Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
EU to recommend abolishing DST
Options
Comments
-
Wow where to start with all this mindless guffFr Tod Umptious wrote: »If the rest of Europe told you to jump off a cliff would you ?
Nice strawman but also sad you had to resort to it.Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »Our northerly latitude and our westerly longitude makes the seasonal swings in our length of daylight different from those in big population bases like France, Germany,and central Europe.
They get by in Iceland just fineFr Tod Umptious wrote: »Just because they think it's a good idea does not make it a good idea for us.
Still havent proved this using any data but keep spouting it if it makes you feel good.Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »In the US Arizona does not observe DST, parts of Indiana do not also.
In Australia QLD does not where as NSW does.
There is scope for non conformity.
Indeed there is which is why the whole Northern Ireland argument is garbage.
However when we are going to single ourselves out from our largest International trading and business partner then that scope for non conformity needs to be weighed against the fact that we would be creating a very unique blocker for business relationships that could honestly hurt our competitivenessB0ll0x to the rest of the EU, the med states don't have to tolerate the light change at our latitude.
Very matureAnd anyway, its not like the EU would be all in one time zone, the Eastern nations will still be +3hr difference from us, albeit fixed for the year.
Whooosh...... thats the sound of the argument going over your head btw......We need to do what is best for US. In practical terms, there is so much goods traffic across the border it makes no sense to have different business hours, but the main consideration IMO is the same one that was argued years ago, the kids should not be going to school in the dark, its an extra risk that is not necessary. All this talk about usable business hours and people walking the cities in the winter evenings is just B.S.
See above theres multiple examples for scope of non conformity on small land borders.
Also the "think of the children" emotional argument is really quite pathetic. You do know it was created by those in favour of DST as another way to get stupid people who couldn't understand it more passionate about it right? The real and only reason for DST was energy saving, nothing more.
But sure lets take a logical look at it if you really want. Currently it doesnt get bright really until about 9 o clock in the deepest part of winter, you do know theres plenty of kids venturing to schools from around 7am yeah? So this wont affect them. Then theres also the fact that the vast vast majority of kids are either driven by their parents or on public transport for the majority of their journeys these days again all done prior to 9am when it actually starts to get bright.
So which kids are you worried about again?0 -
The amount of drama here, you'd swear we were about to relocate within the Arctic Circle with pitch darkness for half the year.0
-
So what would people do with their (radio controlled) clocks?
See posts #971 and #9750 -
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »For the love of jaysus. Are you actually serious with this nonsense? Jet lag? Jet lag? It’s an hour. What are you talking about?
And if you had read the last few pages of the thread, I said I thought the summertime portion being lengthened is a good one. The clock change doesn’t have to equally divide up the year. UTC for two or three months in the dead of winter would get us through the dark mornings and in midwinter, there’d be the square root of fück all extra useable evening, the days are so short.
It’s an hour on a Saturday night. In Ireland one of these Saturdays is always a bank holiday.0 -
So which kids are you worried about again?
Not the kids getting up at 7am to get to school at 9am because they largely don’t exist. Unlike work which takes you across a city or into one, schools are generally close by.
Still waiting for a reasonable explanation as to the major problems with DST. We’ve had the changing clocks one, in an age where most clocks automatically change. Then there’s the jet lag.
That’s it.0 -
Advertisement
-
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »He literally said “changing the clocks”. I don’t know about you but I'd take that to mean changing the clocks.
And if for some reason, that’s not what he meant, a vague “various reasons” is hardly convincing. Wow, various reasons! That’s not at all nebulous. I’m totally convinced now.
No, I’m sticking with it barely being an imposition. I want your life if this is something that really affects you.
I obviously didn't mean the actual physical act of changing them I meant the time changing though it is also an unnecessary annoyance as not everything changes automatically cars for example, clocks on microswaves and covens etc also. Losing an hour of brightness for no good reason every every for the entire time the clocks are on winter time is the big reason for a pointless hour of light in the morning but there are many other reasons. Many parents have a issues with kids for example as they don't understand the change and it can take a long time to get them back on schedule, its a pain losing an hour of your sunday when they go forward especially if you like to sleep on Sundays and so are waking up with the day gone etc etc.0 -
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »For the love of jaysus. Are you actually serious with this nonsense? Jet lag? Jet lag? It’s an hour. What are you talking about?
And if you had read the last few pages of the thread, I said I thought the summertime portion being lengthened is a good one. The clock change doesn’t have to equally divide up the year. UTC for two or three months in the dead of winter would get us through the dark mornings and in midwinter, there’d be the square root of fück all extra useable evening, the days are so short.
Agree with this, I always thought the five months from October to March was too long for UTC, but I wouldn't like to see DST all year round as the mid-winter mornings would be miserable. Clocks back from mid-Nov to late Jan seems reasonable.0 -
Hamsterchops wrote: »So what would people do with their (radio controlled) clocks?
See posts #971 and #975
same as we do now with the clock on the microwave, leave it off by an hour for 5 months of the year...0 -
Lackadaisical wrote: »We could always do what Sommarøy (Store Sommarøya island) in Norway did and abolish time altogether :
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/20/sommaroy-island-norway-attempt-create-first-time-free-zone
This didn't happen, and was never intended to happen. It was a PR stunt designed to attract tourism to the area.0 -
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »...I said I thought the summertime portion being lengthened is a good one. The clock change doesn’t have to equally divide up the year. UTC for two or three months in the dead of winter would get us through the dark mornings and in midwinter, there’d be the square root of fück all extra useable evening, the days are so short.
Why isn't this being considered? It would make absolute sense. I absolutely abhor DST and time changing twice a year, its a ridiculous senseless system which sees perfectly bright late October evenings plunged into darkness for no proper reason.
I would agree with DST if clocks were to change on the 1st December and back again at the end of January. There is no need for 5 fúcking months of it when it serves no purpose other than to follow an outdate and obsolete tradition.0 -
Advertisement
-
The length of day in Ireland is actually very similar to Northern Germany and Belgium and is longer than most of Scandinavia's populated areas.
Ireland does not have the issues that might be experienced in the far North of Scotland and Shetland. It's much further south.
We would be screwed up if we adopt permanent summer time as it's way off our solar time. We aren't too far north, were too far west to be attempting to adopt CET.
If anything, France and Spain should be on GMT.
If we go to permanent summer time, we end up with sunrise at about 9:45am in midwinter
If we go to permanent GMT, we end up with sunset an hour earlier in summer, which to me would be a lot less impactful.
Personally, I would find a 9:40 sunrise extremely depressing.
I don't think the level of consultation done on this was adequate. It smacks of a bubble speaking to itself.
We'll have to go with GMT, or I think we'll risk making life very hard for people who are impacted by the light levels and achieving very little.
I mean it's great that you all love your extra hour at this time of the year at night time but it could have very serious impacts on someone who goes into hibernation mode / SAD in low light.0 -
Lackadaisical wrote: »The length of day in Ireland is actually very similar to Northern Germany and Belgium and is longer than most of Scandinavia's populated areas.
Ireland does not have the issues that might be experienced in the far North of Scotland and Shetland. It's much further south.
We would be screwed up if we adopt permanent summer time as it's way off our solar time. We aren't too far north, were too far west to be attempting to adopt CET.
If anything, France and Spain should be on GMT.
If we go to permanent summer time, we end up with sunrise at about 9:45am in midwinter
If we go to permanent GMT, we end up with sunset an hour earlier in summer, which to me would be a lot less impactful.
Personally, I would find a 9:40 sunrise extremely depressing.
Losing an hour of usable light in summer would be a disaster, honestly I don’t get the love for this bit of biightness in the morning. The morning is a depressing slog regardless and the light is vastly more useful in the evening during winter never mind in summer where people are out doing stuff until late. I was doing things outside last night until midnight, it was bright for most of that.
I know it’s me personally but I don’t even leave the house until 9 for work so it will be getting bright regardless for me but even if not I really don’t see the issue with traveling to work in darkness a lot of people do it regardless and I really don’t see the “use” for this light in going to school or work where as it’s actually usable in the evening particularly up until the end of November and from Mid-Jan onwards if we stayed on summer time. There is also 2 to 3 weeks of the time when it’s Christmas and most people are off work for this and not getting up or commuting to work school anyway. This fact is being missed by a lot of people too.0 -
I'm not kidding, I would probably have to emigrate if it were dark at 9:40 in the morning.
I lived Helsinki's for a year and I literally couldn't function in the mornings. It was just horrible to have no light in the mornings. I don't seem to biologically wake up until sunlight hits my retinas. So basically I would be sleepy until I got outside into the sun for a break at about 11am with coffee.
We are far, far too far west for CET (GMT+1) in winter. Our real solar time is basically GMT minus about 30+ mins, so pushing us into CET would be throwing us over an hour and a half off our solar time on the west coast in particular.
Sitting at GMT all year would also mean better time proximity to North America for businesses, which is actually more relevant than the continent to many of us. A lot of us spend a significant % of our time talking to American based and UK based colleagues due to the language and also Ireland being a major hub of US FDI and tech firms and so on.
Also most people are most definitely not off for two weeks around Christmas. I worked Xmas Eve last year and took two days off. That's not uncommon outside of education and some public sector jobs.
For a lot of sectors (not just retail) there's very little time off around December and January and a lot of people also save up annual leave for summer holidays.0 -
Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »Not the kids getting up at 7am to get to school at 9am because they largely don’t exist. Unlike work which takes you across a city or into one, schools are generally close by.
Still waiting for a reasonable explanation as to the major problems with DST. We’ve had the changing clocks one, in an age where most clocks automatically change. Then there’s the jet lag.
That’s it.
If you don't think there are kids all over the country leaving to get to school at 7:30am your completely out of touch. Time to pop out of your urban bubble maybe?
You did conveniently ignore my point about the vast majority of kids either use public transport for the majority of their journey or being driven in a car the entire way thus removing the problem about walking to school somehow being "dangerous"
I never raised the argument about physically changing clocks or the jet lag so not sure why you are asking me about them?0 -
Flying Fox wrote: »Agree with this, I always thought the five months from October to March was too long for UTC, but I wouldn't like to see DST all year round as the mid-winter mornings would be miserable. Clocks back from mid-Nov to late Jan seems reasonable.Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »Why isn't this being considered? It would make absolute sense. I absolutely abhor DST and time changing twice a year, its a ridiculous senseless system which sees perfectly bright late October evenings plunged into darkness for no proper reason.
I would agree with DST if clocks were to change on the 1st December and back again at the end of January. There is no need for 5 fúcking months of it when it serves no purpose other than to follow an outdate and obsolete tradition.
Aye. I think it’s a good compromise. People would get more useable evening for a lot of the year except for the shortest part of the winter where what would be gained is negligible.0 -
Also the "think of the children" emotional argument is really quite pathetic. You do know it was created by those in favour of DST as another way to get stupid people who couldn't understand it more passionate about it right? The real and only reason for DST was energy saving, nothing more.
But sure lets take a logical look at it if you really want. Currently it doesnt get bright really until about 9 o clock in the deepest part of winter, you do know theres plenty of kids venturing to schools from around 7am yeah? So this wont affect them. Then theres also the fact that the vast vast majority of kids are either driven by their parents or on public transport for the majority of their journeys these days again all done prior to 9am when it actually starts to get bright.
So which kids are you worried about again?
You might characterise it as pathetic, but its the sentiment that it would appear to have won the day, so you might as well digest it.
Your wild rounding up of current daylight hours is completely wrong and thrown in to mislead. On the three shortest days of the year surrounding 21st Dec, Civil Twilight is at its latest at 8.01am with sunrise at 8.43am. Now while I accept that weather conditions may make it very dull on those days, DST means there is ALWAYS effective light in the 8-9am hour.
Yes you can talk about early commuting parents and kids being on the road at 7am and all that, but you ask what kids I'm concerned about, in a word, Rural.
Im thinking of the kids on bikes or walking or waiting on grass verges of bad roads for school buses to go to rural schools who dont need to leave home until after 8am to make it to school in plenty of time. The urban kids were never going to be the greatest risk with good street lighting and footpaths, but having the rural kids out without any usuable light until 9.01am and a sunrise of 9.43 is an unnecessary risk IMO and as a consultant planner I'm used to factoring those sort of risks into mobility plans for private and public buildings alike. And by the way, there is no support in my profession for making this change at all and the IPI have submitted as much.0 -
Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »
Still waiting for a reasonable explanation as to the major problems with DST. We’ve had the changing clocks one, in an age where most clocks automatically change. Then there’s the jet lag.
That’s it.
- stroke was 8% higher in the two days after daylight saving time.- Cancer victims were 25% more likely to have a stroke during that time, and people older than 65 were 20% more likely to have a stroke.
- associated with a 10% increase in heart attacks
- more workplace injuries, auto accidents and even hinders moral decision making
https://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/11/health/daylight-saving-time-health-effects/index.html
Depression Trigger
- A Danish study found an 11% increase in depression cases after the time seasonal change. The cases dissipated gradually after 10 weeks.
- An Australian study found that male suicide rates increased the days after the spring and fall DST shift.
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/dst/daylight-saving-health.html
- IVF success rates drop in March
- Heart attacks spike after the spring time change
https://www.health.com/sleep/daylight-saving-time-health-risks
Other Links
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/wellness/16-ways-daylight-saving-could-affect-your-health-according-to-science/ar-BBPd9px
https://www.mnn.com/health/fitness-well-being/stories/7-little-known-side-effects-of-daylight-saving-time0 -
If you don't think there are kids all over the country leaving to get to school at 7:30am your completely out of touch. Time to pop out of your urban bubble maybe?
You did conveniently ignore my point about the vast majority of kids either use public transport for the majority of their journey or being driven in a car the entire way thus removing the problem about walking to school somehow being "dangerous"
I never raised the argument about physically changing clocks or the jet lag so not sure why you are asking me about them?
Whether or not kids get lifts, public transport, walk or cycle to school it much safer for all of that to happen while it's bright or getting bright rather than in darkness with only artificial light.
Anyone who takes part on bringing kids to school or passes a busy school during the morning school run could tell you that.0 -
Lackadaisical wrote: »
Also most people are most definitely not off for two weeks around Christmas. I worked Xmas Eve last year and took two days off. That's not uncommon outside of education and some public sector jobs.
For a lot of sectors (not just retail) there's very little time off around December and January and a lot of people also save up annual leave for summer holidays.
It’s very common, aside from healthcare I know very few people who aren’t off from 22/23rd dec until Jan be they public or private jobs. I’ve friends in multiple jobs types in both sections and we are all off between Christmas and new year. I’ve never worked past around the 20th dec myself and never back till Jan, I was off for 3 weeks last Christmas (the bit between Christmas and new year is extra days on top of my holiday allocation). I’m in a private sector job now and my public sector job previous was the exact same.
People love being off around Christmas so I don’t think many save up days for the summer, many save up days for Christmas (thankfully I never really need to but given the choice I’d want more time off at Christmas than the summer).
The fact is summer time all year around would be far better than the current clock changing nonsense. Light in the evenings is just much better than pointless light in the morning and over 80% of people feel the same.Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
Anyone who takes part on bringing kids to school or passes a busy school during the morning school run could tell you that.
Yet over 80% of people would like to see summer time all year and good proportion of whom would be parents so obviously it’s not seen as an issue at all.0 -
Leroy Cuddly Warmonger wrote: »,.....
Yet over 80% of people would like to see summer time all year and good proportion of whom would be parents so obviously it’s not seen as an issue at all.
People who support all year summer time throw out that 80% like Brexiterrs throw out the X million votes for Leave figure as if it's some sacred cow.
The 80% (where ever you got from) is not very scientific.
Had it been a referendum with pro and cons sides and a proper debate it's give it more credence, then then again it would be a long way from 80% if people actually knew what they were getting with all year summer time.
As I said, go ahead with all year summer time if you want, the majority will want it changed when they realize how bad the winter mornings will be.0 -
Advertisement
-
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »People who support all year summer time throw out that 80% like Brexiterrs throw out the X million votes for Leave figure as if it's some sacred cow.
The 80% (where ever you got from) is not very scientific.
Had it been a referendum with pro and cons sides and a proper debate it's give it more credence, then then again it would be a long way from 80% if people actually knew what they were getting with all year summer time.
As I said, go ahead with all year summer time if you want, the majority will want it changed when they realize how bad the winter mornings will be.
I fully believe the figure is accurate, I’d say it might even be a higher percentage. This discussion is something I’ve been having and hearing people talk about for years and I’m yet to come across anyone who doesn’t complaint about the time change and the dark evenings after it. That’s across a lot of people at this stage form all ages, different life stages and different job types.
I can guarantee you the majority will not want to change back, they will be damn glad to have the extra hour in the evenings.0 -
Leroy Cuddly Warmonger wrote: »It’s very common, aside from healthcare I know very few people who aren’t off from 22/23rd dec until Jan be they public or private jobs. I’ve friends in multiple jobs types in both sections and we are all off between Christmas and new year. I’ve never worked past around the 20th dec myself and never back till Jan, I was off for 3 weeks last Christmas (the bit between Christmas and new year is extra days on top of my holiday allocation). I’m in a private sector job now and my public sector job previous was the exact same.
That’s highly unusual. You seem to have a very high holiday allowance.People love being off around Christmas so I don’t think many save up days for the summer, many save up days for Christmas (thankfully I never really need to but given the choice I’d want more time off at Christmas than the summer).
Your high holiday allowance is confirmed here. Of course most people aren’t going to sacrifice mid winter holidays for summer time. People on the 21 days holidays aren’t going to use ten days midwinter to only have 2 weeks the rest of the year.The fact is summer time all year around would be far better than the current clock changing nonsense. Light in the evenings is just much better than pointless light in the morning and over 80% of people feel the same.
I’m not sure if the source for that 80%. We’ll see how happy people are with 9:40 - 10 am sunrises when it happens.Yet over 80% of people would like to see summer time all year and good proportion of whom would be parents so obviously it’s not seen as an issue at all.
That’s when given the option of not having DST. I too would choose summer time rather than winter time all year. Much preferable would be a 2-3 month winter time in winter.0 -
Leroy Cuddly Warmonger wrote: »I fully believe the figure is accurate, I’d say it might even be a higher percentage. This discussion is something I’ve been having and hearing people talk about for years and I’m yet to come across anyone who doesn’t complaint about the time change and the dark evenings after it. That’s across a lot of people at this stage form all ages, different life stages and different job types.
I can guarantee you the majority will not want to change back, they will be damn glad to have the extra hour in the evenings.
Try this. Tell all these people that sunrise will be 9:51am in early jan.
(The latest sunset is past Christmas).0 -
Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »Try this. Tell all these people that sunrise will be 9:51am in early jan.
(The latest sunset is past Christmas).
Try this. Tell all these people that sunset would be about 19:00 by the end of February, ten to fifteen minutes later in the west and southwest.
If I can begin working on the garden for an hour or two after work in full daylight from around mid-Feb onwards, that would be just amazing. Currently, it's not until after the clocks go forward at the end of March that I have more usable afternoon/evening light than I would have if we were in IST time in February/all year round.
As it stands, going to work and arriving from work in darkness really gets to me by about mid January, knowing well that there's still another 10 weeks or so to go off dark evenings. If it was sunset at around 18:00 towards the end of Jan (which it would be if we staying in IST all year round), then that would mean I would arrive home to full daylight which would do immense goodness towards the SAD that I suffer from, as do so many people in this country but again, that's my personal predicament.0 -
I could say the exact same thing about losing an hour of light in the evenings. I hate November because of the sudden and very noticeable loss of an hour after the clocks go back. Despite December being darker, the Christmas buzz takes away from it and when we get into the first week or two in January you can already notice the slight stretch in the evenings and it starts to lift my mood again. November is a bleak, dreary month and personally it would help me if the clocks didn't go back. Most people I talk to feel the same.Lackadaisical wrote: »
I mean it's great that you all love your extra hour at this time of the year at night time but it could have very serious impacts on someone who goes into hibernation mode / SAD in low light.0 -
Try this. Tell all these people that sunset would be about 19:00 by the end of February, ten to fifteen minutes later in the west and southwest.
Can do that with a shorter winter time. I say this for the umpteenth time. That’s what I want.
Winter time shouldn’t have ever included the equinox anyway. Maximum 4 months, preferably 2.0 -
Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »Can do that with a shorter winter time. I say this for the umpteenth time. That’s what I want.
Winter time shouldn’t have ever included the equinox anyway. Maximum 4 months, preferably 2.
Whilst I agree that 3 months of "winter" time would be preferable, the discussion is about abolishment of the bi-annual clock change, not amendments to it, so I'm trying to keep to that subject manner.0 -
The simple question I would have on this is where's the cost-benefit analysis?
The costs in terms of disruption seem quite large and the political costs may well be too and the benefits seem few and far between, other than some desire to simplify things.
Whatever about removing daylight saving time, moving Ireland to CET is not the intention of this at EU level and we would want to be very careful we don't just chose the timezone based on some notion that "yay summer all year" as there are serious consequences to having the time out of sync with solar time and our own circadian rhythm. It's not just a bureaucratic issue, it's a biological one too.
Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) is basically a type of depression triggered by low light kicking off our old hibernation patterns. If you start pushing people an extra hour into the dark in the morning, it will have big implications for a % of the population who are sensitive to day light.
Our bodies respond to natural environmental signals i.e. sunlight hitting your retinas and skin, not what it says on the face of a clock.
So for a lot of people if it's still dark at almost 10:00, their brains are registering: It's night time! Why am I awake?!?
The light trailing off in the afternoon can be overcome with artificial lighting much more effectively and you're already awake and active. Getting up in the dark just isn't nice at all and for some people it's really problematic.
If it doesn't impact you the same way, that's because of subjectivity and different genes. A significant % of the population are very attuned to the natural cycles of the day, something that seems to be increasingly seen as a pathology instead of just accepting we're not robots and have to have access to things like light and sleep.
So, why are we going to make life miserable for a % of the population to achieve synchronicity with a different part of the continent? It doesn't make sense.
Also, one of the fundamental principles of the EU is subsidiarity (the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/7/the-principle-of-subsidiarity. Attempting to pass EU-wider legislation on timezones (which impact different places very differently due to physical location) seems to fly in the face of all of that.0 -
Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »Try this. Tell all these people that sunrise will be 9:51am in early jan.
(The latest sunset is past Christmas).
It will not be dark until we reach the sunrise time.....
21st December 2019 with no DTS (Galway)
09:07 — civil twilight
09:50 — sunrise
21st December 2019 with no DTS (Dublin)
08:56 — civil twilight
09:39 — sunrise0 -
Advertisement
-
ForestFire wrote: »It will not be dark until we reach the sunrise time.....
21st December 2019 with no DTS (Galway)
09:07 — civil twilight
09:50 — sunrise
21st December 2019 with no DTS (Dublin)
08:56 — civil twilight
09:39 — sunrise
Also bare in mind that the evenings stop getting any darker from about the 10th Dec where as the mornings don't get any brighter till about the 2nd Jan. So by early January there is already an noticeable stretch in the evenings where as its closer to the end of January before there's much change in the mornings.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement