3 ms·

This was done to save electricity. More direct sun, less light and heating. Historically in France the saving was equivalent to the whole consumption of the ci

This was done to save electricity. More direct sun, less light and heating. Historically in France the saving was equivalent to the whole consumption of the city of Paris over the day (maybe 10-20% of the whole country). It seems people don't care about energy anymore ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

mchusma 6y ago
This was a theory not really backed by evidence. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time (Maybe a tiny electricity decrease and heating usage increase on average, depending on latitude - which would lead to more CO2 emissions overall, depending on the power source). I think the idea of "change time to save power" was a fine experiment, but it clearly failed to produce meaningful results so we can stop the experiment.
- user5994461 6y ago
  It is backed by numbers. Currently in France 17% of electricity consumption goes to lightning, including 12% for public lightning. It's moving down with newer lamps using less energy and other sectors using more. You have to think that daylight saving time was introduced almost a hundred years ago (heavily variable per region) when a significant amount of the electricity was going to (public) lightning, using lights available at the time that were very energy hungry and very inefficient. There was a reason it was done. Seriously, it was not a failed experiment carried out by idiots, like some commenters seem to think. Usage evolved and might have made DST worthless or counterproductive, if anything removing DST might show the importance of adjusting time to match energy consumption.
ChrisLomont 6y ago
“ Our main finding is that -- contrary to the policy's intent -- DST increases residential electricity demand.” [1] When you trade lighting costs for heating costs DST may well be more expensive. [1] https://www.nber.org/papers/w14429 https://www.nber.org/papers/w14429
- jcranmer 6y ago
  Don't forget about extra A/C costs as well!
loloquwowndueo 6y ago
This argument never held, particularly because the brunt of the social cost is borne by regular people but we never see a decrease in our energy bills compared to prior to DST.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- user5994461 6y ago
  >>> prior to DST. that means prior to 1916. I don't know about you but I don't have bills going that far. ^^
  - loloquwowndueo 6y ago
    Look at countries where DST was implemented more recently so you can compare :P (I was in such a country when it adopted DST in the 90s and can tell you power bills were not reduced after the change).
varispeed 6y ago
What's the problem to go an hour earlier to work during the summer? It's not like working hours are regulated by law.
- user5994461 6y ago
  1) Working hours are regulated by law. Your employment contract should state the time you work. It might not be the case in the US, especially for tech workers who can be quite flexible, but it is real in other places/jobs. 2) You don't live in a vacuum. Most people can't change their time by themselves because they depend on the rest of the world. Maybe you take a train/bus at 7 to get to work at 8. There might not be a train at 6. Maybe you have to drop your kids at school. The school is not taking your kid one hour back or forth as you wish. Maybe you work in a factory/office that's opening and closing at some point, you can't work outside of these hours. You depend on coworkers who do other tasks, you may not be able to work by yourself. That's the reality for most workers, outside of developers.

mchusma 6y ago

This was a theory not really backed by evidence. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time (Maybe a tiny electricity decrease and heating usage increase on average, depending on latitude - which would lead to more CO2 emissions overall, depending on the power source). I think the idea of "change time to save power" was a fine experiment, but it clearly failed to produce meaningful results so we can stop the experiment.

user5994461 6y ago
It is backed by numbers. Currently in France 17% of electricity consumption goes to lightning, including 12% for public lightning. It's moving down with newer lamps using less energy and other sectors using more. You have to think that daylight saving time was introduced almost a hundred years ago (heavily variable per region) when a significant amount of the electricity was going to (public) lightning, using lights available at the time that were very energy hungry and very inefficient. There was a reason it was done. Seriously, it was not a failed experiment carried out by idiots, like some commenters seem to think. Usage evolved and might have made DST worthless or counterproductive, if anything removing DST might show the importance of adjusting time to match energy consumption.

ChrisLomont 6y ago

“ Our main finding is that -- contrary to the policy's intent -- DST increases residential electricity demand.” [1] When you trade lighting costs for heating costs DST may well be more expensive. [1] https://www.nber.org/papers/w14429 https://www.nber.org/papers/w14429

jcranmer 6y ago
Don't forget about extra A/C costs as well!

loloquwowndueo 6y ago

This argument never held, particularly because the brunt of the social cost is borne by regular people but we never see a decrease in our energy bills compared to prior to DST.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
user5994461 6y ago
>>> prior to DST. that means prior to 1916. I don't know about you but I don't have bills going that far. ^^
- loloquwowndueo 6y ago
  Look at countries where DST was implemented more recently so you can compare :P (I was in such a country when it adopted DST in the 90s and can tell you power bills were not reduced after the change).

varispeed 6y ago

What's the problem to go an hour earlier to work during the summer? It's not like working hours are regulated by law.

user5994461 6y ago
1) Working hours are regulated by law. Your employment contract should state the time you work. It might not be the case in the US, especially for tech workers who can be quite flexible, but it is real in other places/jobs. 2) You don't live in a vacuum. Most people can't change their time by themselves because they depend on the rest of the world. Maybe you take a train/bus at 7 to get to work at 8. There might not be a train at 6. Maybe you have to drop your kids at school. The school is not taking your kid one hour back or forth as you wish. Maybe you work in a factory/office that's opening and closing at some point, you can't work outside of these hours. You depend on coworkers who do other tasks, you may not be able to work by yourself. That's the reality for most workers, outside of developers.