Alternatives to Daylight Saving Time? 755
Wellington Grey writes "Daylight saving time almost upon us. The arguments about its possible benefits and drawbacks come up twice every year. Does it save energy or lives? Possibly, but it does definitely cause a great deal of inconvenience. My question is this: what do you think would be the best possible system to replace DST with? What is the best way for humans to deal with the inconsistent amount of light over the year and still foster coordination over disparate time zones?"
Let's just use Zulu time... (Score:1, Insightful)
...and be done with it. Semper Fi! Oooh-rah! Gung-ho, Gung-ho, Gung-ho, sir!
No replacement... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does it need replacement? Just get rid of it altogether...
This is not a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Get rid of it (Score:5, Insightful)
See subject. Then make everyone talk in UTC. That should do it.
Re:My proposal (Score:3, Insightful)
OR. Just don't do it. I like my idea much better.
Re:This is not a problem (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
I grew up in AZ - moved to a state that does daylight savings a couple years ago. I hate it. I never felt any lack for not having it or thought, "Gee, I wished we messed with the clocks twice a year."
We should replace it with nothing. Just eliminate it. It would simplify life at no cost.
Re:This is not a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
The effect it does have is actually increasing energy usage as people crank on the AC when they get home earlier in the daylight of afternoon and it's hotter. And AC is vastly more expensive to operate than a bulb.
DST is useless (Score:4, Insightful)
As others have pointed out (http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/pubs/fulltext/nrcc49212/nrcc49212.pdf), Daylight Savings Time likely doesn't save us any energy. This, of course, makes sense as if people are getting up earlier to avoid it being dark when they get home, they're still using electricity in the morning which is now dark. In short, the only way that daylight savings time in the modern day is beneficial to anyone is people who want to play sports or do something else outdoors after work. Not only that, but studies have shown that Daylight Savings Time often actually costs companies money due to needing to change clocks, employees who show up late/early to work during time changes and computer errors resulting from time changes. The solution, is to abolish Daylight Savings Time and save us all some time, money and bother.
Re:Get rid of it (Score:5, Insightful)
Almost. Everybody should be using 24 hour time as well. ie, it's now 20:40.
Re:Picture this... (Score:2, Insightful)
Outdoor lighting for farming and construction would require some hefty light.
One thing sunlight comes with, is a low cost price tag. Oh, right... that's 'free'.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, once the government has adopted something you can't get rid of it. You can change it for better or worse (usually worse) but it is there for ever.
Nuke it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Daylight Savings Time has enormous costs and very little value in return.
We should get read of it and say, "Good riddance..."
If there are issues with available daylight in a particular area, then the times of events should be adjusted accordingly. If it is to dark at 7 AM for kids to go out in order to reach school at 8 AM, then push back the start time of school, etc., to 9 AM.
In reality, this is what Daylight Savings Time does, but at much greater cost.
Not to be a troll... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Internet Required (Score:5, Insightful)
The worldwide inter-connectedness of business is a strong argument AGAINST the 9-5 schedule. What good is standardizing on "9-5" when your customer on the west coast and your partners in India, Japan, and England all have their own, different 9-5?
Who the hell even picked 9 and 5, and what makes those particular numbers so special that everyone has to change our entire time system twice a year to make sure those are always work hours?
If every business adopted a very simple "go to work when you have to and leave when you have to" policy, we wouldn't care what the damn clock said, and would need neither time zones nor daylight saving time.
Re:Picture this... (Score:2, Insightful)
I take it you don't have kids? The not-so-small group of people who do would rather have their kids going to school in the morning in daylight, not darkness.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, once the government has adopted something you can't get rid of it. You can change it for better or worse (usually worse) but it is there for ever.
Like Prohibition?
Re:DST is ending (Score:3, Insightful)
So we have non-DST all year round and work from 8am to 4pm so that midday is always when the sun is at its zenith.
Those at certain latitudes could also have summer hours of 7:30am to 4:30pm, and winter hours of 8:30am to 3:30pm, i.e. a shorter business day in the winter.
Midday and daylight hours are going to vary throughout the year and across the planet anyway.
Re:Picture this... (Score:4, Insightful)
errr... How, exactly, does DST give them more daylight?
The short days are standard time, BTW.
In the winter, start at sun rise, end at sunset. It doesn't matter that the numbers on your clock read, and it doesn't matter that the hands on the watch say. All that matters is you get X amount of work done.
For me, all this means is I get to drive into a sunset for 3 weeks..again.
Re:No it isn't (Score:3, Insightful)
"Pretend it's an hour later than it is,"
Time measurement is an artificial construct. The time is when we say it is, there is no pretending it's a different hour.
If you don't want to take the 10 seconds to adjust your clock, then fine but don't whine about doing the 'math' in your head. If adding or subtracting 1 in you head cause so much trouble, find some other place to post.
Re:This is not a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
It was implemented before mankind had the ability to control light.
Be that as it may, I'm one to prefer natural light over artificial light, and it is simply not an option to change my schedule. The way I see it, DST year-round is much better. It really comes down to personal preference, though, which makes it really hard for any democratic-ish countries to change it.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:4, Insightful)
I hate it also. I live in Queensland, Australia and we don't do daylight savings. The southern part of Australia, Sydney and Melbourne do have it and constantly complain that we don't. See, they are the centre of the universe and because they do, we must.
Never mind that we live closer to the equator, it is bloody hot outside during the day and who on earth, apart from tourists, want to go out in that sun in the middle of the day. It burns!
I'm an early riser. I get up hours before I have to go to work. That's when I clean and shit, so when I come home I can chillax. Many do the same. If you want daylight savings so you can see more daylight, adjust your own clock.
Re:Picture this... (Score:1, Insightful)
Farmers are generally opposed to DST because we cannot begin work during harvest until the sun has dried out the crops sufficiently from the dew the previous night. Therefore, when DST is in effect, we can't start working in the fields until an hour later, and must end work when the sun goes down, which is now an hour later. This means we don't stop working until 9:00 instead of 8:00. Since we would all like to be able to get in an hour earlier, but still complete a full day of work, we are not big fans of when the clock artificially shifts to make us stay at work later.
Currently living in Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
Moved here from Michigan 5 years ago. I don't miss DST at all. I just know that when I wake up at 5am, during the spring/summer, it's nearly broad daylight and in the colder months it's pitch black out. Right now, it's pitch black at 5am, at 5:30, I see some sunlight, by the time I get in my car at 6-615:am, it's daylight.
Right now, I see the idiodicy of DST. You don't actually get more daylight, we just fool you into thinking you do.
Re:This is not a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly this. If it's too dark when you get up or when you want to open your business, don't change the clock, change the time you get up or open your business.
If that's too hard, lets have DST year round. Standard time is only in effect for a couple months anyway. Keeping DST through the winter would keep it light when most people get off work, which is when it actually matters anyway. I know I'd rather get up in the dark, and have an hour of daylight after work to play with, rather than getting up at dawn and wasting that hour getting ready for work.
All DST all the Time (Score:4, Insightful)
That way I could have a ton of daylight when I come home, which is when I need it.
Do you think you could talk to my boss for me?
Most people work in cubes or offices, or at least inside. What use is daylight to most of us of before say.. lunchtime??
I say we spring forward 3 hours and just stay there all the time.
WTF do I need daylight for on my way to work, just so I can wander around my yard with a flashlight at 6pm? We're not farmers anymore.
Re:Internet Required (Score:5, Insightful)
I think they picked 9-5 As Sunrise as 8:00 is the latest time (without DST adjustment) the sun comes up the North Part of the United States. Allowing people of pre-alarm clock days to wake up when the sun rises. Enough time to prepare for work and get there an hour later. As for the 5 it is 8 hours later. Probably 8 hours as it can easily split up your day. 8 hours for sleeping, 8 hours for work, 8 hours of your own time... A healthy balance approach. As Well it can be split into 2 4 hour increments falling in the middle at noon for Lunch, and using the AM/PM to really help divide the day. As well 5:00 is when the sun sets on the shortest days of the year. So in general allowing lighted working conditions during your work day.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
A comment indicitive of someone who lives relatively close to the equator. For those of us who see a 6-12 hour difference in the number of daylight hours it can make a real difference.
Re:Picture this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Jeepers! Where do your kids go to school? The sun rises at around 5:30AM during the summer where I live. If DST were not in effect, that would be 4:30AM. What kind of school do your kids go to that the have to get up that early? Most of the schools around here start at least 2-2.5 hours AFTER sunrise, assuming they're even open in the summer.
You ARE aware that DST affects only summer hours, right?
Re:Get rid of it (Score:3, Insightful)
It would definitely make things easier if at least international businesses and communities talked UTC. Remember the Firefox download day where people from half the planet wondered why Mozilla hasn't started the action even though the date/time specified on the site have already been reached. Only afterwards did many people learn that Mozilla meant that time in some American time zone nobody has ever heard about.
If you try to give a date/time to someone who's probably not from your own country it's usually a bad idea to use local time. UTC was made for a reason and arguably should have greater significance on the internet.
9-5 caused by daylight savings time? (Score:3, Insightful)
The idea of an 8-hour day (and the 40-hour week) has only been around since about the beginning of the 20th century. It's mainly originated from workers' demands in response to conditions in which many factory owners required people to work 12 or more hours a day. Later, it was reinforced by legislation requiring overtime for hours in excess of 40 in an attempt to reduce unemployment. Before industrialization, there was little concept of a "standard" workday. Farmers worked however many hours were necessary to maintain their crops and livestock, even if it meant working from sunrise to after sunset. Shopkeepers in town set their hours according to their needs.
If DST weren't an issue, wouldn't it have been more natural to set an 8-hour workday to run from 8 AM to 4 PM rather than one hour later? In the northern tier of the contiguous U.S., it's common for the sun to set between 4 and 5 PM in the winter. And the sun is almost always up before 8, except for some places close to the Canadian border or near the western edge of a time zone. A workday ending at 5 instead of 4 would have made things somewhat more complicated in a society where electric lighting hadn't yet become ubiquitous. Does anyone know how the hours 9-5 got chosen rather than some other 8-hour span?
Just use Standard Time (Score:5, Insightful)
Daylight Saving Time really only works (if it works at all) for a narrow range of latitudes.
Too far south and the sun sets at the same time all year anyway. Too far north and the sun sets ridiculously late in the summer, and sets very early in the winter. Few of our southern hemisphere friends live far enough south for this to be an issue. Anybody here from Ushuaia?
Even here, in southern Canada (49 degrees north), the sun sets at 1600 in the winter. If we didn't mess with time zones the sun would set at 2000 in the summer, and it isn't really dark until nearly 2200. How much later do you want it to set?
...laura
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>What is the best way for humans to deal with the inconsistent amount of light over the year
The electric lightbulb. Specifically a 5 watt compact fluorescent. It's amazing how I can pretend it's daytime even when it's 4 a.m. in the morning. A marvelous invention, and I no longer care if the sun is up or not, and DST is irrelevant.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:4, Insightful)
This makes sense too because the radio station is used all over the country and neither it, nor your clocks have any way of knowing where you are.
Never understood how DST saved anything anyhow (Score:3, Insightful)
The only reason DST exists (Score:3, Insightful)
Is to get you to buy stuff. The initial intent was good - to save on candles and kerosene. These days DST simply doesn't make sense and the only reason it exists is because retail lobby wants it to exist. See, you're less likely to go out shopping when it's dark outside. So they make you adjust the clock, so you'd go shopping in the evening.
Re:Don't like DST? Do what I did... (Score:2, Insightful)
Better yet, Hawaii!
Alternatives (Score:3, Insightful)
Say, like simply freedom and the stimuli of letting electrical rates change and be variable so utilities try to flatten their demand?
The Sun is not a bulb (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to stereotype Slashdot readers or anything, but I notice nobody sees any difference between sunlight and electric light. If you go outdoors during the day, you may be surprised to find daylight has many ambient properties not provided by your basement's fluorescent bulb (warmth, happy feelings, etc).
Re:Nuke it! (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, 'cos that would be easier than just adjusting a clock.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:5, Insightful)
This might sound a little crazy but stick with me here:
If the daylight hours are changing such that you are not getting daylight at times that best match your schedule: change your schedule, not the clocks.
It's so crazy it could actually work...
Re:Japan's "System" (Score:2, Insightful)
Simple answer: abolish it. I lived in Japan for several years and they don't adjust their clocks. Guess what? I didn't notice! Well, except that I didn't have the hassle of changing all my clocks, and throwing off my sleeping rhythm twice a year.
I also lived in Japan, and on the contrary, I think Japan needs more hours of DST. Why on earth should it get light at 4 AM and get dark at 6 PM?
Re:Let's just use Zulu time... (Score:2, Insightful)
We should. Either way you have to do the math to figure out what time it is at the Dell help desk in India.
I like how they are doing us a favor by helping "humans to deal with the inconsistent amount of light over the year".
Didn't we evolve on this planet? Shouldn't we probably be used to it by now?
Daylight Savings Time? (Score:2, Insightful)
Change work and school timings, not the clock (Score:2, Insightful)
A good solution would be to just have businesses and schools decide when they want to open. The TZ stays the same all year round. If a business or school wants to open early, or late, it's their decision, and their responsibility to advertise the timings.
move it to the middle and leave it alone (Score:3, Insightful)
duh.
if businesses want to change their hours to take advantage of light differences, fine, but there's no practical reason to change the damned time.
Re:Move to Arizona (Score:3, Insightful)
It's late and you didn't provide any sources, so I won't either. The commerce clause has been invoked to cover absurd federal drug/culture war activities by the current administration. It was used in an attempt to fight California's emissions standards.
It certainly has been abused by every single administration/Congress since FDR.
You seem to be implying that the modern Republican Party supports a more equitable distribution of power between the branches or between the levels of government.
I said nothing at all to imply that, nor do I believe it. I was just lamenting the decision by FDR to apply political leverage against the theoretically non-political SCOTUS in order to disregard the Constitution, which made it possible for succeeding administrations -- including the current one -- to ignore the Constitution.
Further, I would argue that judicial support of new deal legislation came with the five justices appointed by FDR during his second term.
Eventually, yes. But he broke SCOTUS to his will even before then. Look up the Judiciary Reorganization of 1937, also known as the "Court-packing" bill. It was never passed, but its threat was sufficient to cow the justices.
I feel that an amendment should have been required to implement many of the New Deal programs. I also feel that many of those programs were a step in the right direction.
I disagree. New Deal-style social programs are fine, but they should be implemented at the state level. Such economic manipulation may (or may not) be necessary, but it's not an appropriate role for the federal government.
We tend to think of the states as having insufficient fiscal resources for carrying out such programs, but that's only because the bulk of the tax revenues go to the federal government. Had we not made the mistake embodied in the 16th and 17th amendments, the states would have had the necessary resources. As a benefit, the states would undoubtedly have taken different approaches, which would have provided an ongoing set of parallel experiments to see which approaches work best.
Re:No it isn't (Score:3, Insightful)