This is not a sneering or sarcastic post. Quite the contrary. This is a sincere, I-would-really-like-to-understand post.

I own a hybrid.
I've replaced most of my home appliances and electronics with energy-star compliant ones.
I've replaced all the light bulbs at home, (except in the bathrooms) with CFLs.
I've added extra insulation to my home.
And I talk to anyone who will listen about the benefits of energy-efficiency.

Thus, although I'm no Al Gore or belong to the Sierra Club, I believe that I qualify as a conscientious citizen who wants to reduce his energy consumption for the benefit of the environment, National security and my own wallet.

Still, I cannot understand the benefits of DST.

Back when this was initially implemented, artificial light was one of the largest consumers of energy.
But in the 21st-century, with computers and electronic gizmos who consume electricity regardless of ambient light, where many jobs are in service sectors which operate in windowless air-conditioned offices, where people work 24/7 or at least 2 shifts, is this still true?

Would anyone explain how DST reduces energy consumption? (I'm an engineer, and I understand technical language).

 

There is no really understanding a government move like changing DLS time back 3 weeks to save more energy. All we as the general public get to do is comply with the wisdom that is already debatable. I have done all i can to save energy myself as well............but is it making a difference?? I hope so!!

 

I heard a radio program that explained the Chamber of Commerce supports DST because it gets more customers out after work. My understanding is folks will stay at home and not go shopping after dark if they can help it. But DST lengthens the 'shopping day.' At least that is how it was explained.

Bob Wilson

 

Thanks Bob, for your explanation.
I knew there had to be an "economic" reason. Consumer spending seems to be the cure for all.
And don't get me wrong, I really enjoy the longer afternoon hours and the time I spend in the yard or pool or something.
But whether that will actually "save" energy, which is the reason we were told, is something that I cannot understand.

 

Bob is right on the money. When it is light out people go out and spend $$$. DST is purely an economic function.

On a side note, the DST does help my commute. There are less people are on the road at 6:20am because it is darker out.
Darker Out = Less People = Less Traffic = Less Stop and Go = High MPG's
My morning commutes these past three days have been a relative breeze - only 75 minutes instead of 90 minutes.

 

What really ticks me off about DST is that my backyard sundial only keeps standard time

 

What? Didn't yours come with an Archimedes lever?

Bob Wilson

ps. "Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it and I shall move the whole world."

 

For those of us on the east coast right on the east coast time line, DST is great. We should have DTS year round. For those of us west of the eastern standard time zone (within the EST zone), DST doesn't really matter.

So if you are near the eastern portion of your time zone, DST gives you more daylight in the evening hours. The western portion gets more too, but they had more to begin with.

Look at Indiana, it's on Eastern time zone, but they don't really need to observe DST, in fact some years they don't (they were central time zone for a period of time too). I don't know the laws around their time but it is bizarre and it is because they are on the western portion of the eastern time zone.

 

Around here (Seattle) it doesn't get dark until 11PM in mid-summer. So I tend to eat too late, stay up too late, not sleep well (because of the late food) -- and then don't get up quickly and need to rush in the mornings. DST is a pain in the posterior.

 

Exactly... you are on the western side of pacific time zone.