence of DST makes it not true, but even notwithstanding that you're talking about a system that did not exist as we now know it prior to the industrial revolution. Over the centuries and millennia, various cultures have deemed the day to begin and end at sunset (this system is still in use to this day for observance of Jewish holidays), at sunrise, or even at noon instead of midnight. Various cultures have also divided calendar dates into numbers of segments other than 24, and there have also been cultures that have had the length of an hour (or equivalent measure) vary throughout the year since it was defined as a fixed fraction of the length of daylight on that day rather than a fixed unit of time.
Read up if you wanna go down this rabbit hole some more. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hour)
Anyway, point being, the 24-hour clock with solar noon pegged to 12:00 is a human construct. There is no scientific reason the day
must naturally be measured this way.
Noon is fairly arbitrary, and even hard to observe exactly without instruments. By eye you just get within a couple of hours either way.
Sunrise is easy to observe, unless it's obscured by clouds. Even if it's cloudy you can tell within 15 minutes or so just because of getting brighter and the birds singing.
Quote from: kkt on March 18, 2022, 01:03:05 AM
Noon is fairly arbitrary, and even hard to observe exactly without instruments. By eye you just get within a couple of hours either way.
Sunrise is easy to observe, unless it's obscured by clouds. Even if it's cloudy you can tell within 15 minutes or so just because of getting brighter and the birds singing.
Solar noon is a convenient reference point for discussion like this, as it provides a centerpoint with equal amount of sunshine before and after. Unlike sunrize and sunset, noon has only a limited shift against 24 hour cycle over the year (20 min or so) .
We can talk about clock setting as a way to budget limited natural resource - sunshine - with respect to schedule. Clock setting for solar noon is one of basic knobs to tweak.
For example, standard time at timezone center means "solar noon at beginning of typical lunch hour. 5 hours of sunshine before and after that point in winter, 7 hours in summer".
DST - "solar noon at the end of lunch hour"
Quote from: Duke87 on March 18, 2022, 12:00:11 AM
Quote from: bm7 on March 17, 2022, 11:27:19 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on March 17, 2022, 06:20:44 PM
Have to ask the question: so what?
There is this common argument that DST is bad because it desynchronizes solar noon from clock noon... okay, but why is that bad? There is no cosmic law that the sun "should" peak in the sky approximately when the clock reads 12:00. Clocks are human inventions and the numbers on them are arbitrary.
It's not arbitrary, that's how people have always told time. AM means before mid-day, and PM means after. Noon is the point at mid-day, and midnight is as the name suggests, the middle of the night.
Would society collapse if we made the middle of the day be at 7 pm instead? No, but how would that make any sense?
"We've always done it that way" is still an arbitrary reason, and... well guess what, it's not even a true statement. For one thing the very existence of DST makes it not true, but even notwithstanding that you're talking about a system that did not exist as we now know it prior to the industrial revolution. Over the centuries and millennia, various cultures have deemed the day to begin and end at sunset (this system is still in use to this day for observance of Jewish holidays), at sunrise, or even at noon instead of midnight. Various cultures have also divided calendar dates into numbers of segments other than 24, and there have also been cultures that have had the length of an hour (or equivalent measure) vary throughout the year since it was defined as a fixed fraction of the length of daylight on that day rather than a fixed unit of time.
Read up if you wanna go down this rabbit hole some more. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hour)
Anyway, point being, the 24-hour clock with solar noon pegged to 12:00 is a human construct. There is no scientific reason the day must naturally be measured this way.
This is true of pretty much everything time-related other than that overall our planet takes a specific amount of time to make one revolution around the sun and rotates on its axis once every so often. Those periods are fixed, but how we define and subdivide them is a man-made creation. Look up the French Republican Calendar if you want an extreme example: 12 months of 30 days each, with each month divided into three ten-day periods that replaced the seven-day week, each day divided into 10 hours of 100 minutes each, etc. To complete the year, there were five extra days not assigned to a month plus an extra such day in leap years. Aside from religious objections to not having the seven-day week, one practical objection many people had was that using a ten-day period meant you got fewer days off from work.
Calendar reform so that every year would start and end on the same day has been a proposal that's never gotten much traction because doing that requires insertion of a "blank day" that is not assigned to a particular day of the week. Probably the best-known example of this (because so many copies have been sold) is the hobbits' calendar in the appendices to
The Return of the King. Midyear's Day (and, in leap years, the Overlithe) was not assigned to a weekday. In our society, of course, that causes lots of religious objections. But from a practical standpoint, there's nothing preventing the use of such a day aside from it seeming like an utterly alien notion because we're so accustomed to the seven-day week. Some people also object to the idea of a calendar reform that would change the lengths of the months and do away with existing dates–for example, I was born on May 31, so in an all-30-day-month calendar like the French one, my "birthday" would cease to exist–but then, people's birthdays changed during the conversion from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar and it wasn't all that big of a problem in the end. Whether existing fixed-date holidays (July 4, December 25, November 11) might have to be remapped would be another question.
The International Association for Energy Economics (IAEE) put together a meta-analysis in 2017 looking at 44 different studies to answer the question does Daylight Saving Time save electricity. They concluded that DST results in 0.34% electricity savings and that electricity savings are larger for countries farther away from the equator, while subtropical regions consume more electricity because of DST. .
https://www.iaee.org/en/publications/init2.aspx?id=0
This makes perfect sense if you think about it. While DST extends the use of (waking) daylight hours and helps reduce the electricity usage for lighting, the added hour of daylight in the evening encourages more air conditioning usage especially in regions of the country that experience sweltering summer heat. So you have a scenario where DST may increase energy usage in Texas but decrease energy usage in Washington State. However, overall it was found that overall DST reduces electricity usage by 0.34%.
Here are the monthly average temperatures for Dallas and Seattle. People in Dallas are cranking their AC pretty hard with monthly average highs of 98 in August, but Seattle's high of 79 in August is relatively comfortable.
(https://i.imgur.com/WYYhzvR.png)
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:01:06 PM
The International Association for Energy Economics (IAEE) put together a meta-analysis in 2017 looking at 44 different studies to answer the question does Daylight Saving Time save electricity. They concluded that DST results in 0.34% electricity savings and that electricity savings are larger for countries farther away from the equator, while subtropical regions consume more electricity because of DST. .
https://www.iaee.org/en/publications/init2.aspx?id=0
This makes perfect sense if you think about it. While DST extends the use of (waking) daylight hours and helps reduce the electricity usage for lighting, the added hour of daylight in the evening encourages more air conditioning usage especially in regions of the country that experience sweltering summer heat. So you have a scenario where DST may increase energy usage in Texas but decrease energy usage in Washington State. However, overall it was found that overall DST reduces electricity usage by 0.34%.
Again, a lot of DST stuff comes from the times when light was expensive. Be it candles, kerosene, or incandescent lamps.
Today, LEDs changed that completely.
I don't think AC energy use is really going to change with time setting too much.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:21:39 PM
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
News flash: you are not changing total amount of sunlight when you move clocks. Any energy savings would depend on much smaller effect of thermostat down during colder hour in the morning vs maybe hopefully a bit warmer hour in the evening.
Major (well, few %% during few days) economic effect was about using more sunlight during normal day cycle vs loosing it while sleeping behind dark curtains and having to turn lights earlier in the evening.
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:21:39 PM
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
News flash: you are not changing total amount of sunlight when you move clocks. Any energy savings would depend on much smaller effect of thermostat down during colder hour in the morning vs maybe hopefully a bit warmer hour in the evening.
Major (well, few %% during few days) economic effect was about using more sunlight during normal day cycle vs loosing it while sleeping behind dark curtains and having to turn lights earlier in the evening.
Daylight saving time in the winter (just like the summer) gives people back waking hours of daylight. Maximizing the waking hours of heat generating sunlight would help reduce people's heating bills. During the winter solstice the sun rises in Boston at 7:15AM and sets at 4:15PM. So any Bostonian who sleeps in past 7:15AM isn't maximizing a free natural heating source during the winter... A.K.A. the sun.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:21:39 PM
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
News flash: you are not changing total amount of sunlight when you move clocks. Any energy savings would depend on much smaller effect of thermostat down during colder hour in the morning vs maybe hopefully a bit warmer hour in the evening.
Major (well, few %% during few days) economic effect was about using more sunlight during normal day cycle vs loosing it while sleeping behind dark curtains and having to turn lights earlier in the evening.
Daylight saving time in the winter (just like the summer) gives people back waking hours of daylight. Maximizing the waking hours of heat generating sunlight would help reduce people's heating bills. During the winter solstice the sun rises in Boston at 7:15AM and sets at 4:15PM. So any Bostonian who sleeps in past 7:15AM isn't maximizing a free natural heating source during the winter... A.K.A. the sun.
Well then don't sleep past 7:15.
When did we get the idea that the clock should adjust to our sleep schedules rather than the other way around?
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 02:43:10 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:21:39 PM
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
News flash: you are not changing total amount of sunlight when you move clocks. Any energy savings would depend on much smaller effect of thermostat down during colder hour in the morning vs maybe hopefully a bit warmer hour in the evening.
Major (well, few %% during few days) economic effect was about using more sunlight during normal day cycle vs loosing it while sleeping behind dark curtains and having to turn lights earlier in the evening.
Daylight saving time in the winter (just like the summer) gives people back waking hours of daylight. Maximizing the waking hours of heat generating sunlight would help reduce people's heating bills. During the winter solstice the sun rises in Boston at 7:15AM and sets at 4:15PM. So any Bostonian who sleeps in past 7:15AM isn't maximizing a free natural heating source during the winter... A.K.A. the sun.
Well then don't sleep past 7:15.
When did we get the idea that the clock should adjust to our sleep schedules rather than the other way around?
I'm always fairly amused at how many east coast people have the luxury of waking up past 7 AM or even later. Out west the work week tends to bend towards the whims of what the largely east coast driven economy is doing, meaning a lot of people are on the road for a 6 AM or 7 AM start time to their day.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 18, 2022, 02:56:11 PM
I'm always fairly amused at how many east coast people have the luxury of waking up past 7 AM or even later. Out west the work week tends to bend towards the whims of what the largely east coast driven economy is doing, meaning a lot of people are on the road for a 6 AM or 7 AM start time to their day.
That's what I would think too, and was surprised someone commented in the San Fran area their rush hours were generally later in the traditional commuting period.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 02:43:10 PM
Well then don't sleep past 7:15.
When did we get the idea that the clock should adjust to our sleep schedules rather than the other way around?
The reality is there is a percentage of Bostonians who wake up at 8:15AM each morning, and that percentage won't change very much regardless if Boston is on standard time or Daylight Saving Time. Along the East Coast people's sleep schedules are largely dictated by when they need to get up for work/school. But with the country on permanent DST, those Bostonians who do wake up at 8:15AM each morning now maximize their waking hours of heat generating daylight during the winter.
Now if you live in the Great Plains, the position of the sun can play a key factor to your sleep schedule. There are only so many hours of daylight each day, and if you are a farmer and got to get so much done before the sun goes down, you get up when the sun tells you. The difference between East Coast/Great Plain bedtimes is shown pretty clearly on this map.
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/bedtime-1024x737.jpg)
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Daylight saving time in the winter ... gives people back waking hours of daylight.
Nope. If it's dark when I get up instead of light, then I didn't gain any "waking hours of daylight" at all.
For what it's worth, I don't think I know a single person in my area who has the luxury of sleeping in past 7 am.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 03:20:23 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 02:43:10 PM
Well then don't sleep past 7:15.
When did we get the idea that the clock should adjust to our sleep schedules rather than the other way around?
The reality is there is a percentage of Bostonians who wake up at 8:15AM each morning, and that percentage won't change very much regardless if Boston is on standard time or Daylight Saving Time. Along the East Coast people's sleep schedules are largely dictated by when they need to get up for work/school. But with the country on permanent DST, those Bostonians who do wake up at 8:15AM each morning now maximize their waking hours of heat generating daylight during the winter.
Now if you live in the Great Plains, the position of the sun can play a key factor to your sleep schedule. There are only so many hours of daylight each day, and if you are a farmer and got to get so much done before the sun goes down, you get up when the sun tells you. The difference between East Coast/Great Plain bedtimes is shown pretty clearly on this map.
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/bedtime-1024x737.jpg)
I don't think the entire country should be subjected to permanent DST because some Bostonians are too lazy to get out of bed before 8am.
Quote from: kphoger on March 18, 2022, 03:23:38 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Daylight saving time in the winter ... gives people back waking hours of daylight.
Nope. If it's dark when I get up instead of light, then I didn't gain any "waking hours of daylight" at all.
For what it's worth, I don't think I know a single person in my area who has the luxury of sleeping in past 7 am.
Yeah, I don't know what kind of life people have who can sleep past 8am regularly. Must not have school aged kids, must not have jobs that require starting before 9:30.
Even if you don't have to get up before 8am, there's nothing that says you can't. You can choose to go to bed at 11pm and get up at 7am and have an extra hour of daylight. If you don't want to do that, then I guess that extra hour of daylight isn't important.
Quote from: kphoger on March 18, 2022, 03:23:38 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Daylight saving time in the winter ... gives people back waking hours of daylight.
Nope. If it's dark when I get up instead of light, then I didn't gain any "waking hours of daylight" at all.
For what it's worth, I don't think I know a single person in my area who has the luxury of sleeping in past 7 am.
I agree if you wake up in the winter and it's still dark outside, you are already maximizing your waking hours of heat generating daylight. But you are just 1 person out of 330 million people. I'm sure at least a few people are still asleep past 7:15AM during the winter (ie. the Boston example).
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 03:26:51 PM
I'm sure at least a few people are still asleep past 7:15AM during the winter (ie. the Boston example).
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 03:28:29 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 03:26:51 PM
I'm sure at least a few people are still asleep past 7:15AM during the winter (ie. the Boston example).
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
What are the needs?
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:21:39 PM
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
News flash: you are not changing total amount of sunlight when you move clocks. Any energy savings would depend on much smaller effect of thermostat down during colder hour in the morning vs maybe hopefully a bit warmer hour in the evening.
Major (well, few %% during few days) economic effect was about using more sunlight during normal day cycle vs loosing it while sleeping behind dark curtains and having to turn lights earlier in the evening.
Daylight saving time in the winter (just like the summer) gives people back waking hours of daylight. Maximizing the waking hours of heat generating sunlight would help reduce people's heating bills. During the winter solstice the sun rises in Boston at 7:15AM and sets at 4:15PM. So any Bostonian who sleeps in past 7:15AM isn't maximizing a free natural heating source during the winter... A.K.A. the sun.
I am at a loss. When do you turn down your thermostat and by how much? How is your house painted? What kind of windows do you have?
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 03:24:15 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 03:20:23 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 02:43:10 PM
Well then don't sleep past 7:15.
When did we get the idea that the clock should adjust to our sleep schedules rather than the other way around?
The reality is there is a percentage of Bostonians who wake up at 8:15AM each morning, and that percentage won't change very much regardless if Boston is on standard time or Daylight Saving Time. Along the East Coast people's sleep schedules are largely dictated by when they need to get up for work/school. But with the country on permanent DST, those Bostonians who do wake up at 8:15AM each morning now maximize their waking hours of heat generating daylight during the winter.
Now if you live in the Great Plains, the position of the sun can play a key factor to your sleep schedule. There are only so many hours of daylight each day, and if you are a farmer and got to get so much done before the sun goes down, you get up when the sun tells you. The difference between East Coast/Great Plain bedtimes is shown pretty clearly on this map.
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/bedtime-1024x737.jpg)
I don't think the entire country should be subjected to permanent DST because some Bostonians are too lazy to get out of bed before 8am.
Most of the rest want permanent DST.
No more sunsets at 4 pm!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 18, 2022, 02:56:11 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 02:43:10 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 02:36:56 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:38:09 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 12:21:39 PM
Now look at January, February, November, and December temperatures of both cities. Wouldn't both cities benefit from having an extra hour of sunlight during the evening and have a natural heating source (the sun) help heat their homes? People in Dallas aren't cranking their AC in January when the average high is only 57 degrees. That extra waking hour of sunlight naturally heating homes/businesses could really put a dent on people's heating bills during the winter.
News flash: you are not changing total amount of sunlight when you move clocks. Any energy savings would depend on much smaller effect of thermostat down during colder hour in the morning vs maybe hopefully a bit warmer hour in the evening.
Major (well, few %% during few days) economic effect was about using more sunlight during normal day cycle vs loosing it while sleeping behind dark curtains and having to turn lights earlier in the evening.
Daylight saving time in the winter (just like the summer) gives people back waking hours of daylight. Maximizing the waking hours of heat generating sunlight would help reduce people's heating bills. During the winter solstice the sun rises in Boston at 7:15AM and sets at 4:15PM. So any Bostonian who sleeps in past 7:15AM isn't maximizing a free natural heating source during the winter... A.K.A. the sun.
Well then don't sleep past 7:15.
When did we get the idea that the clock should adjust to our sleep schedules rather than the other way around?
I'm always fairly amused at how many east coast people have the luxury of waking up past 7 AM or even later. Out west the work week tends to bend towards the whims of what the largely east coast driven economy is doing, meaning a lot of people are on the road for a 6 AM or 7 AM start time to their day.
It's a real pain in the butt for US government workers in videoconferences. I worked in St Louis while our agency was HQed in DC like the rest of government. Many of our meetings would be scheduled for 7:30 or 8:00AM ET because most of them would commute early to beat the notorious DC traffic. It was tough enough for those of us in the Midwest, but for those on the West Coast and Hawaii it was awful.
Quote from: Rothman on March 18, 2022, 04:55:12 PM
Most of the rest want permanent DST.
No more sunsets at 4 pm!
I think the most extreme example of early sunsets in the lower 48 would be Caribou, Maine. The sunset is before 3:45PM for about a week in December.
My vote is for year-round DST. Near-total darkness at 5 PM just isn't ideal. That first Sunday of November always surprises you.
Quote from: thspfc on March 18, 2022, 05:21:23 PM
My vote is for year-round DST. Near-total darkness at 5 PM just isn't ideal. That first Sunday of November always surprises you.
You are not the only one. Six in 10 Americans (61%) want to do away with the nation's twice-a-year time change while a little over one-third (35%) want to keep the current practice. Those who want to stick with a single year-round time prefer to have later sunrise and sunset hours (44%) than the earlier setting offered by standard time (13%).
(https://i.imgur.com/KOdxLPV.png)
https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_031522/
A recent YouGov poll found that 59% of respondents would like to see Daylight Saving Time made permanent while just 19% would not want to make Daylight Saving Time permanent.
(https://i.imgur.com/NNXpJiX.png)
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2022/03/16/1742a/1
So there's not a majority for ANYthing.
Quote from: kkt on March 18, 2022, 06:49:44 PM
So there's not a majority for ANYthing.
The problem is that the best option is mainly dependent on where you are within a time zone.
Bangor, ME, and South Bend, IN, are both in Eastern Time.
On standard time in Bangor, December 21 sunrise-sunset are 7:09-3:56. Permanent DST makes sense.
On standard time in South Bend, December 21 sunrise-sunset are 8:08-5:17. Permanent DST would be ludicrous.
If we're going to do permanent DST, the the time zone boundaries need to shift at least 300 miles east.
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:32:39 PM
Again, a lot of DST stuff comes from the times when light was expensive. Be it candles, kerosene, or incandescent lamps.
Today, LEDs changed that completely.
I don't think AC energy use is really going to change with time setting too much.
You'd be surprised, actually. The key thing to remember here is not everyone has a thermostat or a central AC system. Many people rely on window AC units which are switched off when they are not home. If there are more hours of sunlight after someone gets home, this will increase the amount of electricity they use running their AC.
Also don't forget solar PV production. Daylight time in the summer has the benefit of making solar PV production more coincident with when people are likely to be awake and using electricity, which makes it easier to use by reducing the need to store it for later. That said this isn't so helpful in areas where electric consumption peaks in winter rather than summer.
Anyway I'd take any assertions that DST saves energy with a massive boulder of salt. This is extremely difficult to quantify and there are so many other factors affecting it that it's impossible to measure. And 0.34% savings might as well be nothing, this is a rounding error away from zero.
(note: I work with energy and utilities for a living)
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 03:26:33 PM
Yeah, I don't know what kind of life people have who can sleep past 8am regularly. Must not have school aged kids, must not have jobs that require starting before 9:30.
A decent number of people now work from home and don't need
90 minutes between when they get out of bed and when they start working (it typically takes me 10 minutes). Many more work afternoon/evening shifts. Still more are retired and have few schedule obligations beyond those they make for themselves.
So yeah, if you're having trouble fathoming someone whose life permits them to routinely be sleeping until 9:30 - hi! I exist!
And I really don't like dealing with people who are dismissive of this, or act under the assumption that I should be awake earlier than that without bothering to ask.
One particularly aggravating example is contractors who tell me "I'll be there sometime between 8 and 10" and then show up at 10:15. Thanks asshole I needlessly forced myself to wake up 2 hours early because of you.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 18, 2022, 07:10:25 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 03:26:33 PM
Yeah, I don't know what kind of life people have who can sleep past 8am regularly. Must not have school aged kids, must not have jobs that require starting before 9:30.
A decent number of people now work from home and don't need 90 minutes between when they get out of bed and when they start working (it typically takes me 10 minutes). Many more work afternoon/evening shifts. Still more are retired and have few schedule obligations beyond those they make for themselves.
So yeah, if you're having trouble fathoming someone whose life permits them to routinely be sleeping until 9:30 - hi! I exist!
And I really don't like dealing with people who are dismissive of this, or act under the assumption that I should be awake earlier than that without bothering to ask.
One particularly aggravating example is contractors who tell me "I'll be there sometime between 8 and 10" and then show up at 10:15. Thanks asshole I needlessly forced myself to wake up 2 hours early because of you.
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 18, 2022, 07:10:25 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2022, 01:32:39 PM
Again, a lot of DST stuff comes from the times when light was expensive. Be it candles, kerosene, or incandescent lamps.
Today, LEDs changed that completely.
I don't think AC energy use is really going to change with time setting too much.
You'd be surprised, actually. The key thing to remember here is not everyone has a thermostat or a central AC system. Many people rely on window AC units which are switched off when they are not home. If there are more hours of sunlight after someone gets home, this will increase the amount of electricity they use running their AC.
Also don't forget solar PV production. Daylight time in the summer has the benefit of making solar PV production more coincident with when people are likely to be awake and using electricity, which makes it easier to use by reducing the need to store it for later. That said this isn't so helpful in areas where electric consumption peaks in winter rather than summer.
Anyway I'd take any assertions that DST saves energy with a massive boulder of salt. This is extremely difficult to quantify and there are so many other factors affecting it that it's impossible to measure. And 0.34% savings might as well be nothing, this is a rounding error away from zero.
(note: I work with energy and utilities for a living)
I would expect those shifts in window units activity to be offset at least partially by more use elsewhere and at different time. At work, in a car, etc.
And my understanding that pv doesn't actually come to full operation until sun is high in the sky, so limited benefit as well
0.34% is barely a thing. I had a heated argument with some utility guys at some point. They threw a lot of data at me - but my only take home message was that they have more data collection opportunities than understanding how to interpret that data.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 07:15:46 PM
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Would you prefer permanent standard time or do you just want to keep the status quo and keep dealing with the bi-annual time changes? By your previous comments i don't think you are in favor of permanent Daylight Saving Time but who knows.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 08:29:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 07:15:46 PM
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Would you prefer permanent standard time or do you just want to keep the status quo and keep dealing with the bi-annual time changes? By your previous comments i don't think you are in favor of permanent Daylight Saving Time but who knows.
I prefer permanent standard time, with some spots where that would be really bad, like Maine, shifting one time zone to the east to compensate.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 08:34:20 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 08:29:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 07:15:46 PM
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Would you prefer permanent standard time or do you just want to keep the status quo and keep dealing with the bi-annual time changes? By your previous comments i don't think you are in favor of permanent Daylight Saving Time but who knows.
I prefer permanent standard time, with some spots where that would be really bad, like Maine, shifting one time zone to the east to compensate.
But if more people want year round DST than any other option, how is your point about "majority over minority" relevant?
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 08:34:20 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 08:29:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 07:15:46 PM
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Would you prefer permanent standard time or do you just want to keep the status quo and keep dealing with the bi-annual time changes? By your previous comments i don't think you are in favor of permanent Daylight Saving Time but who knows.
I prefer permanent standard time, with some spots where that would be really bad, like Maine, shifting one time zone to the east to compensate.
good luck
Too close to boston for the time zone shift
you can argue with those in areas too far east for a decent sunset to occur in std and too far west for decent sunrise to occur in daylight
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 08:34:20 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 08:29:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 07:15:46 PM
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Would you prefer permanent standard time or do you just want to keep the status quo and keep dealing with the bi-annual time changes? By your previous comments i don't think you are in favor of permanent Daylight Saving Time but who knows.
I prefer permanent standard time, with some spots where that would be really bad, like Maine, shifting one time zone to the east to compensate.
I appreciate your response. This might not be the first fringe case that comes to mind, but without Daylight Saving Time the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the longest day of the year. People in Southern California would be cool with the sun setting before the first pitch of the Padres game?
Apparently, the Senate seems to have passed this change on
accident:
Quote from: Christopher Bates, electoral-vote.com
When we wrote up the newly passed Senate bill that would theoretically establish year-round Daylight Savings Time, we observed that there was no indication this was coming down the pike, and also that nobody seemed to know why the senators had all of a sudden gotten on board with the idea, en masse.
It turns out that we weren't the only ones who were surprised and a bit confused. In fact, most of the senators were, as well. The bill was passed by unanimous consent, which is really the only way for there to be a unanimous vote in the Senate. What was not publicly known on Tuesday was that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked for unanimous consent, and expected Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) to object. The Floridian didn't actually expect to secure passage, he just wanted to be able to send out an "I'm trying" tweet and press release in an election year. And because Rubio (and everyone else) expected an objection, there wasn't much communication among members of the Senate (or among their staffs), and most members weren't even on the floor of the chamber when the matter came up. That meant that when Wicker, in a rather big surprise, decided he didn't care enough to object, the Senate inadvertently approved the bill unanimously. A sizable number of senators only found out about it when they were asked by reporters, or when they read about it online.
It's hard to believe this is for real, and is not, say, a Marx Brothers short ("Oops! Sens. Groucho and Harpo accidentally declared war on Canada!"). In any case, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has put the legislation on the back burner for now. If she wants to kill it, or if Joe Biden does, there's now plenty of justification for them to do so.
Quote from: thspfc on March 18, 2022, 08:58:25 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 08:34:20 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 08:29:49 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 18, 2022, 07:15:46 PM
Nice that you can sleep so late--just don't insist that the clocks change to put the sunlight on the schedule of the minority. The majority are up and about before 8am and appreciate the morning light.
Would you prefer permanent standard time or do you just want to keep the status quo and keep dealing with the bi-annual time changes? By your previous comments i don't think you are in favor of permanent Daylight Saving Time but who knows.
I prefer permanent standard time, with some spots where that would be really bad, like Maine, shifting one time zone to the east to compensate.
But if more people want year round DST than any other option, how is your point about "majority over minority" relevant?
Year round DST advocates have been very good at selling "light later in the evening" to people and I don't think most people have really considered how it will impact mornings.
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 19, 2022, 10:40:46 AM
Apparently, the Senate seems to have passed this change on accident:
Quote from: Christopher Bates, electoral-vote.com
When we wrote up the newly passed Senate bill that would theoretically establish year-round Daylight Savings Time, we observed that there was no indication this was coming down the pike, and also that nobody seemed to know why the senators had all of a sudden gotten on board with the idea, en masse.
It turns out that we weren't the only ones who were surprised and a bit confused. In fact, most of the senators were, as well. The bill was passed by unanimous consent, which is really the only way for there to be a unanimous vote in the Senate. What was not publicly known on Tuesday was that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked for unanimous consent, and expected Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) to object. The Floridian didn't actually expect to secure passage, he just wanted to be able to send out an "I'm trying" tweet and press release in an election year. And because Rubio (and everyone else) expected an objection, there wasn't much communication among members of the Senate (or among their staffs), and most members weren't even on the floor of the chamber when the matter came up. That meant that when Wicker, in a rather big surprise, decided he didn't care enough to object, the Senate inadvertently approved the bill unanimously. A sizable number of senators only found out about it when they were asked by reporters, or when they read about it online.
It's hard to believe this is for real, and is not, say, a Marx Brothers short ("Oops! Sens. Groucho and Harpo accidentally declared war on Canada!"). In any case, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has put the legislation on the back burner for now. If she wants to kill it, or if Joe Biden does, there's now plenty of justification for them to do so.
*citation needed*
Quote from: Rothman on March 19, 2022, 11:15:46 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 19, 2022, 10:40:46 AM
Apparently, the Senate seems to have passed this change on accident:
Quote from: Christopher Bates, electoral-vote.com
When we wrote up the newly passed Senate bill that would theoretically establish year-round Daylight Savings Time, we observed that there was no indication this was coming down the pike, and also that nobody seemed to know why the senators had all of a sudden gotten on board with the idea, en masse.
It turns out that we weren't the only ones who were surprised and a bit confused. In fact, most of the senators were, as well. The bill was passed by unanimous consent, which is really the only way for there to be a unanimous vote in the Senate. What was not publicly known on Tuesday was that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked for unanimous consent, and expected Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) to object. The Floridian didn't actually expect to secure passage, he just wanted to be able to send out an "I'm trying" tweet and press release in an election year. And because Rubio (and everyone else) expected an objection, there wasn't much communication among members of the Senate (or among their staffs), and most members weren't even on the floor of the chamber when the matter came up. That meant that when Wicker, in a rather big surprise, decided he didn't care enough to object, the Senate inadvertently approved the bill unanimously. A sizable number of senators only found out about it when they were asked by reporters, or when they read about it online.
It's hard to believe this is for real, and is not, say, a Marx Brothers short ("Oops! Sens. Groucho and Harpo accidentally declared war on Canada!"). In any case, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has put the legislation on the back burner for now. If she wants to kill it, or if Joe Biden does, there's now plenty of justification for them to do so.
*citation needed*
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2022/Senate/Maps/Mar18.html#item-2https://www.mediaite.com/politics/that-daylight-saving-time-bill-passed-because-a-bunch-of-senators-just-werent-paying-attention/
Quote from: kphoger on March 19, 2022, 09:29:25 PM
Quote from: Rothman on March 19, 2022, 11:15:46 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 19, 2022, 10:40:46 AM
Apparently, the Senate seems to have passed this change on accident:
Quote from: Christopher Bates, electoral-vote.com
When we wrote up the newly passed Senate bill that would theoretically establish year-round Daylight Savings Time, we observed that there was no indication this was coming down the pike, and also that nobody seemed to know why the senators had all of a sudden gotten on board with the idea, en masse.
It turns out that we weren't the only ones who were surprised and a bit confused. In fact, most of the senators were, as well. The bill was passed by unanimous consent, which is really the only way for there to be a unanimous vote in the Senate. What was not publicly known on Tuesday was that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked for unanimous consent, and expected Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) to object. The Floridian didn't actually expect to secure passage, he just wanted to be able to send out an "I'm trying" tweet and press release in an election year. And because Rubio (and everyone else) expected an objection, there wasn't much communication among members of the Senate (or among their staffs), and most members weren't even on the floor of the chamber when the matter came up. That meant that when Wicker, in a rather big surprise, decided he didn't care enough to object, the Senate inadvertently approved the bill unanimously. A sizable number of senators only found out about it when they were asked by reporters, or when they read about it online.
It's hard to believe this is for real, and is not, say, a Marx Brothers short ("Oops! Sens. Groucho and Harpo accidentally declared war on Canada!"). In any case, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has put the legislation on the back burner for now. If she wants to kill it, or if Joe Biden does, there's now plenty of justification for them to do so.
*citation needed*
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2022/Senate/Maps/Mar18.html#item-2
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/that-daylight-saving-time-bill-passed-because-a-bunch-of-senators-just-werent-paying-attention/
First cite is crap. Second cite was okay, but still gets a shrug.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 19, 2022, 10:42:19 AM
Year round DST advocates have been very good at selling "light later in the evening" to people and I don't think most people have really considered how it will impact mornings.
During certain days the sun would rise in Spokane, Washington by 3:49AM without DST (with dawn starting at 3:10AM). I do consider the morning impacts and am in favor of permanent DST as it would prevent pre-4AM sunrises anywhere within the lower 48. On the flip side the most extreme late sunset examples within the lower 48 occur in the UP of Michigan where the sun sets at 9:57PM during the summer solstice. But nearly everybody is still up enjoying Michigan's beautiful summer evenings at that time. While lots of people are still up at 9:57PM, but how many people are awake at 3:49AM?
Quote from: Rothman on March 19, 2022, 11:15:46 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 19, 2022, 10:40:46 AM
Apparently, the Senate seems to have passed this change on accident:
Quote from: Christopher Bates, electoral-vote.com
When we wrote up the newly passed Senate bill that would theoretically establish year-round Daylight Savings Time, we observed that there was no indication this was coming down the pike, and also that nobody seemed to know why the senators had all of a sudden gotten on board with the idea, en masse.
It turns out that we weren't the only ones who were surprised and a bit confused. In fact, most of the senators were, as well. The bill was passed by unanimous consent, which is really the only way for there to be a unanimous vote in the Senate. What was not publicly known on Tuesday was that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked for unanimous consent, and expected Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) to object. The Floridian didn't actually expect to secure passage, he just wanted to be able to send out an "I'm trying" tweet and press release in an election year. And because Rubio (and everyone else) expected an objection, there wasn't much communication among members of the Senate (or among their staffs), and most members weren't even on the floor of the chamber when the matter came up. That meant that when Wicker, in a rather big surprise, decided he didn't care enough to object, the Senate inadvertently approved the bill unanimously. A sizable number of senators only found out about it when they were asked by reporters, or when they read about it online.
It's hard to believe this is for real, and is not, say, a Marx Brothers short ("Oops! Sens. Groucho and Harpo accidentally declared war on Canada!"). In any case, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has put the legislation on the back burner for now. If she wants to kill it, or if Joe Biden does, there's now plenty of justification for them to do so.
*citation needed*
I have a different concern. Can the Senate pass a bill by unanimous consent without a quorum? The text says that most of the members were not on the floor. Is that an exaggeration? Can a quorum be made up of people who are in the building, having the option to be on the floor even if they choose not to be? How did a bill pass with "most" of the members not on the floor?
omg why do we always have to be different. leave time tf alone!
Quote from: kenarmy on March 20, 2022, 02:43:47 AM
omg we do we always have to be different. leave time tf alone!
We need to make time metric. A minute is made of 100 seconds. An hour is made of 100 minutes. A day is made of 10 hours. A month is made of 100 days, and a year is made of 10 months. Also, a year is the time it takes light in a vacuum to travel from here to the nearest star. Also, the speed of light is adjusted so that the energy contained in the mass of a carbon atom is divisible by 10. And every clock in the world is changed to show the same time, so people who don't live at the "Standard Point," which is some city randomly selected a thousand years ago, have to adjust their lives to fit the clock, regardless of when the sun is up at that location.
^^ There was the French revolution clock that used the day as you described.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 18, 2022, 03:20:23 PMBut with the country on permanent DST, those Bostonians who do wake up at 8:15AM each morning now maximize their waking hours of heat generating daylight during the winter.
Does the house not heat up with the sun when you are asleep?
Those waking up as the sun rises over the horizon are not using the natural heating effect of the sun, getting up before it has a chance to heat the house and so requiring artificial heating. Those waking up afterwards are using it because they get out of their warm bed into a room partially heated by the sun. With permanent DST, those Bostonians waking up at 8.15AM have reduced their use of heat generating daylight by an hour - minimised, not maximised!
And many people need the sun to help them wake up naturally (well everyone does, but some need more of it than others) - this is why those sleep experts said that ideally we'd be on standard time year-round because DST is very bad for sleep (both the late dawns in winter,
and the late dusks in summer), and because changes are not great for sleep so you want to keep on one time all year round rather than playing around with the clocks given that we work to them not the sun (which is the heart of this problem).
QuoteNow if you live in the Great Plains, the position of the sun can play a key factor to your sleep schedule. There are only so many hours of daylight each day, and if you are a farmer and got to get so much done before the sun goes down, you get up when the sun tells you. The difference between East Coast/Great Plain bedtimes is shown pretty clearly on this map.
(https://vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/bedtime-1024x737.jpg)
And note how all of these are a considerable time after sunset (even mid-summer on DST sunset, ignoring Alaska), whereas we get up roughly around dawn (or a considerable time after it in mid-summer, even with DST). Also note how there is an element of the sun there with places further west in the timezone going to bed later. There are other factors though (starkly seen with Clark County, NV being much later than surrounding counties).
Our days are not symmetrical around solar noon, and never have been, but DST is a shift towards trying to do that, by moving the middle of our day closer to solar noon.
Quote from: Big John on March 20, 2022, 03:57:15 AM^^ There was the French revolution clock that used the day as you described.
And even that ideology-obsessed totalitarian government called "The Terror" delayed its implementation and while the following, nearly-as-bad, lot did make it the official time of France, they abandoned it's mandatory nature in the law that made the metric system mandatory (decimal time isn't metric, and never has been. The metric unit of time was added after a few years of the system existing - the second) just 6 months later.
It's something even less successful when meeting the real-world as year-round DST - which gets undone quickly everywhere that it was implemented!
Ted Turner tried to change the time by five minutes. The attempt failed miserably.
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2022, 09:56:06 PM
I for one think the Bloodhound Gang got it right when they said "you are inclined to make me rise an hour early just like Daylight Savings Time". To that end, I'm not looking forward to being forced to become even more of a morning lark against my will (my natural inclination is to be a night owl, but unlike many owls apparently, I work a normal "9-5" office job). Or to having to wait 10 minutes for the car to warm up and defrost the ice in winter. Or to no longer being able to see the Christmas lights in my neighborhood (as sunset will now be at least half an hour after I get home every single day of the year).
In any case, we tried this already in the 1970s. It was quickly abandoned. Is there any reason to believe things are different now?
Quote
In any case, we tried this already in the 1970s. It was quickly abandoned. Is there any reason to believe things are different now?
Things are very different now.
News Feed And Weed.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 05:02:31 AM
And many people need the sun to help them wake up naturally (well everyone does, but some need more of it than others) - this is why those sleep experts said that ideally we'd be on standard time year-round because DST is very bad for sleep (both the late dawns in winter, and the late dusks in summer), and because changes are not great for sleep so you want to keep on one time all year round rather than playing around with the clocks given that we work to them not the sun (which is the heart of this problem).
...
Our days are not symmetrical around solar noon, and never have been, but DST is a shift towards trying to do that, by moving the middle of our day closer to solar noon.
if you will, more natural way of doing things may be "wake up with the sun, stay up in the evening regardless". DST is an attempt to reduce variation in sunrize times. We (42 deg north) have about 2 hours variation of sunrise time over the year, reduced to about 1 hr by DST.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 05:02:31 AM
It's something even less successful when meeting the real-world as year-round DST - which gets undone quickly everywhere that it was implemented!
Again, not quite true. A simple quote:
Quote from: tradephoric on March 17, 2022, 07:36:36 PM
A great map created by Stefano Maggiolo looking at how out of sync the time zones are from solar time. Shaded green areas are too early, shaded red areas are too late. Throughout the entire world it's somewhat common place for time zones to creep west (ie. more shaded red areas).
Timezone creeping west is, effectively, adding 1 hour to the geographic clock, and effectively implementing year-round DST (in many cases on top of mandated DST).
Overall, year-round clock shift is locally meaningless. People would adopt schedule which works better for them, if no external pressure is applied. There is nothing forcing banks to open at X o'clock, as long as everyone is on the same page.
However, there
is external pressure, and amount of that grows with globalizing things.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 18, 2022, 02:56:11 PM
I'm always fairly amused at how many east coast people have the luxury of waking up past 7 AM or even later. Out west the work week tends to bend towards the whims of what the largely east coast driven economy is doing, meaning a lot of people are on the road for a 6 AM or 7 AM start time to their day.
Another example of schedule shifted towards earlier part of the day (=clocks shifted forward).
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 05:02:31 AM
And many people need the sun to help them wake up naturally (well everyone does, but some need more of it than others) - this is why those sleep experts said that ideally we'd be on standard time year-round because DST is very bad for sleep (both the late dawns in winter, and the late dusks in summer), and because changes are not great for sleep so you want to keep on one time all year round rather than playing around with the clocks given that we work to them not the sun (which is the heart of this problem).
"Experts" tends to be an overused media term in that it makes whatever they say sound like it's authoritative, when in reality the media either randomly approached someone or had someone call in for self-promotion. All too often the media doesn't even name who the supposed experts are.
Thus argument would be better shown as a need for earlier darkness to enourage people to go to bed earlier.
If the sun rises at 4am or 5am, it doesn't matter for those that are waking up at 6am.
To compensate in the winter for this issue, we'd need to move the clocks two hours *back*, which has never been proposed.
Actually, there's a bit of conflicting conclusions with what the "so called" experts say, as they don't want the clocks to change, yet they want sunrises to coincide with people waking up. They can't get one over the entire year without the other occurring.
Quote from: In_Correct on March 20, 2022, 05:25:14 AM
Ted Turner tried to change the time by five minutes. The attempt failed miserably.
If I recall, a lot of this is based on the theory that if a show ends at :03 past the hour, you'll more likely just stay on the channel for the next show since other shows started on other channels and you missed the beginning. But, this also means that if you're watching another channel and you're flipping around at the top of the hour, you'll see the *ending* of a show you missed, so why bother hanging around another 5 minutes to see the beginning of the next show?
This timing also probably didn't work out too well with VCR recording, which was done manually and most people set at the :00 and :30 minute marks.
If you're too young to understand recording a show with a VCR, you missed out.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 05:02:31 AM
Those waking up as the sun rises over the horizon are not using the natural heating effect of the sun, getting up before it has a chance to heat the house and so requiring artificial heating. Those waking up afterwards are using it because they get out of their warm bed into a room partially heated by the sun. With permanent DST, those Bostonians waking up at 8.15AM have reduced their use of heat generating daylight by an hour - minimised, not maximised!
Yeah, but you are ignoring how the heat generating daylight would be maximized at night. It's clear that the average Bostonian will see their waking hours of daylight increase during the winter if DST was made permanent. If you don't believe that just take a cursory glance at the average bedtime by US county map. This shouldn't be rocket science, but i guess equations become unsolvable when you only consider one side of them (ie. only considering the heat generating effects of the sun in the morning). During Bostonian's waking hours they are looking for ways to keep warm in the winter, and the sun happens to be a pretty effective heating source.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 20, 2022, 11:19:36 AM
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 05:02:31 AM
Those waking up as the sun rises over the horizon are not using the natural heating effect of the sun, getting up before it has a chance to heat the house and so requiring artificial heating. Those waking up afterwards are using it because they get out of their warm bed into a room partially heated by the sun. With permanent DST, those Bostonians waking up at 8.15AM have reduced their use of heat generating daylight by an hour - minimised, not maximised!
Yeah, but you are ignoring how the heat generating daylight would be maximized at night. It's clear that the average Bostonian will see their waking hours of daylight increase during the winter if DST was made permanent. If you don't believe that just take a cursory glance at the average bedtime by US county map. This shouldn't be rocket science, but i guess equations become unsolvable when you only consider one side of them (ie. only considering the heat generating effects of the sun in the morning). During Bostonian's waking hours they are looking for ways to keep warm in the winter, and the sun happens to be a pretty effective heating source.
Are you trying to evade the law of energy conservation here?
Do people not heat their homes at night? It's not like we're living in log cabins and have to stoke up the fire when we get up in the morning.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 20, 2022, 11:19:36 AMDuring Bostonian's waking hours they are looking for ways to keep warm in the winter, and the sun happens to be a pretty effective heating source.
But under DST-in-winter they would need artificial heating to heat up the house from the house at its coldest without the help of the sun which doesn't kick in until their already up under your ideal scenario whereby people do not stay in bed after dawn because that's 'wasteful'.
I ignore the keeping-the-house-warm for an extra hour in the evening, because maintaining heat is less of an issue energy-wise than warming. And that hour would be right after sunset, when the house has been warmed all day by the sun.
Quote from: GaryV on March 20, 2022, 01:08:17 PMDo people not heat their homes at night? It's not like we're living in log cabins and have to stoke up the fire when we get up in the morning.
Obviously, but assuming tradephoric's dumb argument about heating up the house with the sun is valid, then its better that the sun comes up earlier in the morning so that the house is warm when you get up, rather than getting up before the sun heats your house and having to use artificial heat.
My heating has 5 periods in the year:
1) April to late-September: off unless a cold snap hits
2) late-September to mid-October: on for a bit in the morning to take the chill off for when I wake up because the sun hasn't had time to warm the house (the evenings are fine because the house, after a day being warmed by the sun, takes time to cool)
3) mid-October to late-October: on for the morning, plus a bit in the late evening too because the daytime temperature isn't enough to keep the house warm all the way through to bedtime
4) November to February: always on because its too cold otherwise
5) early- and mid-March: same as 3, but the other side of winter
there is no 6 to mirror 2 because 2 occurs in the month between equinox and falling back, whereas the spring forward is about the equinox and so there's enough daylight to warm the house up enough before I wake up.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 02:11:30 PM
Obviously, but assuming tradephoric's dumb argument about heating up the house with the sun is valid, then its better that the sun comes up earlier in the morning so that the house is warm when you get up, rather than getting up before the sun heats your house and having to use artificial heat.
The sun's angle is so low in the winter that very little warm will occur naturally from that sun in the morning.
For those that get snow, this is very acutely seen in snow melt. In the morning, areas that are in full sun in the morning and shady in the afternoon will see snow stick around much longer than areas where it's shady in the morning and full sun in the afternoon.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 02:11:30 PM
Quote from: GaryV on March 20, 2022, 01:08:17 PMDo people not heat their homes at night? It's not like we're living in log cabins and have to stoke up the fire when we get up in the morning.
Obviously, but assuming tradephoric's dumb argument about heating up the house with the sun is valid, then its better that the sun comes up earlier in the morning so that the house is warm when you get up, rather than getting up before the sun heats your house and having to use artificial heat.
Greenhouses are so dumb.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 02:11:30 PM
I ignore the keeping-the-house-warm for an extra hour in the evening, because maintaining heat is less of an issue energy-wise than warming. And that hour would be right after sunset, when the house has been warmed all day by the sun.
Average bedtime in Boston is about 11:45PM. Sun currently sets at 4:15PM during the winter solstice. That's 7 1/2 hours after the sun sets in Boston where the heat keeps kicking on to heat people's homes. If you want to ignore the first hour after sunset, that's still 6 1/2 hours where people have to keep heating their homes before they go to bed. Regardless of your logic, there are costs associated with heating people's homes after the sun goes down. That just can't be ignored.
EDIT: This whole argument is predicated on the fact that people turn down their thermostats when they go to bed at night. If you lock your thermostat to 72 degrees 24/7 than you my friend are a freak!
Quote from: kalvado on March 20, 2022, 09:57:15 AMif you will, more natural way of doing things may be "wake up with the sun, stay up in the evening regardless". DST is an attempt to reduce variation in sunrize times. We (42 deg north) have about 2 hours variation of sunrise time over the year, reduced to about 1 hr by DST.
Not quite true - more useful unintended consequence (though meaningless here at 51N, as sunrise has a 0442-0806 range. That's over 3 hours despite that range being shrunk by an hour)...
DST has always been about more light in the evenings (when we are more happy to be awake in the dark, compared to the mornings) in the summer.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 20, 2022, 10:32:18 AMThus argument would be better shown as a need for earlier darkness to enourage people to go to bed earlier.
I think you took my italicised bit as the most important. It isn't, but it is important for why DST in the middle of summer is also not great for sleep and 'lighter later' isn't always a good thing. I think the experts are too idealistic, but they are right that.
As for turning the clocks back in winter - it is that what we do currently and why DST was always meant to be seasonal. The dawns in winter are still a bit late for the ideal, but just as there isn't enough daylight to borrow some from the morning to give to the evening, the opposite is likewise true - the issue is latitude, rather than what the time shift between social and solar noons is. That, and getting up too early generally.
----
Of course, Ben Franklin's solution - which was the solution for all humanity before we became obsessed with numbers on a clock - of shifting our days, not the clock - is the superior one. Due an accident of fascism, and failure to undo that, France and Spain are on Central European Time. However, while they have the same timezone as Germany, they work different hours - effectively they are operating in different timezones, but have the same numbers on the clock. For example, the Germans start school at about 8, the French at about 8.30, the Spanish at about 9 - it's not because the Germans are efficient and driven that they start half an hour before the French, and the Spanish don't start half an hour later the French because they are feckless and lazy, but it's because the sun rises an hour later in Spain than in Germany, with France in the middle!
Quote from: tradephoric on March 20, 2022, 02:31:05 PMGreenhouses are so dumb.
I'm not calling dumb the idea that the sun heats. I'm calling dumb the idea that the sun heats up rooms instantly and so having an hour of sun's heating effect before you get up is somehow wasting that.
Go to a greenhouse just after sunrise - it's not much warmer than outside (and what warmth there is is residual from the previous day). Go to a greenhouse an hour after dawn, and the heating effect of the sun has kicked in a little...
Let's say Bostonian wakes up at 8.15 and go to work at 9. Under standard time, in winter, the house would have had about an hour of daylight to help warm it up - perhaps you wouldn't need to turn up the thermostat (as long as you aren't getting cold air to try and cool it down) because the sun has given you a couple of degrees to make it tolerable. But under DST, the sun has barely any time to warm your house up before you get up - and by the time it has had a meaningful effect, you are out of the door.
QuoteAverage bedtime in Boston is about 11:45PM. Sun currently sets at 4:15PM during the winter solstice. That's 7 1/2 hours after the sun sets in Boston where the heat keeps kicking on to heat people's homes. If you want to ignore the first hour after sunset, that's still 6 1/2 hours where people have to keep heating their homes before they go to bed. Regardless of your logic, there are costs associated with heating people's homes after the sun goes down.
I'm not denying there aren't costs to heat your home in the evening, but saying that there are costs involved to heat your home in the morning that you are ignoring, assuming that a just-up sun would do all the work instantly.
An extra hour of stopping the temperature dropping too much in the evening before bed or an extra hour of heating it up from nighttime temperatures to something tolerable without the sun's help? Clearly the latter is more energy intensive.
And your house being too cold due to lack of solar effect is also more easily dealt with at 10pm when unwinding than 8am when getting ready - you just grab a blanket and put it over you.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 20, 2022, 02:30:53 PMThe sun's angle is so low in the winter that very little warm will occur naturally from that sun in the morning.
Sure, I'm giving the effect a higher value, because somehow it's important to tradephoric that people don't 'waste' the sun's early morning heat giving properties in winter by being in bed while it is happening (of course, they are actually putting that morning sun energy to more use by getting up after the house has had a chance to warm up from it, rather than leaving it before that happens).
And the same low-energy sun is the case in the evening - sun is low, warming effect not very much in that last hour (the afternoon-sunned snow has a double wammy of both the sun's rays, and the higher temperatures because the sun's been warming it all day. The solar energy the snow gets is the same, but the afternoon-sunned snow gets it in a shorter time period).
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 03:11:57 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 20, 2022, 09:57:15 AMif you will, more natural way of doing things may be "wake up with the sun, stay up in the evening regardless". DST is an attempt to reduce variation in sunrize times. We (42 deg north) have about 2 hours variation of sunrise time over the year, reduced to about 1 hr by DST.
Not quite true - more useful unintended consequence (though meaningless here at 51N, as sunrise has a 0442-0806 range. That's over 3 hours despite that range being shrunk by an hour)...
Still we're talking more or less same thing.
Under "work in the morning, play later" arrangement it makes sense to staple extra sunshine to the end of the day, not waste it before work. Keeping "wake up at sunrise" schedule is ideal, but impossible. We're (42N) getting close to maintaining that with DST, you're getting too much sunshine hours in summer to complain about loosing some. Actually I grew up even further north than 51N, so I know that part of the deal as well. I assume that, for example Florida (28N) should be close to "why bother?" as their changes are even smaller.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 20, 2022, 02:31:05 PM
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 02:11:30 PM
Quote from: GaryV on March 20, 2022, 01:08:17 PMDo people not heat their homes at night? It's not like we're living in log cabins and have to stoke up the fire when we get up in the morning.
Obviously, but assuming tradephoric's dumb argument about heating up the house with the sun is valid, then its better that the sun comes up earlier in the morning so that the house is warm when you get up, rather than getting up before the sun heats your house and having to use artificial heat.
Greenhouses are so dumb.
Quote from: english si on March 20, 2022, 02:11:30 PM
I ignore the keeping-the-house-warm for an extra hour in the evening, because maintaining heat is less of an issue energy-wise than warming. And that hour would be right after sunset, when the house has been warmed all day by the sun.
Average bedtime in Boston is about 11:45PM. Sun currently sets at 4:15PM during the winter solstice. That's 7 1/2 hours after the sun sets in Boston where the heat keeps kicking on to heat people's homes. If you want to ignore the first hour after sunset, that's still 6 1/2 hours where people have to keep heating their homes before they go to bed. Regardless of your logic, there are costs associated with heating people's homes after the sun goes down. That just can't be ignored.
EDIT: This whole argument is predicated on the fact that people turn down their thermostats when they go to bed at night. If you lock your thermostat to 72 degrees 24/7 than you my friend are a freak!
Heat transfer would be more or less proportional to temperature difference between indoors and outdoors. If you want to keep more or less similar indoor temperature profile, then there will be no difference in total heat loss if you shift the schedule - not until you have to run both heat and AC on same day.
Or please clearly state what are the hours of colder indoors temperature on resident's DST/non-DST schedule - hours not offset by warmer hours during different time of the day. That would be the only real way to reduce heat loss.
I've never liked the earlier sunsets that occur when the time changes from daylight to standard, and if I lived on the eastern edge of Central Time instead of the western edge of Eastern Time, I'd like them even less. They're downright depressing (seasonal affective disorder is real). My mornings consist of the grooming ritual and driving to work, and I don't need sunlight to do that.
I guess the point was really driven home for me several years ago when I attended the road meet in Springfield, Mass., which occurred in November after the time change. The early sunset was a shocker and a downer.
The Nashville area, on the eastern edge of Central, has the sun peaking over the horizon at 5:30 a.m. near the summer solstice on DST. The sunset is just a little past 8 p.m. That is an area that might benefit from being on ET with a clock change.
Quote from: wxfree on March 20, 2022, 02:13:18 AM
Quote from: Rothman on March 19, 2022, 11:15:46 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 19, 2022, 10:40:46 AM
Apparently, the Senate seems to have passed this change on accident:
Quote from: Christopher Bates, electoral-vote.com
When we wrote up the newly passed Senate bill that would theoretically establish year-round Daylight Savings Time, we observed that there was no indication this was coming down the pike, and also that nobody seemed to know why the senators had all of a sudden gotten on board with the idea, en masse.
It turns out that we weren't the only ones who were surprised and a bit confused. In fact, most of the senators were, as well. The bill was passed by unanimous consent, which is really the only way for there to be a unanimous vote in the Senate. What was not publicly known on Tuesday was that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked for unanimous consent, and expected Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) to object. The Floridian didn't actually expect to secure passage, he just wanted to be able to send out an "I'm trying" tweet and press release in an election year. And because Rubio (and everyone else) expected an objection, there wasn't much communication among members of the Senate (or among their staffs), and most members weren't even on the floor of the chamber when the matter came up. That meant that when Wicker, in a rather big surprise, decided he didn't care enough to object, the Senate inadvertently approved the bill unanimously. A sizable number of senators only found out about it when they were asked by reporters, or when they read about it online.
It's hard to believe this is for real, and is not, say, a Marx Brothers short ("Oops! Sens. Groucho and Harpo accidentally declared war on Canada!"). In any case, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has put the legislation on the back burner for now. If she wants to kill it, or if Joe Biden does, there's now plenty of justification for them to do so.
*citation needed*
I have a different concern. Can the Senate pass a bill by unanimous consent without a quorum? The text says that most of the members were not on the floor. Is that an exaggeration? Can a quorum be made up of people who are in the building, having the option to be on the floor even if they choose not to be? How did a bill pass with "most" of the members not on the floor?
According to Senate rules, a quorum is assumed to be present until it is proven otherwise. There are two ways this is done–the first is done by a "quorum call" which is essentially just calling attendance, alphabetically, like they used to do in elementary school. Any senator has the right to ask for a quorum call (and in fact, invoking a quorum call is a tactic often used to stall for time, both for benign reasons like allowing last-minute negotiations to conclude before an item is reached on the agenda, or for less benign purposes of obstruction). An in-progress quorum call can be stopped by unanimous consent so long as the 100th senator's name has not yet been called.
The other way to cause the absence of a quorum to be officially recorded is to force a roll call vote on a motion. That is, for a member to object to a unanimous consent vote, which then causes the presiding officer to begin calling for yea and nay votes on the motion. Such a tally will of course reveal the lack of a quorum and the Senate must either adjourn or wait for the presence of a quorum to be established through a roll-call vote.
In this case, what was expected to happen was that Senator Wicker would object to the bill, and then Senator Rubio probably would have moved to table the bill and move on to other unimportant business. Since Wicker did not object, and unanimous consent was granted, the lack of a quorum was never procedurally established. So it passed.
Some of the comments in this thread are making me wonder how some of y'all set your thermostats. We have ours set to a lower temperature at night for sleeping than we do during the day, and that's true both in winter and summer. Assuming we're home or are only going out for a little while (grocery store or similar), during the winter the heat is set to 70° during the way and drops to 58° at 10:00 PM; it reaches 70° again at 7:30 on weekdays and 8:30 on weekends. To be clear, the temperature never drops as low as 58°; rather, the thermostat is set low enough so that the heat will not kick on during the night because the temperature will be higher than what's programmed. That, in turn, means it doesn't blow hot air at night (which wakes me up). During the summer, it's set to 78° during the day, goes down to 76° at 6:00 PM for the evening, and drops to 73° for overnight.
(This morning it was 66° when I got up because I had overridden the program over the weekend due to the warm weather and I forgot to change it back last night.)
It used to be a more complex setup when we both worked downtown; the heat went down to 60° on weekdays because it makes no sense to heat the house when nobody's home and it went back up to 68° by 6:00 PM. Now that we're both home during the day I changed that, and since we replaced our HVAC some years back the new one is more efficient than the old such that I can run it at a warmer setting without a huge bill (plus the vet said 70° is better for our cat, who has only lived with us since last November).
So tradephoric's point about sunlight in late afternoon is largely irrelevant for us. The system would work more or less the same most of the winter and it might have a slightly larger load in the morning due to the lack of sunlight.
Just wondering: why do temperatures in the 50s feel fine outdoors but not indoors?
Quote from: 1 on March 21, 2022, 08:03:13 AM
Just wondering: why do temperatures in the 50s feel fine outdoors but not indoors?
That one has gotten me my entire life. All winter I have the heat inside at 64 to 68 and I wear a t-shirt under a sweatshirt. Put me outside in those temps I'm wearing shorts and a t-shirt.
Quote from: 1 on March 21, 2022, 08:03:13 AM
Just wondering: why do temperatures in the 50s feel fine outdoors but not indoors?
More clothes, more movements. Sunbathing is not recommended in those conditions.
Of the metropolitan areas in the United States with over 1 million people; Detroit, Grand Rapids, and Indianapolis are the only cities that see sunrises after 8AM during the winter. Grand Rapids, Michigan is the most extreme example with sunrises as late as 8:13AM. With permanent DST, sunrise would get pushed back to 9:13AM but that's about the worst case scenario for anyone living in a metropolitan area of over 1 million people.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 21, 2022, 10:17:14 AM
Of the metropolitan areas in the United States with over 1 million people; Detroit, Grand Rapids, and Indianapolis are the only cities that see sunrises after 8AM during the winter. Grand Rapids, Michigan is the most extreme example with sunrises as late as 8:13AM. With permanent DST, sunrise would get pushed back to 9:13AM but that's about the worst case scenario for anyone living in a metropolitan area of over 1 million people.
If we switch, Canada will probably switch, too. Toronto is a huge metro, and while it's not quite 8 AM, 7:47 is pretty close to 8.
Quote
During Extended Daylight Saving Time, electricity savings generally occurred over a three- to five-hour period in the evening with small increases in usage during the early-morning hours. On a daily percentage basis, electricity savings were slightly greater during the March (spring) extension of Extended Daylight Saving Time than the November (fall) extension. On a regional basis, some southern portions of the United States exhibited slightly smaller impacts of Extended Daylight Saving Time on energy savings compared to the northern regions, a result possibly due to a small, offsetting increase in household air conditioning usage.
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/pdfs/edst_national_energy_consumption.pdf
A slight increase in energy usage in the morning was offset by a three- to five-hour period of electricity savings in the evening when DST was extended in 2007 according to the U.S Department of Energy. Northern regions seemed to benefit more from the extended DST than southern regions; arguably because southern regions had offsetting increases in household air conditioning usage. But what are the results if DST was extended even further into the winter months (ie. made permanent). In January how many Florida residents are air conditioning their homes? In Minneapolis, how much more energy does it take to heat their homes when the heat generating sun comes up an hour later? Are any potential morning increases offset in the evenings when the sun stays out an hour later?
Quote from: tradephoric on March 21, 2022, 11:09:49 AM
Quote
During Extended Daylight Saving Time, electricity savings generally occurred over a three- to five-hour period in the evening with small increases in usage during the early-morning hours. On a daily percentage basis, electricity savings were slightly greater during the March (spring) extension of Extended Daylight Saving Time than the November (fall) extension. On a regional basis, some southern portions of the United States exhibited slightly smaller impacts of Extended Daylight Saving Time on energy savings compared to the northern regions, a result possibly due to a small, offsetting increase in household air conditioning usage.
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/pdfs/edst_national_energy_consumption.pdf
A slight increase in energy usage in the morning was offset by a three- to five-hour period of electricity savings in the evening when DST was extended in 2007 according to the U.S Department of Energy. Northern regions seemed to benefit more from the extended DST than southern regions; arguably because southern regions had offsetting increases in household air conditioning usage. But what are the results if DST was extended even further into the winter months (ie. made permanent). In January how many Florida residents are air conditioning their homes? In Minneapolis, how much more energy does it take to heat their homes when the heat generating sun comes up an hour later? Are any potential morning increases offset in the evenings when the sun stays out an hour later?
A big thing is peak energy usage. Year-wise, winter and summer are high usage areas, while spring and fall are more moderate with lower
daily peaks.
That is a significant factor for utilities as it should allow more downtime for powerplant maintenance.
Flatten the peak of daily usage- why does that sound familiar?
Quote from: tradephoric on March 21, 2022, 10:17:14 AM
Of the metropolitan areas in the United States with over 1 million people; Detroit, Grand Rapids, and Indianapolis are the only cities that see sunrises after 8AM during the winter. Grand Rapids, Michigan is the most extreme example with sunrises as late as 8:13AM. With permanent DST, sunrise would get pushed back to 9:13AM but that's about the worst case scenario for anyone living in a metropolitan area of over 1 million people.
Both MI and IN could easily switch from year-round EDT to year-round CDT because they border the Central time zone. As always, it will depend on who kvetches the most: The "the poor schoolkids in the dark!" crowd, or the "I want to play golf until 9 PM in summer, dammit!" crowd.
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
My results:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wjWFkJDZ/DST.png)
Well, now I feel even less weird for not caring about changing clocks.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
[/img]
That is definitely a cool site. Just a half hour shift from what reasonable sunrise/sunset times are from your selections (and selecting "sunset time is more important") and the entire map changes. Highlights just how difficult it is to please everyone in this debate as people have a differing opinion of what they view as a reasonable sunrise/sunset.
(https://i.imgur.com/Y2mOj3a.png)
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Why won't it let me set it to 11 AM sunrises?
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for
earliest sunrise and
latest sunset to be of any use.
Unsurprisingly, "always use DST" was my result.
My inputs: latest sunrise 8 a.m., earliest sunset 7:30 p.m., sunset is much more important.
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 12:33:07 PM
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Shifting sunrise/sunset times back a half hour while maintaining JayhawkCO "Sunrise time is more important" selection - there is a lot less yellow. There is definitely a change there.
(https://i.imgur.com/PKLQgUU.png)
Quote from: hbelkins on March 23, 2022, 12:40:10 PM
Unsurprisingly, "always use DST" was my result.
My inputs: latest sunrise 8 a.m., earliest sunset 7:30 p.m., sunset is much more important.
Using those same times, but with sun
rise being much more important (which it absolutely is relative to a 7:30 PM sunset), about 95% of the map flips to "make no change", with Alabama and Arizona being the main exceptions (those still show "always use DST").
That basically proves my point:
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 12:38:46 PM
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for earliest sunrise and latest sunset to be of any use.
7:30 PM is not a reasonable "earliest sunset time" as that would be a ludicrous during in the winter, so the tool really needs upper and lower bounds for it to tell you anything you didn't already know.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
My results:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wjWFkJDZ/DST.png)
That's a weird tool. It allows you to ask for things that can't happen, for instance in Seattle you can ask for the latest sunrise to be 7 AM and the earliest sunset to be 5:30 PM, and there's no way for both of those things to happen in winter. If you set sunrise time as the more important criteria it SHOULD just indicate standard time in winter and says nothing about should happen in summer. Yet it sticks Seattle in the "abolish DST" group, when it could fit in the "keep switching between standard time and DST" equally well, and better if there were also a criteria for "earliest sunrise" no earlier than, say, 5 AM and a preference for later sunsets when they days are long enough.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 12:33:07 PM
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Shifting sunrise/sunset times back a half hour while maintaining JayhawkCO "Sunrise time is more important" selection - there is a lot less yellow. There is definitely a change there.
(https://i.imgur.com/PKLQgUU.png)
That's about what I'd do if I could shift lines over. Again, I don't know what to do with Kansas City.
Quote from: elsmere241 on March 23, 2022, 12:53:19 PM
That's about what I'd do if I could shift lines over. Again, I don't know what to do with Kansas City.
Without knowing what your map looks like, I would put it in the one on the west. Topeka and Lawrence probably want to be on Kansas City time, while there's nothing major on the Missouri side that would want to stay on Kansas City time except St. Joseph, which borders Kansas and wouldn't cause any problems.
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for earliest sunrise and latest sunset to be of any use.
The text below the map on the site makes it clear the author is not neutral on the subject, and his choice of data points reinforces that.
Quote from: DTComposer on March 23, 2022, 12:58:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for earliest sunrise and latest sunset to be of any use.
The text below the map on the site makes it clear the author is not neutral on the subject, and his choice of data points reinforces that.
Well, considering the summer/winter thing, I think people only reaaaalllly care about the daylight when it's shorter. I don't think anyone in Minnesota complains that they have sunlight at 9:00 PM in June. It makes more sense to try to accommodate people's concerns in the wintertime.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 01:14:51 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on March 23, 2022, 12:58:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for earliest sunrise and latest sunset to be of any use.
The text below the map on the site makes it clear the author is not neutral on the subject, and his choice of data points reinforces that.
Well, considering the summer/winter thing, I think people only reaaaalllly care about the daylight when it's shorter. I don't think anyone in Minnesota complains that they have sunlight at 9:00 PM in June. It makes more sense to try to accommodate people's concerns in the wintertime.
OK, so then "no change" should not be an option. As
kkt noted, right now it's factoring in summer preferences without having enough information to do so. "No change" and "abolish DST" are redundant if you're looking at winter only.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 12:33:07 PM
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Shifting sunrise/sunset times back a half hour while maintaining JayhawkCO "Sunrise time is more important" selection - there is a lot less yellow. There is definitely a change there.
(https://i.imgur.com/PKLQgUU.png)
If anything, this map may send a message that 1 hour steps are too crude. Going to 30 min zones? Not unheard of, India with "rotate your clock" is an example. May add some mess short-term, though
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 01:17:32 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 01:14:51 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on March 23, 2022, 12:58:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for earliest sunrise and latest sunset to be of any use.
The text below the map on the site makes it clear the author is not neutral on the subject, and his choice of data points reinforces that.
Well, considering the summer/winter thing, I think people only reaaaalllly care about the daylight when it's shorter. I don't think anyone in Minnesota complains that they have sunlight at 9:00 PM in June. It makes more sense to try to accommodate people's concerns in the wintertime.
OK, so then "no change" should not be an option. As kkt noted, right now it's factoring in summer preferences without having enough information to do so. "No change" and "abolish DST" are redundant if you're looking at winter only.
And that's fair. Either way, the author even says that the tool isn't some foolproof solution or idealization thereof. It gives you a general idea of what your preferences would align with. I didn't post to have everyone take it as gospel by any means.
To me, the map only works if you think about latest reasonable sunrise time and earliest reasonable sunset time for the entire year.
tradephoric inputs an earliest reasonable sunset time of 7 PM, which is impossible in winter under any circumstances except perhaps double DST.
I input an latest reasonable sunrise of 8 AM and an earliest reasonable sunset of 5:30 PM, with sunset being very important, and got quite a bit of green on the board to move to permanent DST. <shrugs>
Imagine working till 5PM then fighting traffic and making it home between 5:30-6PM. An earliest reasonable sunset of 7PM at least gives people an hour after they get home before the sun sets. Maybe they got to do a brake job on their car but they don't have a lighted garage (a job that becomes very difficult once it gets dark). Now if you live in San Diego and the country was on permanent standard time, the sun would always set before 7PM even in the middle of summer. This means if you have a steady 9-5 job in San Diego, you would really never have enough time to do a brake job during the week (but what if you already have weekend plans and really need that brake job done before the weekend?).
One could argue that they should stop by a brake shop during their lunch break and pay through the nose for a job. It's almost as arrogant as suggesting someone buy an EV to combat high gas prices... and disregarding how expensive EV's are. The other option is getting up at 4:40AM when the sun rises in San Diego in the summer (assuming permanent standard time) and do the brake job before work. But we all know how it goes... a quick 30 minute brake job always seems to turn into 3 hours and 30 minutes of cursing. If you can't finish the brake job in time, now you are stuck having to get to work with no vehicle. At least if you start the brake job at night and realize you won't be able to finish in time, you have over 10 hours to coordinate an alternate ride before work the next morning.
If people don't have at least an hour of daylight after work, that's not enough. Hence why i choose 7PM for the earliest reasonable sunset time.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
If people don't have at least an hour of daylight after work, that's not enough. Hence why i choose 7PM for the earliest reasonable sunset time.
You do realize that means sunrises after
10AM for much of the country in the winter, right?
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
If people don't have at least an hour of daylight after work, that's not enough. Hence why i choose 7PM for the earliest reasonable sunset time.
You do realize that means sunrises after 10AM for much of the country in the winter, right?
The classic AARoads logical fallacy of assuming every other place in the country is just like yours.
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 12:38:46 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Here's a fun tool (https://observablehq.com/@awoodruff/daylight-saving-time-gripe-assistant-tool) to figure out if you should be in favor of abolishing DST, keeping it full time, or staying with the status quo.
Interesting tool, but with a huge glaring issue: The only inputs are latest sunrise and earliest sunset, so the two most important things in the winter are weighted to 100% while the two most important things during the summer are weighted to 0%. It really needs a third and fourth input for earliest sunrise and latest sunset to be of any use.
Yes. Especially if one of the things you're considering is whether or not to change times twice a year.
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
If people don't have at least an hour of daylight after work, that's not enough. Hence why i choose 7PM for the earliest reasonable sunset time.
You do realize that means sunrises after 10AM for much of the country in the winter, right?
I'm not suggesting that we guarantee the sun is still up by 7PM throughout the entire country even in the middle of winter. If that was attempted than you would see sunrises after 10AM throughout much of the country. The reality is in the middle of winter the sun will set by 5PM in places (even under permanent daylight saving time) and there's not a whole lot that can be done with that. I'm personally OK with 5PM sunsets in Maine during the winter. What I'm not cool with is that the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the longest day of the year under permanent standard time. People would barely have time (if they could finish at all) to do a simple brake job after work before the sun goes down.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
If people don't have at least an hour of daylight after work, that's not enough. Hence why i choose 7PM for the earliest reasonable sunset time.
You do realize that means sunrises after 10AM for much of the country in the winter, right?
I'm not suggesting that we guarantee the sun is still up by 7PM throughout the entire country even in the middle of winter. If that was attempted than you would see sunrises after 10AM throughout much of the country. The reality is in the middle of winter the sun will set by 5PM in places (even under permanent daylight saving time) and there's not a whole lot that can be done with that. I'm personally OK with 5PM sunsets in Maine during the winter. What I'm not cool with is that the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the longest day of the year under permanent standard time. People would barely have time (if they could finish at all) to do a simple brake job after work before the sun goes down.
Do it before work. If you want the sun to set at 7 PM exactly, the sun would rise at 4:45 AM in late June.
Quote from: kalvado on March 23, 2022, 01:30:11 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 12:33:07 PM
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Shifting sunrise/sunset times back a half hour while maintaining JayhawkCO "Sunrise time is more important" selection - there is a lot less yellow. There is definitely a change there.
(https://i.imgur.com/PKLQgUU.png)
If anything, this map may send a message that 1 hour steps are too crude. Going to 30 min zones? Not unheard of, India with "rotate your clock" is an example. May add some mess short-term, though
India has a single time zone for the entire country, when it occupies enough longitude that it could easily be two time zones.
I wonder if half hour clock changes would be easier for the people who have trouble adjusting to it. Would it be better to jump 30 minutes forward at the beginning of March and than another 30 minutes forward at the beginning of April? Or would it just be twice as bad?
China is worse.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 03:25:51 PM
Quote from: webny99 on March 23, 2022, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
If people don't have at least an hour of daylight after work, that's not enough. Hence why i choose 7PM for the earliest reasonable sunset time.
You do realize that means sunrises after 10AM for much of the country in the winter, right?
The classic AARoads logical fallacy of assuming every other place in the country is just like yours.
I was very careful to say
much of the country, not the entire country. :-P
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 03:41:30 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
I'm not suggesting that we guarantee the sun is still up by 7PM throughout the entire country even in the middle of winter. If that was attempted than you would see sunrises after 10AM throughout much of the country. The reality is in the middle of winter the sun will set by 5PM in places (even under permanent daylight saving time) and there's not a whole lot that can be done with that. I'm personally OK with 5PM sunsets in Maine during the winter. What I'm not cool with is that the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the longest day of the year under permanent standard time. People would barely have time (if they could finish at all) to do a simple brake job after work before the sun goes down.
Do it before work. If you want the sun to set at 7 PM exactly, the sun would rise at 4:45 AM in late June.
Doesn't a 4:45AM sunrise seem awfully early especially considering the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the summer solstice? And name me one person who wants to get up at 4:45AM to do a brake job before work. In my previous post i explained why this isn't a great option either...
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
The other option is getting up at 4:40AM when the sun rises in San Diego in the summer (assuming permanent standard time) and do the brake job before work. But we all know how it goes... a quick 30 minute brake job always seems to turn into 3 hours and 30 minutes of cursing. If you can't finish the brake job in time, now you are stuck having to get to work with no vehicle. At least if you start the brake job at night and realize you won't be able to finish in time, you have over 10 hours to coordinate an alternate ride before work the next morning.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 04:53:40 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on March 23, 2022, 03:41:30 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
I'm not suggesting that we guarantee the sun is still up by 7PM throughout the entire country even in the middle of winter. If that was attempted than you would see sunrises after 10AM throughout much of the country. The reality is in the middle of winter the sun will set by 5PM in places (even under permanent daylight saving time) and there's not a whole lot that can be done with that. I'm personally OK with 5PM sunsets in Maine during the winter. What I'm not cool with is that the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the longest day of the year under permanent standard time. People would barely have time (if they could finish at all) to do a simple brake job after work before the sun goes down.
Do it before work. If you want the sun to set at 7 PM exactly, the sun would rise at 4:45 AM in late June.
Doesn't a 4:45AM sunrise seem awfully early especially considering the sun would set in San Diego at 6:59PM during the summer solstice? And name me one person who wants to get up at 4:45AM to do a brake job before work. In my previous post i explained why this isn't a great option either...
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 02:57:02 PM
The other option is getting up at 4:40AM when the sun rises in San Diego in the summer (assuming permanent standard time) and do the brake job before work. But we all know how it goes... a quick 30 minute brake job always seems to turn into 3 hours and 30 minutes of cursing. If you can't finish the brake job in time, now you are stuck having to get to work with no vehicle. At least if you start the brake job at night and realize you won't be able to finish in time, you have over 10 hours to coordinate an alternate ride before work the next morning.
Sorry I missed you had pre-empted.
I mean, if you need a ride to work, Uber isn't hard to book on 10 minutes' notice. I guess I fail to see the relevance of a long running car maintenance project to the subject at hand.
I think, in an ideal world, we get rid of time changes but also recalibrate the time zones at the same time. Just with a quick Googling, the U.S. loses $434,000,000 in productivity during the Spring time change because of sleep schedules getting all screwed up. But then we need most of New England to move to Atlantic time among other changes.
Quote from: kkt on March 23, 2022, 03:43:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 23, 2022, 01:30:11 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 12:33:07 PM
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Shifting sunrise/sunset times back a half hour while maintaining JayhawkCO "Sunrise time is more important" selection - there is a lot less yellow. There is definitely a change there.
(https://i.imgur.com/PKLQgUU.png)
If anything, this map may send a message that 1 hour steps are too crude. Going to 30 min zones? Not unheard of, India with "rotate your clock" is an example. May add some mess short-term, though
India has a single time zone for the entire country, when it occupies enough longitude that it could easily be two time zones.
I wonder if half hour clock changes would be easier for the people who have trouble adjusting to it. Would it be better to jump 30 minutes forward at the beginning of March and than another 30 minutes forward at the beginning of April? Or would it just be twice as bad?
India has a 5.30 offset to GMT, i.e. a fractional time zone. There are 15 min offsets, if I remember correctly, but India story is... funny.
My idea was redrawing the time zone lines and remaining on the same time year round. I basically did it by TV DMA's. For example, the portions of NY state that would remain on EST are the Rochester and Buffalo DMA's. The couple of counties in NC that would go to AST are part of the Norfolk DMA, and Garrett County, MD, because it is part of the Pittsburgh DMA, would be the only county in MD on EST. Here is my plan:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/1773/29067492267_ab96b405e6_z.jpg)
You've split too many states. For example, both of Oregon's yellow counties are very rural and could be red, as they don't need to match anything in another state.
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 07:18:34 PM
You've split too many states. For example, both of Oregon's yellow counties are very rural and could be red, as they don't need to match anything in another state.
Heck, he even split NC's Outer Banks!
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 07:18:34 PM
You've split too many states. For example, both of Oregon's yellow counties are very rural and could be red, as they don't need to match anything in another state.
Actually, Malheur County (at the southeast corner of Oregon) is already split from the rest of the state due to their need to be on the same time as Boise.
Not sure if the Washington split would make sense, but at least the DMA boundary avoids splitting metropolitan areas. The Palouse being an hour away from the Tri-Cities would definitely be weird, though.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 23, 2022, 07:15:09 PM
My idea was redrawing the time zone lines and remaining on the same time year round. I basically did it by TV DMA's. For example, the portions of NY state that would remain on EST are the Rochester and Buffalo DMA's. The couple of counties in NC that would go to AST are part of the Norfolk DMA, and Garrett County, MD, because it is part of the Pittsburgh DMA, would be the only county in MD on EST. Here is my plan:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/1773/29067492267_ab96b405e6_z.jpg)
Would the entire country be on standard time year round with the adjustments in time zones? If so, then Florida would be losing an hour of evening sunshine during the summer. Marco Rubio is the lead sponsor of the Sunshine Protection Act and the whole idea was to add an hour of evening sunshine for Florida in the winter; not to take an hour of evening sunshine away during the summer.
Quote from: kkt on March 23, 2022, 03:43:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 23, 2022, 01:30:11 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on March 23, 2022, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 12:33:07 PM
Shifting it half an hour did nothing. The reason it changed was because you chose sunset is more important – with the two selected times being 12 hours apart, it is impossible to satisfy both between the fall equinox and the spring equinox no matter what you choose.
Also, that map really should have had a different projection. They curved the map but not the grid squares.
Shifting sunrise/sunset times back a half hour while maintaining JayhawkCO "Sunrise time is more important" selection - there is a lot less yellow. There is definitely a change there.
(https://i.imgur.com/PKLQgUU.png)
If anything, this map may send a message that 1 hour steps are too crude. Going to 30 min zones? Not unheard of, India with "rotate your clock" is an example. May add some mess short-term, though
India has a single time zone for the entire country, when it occupies enough longitude that it could easily be two time zones.
I wonder if half hour clock changes would be easier for the people who have trouble adjusting to it. Would it be better to jump 30 minutes forward at the beginning of March and than another 30 minutes forward at the beginning of April? Or would it just be twice as bad?
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 23, 2022, 07:30:50 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 23, 2022, 07:18:34 PM
You've split too many states. For example, both of Oregon's yellow counties are very rural and could be red, as they don't need to match anything in another state.
Heck, he even split NC's Outer Banks!
Those Outer Banks counties in green are part of the Norfolk DMA. The orange ones are part of the Greenville/New Bern market. The WV counties in green are part of the DC and Harrisonburg, VA markets. For the EST/CST boundary, I generally followed the Mississippi River, giving any DMA that straddles it to EST. This explains some of the bulges to the west (the Twin Cities DMA stretches almost to the ND border)
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
Quote from: US 89 on March 23, 2022, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
How many really need to do that though? And if it's one and done, I would think you would get used to the same differences pretty quick.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 23, 2022, 07:15:09 PM
My idea was redrawing the time zone lines and remaining on the same time year round. I basically did it by TV DMA's. For example, the portions of NY state that would remain on EST are the Rochester and Buffalo DMA's. The couple of counties in NC that would go to AST are part of the Norfolk DMA, and Garrett County, MD, because it is part of the Pittsburgh DMA, would be the only county in MD on EST. Here is my plan:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/1773/29067492267_ab96b405e6_z.jpg)
That's a no to me
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 23, 2022, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 23, 2022, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
How many really need to do that though? And if it's one and done, I would think you would get used to the same differences pretty quick.
I find myself "calculating" what time it is in the other time zones at least several times a day, and not just for work-related purposes.. even just for friends/family that live in other time zones.
The Wikipedia community also uses UTC.
Quote from: webny99 on March 24, 2022, 08:15:11 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 23, 2022, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 23, 2022, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
How many really need to do that though? And if it's one and done, I would think you would get used to the same differences pretty quick.
I find myself "calculating" what time it is in the other time zones at least several times a day, and not just for work-related purposes.. even just for friends/family that live in other time zones.
I work remotely, and my office is on a different time zone.
Quote from: webny99 on March 24, 2022, 08:15:11 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 23, 2022, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 23, 2022, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
How many really need to do that though? And if it's one and done, I would think you would get used to the same differences pretty quick.
I find myself "calculating" what time it is in the other time zones at least several times a day, and not just for work-related purposes.. even just for friends/family that live in other time zones.
Not sure whether Windows 10 allows this because I haven't bothered to figure it out, but Windows XP and Windows 7 allowed for adding "additional clocks" to the time shown in the system tray so you could hover over the date and time and you'd see other listings–for example, I used to work with people in London a fair amount and while I know well that's normally a five-hour difference, having London added down there served as a useful reminder during the weeks of the year when the difference was something else (prior to 2007, the difference was six hours for one week at the end of March; since 2007, the difference has been four hours for a couple of weeks in March and for one week at the end of October/beginning of November).
Regarding local time usage, there are places in the world where people informally observe a time other than the legally-imposed time zone. I recall in Phenix City, Alabama, for example, a lot of the private-sector businesses operated on Eastern Time to be in sync with the much larger city of Columbus, Georgia, located immediately across the state line (but state and federal offices operated on Central Time). Then there's Central Western Time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTC%2B08:45) in Australia, which people observe despite it not being legally-sanctioned because it splits the difference on the 90-minute (under non-DST) or 2.5-hour (under DST) time difference between Western Australia and South Australia.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Entering_Central_Western_Time_Zone.jpg/1280px-Entering_Central_Western_Time_Zone.jpg)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 23, 2022, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 23, 2022, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
How many really need to do that though? And if it's one and done, I would think you would get used to the same differences pretty quick.
For me, Outlook takes care of many conversions. Zooms starting at .30 also happen.
Not totally convenient, but... I still wonder what happened to free will of people. Shifting schedule by 30 minutes shouldn't be more difficult than shifting timezones.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 23, 2022, 10:58:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on March 23, 2022, 10:54:42 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
It's not unheard of, but it would get really annoying and unnecessarily complicated for those of us who need to make UTC conversions rapidly multiple times a day.
How many really need to do that though? And if it's one and done, I would think you would get used to the same differences pretty quick.
Indeed. I'm certain there would be an app for that within days of such a time change.
With the shift to DST and the days getting longer, areas along the western edge of time zones are starting to see sunsets after 8PM. These will keep extending later and for states on the fringe northwest edge of the timezone, these sunsets will extend to near 10PM during the summer. I didn't think there was any spot in the lower 48 that saw sunsets after 10PM but i think i found one... the Isle Royale National Park is a remote island on Lake Superior near the Canadian border that sees sunsets after 10PM in late June. Other than that remote island though, the sun never sets after 10PM anywhere within the lower 48.
I also wouldn't want the US to be like Australia, which has 6 different time zones for its 7 states...
Quote from: 1 on March 24, 2022, 08:26:06 AM
The Wikipedia community also uses UTC.
A bunch of people use UTC. Airlines that operate intercontinentally, communications and computer networks, militaries that operate worldwide.
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 24, 2022, 08:30:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 24, 2022, 08:15:11 AM
I find myself "calculating" what time it is in the other time zones at least several times a day, and not just for work-related purposes.. even just for friends/family that live in other time zones.
I work remotely, and my office is on a different time zone.
In both cases, after the initial 30 minute conversion, you'll still be calculating the number of hours.
Currently if you're sitting here saying it's 1:04pm, that means in the Pacific Time zone it's 10:04am. If the difference from UTC was a factor of 30 minutes, if it's 1:04pm here, it's still going to be 10:04am Pacific Time.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 24, 2022, 01:04:13 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on March 24, 2022, 08:30:43 AM
Quote from: webny99 on March 24, 2022, 08:15:11 AM
I find myself "calculating" what time it is in the other time zones at least several times a day, and not just for work-related purposes.. even just for friends/family that live in other time zones.
I work remotely, and my office is on a different time zone.
In both cases, after the initial 30 minute conversion, you'll still be calculating the number of hours.
Currently if you're sitting here saying it's 1:04pm, that means in the Pacific Time zone it's 10:04am. If the difference from UTC was a factor of 30 minutes, if it's 1:04pm here, it's still going to be 10:04am Pacific Time.
But math is haaaaaaaard! :D :D :D
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
Or easier still just shift our cultural norms by a half hour? You mentioned schools and for years the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended that middle and high schools start at 8:30 a.m. or later to give students the opportunity to get enough sleep. Going to permanent DST in this country gives school boards the perfect opportunity to actually adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations. Under permanent DST I'm sure the inevitably stories of kids getting struck and killed while walking to school in the dark will arise. But instead of putting all the blame on the switch to permanent DST, much of the focus should be on early school start times. Less kids will be walking to school in the dark if the schools started after 8:30AM.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 24, 2022, 02:44:59 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
Or easier still just shift our cultural norms by a half hour? You mentioned schools and for years the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended that middle and high schools start at 8:30 a.m. or later to give students the opportunity to get enough sleep. Going to permanent DST in this country gives school boards the perfect opportunity to actually adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations. Under permanent DST I'm sure the inevitably stories of kids getting struck and killed while walking to school in the dark will arise. But instead of putting all the blame on the switch to permanent DST, much of the focus should be on early school start times. Less kids will be walking to school in the dark if the schools started after 8:30AM.
The problems that have been pointed out with later school starts:
-Their parents' jobs will not also be starting an hour later than they do now, which fucking with parents' routines has been the most common objection to later school starts.
-It won't mean kids (HS in particular) will go to bed at a reasonable time - they'll just stay up an hour later than they did previously, and still not get enough sleep. Trust me, I can vouch for that.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 24, 2022, 02:44:59 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on March 23, 2022, 08:07:44 PM
Something I've proposed before is a "split the difference" solution: Advance all current time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it. Bully if Canada and Mexico join us. This would eliminate clock changes, but if we advance by only 30 minutes, it mitigates a lot of the "kids in the dark waiting for the school bus" wailing in the winter. And as others point out, a +30 minute time zone is not unheard of worldwide.
Or easier still just shift our cultural norms by a half hour? You mentioned schools and for years the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended that middle and high schools start at 8:30 a.m. or later to give students the opportunity to get enough sleep. Going to permanent DST in this country gives school boards the perfect opportunity to actually adhere to the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations. Under permanent DST I'm sure the inevitably stories of kids getting struck and killed while walking to school in the dark will arise. But instead of putting all the blame on the switch to permanent DST, much of the focus should be on early school start times. Less kids will be walking to school in the dark if the schools started after 8:30AM.
Here the school district moved the middle and high school start times to 9:00 a few years ago. But in winter sunup is 8:00 AM now, if we change to DST in winter sunup will be 9:00 AM when they're already supposed to be in school. So we're back to getting to school in the dark, and without any sunlight at all to soften up the ice and snow that we get in overnight freezes here. Should we move the start times to 10:00? Well, once the kids get their required time in class, they wouldn't have much time after school. Lots of kids in high school have jobs, practice for sports, drama, or music. For many kids these extracurricular activities are what keeps them showing up for class.
(edit: unmangled the quotes)
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 24, 2022, 02:58:07 PM
-Their parents' jobs will not also be starting an hour later than they do now, which fucking with parents' routines has been the most common objection to later school starts.
The "poor children waiting in the dark" argument shifts to "I'm not adjusting my work schedule for those little bastards" when the solution of later school times is brought up.
Quote from: tradephoric on March 24, 2022, 03:27:51 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 24, 2022, 02:58:07 PM
-Their parents' jobs will not also be starting an hour later than they do now, which fucking with parents' routines has been the most common objection to later school starts.
The "poor children waiting in the dark" argument shifts to "I'm not adjusting my work schedule for those little bastards" when the solution of later school times is brought up.
Lots of people really don't have the option of changing their work hours.
same damn thread we always have, I see