Originally posted by sh76The trouble with changing the clocks is that it has to be done on a nationwide or at least a statewide basis. Particularly if you live in a long thin north-south country like Britain (or Sweden, Norway, Finland, Japan, take your pick), there may be regional differences in the desirability of the practice. Generally in Britain, the Scots want to maintain the switch back to GMT in October, while the English would rather have BST all year round. But even within those regions, there may be differences between the attitudes to DST in Cornwall and Northumberland, or in Edinburgh and Aberdeen.
In "my region," the workday starts something like 9 o'clock and the workday ends something like 5:30ish. By and large, the average person stays up until roughly 11 or 12 and then wakes up at around 7. Of course it doesn't have to be this way, but it is. That's the general expected convention. You want the workday to shift based on the season? I suppose that could be done, but it would be terribly confusing and inefficient.
This could readily be resolved by allowing individual regions (or even individual municipalities or workplaces) to make their own decisions about winter and summer working hours. This would be more flexible than changing the clocks over a whole jurisdiction.
Here's an article from the Japan Times about Japan's failure to implement DST.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20061017zg.html
[i]For tourists and residents alike, the quintessential image of Tokyo is of a city lit by artificial light. As soon as twilight gathers, the central shopping and entertainment districts of Shibuya, Shinjuku and Roppongi are awash with neon, shining from each shop and office, even turning the night to a purplish haze.
This image, in fact, aptly describes any city in Japan, from Sapporo to Naha. Few seem to wonder why the country spends so much time in the dark, whether it is desirable to expend so much energy on illuminating it, or what the alternatives might be.
During the last weekend of this month, throughout the developed world, residents will turn their clocks and watches back by an hour. This will mark the end of a summer characterized by long, light evenings, enabling citizens to work and play by natural light. Of the 30 OECD countries, 27 have opted to introduce daylight-saving time from April to October.
In Japan, sunset still comes early. Even in June, it is dark by 8 p.m., when many are still at work in artificially lit offices, while others are heading for bright "izakaya" [tapas-type bars]. The sun has risen by four in the morning; daylight is wasted while Japan sleeps.
Yet the absence of DST is not only anomalous but irresponsible in a time of profligate energy use, diminishing resources and global warming. Worldwide, environmental issues are climbing the political agenda. In Germany, thousands of houses are being built to the "passivhaus" standard: these are so efficiently insulated that they can be warmed to a comfortable temperature only by body heat and sunlight.
Even the U.S., which has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol, is showing new signs of environmental consciousness. California's maverick Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, has just implemented legislation to promote solar energy use, and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent in 20 years.
Schwarzenegger was able to take popular support for this measure for granted. California is plagued each summer by blackouts, when demand for air conditioning outstrips the electricity supply. Tokyo, so far, has suffered only occasional power failures, mainly when safety concerns have led nuclear power stations to run at less than full power. But these will become more numerous if demand for energy continues to rise.
Certainly, demand for energy is rising. Japan was the host of the 1997 Kyoto conference on climate change, and an enthusiastic signatory to the resulting Protocol. Under its terms, the country undertook to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 6 percent below 1990 levels by 2010. Instead, emissions have risen by 8 percent.
The government has run a campaign, "Cool Biz," encouraging workers to shed jackets and ties in summer. But this amounts to gesture politics considering the energy expended illuminating cities.
The Japan Productivity Center calculated that moving the clocks forward an hour between April and October would save 40 tons of carbon dioxide emissions daily. The economic effect is harder to gauge. Some have suggested that citizens will take advantage of lighter evenings to leave the house, and that shops will consequently see an increase in profits.
Others argue that the heat of the Japanese summer may keep people indoors. Even so, the Productivity Center estimates that the shift to DST would boost the yearly nominal Gross Domestic Product by 0.2 percent.
Why then has such a common sense measure never been implemented? Japanese opponents of DST tend to protest that adjusting clocks would be inconvenient.
But in an article last year in this newspaper, Mayumi Negishi traced the real roots of this antipathy to the Occupation, which, between 1948 and 1952, imposed the system on Japan.
DST was seen as a symbol of foreign rule, a perception owing less to the mere fact that it was an American initiative than to the ham-fisted way in which it was introduced. Clocks were moved forward abruptly on May 1, 1948, only three days after a bill to that effect had been passed in the Diet. No attempt was made to argue a case or to win over a skeptical public. In 1951, in the dying months of the Occupation, the Diet passed a bill to abandon DST. It has never been restored.
Renewed debate last year in the Diet was shelved when then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi called an election to confirm support for his plan to privatize Japan Post. Many of the leading supporters of DST were also opposed to postal privatization, and some subsequently lost their seats. For the moment, therefore, the prospects of its implementation seem dim.
But in the absence of direction from central government, businesses and local governments are taking action. The case for DST is particularly strong in Hokkaido, where summer daylight hours are especially long. Since 2004, many firms and government offices there have voluntarily adopted a working schedule equivalent to DST, instructing their employees to arrive at work and leave an hour earlier than normal during the summer months.
This year, on June 21, the city of Oshu in Iwate Prefecture opted unilaterally to move its clocks forward an hour. One may hope that such grassroots actions will continue to spread south. But it will take legislation to guarantee a significant effect on energy consumption.
There are few logical counterarguments. Historically, opposition to DST was strong among farmers, who tended to stop work at dusk, and who feared that longer daylight hours would mean longer working hours.
But numbers engaged in farming have now dwindled to around 5 percent of the Japanese population. More recently, opponents in the Ministry of Education have argued that longer daylight hours would distract schoolchildren from their homework. That may be true, but most Japanese children pursue their after-school studies at "juku" [cram schools]; and they would be safer walking home in daylight.
Some might complain that evenings would be too light for "Obon hanabi" [fireworks to mark the summer festival]. Yet the United States celebrates Independence Day with fireworks, not long after midsummer, in a country stretching far further north than Japan.
There remains the counter-argument of custom: those complaints about the inconvenience of changing clocks. This is a change the rest of the developed world performs twice a year without complaint, but DST is likely to remain unpopular in Japan until its case has been argued more clearly.
Still, there might be a creative way of neutralizing such complaints. DST is generally a policy of temperate regions, where there are sharp differences between daylight hours in winter and summer. Countries in equatorial latitudes have never adopted the system.
But visitors to the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur, will notice that sunrise and sunset occur, year round, at seven in the morning and evening -- not at six, as they would do if midday was truly the middle of the day. This is because the city is at the westernmost edge of a country that stretches for around 2000 km to the east.
This means that Malaysia's most populous regions benefit throughout the year from an extra hour of evening daylight.
Though this is not a deliberate strategy on Malaysia's part, Japan might consider following the Southeast Asian country's lead. European nations put the clocks back in winter because they are relatively far north: permanent DST would mean dark winter mornings, inconvenience for farmers and more deaths on the road. Tokyo, on the same latitude as Los Angeles and Algiers, enjoys proportionally longer hours of winter daylight.
Much of Japan is further south again: the southernmost islands of Okinawa stretch almost to the tropic of Cancer. Even the northern tip of Hokkaido is further south than Paris. Ninety-five percent of Japanese live in latitudes that might benefit from perpetual daylight-saving time.
I suggest that the Diet consider turning the clocks an hour forward in April. Once that is done, to avoid any further inconvenience, they should stay like that forever.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraIt's not the matter of what's more "trouble." Neither are a terribly big deal. I could handle either one. But people tend to like daylight. People do more outdoors and use less electricity. It's better for their psyche too. If it has to be light for an hour, I'd much rather it be light when I'm awake than when I'm asleep.
Some people have trouble adjusting to DST. Some people have trouble going to work when it's still dark. I wouldn't know which one weighs more heavily. Personally I don't think going to work when it's dark is that big a deal, in winter I always go to work when it's dark and come back home when it's dark. Then again I don't have much trouble adjusting to ...[text shortened]... rmanently in Russia, perhaps researchers can investigate which system is more convenient.
Could I go to work when it's dark? Of course I could. At one time I left the house at 6:20 when it was dark 4 months of the year. I did it, but I'd rather not do it all else being equal.
This is about energy savings and efficiency, not necessity.
For example, in Arizona, where daylight in the summer is considered a bad thing (it's so hot that people stay inside more and use more electricity), they don't use DST. That makes sense as well.
Originally posted by TeinosukeUS states choose whether to change the clocks. Arizona does not apply DST at all.
The trouble with changing the clocks is that it has to be done on a nationwide or at least a statewide basis. Particularly if you live in a long thin north-south country like Britain (or Sweden, Norway, Finland, Japan, take your pick), there may be regional differences in the desirability of the practice. Generally in Britain, the Scots want to maintain th ...[text shortened]... r working hours. This would be more flexible than changing the clocks over a whole jurisdiction.
There's no reason England and Scotland have to be in lockstep on this. In the US, we're used to having different states in different time zones, so the idea of some states not adopting DST is not a big deal.
Originally posted by sh76Sure. But as I said in my earlier post, it's not just an Anglo-Scottish divide. People in London might feel differently from people in Newcastle upon Tyne. One could leave it up to individual cities or even businesses to make what they feel is the appropriate decision for their citizens / workers.
US states choose whether to change the clocks. Arizona does not apply DST at all.
There's no reason England and Scotland have to be in lockstep on this. In the US, we're used to having different states in different time zones, so the idea of some states not adopting DST is not a big deal.
Originally posted by TeinosukeIt is not just a North-South issue either. With the current time zone, people in the West of the UK have different sunrise/sunset times from people in the east with just over half an hour difference.
Sure. But as I said in my earlier post, it's not just an Anglo-Scottish divide. People in London might feel differently from people in Newcastle upon Tyne. One could leave it up to individual cities or even businesses to make what they feel is the appropriate decision for their citizens / workers.
Iceland is in the same time zone as the UK but has sunrise/sunset times an hour later.
Spain has the same sunrise/sunset times as the UK but set their clocks an hour earlier.
Here in Southern Africa, there is as much as 2 hours difference between sunrise/sunset times on the west coast of Namibia and the East coast of Mozambique, yet we all share the same time.
Originally posted by twhiteheadSpain sets their clocks an hour later, in fact (but maybe this is a good thing, given that they eat lunch at three in the afternoon and dinner at ten at night!).
It is not just a North-South issue either. With the current time zone, people in the West of the UK have different sunrise/sunset times from people in the east with just over half an hour difference.
Iceland is in the same time zone as the UK but has sunrise/sunset times an hour later.
Spain has the same sunrise/sunset times as the UK but set their cloc ...[text shortened]... s on the west coast of Namibia and the East coast of Mozambique, yet we all share the same time.
The article I posted from The Japan Times makes a similar observation about Malaysia.
Originally posted by TeinosukeCompanies are still free to do what they like with respect to their own hours. But the government has to choose what's best for the country as a whole.
Sure. But as I said in my earlier post, it's not just an Anglo-Scottish divide. People in London might feel differently from people in Newcastle upon Tyne. One could leave it up to individual cities or even businesses to make what they feel is the appropriate decision for their citizens / workers.
Originally posted by TeinosukeWould that not make life a bit complicated if every city in UK had it's own time, say you were trying to track a delivery from london to glasgow would the shippers have to stipulate whose time they were using?
Sure. But as I said in my earlier post, it's not just an Anglo-Scottish divide. People in London might feel differently from people in Newcastle upon Tyne. One could leave it up to individual cities or even businesses to make what they feel is the appropriate decision for their citizens / workers.
Originally posted by kevcvs57Every city wouldn't have its own time. It would just have its own working hours!
Would that not make life a bit complicated if every city in UK had it's own time, say you were trying to track a delivery from london to glasgow would the shippers have to stipulate whose time they were using?
Originally posted by mikelomHate DLS. It is like intentionally induced jet lag.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/12/120309-daylight-savings-time-2012-what-time-is-it-spring-forward-nation/
I guess this post may belong in debates, but seeing as it is scientifically based I have placed here.
I am not a believer in changing the clocks. I believe Greenwich got it wrong in the first place for the UK, and that the atomic clo ...[text shortened]... have opinion about it?
I'm interested to know how many are for, or against, DST.
-m. 😉