Daylight Savings Doesn't Save

[MA-Caver]

Study: Daylight Saving Time actually raises utility bills
Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:06PM EST
It's official: Daylight Saving Time is a bust. Designed (and recently extended) as a measure to save energy in a period of inflated electricity prices, an in-depth University of California study has now shown that DST doesn't save anyone any money at all. In fact, it's costing consumers extra, to the tune of $3.19 in extra utility bills per year.

The study was made possible because of the peculiarities of the state of Indiana, which was only partially on DST until 2006. When the whole state finally went DST (to sync with the national business day), some comparisons vs. the prior method were made apparent. The study calculated that the shift costs Indiana residents an extra $8.6 million in electricity bills in total.

<snip> Professor Matthew Kotchen, who pioneered the study, noted, "I've never had a paper with such a clear and unambiguous finding as this."
more here http://tech.yahoo.com/blog/null/83073

So what to do? Drop DST? Don't set your clocks ahead one hour? Collectively it's costing a lot more money, but individually it's only a loss of $3.19. I can see for some groups of people that this is a lot but for most it probably isn't.
Still what to do?
Your thoughts? Ideas?

 

[Ray]

So what to do? Drop DST? Don't set your clocks ahead one hour? Collectively it's costing a lot more money, but individually it's only a loss of $3.19. I can see for some groups of people that this is a lot but for most it probably isn't.
Still what to do?
Your thoughts? Ideas?

Back in the 70's, I think we had year round DST in California, or at least an extended period of it. I recall walking to school in pitch black darkenss for my driver's ed class which was one hour before the normal start of the day. I didn't think it was such a good idea then.

 

[Ninjamom]

Do you mean that our Federal Government instituted a well-intentioned program that ended up doing nothing except costing more money???!?!?!?!


Who'd a thunk??

 

[CoryKS]

As I follow-up, I'd like to see an analysis of how much money consumers would save if they weren't obliged to finance dumbass research programs like this one here.

 

[Big Don]

It is nothing more than a big PITA

 

[Touch Of Death]

So what to do? Drop DST? Don't set your clocks ahead one hour? Collectively it's costing a lot more money, but individually it's only a loss of $3.19. I can see for some groups of people that this is a lot but for most it probably isn't.
Still what to do?
Your thoughts? Ideas?

Were you to own a store, or restaurant, you would see the beauty of daylight savings. It creates cashflow, and yes it is your cash that is flowing; but, that's the whole point.
Sean

 

[Fabio]

Were you to own a store, or restaurant, you would see the beauty of daylight savings. It creates cashflow, and yes it is your cash that is flowing; but, that's the whole point.
Sean

In the IT/Software Development world, changes like the one made to extend daylight savings are very expensive and have a lot of side effects. I sure don't look forward to it changing again.

 

[Touch Of Death]

In the IT/Software Development world, changes like the one made to extend daylight savings are very expensive and have a lot of side effects. I sure don't look forward to it changing again.

Its for business overall.
Sean

 

[MBuzzy]

Personally, I say get rid of Daylight savings time. I never saw the point.

As I follow-up, I'd like to see an analysis of how much money consumers would save if they weren't obliged to finance dumbass research programs like this one here.

I may have missed this one...but I fail to see the funding stream from consumer to academic research? Again, I may have missed it, but it looks like this was a study done by a professor, who is most likely interested mainly in publication and advancing existing knowledge. At least where I did my undergrad and where I'm doing my masters, research projects like this are either done for free (at the cost of the student or professor's time alone) or by sponsor, i.e. private organization who finances the effort. I suppose that if you follow it back far enough, you could trace how the money came from a consumer, I'm just not seeing it. Seems to me that research that advances our understanding of things or debunks popular myths is a good thing.

 

[CoryKS]

I may have missed this one...but I fail to see the funding stream from consumer to academic research? Again, I may have missed it, but it looks like this was a study done by a professor, who is most likely interested mainly in publication and advancing existing knowledge. At least where I did my undergrad and where I'm doing my masters, research projects like this are either done for free (at the cost of the student or professor's time alone) or by sponsor, i.e. private organization who finances the effort. I suppose that if you follow it back far enough, you could trace how the money came from a consumer, I'm just not seeing it. Seems to me that research that advances our understanding of things or debunks popular myths is a good thing.

Where is this professor employed? How is that institution funded? I suppose it's possible that the professor pursued this course of inquiry in his free time. I sort of doubt it, though. And anyway, there are so many government programs that cost us a lot more than $3.19 a year with little or nothing to show for it that it's ridiculous to focus on this one.

 

[MBuzzy]

Agreed that there are a great many government and other publicly funded programs that get very little result. But there are also very many that have MASSIVE and far reaching results. Who is to draw the line? A researcher can't know the result before they begin.

As for this professor, if he is employed by a University, at least in my experience, funding for these types of things comes from the school's budget. Largely coming from the students. Who are generally involved and/or benefitting from this research. You're probably right, it wasn't in his "free time," it was probably during his working hours....even so, it was either funded by the school or a sponsor. Either way, someone shelled out the cash knowingly.

Bottom line - in my opinion - is that it may not have been the most meaningful research project, but IN THIS CASE...I just don't see the harm. I also don't see how a 2 paragraph blurb on yahoo constitutes focusing on it....Outside his publication and this article, that's probably all you'll ever hear of it.

Sorry to derail the thread....just curious if there was more to this study. Seems like an interesting piece of information to me. Now we can PROVE that DST is worthless!

 

[Grenadier]

I'm not entirely sure about the article's merit, but I can certainly tell you that my productivity will be lessened a bit as a result of the skewing of my sleep cycles!

The DST results in needing more coffee in the morning to achieve effective productivity, and I suspect that it's going to cost me more than $3.19 per month... Now, about that cup of coffee, I think it's time for another.

:caffeine:

 

[mrhnau]

I'm not entirely sure about the article's merit, but I can certainly tell you that my productivity will be lessened a bit as a result of the skewing of my sleep cycles!

Amen to that! Nice in the Fall, but it SUCKS in the Spring! I think the need for such an artificial construction does not exist anymore. Banish it!

 

[BrandiJo]

ugh day light saving my butt, give me back my hour of sleep and let me make the rest of my day happy.

 

[punisher73]

I think it may have had some merit when it was originally conceived, but I don't think it makes a difference that much anymore.

I don't think Indiana really cared except that it is in the eastern time zone and was not on the same time for business as all the other surrounding states. Some areas of Michiana did switch over unofficially to coincide with Michigan business.

I stay out the same time no matter if it is light or dark, and I get up at the same time whether it is light or dark. I think most people are this way now. I think there might be some people who "dont' go out after dark", but I can't imagine that they are really putting that much money into the economy in that time anyways.

 

[Ceicei]

I read this editorial yesterday in my local news and it had some statistics that were interesting... DST is supposed to be saving energy, a safety measure, an anti-crime measure, and also cost-saving. Apparently it may be none of these....

http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/258221/57/

Let's lobby to get rid of DST.

- Ceicei

 

[little_miss_fracus]

I've grown up with it so i don't really care. But I still live at home, so maybe it matters more to people who have to shell out that gallon-of-gas priced payment once every year.

 

[Bodhisattva]

So what to do? Drop DST? Don't set your clocks ahead one hour? Collectively it's costing a lot more money, but individually it's only a loss of $3.19. I can see for some groups of people that this is a lot but for most it probably isn't.
Still what to do?
Your thoughts? Ideas?

It is what it is.

Out of all the injustices and inequities currently existing, daylight savings time is probably nothing to worry about...