The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Daylight Savings Time wastes money
Smug Duckling
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
According to the Wall Street Journal, a study conducted on a few counties in Indiana that just switched over to DST, daylight savings time actually costs money contrary to popular belief.
I hate DST and would love to get rid of it. It's a needless annoyance. In the modern world, no ones cares about this one hour shift in the hours of daylight. Given that it doesn't even save money as it has long been purported to, I think that it should be abolished.
The Wall Street Journal wrote:For decades, conventional wisdom has held that daylight-saving time, which begins March 9, reduces energy use. But a unique situation in Indiana provides evidence challenging that view: Springing forward may actually waste energy.
Up until two years ago, only 15 of Indiana's 92 counties set their clocks an hour ahead in the spring and an hour back in the fall. The rest stayed on standard time all year, in part because farmers resisted the prospect of having to work an extra hour in the morning dark. But many residents came to hate falling in and out of sync with businesses and residents in neighboring states and prevailed upon the Indiana Legislature to put the entire state on daylight-saving time beginning in the spring of 2006.
Indiana's change of heart gave University of California-Santa Barbara economics professor Matthew Kotchen and Ph.D. student Laura Grant a unique way to see how the time shift affects energy use. Using more than seven million monthly meter readings from Duke Energy Corp., covering nearly all the households in southern Indiana for three years, they were able to compare energy consumption before and after counties began observing daylight-saving time. Readings from counties that had already adopted daylight-saving time provided a control group that helped them to adjust for changes in weather from one year to the next.
Their finding: Having the entire state switch to daylight-saving time each year, rather than stay on standard time, costs Indiana households an additional $8.6 million in electricity bills. They conclude that the reduced cost of lighting in afternoons during daylight-saving time is more than offset by the higher air-conditioning costs on hot afternoons and increased heating costs on cool mornings.
"I've never had a paper with such a clear and unambiguous finding as this," says Mr. Kotchen, who presented the paper at a National Bureau of Economic Research conference this month.
A 2007 study by economists Hendrik Wolff and Ryan Kellogg of the temporary extension of daylight-saving in two Australian territories for the 2000 Summer Olympics also suggested the clock change increases energy use.
That isn't what Benjamin Franklin would have expected. In 1784, he observed what an "immense sum! that the city of Paris might save every year, by the economy of using sunshine instead of candles." (Mr. Franklin didn't propose setting clocks forward, instead he satirically suggested levying a tax on window shutters, ringing church bells at sunrise and, if that didn't work, firing cannons down the street in order to rouse Parisians out of their beds earlier.)
During the first and second world wars, the U.S. temporarily enacted daylight-saving time as an energy-saving measure. Over time, most states began changing their clocks, and in response to the 1973 oil shock, the country extended daylight-saving time in 1974 and 1975. Analyzing that time shift, a 1975 report by the U.S. Department of Transportation concluded that the change reduced electricity demand by 1% in March and April. But in a 1976 report to Congress evaluating that analysis, the National Bureau of Standards concluded that there were no significant energy savings.
Still, the Transportation Department study stuck. Speaking before the House of Representatives in 2002, Indiana Rep. Julia Carson said that under daylight-saving time, Indiana families would save "over $7 million annually in electricity rates alone."
In 2005, Reps. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts and Fred Upton of Michigan drafted legislation that would extend daylight-saving time nationwide. Congress approved the amendment, which called for clocks to be sprung forward three weeks earlier in the spring and one week later in the fall. The change went into effect last year.
The energy-savings numbers often cited by lawmakers and others come from research conducted in the 1970s. Yet a key difference between now and the '70s -- or, for that matter, Ben Franklin's time -- is the prevalence of air conditioning.
"In an inland state like Indiana, it gets hot in the summer," says Steve Gustafsen, a lawyer in New Albany, Ind., who filed a suit in 2000 in an effort to get his county to abandon daylight-saving time. "Daylight saving means running the air conditioner more."
That was borne out by the study by Mr. Kotchen and Ms. Grant. Their research showed that while an extra hour of daylight in the evenings may mean less electricity is spent on lights, it also means that houses are warmer in the summer when people come home from work. Conversely, during daylight-saving time's cooler months, people may crank up the thermostats more in the morning.
Still, the case on daylight-saving time isn't closed.
"My read on this study is that it's one data point that gives us something to think about," says Richard Stevie, an economist with Duke Energy, of Mr. Kotchen and Ms. Grant's research. "I think that additional research really needs to be done." And UCLA economist Matthew Kahn points out that even if the evidence on Indiana is airtight, the effect of daylight-saving time on other states might be different -- a point that Mr. Markey makes as well.
"One study of the situation in Indiana cannot accurately asses the impact of [daylight-saving time] changes across the nation, especially when it does not include more northern, colder regions," the congressman notes.
There may also be social benefits to daylight-saving time that weren't covered in the research. When the extension of daylight-saving time was proposed by Mr. Markey, he cited studies that noted "less crime, fewer traffic fatalities, more recreation time and increased economic activity" with the extra sunlight in the evening.
In Indiana, the debate goes on. "The simpler the issue, the more people have opinions about it," says Indiana State Rep. Scott Reske, who voted against the switch to daylight-saving time. In the aftermath of the time shift, "a lot of people who hated it now love it, and a lot of people who loved it now hate it," he says. A separate debate over whether the state should be on Central or Eastern Time rages on.
I hate DST and would love to get rid of it. It's a needless annoyance. In the modern world, no ones cares about this one hour shift in the hours of daylight. Given that it doesn't even save money as it has long been purported to, I think that it should be abolished.
Smug Duckling on
0
Posts
If you have blankets on, you don't need as much heating.
So, 8.6 million a year divided amongst all the households in Indiana.
I understand the claim they are refuting is that it saves money so really any increase in expenditure would be sufficient to prove what they're after but I'm really not seeing this making much of a difference either way. (at least economically speaking)
Also, isn't DST something that takes time to get used to? I wouldn't expect a ton of people dealing with it for the first time ever to go about adjusting in the most efficient ways.
EDIT: Ok so the first 3 times since the study was done over the course of 3 years... It weakens my point a bit but I think it still stands.
Yeah, but I don't crank up the heat when I wake up, either...if it's cold, I just brave it for the half hour it takes me to get ready and leave for work. Maybe I'm just stingy. :P
I guess I can see it costing more, though, especially with schools and business.
Costs aside, I do like DST. Being more of an evening person, it's nice having it stay light an hour later.
For that matter, I think it's time we abolish time zones altogether. GMT for all! It's a bit ridiculous that we don't even use uniform time codes on this planet. If E.T. ever visits, he'll laugh at us for the notion of time zones.
Actually that's true.
There are 6345289 people in Indiana (as of a 2007 estimate), and 15 out of 92 counties were tracked in this study, meaning that
$8600000 / (15/92 * 6345289 people) = $8.31 per person
more was spent over the course of the study.
Yeah... That's not actually that much.
Still hate DST though.
EDIT: saved = wasted. Way too late.
Also, people who complain it's hard to "deal with" DST are silly. Twice a year you move your clocks one hour. You don't even need to remember when or in which direction: modern computers take care of it for you. It couldn't be easier. An hour offset shouldn't be too much for your body to adapt to, it's less than most jetlags you'll feel while travelling. OMG ABOLISH TIME ZONES?
fuck daylight savings time, fuck it in its stupid ass.
(my point being, if it serves no real purpose other than to annoy people...why do we still do it?)
It's not that it's particularly hard to deal with, it's just that the adjustment (by which I am not referring to the simple act of changing your clocks) is inconvenient.
Oops. Wrote the wrong word. Good catch.
Actually, DST is pretty stupid these days. At one point, back in the time of oil lamps and fireplaces, it likely did save energy. Now, however, it doesn't matter or, as this study might indicate, actually costing money and energy. Of course, I also think we should abolish time zones all together and move to decimal time.
What's with all the time-zone hate though guys? Doing away with it entirely seems... difficult.
I did. In fact, we were frowned upon for NOT doing it.
People need to quit being so lazy and get the hell out of bed.
3DS FC: 5343-7720-0490
Also, at the beginning and end of DST the times are always really screwy. You start waking up in the dark and you are upset but a month later and the times fit much better than they would have. But you don't think about DST a month after a switch.
But DST doesn't change when the sun sets or rises one bit. Now, if we all want to agree to have work start and end one hour earlier during the Summer, I'm cool with that. But changing the actual time code? Ridiculous.
It's currently easy to understand that 6AM ~= sunrise, because we have to remember all those stupid time zones to begin with! Under world-wide GMT, you would always know the time code around the world (it's the same), but would instead have to figure out sunrise/sunset times. That's no more difficult than remembering time zones, e.g. UK would still roughly be U.S. Eastern + 5 hours.
The arguments in favor of DST and time zones remind me of the arguments against the metric system. Like, some people argue that since 1 lbs = 0.45359237 kg, it's better to remember the "easy" imperial measure than the "hard" metric measure. Which of course is rubbish. It's all a matter of what your original reference point is.
Contrary to popular belief, Earth is not the center of the solar system. :P
Also, DST sucks. My roommate was telling me that 5% more heart attacks happen during DST; I think it was probably a terrible study but I'm willing to cite unscientific statistics in order to slay DST.
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
Edit: Although by the time spring forward hits I'm usually seeing at least a little light after work. Yay!
Then step into the 20th century and get AC. :P
Let me tell you, I wait for DST all winter. Finally it won't be pitch black out at 5:00. Plus once we get into summer it's nice to be able to walk around and actually do stuff outside after work.
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
I don't care either way. Just wish they'd pick one and stop fucking with it. Hell, make it :30 mins for the whole year and split the difference.
Also, anybody who thinks it's "weird" to have daylight at 9 pm should go a few lines of latitude north of where they're at. When I was in Ireland a few years ago it didn't get dark until nearly 11 in the middle of summer. Crazy stuff. Made it really easy to get up early in the morning, though, although I imagine the winters would be hell.
Till we have an eclipse and everyone goes crazy and burns down society.
but they're listening to every word I say
Sold!
It works better for business the current way. Easier to adjust to travel, since you have a general idea when stores are open and when things are closed. When the liquor store opens...
Plus, who gets to decide where noon is? I would hate to be the shitty country that gets to have 3 AM as mid day.
but they're listening to every word I say
Why would it be easier to adjust to travel? Let's take NY City -> London.
Now you have to remember: Stores open at 9:00AM in both locations. Also London is +5 hours.
Under my glorious system: NY and London have the same time. Also London stores open 5 hours earlier.
In fact, since there is a significant probability that stores don't open a 9:00AM local (current system) around the world, you have to remember both, time zone and opening-hour difference. Under my system, you never have to remember time zones and only ever have to remember opening-hour difference.
Clearly, the reference time we'd all adopt is GMT. AKA: 0° longitude, Zulu time.
And now it apparently also costs us more to implement this stupid, backwards, inconvenient system.
Grrrrr.