Daylight Time Wasting

[altivo]

I think we should line all those stupid politicians who believe playing with the clock saves energy, and tie each one head down to the pendulum of some large chiming clock for a year or something.

There is not, and cannot, be any significant savings. It shifts things around, costing some of us more and others less perhaps, but overall there can be no savings. There is added cost brought about by the switching back and forth and the complexities that are added to everything because of that. Altering the schedule does nothing at all except create more bother and fuss and cost extra to fix the problems. This is a case of politicians not having enough intelligence to do anything actually valuable, so they dream up things to talk about so as to look like they are doing something when they are not.

My farm animals do not use clocks. They do not take well to having their schedules altered by human clocks. The sun hasn't changed, they expect things to happen related to solar time. It takes a good solid month to readjust them, and then in the fall we get to do it all over. Because my day job is tied to the stupid clock, we do have to adjust the animals' schedule.

Much more energy would probably be saved by promoting flexible work shifts and breaking up rush hour traffic. Changing the time of day at which the traffic occurs does nothing to save energy. The amount of electricity poured into light pollution by streetlights and shopping malls stays the same, since those lights are on all night anyway. Electric energy used in the average home doesn't change either. If an hour less of lighting is used in the evening, chances are that more will be used in the morning. Not only that, but lengthening the recreational hours in the evening probably promotes more automobile use.

If we as a society want to promote energy saving, let's really do something to reduce consumption rather than just shifting it around on the clock or from one sector to another.

Comments

[cats-haven.livejournal.com]

I couldn't have said it better myself. Recovering from the adjustment of the clocks is murder when you work the weekends too. i was half out of it due to having one less hour of sleep yesterday since I stayed up in order to be able to turn the clocks forward.

[murakozi.livejournal.com]

The ideas you suggest have been bantered around for a long time. Unfortunately, nobody really does anything about following up on them. Every company seems to just figure that they'll keep their schedules the same and let someone else vary theirs.

I'm not a huge fan of Daylight Savings Time in the first place. It doesn't matter much to me whether it's dark or light out when I go to/from work. More daylight in the evening isn't going to save any energy in my case, since it'll be dark when I get up and I'll be using lights and such at home and at work that I wouldn't have if it were an hour later. Most of the office buildings that I've encountered are just like the one I'm in now: the lights are off til people start coming in and turning them on and they pretty much stay on til the end of the day no matter how light or dark it is outside. The amount of time the lights are on, workstations are in use, HVAC, and other equipment is running is the same.

As for after work activities, well, folks are going to do shopping/classes/sports stuff on pretty much the same schedule. In this area, commuting can be even worse during the summer because not only are you stuck in traffic, but instead of being stuck around sundown, you now get to sit there while the temperature is higher.

On the surface, though, shifting the time around looks good so long as you don't put any real thought into the effects and it makes politicians look like they're doing something productive.

Fortunately, at least at the barn here, the horses don't mind getting fed an hour earlier in the spring. Instead, it's suddenly getting fed an hour later than they expect that makes them fidgety.

[kamo2paws.livejournal.com]

It costs our company hundreds of thousands every year to realign new equipment with our systems and Daylight Savings always causes everything to be an hour off for the local customers. Total waste of time, money and brain cells.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

This pretty much fits my expectations. So why don't the corporations start hitting politicians over the head with a clue by four? In many cases, it is corporate contributions that elect these brainless morons in the first place.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Getting fed an hour early in the morning doesn't bother horses, no. But in the evening we have a Catch-22. Put them in and feed them an hour early again, when it's still nice and light and pleasant outside so they get fidgety when they've finished eating and they are stuck in their stalls for an hour before dark; or else make them WAIT an hour to be fed and put in, and boy do we hear about that one. Horses in particular seem to tell time not only by the sun, but by their tummies.

Sheep just don't like waking up early. They move slowly and stupidly, even for sheep, and don't quite seem to get what they are supposed to be doing. Going into the pen at night causes the same quandary as with the horses, though.

I simply refuse to see that this silly scheme ever really saved much energy, and today when so much activity happens indoors or involves equipment that runs for the same number of hours no matter what, it makes no sense at all.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

You're kidding about staying up just to change the clocks, aren't you? Please tell me you are.

I change the important ones before going to bed at 10 pm. The rest get done over the next couple of days, at my convenience. Making a rough count in my head: I've reset more than 20 clocks since Saturday, not counting any at work, or my wristwatches, or any computers. Maybe I should present a bill for my time to the Bush Administration?

[dakhun.livejournal.com]

The worst part, for me, is that Canada felt that it had to go along with this little scheme, for economic reasons. Not economic reasons because of saving electricity, but for economic reasons of cross-border trade and so that Canadian and American companies that were accustomed to staying in sync with each other could stay in sync. The lost value from trade and the chaos of having several weeks of the year when nobody would know what time it was across the border could easily exceed any net savings or net cost in electricity, which would be miniscule in either instance. So, it doesn't matter how stupid it was, or what decisions are made to fiddle around with the clocks in the future: we have to go along with it, even though it isn't our decision.

[(Anonymous)]

Dear Rider.

First of all, LJ is all messed up and I have to go through a long rigamorole to get my icon right and so forth but fine. So be it.

Just like stupid Daylight Savings Time. Now if it really was, that would be different and better but all this does is cost us time, money and life. Gee.

Get off this rant please. You are starting to sound like me.

Imp

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's a shame. Had Canada resisted, it might have helped get the thing stopped before now. Mexico has been a holdout so far.

Of course, nothing stops the federal government. Back in 1973 when I toured the Southwest, I remember that Richard Nixon's first attempt to impose universal daylight saving on the US had just been activated with mixed success. All federal government offices, including post offices, were forced to go onto DST. The State of Arizona, however, refused it. The Navajo Reservation, which lies partly in Arizona and partly in Utah, went along with the feds, probably because their council was heavily influenced with arguments about it being unpatriotic to resist. The Hopi, however, who live on a reservation completely surrounded by the Navajo, rejected DST. The clocks in many towns often disagreed from one side of the street to the other, or even from one floor to another in the same building. It was utterly ridiculous. Oddly enough, the Hopi were the more "modern" of the two tribes, with activities going on in modern office buildings and such, where having the time in sync with the rest of the area might be more important. The Navajo, at least in the areas I saw, were still agricultural, mostly shepherds, and many even lived in traditional hogans, without electricity. So most of them probably didn't much care what time Nixon thought it was, and DST was decidedly not saving any energy out there. ;p

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Heh, if I sound like you it must be from listening to you so often. ;D

Clear your cookies in your web browser, make sure your system clock has the right date and time, then sign onto LJ again. Most likely your login cookies had conflicting dates and times.

One good thing about daylight savings time

[wolfgrowl.livejournal.com]

WE DON'T HAVE IT DOWN HERE!

(And as a bonus we're now one hour earlier than Toronto, and H.O. stops bothering me an hour earlier. And the television that is broadcast here is now one hour earlier so TV addicts can go to bed an hour earlier. Oh and financial markets open (and close) earlier too.)

So my vote would be to continue to inconvenience millions for our convenience!

[heavens-steed.livejournal.com]

Well said, my wise old horse :)

I have to admit that I do like daylight savings in the fall because the clocks get set back an hour so you get that extra hour of time. But you make good points about energy consumption and the extra effort it takes to adjust to the time changes.

[hrrunka]

Aye. I loathe the "daylight saving" changes too. This year I'm going to be avoiding the weekend they change in the UK by visiting Canada, but that's a bit extreme. I guess at least the jet-lag will be worth it. ;)

I was wryly amused by the number of problems the latest batch of DST fixes seem to have caused. One thing it did for us at work was find quite a few incorrectly configured machines. Oh well.

[bariki.livejournal.com]

I can't think of anything more pissed off than an angry, hungry horse. Ouch. x.x

Perhaps if Americans paid $6.30 for a gallon of gas like we Britons do then they'd invest a little more in public transport and drive private vehicles a little less, ne? Heh, although the flip side to that is that you'd end up with a public transport system as twisted as ours where it's cheaper to fly to Rome from London than it is to get to Leeds and back on the train. *shrugs*

Two more weeks till British Summer Time kicks off here. The BBC was talking about it this morning, saying that for two days after the switch the crime rate drops, as do the number of car accidents. Hmm, perhaps the criminals forgot to change their clocks?

[songdogmi.livejournal.com]

Now that I've gotten caught up on sleep from losing the hour over the weekend, the worst thing about the time change for me is this: I often judge when to go home by how dark it is out, and it's not dark yet. (I tend to get caught up in work, and don't stare at the clock these days.) Of course I'd have had to make the adjustment at some point (i.e. March 31), but it seems pretty striking today.

I agree that it's largely pointless as far as saving energy or money, and more of an inconvenience to people who have the sorts of concerns you have with the critters. I can't really see any benefit at all, aside from a possible one-time revenue boost for those involved in releasing software upgrades.

Re: One good thing about daylight savings time

[altivo.livejournal.com]

How about a one time change of time zone for the islands? That would produce the same effect, and if the rest of us stopped with this clock shifting idiocy, it would be permanent.

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

We're the only state on the East coast of Australia who voted out Daylight savings ;)

[altivo.livejournal.com]

But all that does is give back the hour they stole from you in the spring, and it only happens once. Hardly seems worth the headaches to me. Meanwhile, all sorts of accounting and other things have to be meddled with to compensate for having one 23 hour day in the year and another that is 25 hours long and has the same times twice for one of them.

Back in 1973, Phil Frank drew a political cartoon of Richard Nixon holding a blanket and a pair of scissors. Quoth the President: "I will now demonstrate how to save energy and stay warmer by cutting a foot off the top of your blanket and sewing it on the bottom." It's still true.

When the concept was invented, electric lights and small appliances accounted for much of the energy consumption. Gas powered vehicle travel was largely limited to daylight hours because headlights weren't that great and neither were the roads. Consequently, the clock shift made a little more sense and probably did save a little bit. The trouble is, things have changed a hell of a lot in the last century. Automobile travel is 24/7 now, and unaffected by the clock time. People will do it anyway, regardless. Most electricity is consumed by devices that operate on schedules having little or nothing to do with when daylight is present. Either it is lighting that simply stays on all night or even 24 hours a day, or it is other devices like washing machines, air conditioners, pumps, computers, and televisions that will be operated the same number of hours in a day without respect to the clock time.

My answer to those who insist that there really is an energy saving is then why don't we just do it year round? Forget this stupid switching back and forth. Frankly, the time when I really want daylight to last later is in the winter. In the summer there is no shortage. If having it dark for an hour later in the morning bothers you in winter, too bad. It bothers me in summer because I'm an early riser. What right do they have to mess up MY day?

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Yep. As usual, those who decree these idiotic things are so isolated from the reality of it all that they are like Marie Antoinette with the "Let them eat cake" crack.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Nah. Riding public transport means rubbing shoulders with icky people that you don't want to admit even exist. Ain't gonna happen. Actually, there's another issue with that too: As you've no doubt experienced, though moreso out west where I'm not sure you've been, the distances here are vast compared with what you have in the UK. Effective public transport over those distances is just as costly as private vehicles. Moreso if you pass the full cost on to those who use it. Of course, the drivers of private vehicles are paying for road construction and maintenance, but those costs are "hidden" so they don't really see it as part of the cost of driving their car wherever and whenever they choose.

If the drop in crime and accidents is real, maybe we should push the clock forward another hour every third day, year round. Would that work? ;p

[altivo.livejournal.com]

That and it lets politicians crow about how they did something about the energy crisis. It's all BS, but like the war on drugs and now the war on terror, it seems to fool a lot of people into thinking something real was done.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Which means what? You end up with a two hour clock difference when crossing one of your borders? Actually, I think that like the US, Australia needs to boot out some big mouthed and empty headed politicians. Right into the ocean would be a good place to kick them.

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

Yup and being an hour out compared to every other state on the East coast.

Still at least I don't have to set my clocks forward or change my sleeping patters ;)

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I don't change my sleeping paffers either. For that matter, I don't change them when I'm awake.

[zachary-geminus.livejournal.com]

Your animals do too use clocks. You just never realize it. Check under the hay sometime. ^.^

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

I meant patterns O.O

*looks at his paws* Ohno I have "patters" you have "paffers" and I have "patters" *falls over giggling*

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Patters are just small paffers unless the claws are out. See?

*stands with a silly grin, perking one ear to the pitter patter of your tiny paffers*

Get out of that one if you can.

[bariki.livejournal.com]

Hmm, but 80% of the US population lives in the city (source: BBC News). Surely that moots the idea that investing in decent public transport isn't worth it, just because one in five wouldn't benefit as much. As for those people that you'd rather admit don't exist... and I've used Greyhound buses, so I understand what you mean here... surely cheaper, cleaner transport for them can be nothing but a good thing?

Finally, getting people out of their cars and onto buses and trains might help to reduce the 25% of global carbon emissions that the United States is responsible for - rather a large proportion from a country with only 5% of the world's population.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

They don't need to hide anything under their straw. I have a large schoolroom type clock hanging in each barn, and I dutifully changed them an hour ahead on Sunday morning. Makes no difference, though.

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

*rolls about holding his sides* Ack no no XD

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I'm not at all opposed to developing better public transport systems. The problem remains that we have a lot of difficulty getting people to use them here. That's a very stubborn cultural issue.

I'm suspicious of that 80% figure. How did they define "in the city"? My guess is that the majority of the US population lives in suburban areas rather than in the core cities themselves. That's what makes public transit such a knotty problem: sprawl.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

*tickles you more while you're rolling about*

Now don't tell me I'm mean to kitties. See, I made you laugh. That's good isn't it?

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

*tries to crawl away to safety* Ah no no Mercy!!

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

I love the train system in Japan, much cheaper than owning a car there ;)

[avon-deer.livejournal.com]

Perhaps if Americans paid $6.30 for a gallon of gas like we Britons do then they'd invest a little more in public transport

We don't. What makes you think the US would? ;)

[hrrunka]

invest a little more in public transport

Hasn't happened here in the UK last time I looked. They keep pushing fuel prices up but they do sweet nothing about providing an alternative, at least down here in the South East. Even in the Big Smoke the public transport is quite flakey. Beyond the M25, except along the main arterial routes, there is no effective public transport.

for two days after the switch the crime rate drops, as do the number of car accidents

I'd guess the crime rate drop is just down to people being out of kilter and taking a while to adjust. The accident rate drop can probably be accounted for by a slightly greater number of people leaving for work late, thus spreading the rush our a bit and reducing the peak slightly. That said, my personal observations suggest that Mondays and Thursdays are the ones my journey to work is more likely to be disrupted by accidents. I can make a guess why Mondays would be worse, but Thursdays I'll just have to blame on Arthur Dent...

[hrrunka]

...and over in WA, where they've already voted it out three times, those idiots in charge have insisted on trying again!

[octatonic.livejournal.com]

Yes.

[bariki.livejournal.com]

£0.90 for one liter of petrol (that's what Esso down the road wanted yesterday morning), converted into gallons (1 US gallon = 3.7854118 liters) makes one gallon cost £3.48. Assuming an exchange rate of £1=$1.85 (yesterday's retail exchange rate at HSBC), one gallon of petrol expressed in dollars would cost $6.30.

So, yes we do, although I admit that the exchange rate skews the illustration somewhat. :P

[avon-deer.livejournal.com]

Actually...when I said "We don't", I was referring to the public transport bit.

[bariki.livejournal.com]

This happened only yesterday: Railways to get 1000 extra carriages. It's one small improvement in an otherwise crippled public transport system - hey, I never said our system was great! :P Paying £80 for a return trip to Leeds when I could go to Rome and back for the same money seems rather anachronistic to say the least.

Retail fuel prices have actually fallen in the last three months (down from highes of about £0.97 to roughly £0.91), and natural gas prices have also fallen a little (seen the ads for price cuts by British Gas on TV?). Only electricity seems unwilling to budge much from its unit cost.

And, for all the extra money you're giving to the Treasury, you will get some things back: a shiny new submarine-based nuclear weapons programme, satellite-based road pricing to squeeze out a few more pounds from you when you drive and a very expensive identity card and ePassport scheme. Wow, isn't Gordon generous?

[bariki.livejournal.com]

Ahh. Yes, that makes a bit more sense. ^)^

[avon-deer.livejournal.com]

That's the trouble with fuel duty. It starts off as an honest attempt to get people to leave their cars at home, and use the bus. Then when people actually start doing this, the government lose all the cash they get from fuel duty. This results in a sudden change of heart. Eventually they come to depend on the revenue from fuel duty. Which is exactly why nothing will change.

Those 1000 extra carriages are a gimmick. They will be rolled out mostly to the South East (where they are admittedly needed the most), but it will still not be enough to cope with anticipated growth. I will treat the "cities in the rest of England and Wales are also expected to benefit" bit with the same suspicion as I have for that statement every time I hear it. Also; another problem, mainly moving about WITHIN city centres is being neglected. Bristol/Leeds/Liverpool/Southampton tram, anyone?

Basically, sorting out this county's transport woes will come with a huge price tag. No one in power is prepared to pick up the bill. Not while they can tax the population to death under the guise of being green; provide no viable alternatives and sit back and fund wars with the proceeds.

I would suspect the situation in the US is similar, with the obvious difference of Oil industry political pressure groups playing the inhibiting role, instead of tax collection. (sorry for hi-jacking your LJ, Altivo).

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I think Avon's "We don't" was meant to refer to spending on public transit rather than to deny the price of petrol in the UK.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Oh, tax collection and revenue are part of the craziness here too. Even though fuel is cheaper here, a huge percentage of what we pay for it is tax supposedly earmarked for road construction and maintenance, traffic enforcement, and now pollution abatement. In fact, it's difficult to trace where that money goes but I'm sure a lot of it never reaches the supposed target spending.

[hrrunka]

1000 extra

Yeah. I heard that on the news this morning. Nice to know they will throw the occasional peanut in the right direction. It's too late and probably way too little, but it's probably better than nothing...

fuel prices have actually fallen

...though not because of anything the government has done, of course.

shiny new

Oh yes, they've all sorts of ideas how to spend the money they raise. Pity most of them are psycho-ceramic...

[bariki.livejournal.com]

If there's one thing that you can count on the government doing, it's spending our money in bizarre and wasteful ways.

[bariki.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I realised that about seven hours ago. ^)^