3 ms·
I strongly disagree. In Stockholm the sun rises at about 03:30 and sets at around 22:00 in the summer, using DST (UTC+2). If we were to use normal time (UTC+1)
by sorenjan 5y ago
I strongly disagree. In Stockholm the sun rises at about 03:30 and sets at around 22:00 in the summer, using DST (UTC+2). If we were to use normal time (UTC+1) in the summer, it would instead be 02:30 (worthless added light for almost everyone) and 21:00, meaning most people would lose an hour of daylight, and one of the best things about living so far north.
If we instead switch to UTC+2 all year, the sun would rise at 09:45 instead of 08:45, and set at 15:50 instead of 14:50 in December. So it would still rise after most people had gone to work (starting at 08:00 is the norm), but it would set closer to when most people leave work.
I hear the argument that we should just use UTC+1 year round since that's when the sun is highest at 12:00, and if you want more light you should just wake up earlier. But speaking for myself, I don't want to go to bed one hour earlier to wake up 03:00 and invite people over for a barbecue. The early morning light is wasted light due to sleep, and the evening light is much more valuable, so it's not an even trade. Personally I don't care when the sun is highest anyway. For me, the day starts when I wake up, and I wake up so I can get to work on time. Everything after work and before sleep is free time, and I want to maximize that since a contiguous time block lets me do stuff I can't do if I had to split it before and after work.
- rafaelturk 5y agoMy two cents.. DST will not change when and how the sun rises and sets. You should really start thinking about +1 hour all year. As you said if you want more light you should just wake up earlier... but that's your point of view.. hence all the fuss about DST, it makes only one portion of the population happy.
- sorenjan 5y ago> DST will not change when and how the sun rises and sets. But it does change when people work and when stores and restaurants etc are open. If you're in complete control of your schedule you can just wake up earlier, but unfortunately most of us aren't. If I want to go on an evening hike, am I supposed to do most of it in the evening, stay the night in the woods, do the last hour in the morning, and then go to work? If I am eating dinner with friends in the garden, should they leave when it gets dark and come back to pick it up again tomorrow morning before one of them have to get on a train? Who benefits from having several hours of daylight while they're asleep?
- Aaargh20318 5y ago> meaning most people would lose an hour of daylight, and one of the best things about living so far north. I disagree completely. I’m not that far north (the Netherlands) but in the middle of summer it usually too hot to be outside until after sunset. You’d lose a useless hour of daylight and gain an hour of comfortable twilight/nighttime.
- sorenjan 5y ago> the Netherlands That's western Europe, not northern Europe[0]. You're welcome up north to enjoy our long comfortable summer evenings. You're further west than Sweden, but the same timezone (CET), so you're already offset compared to the sun. Sweden is pretty spot on where UTC+1 follows the sun time[1], but as I already mentioned, I think modern people's schedules should be more important than when the sun is at its highest. I think UTC+1 would be good for you, UTC+2 would suit us better, and then countries in central and southern Europe could come to some agreement where to draw the line to avoid time zone enclaves. If it's 30+° C I understand wanting to let it cool down, but I'd be damned if I live through these long dark winters and then have the long bright summer evenings taken from me. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Europe#EuroVoc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Europe#EuroVoc [1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/World_Time_Zones_Map.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/World_Ti...