Is Gmt Time Over Forever

[Anti Boring Weather]

i hope this isnt the last of GMT time as i hate dark mornings in winter if the clocks stayed BST time all year round. Next year there is talk of going double summertime meaning 1030 sunsets in june but i doubt that will happen and will prob stay BST

[BARRY]

i hope this isnt the last of GMT time as i hate dark mornings in winter if the clocks stayed BST time all year round. Next year there is talk of going double summertime meaning 1030 sunsets in june but i doubt that will happen and will prob stay BST

so do i, As it's ok if your in the office you can flick a light switch, but outside for all inside workers IT GET DARK OK.

[swipe]

No it was dropped from the bill. The clocks will stay the same and change as normal.

[Bottesford]

Shame really. Would make for a nice change not wasting so much daylight in the mornings. Oh well.

[Thundery wintry showers]

I think the problem is that we don't get enough daylight in the winter months. Changing permanently to BST gets rid of one set of problems but only to replace them with other problems, so I doubt that it makes a big difference overall.

[Alex]

It would be nice to have GMT +2 I'n summer, added benefits are

Longer days

Less electricity used

Warmer evenings

No changing clocks when you go abroad

Can do more sport I'n evenings ie cricket/tennis/footie

[Weather-history]

It would be nice to have GMT +2 I'n summer, added benefits are

Longer days

Less electricity used

Warmer evenings

No changing clocks when you go abroad

Can do more sport I'n evenings ie cricket/tennis/footie

You won't get longer days, it will still be the same amount of daylight, humans have lived in the British Isles for many centuries and have adapted to the changing amount of daylight in this country long before before they started fiddling with the clocks. So why are we lazy to adapt when our ancestors weren't?

Use less electricity? Difficult to tell because how much the darker mornings will cancel out the lighter evenings?

You mention cricket, I don't think those county grounds who have installed floodlights will be happy. Day night cricket is an attraction and in any case, sport is largely determined by weather conditions. No good if the sun sets an hour later if there is a thunderstorm raging.

Shame really. Would make for a nice change not wasting so much daylight in the mornings. Oh well.

Daylight is "wasted" in the morning because we have become too lazy and too regimented to adapt. We have had this change in amount of daylight throughout the year for centuries in this country, its only within the last 100 years that we have fiddled with the clocks, our ancestors adapted to this, why can't we? They didn't waste or even care about the waste of daylight. Daylight is not being wasted because we are not changing the clocks a further hour forward. Daylight is wasted because the current generation is not encourage to adapt.

[Thundery wintry showers]

There's often no need for employers (and employees, when flexibility is offered but isn't taken advantage of) to be so rigid with the 9-5- even in cases where rigidity is absolutely necessary, 8-4 could often be used for instance and that would mean an hour of extra free daylight in the evening.

[Bottesford]

Bit of a repeat of another recent thread but anyway...

Daylight is "wasted" in the morning because we have become too lazy and too regimented to adapt. We have had this change in amount of daylight throughout the year for centuries in this country, its only within the last 100 years that we have fiddled with the clocks, our ancestors adapted to this, why can't we? They didn't waste or even care about the waste of daylight. Daylight is not being wasted because we are not changing the clocks a further hour forward. Daylight is wasted because the current generation is not encourage to adapt.

True we are indeed locked in to a fairly rigid set of working hours on the whole - and I agree it makes much more 'sense' to work around the sun.

But it isn't that simple. For example. it's no use Employer X being forward thinking in summer allowing employees to work 7 to 3 if their clients work 9 to 5 and expect support in those hours.

Just thinking about my office - we have a number of processes that run on our server at a specific time (around clients and such). Do you think it's easier to change the clock on the server (automatic anyway) or go around changing every single process schedule? The same would apply for countless other systems like transport if nothing else (e.g. a software update might be needed to update those bus/tram/train time displays at stations with new timetable information).

Our ancestors had none of this complexity to deal with.

Of course there would be ways to remedy all of the above but it won't come cheap (remember the 'Millenium Bug'?).

The clock move is a simple way to 'fool' us into having daylight at more appropriate hours for more people without having to change transport timetables, schedules and such 2 or more times a year.

Perhaps overal we need to start making midday nearer to the middle of our 'day' throughout the year? But that would mean dark mornings for large parts of the year which won't be popular.

[AderynCoch]

Is not changing the clocks an example of modern society adapting? After all, even with a fixed timetable one will be going to and from work an hour earlier than they would have been previously.

Edited March 28, 2011 by AderynCoch

[Derp Patrol]

I think GMT +2 is a good idea, in summer only. In winter I think it would be best to keept it as it is at the moment, but If it were up to me I would move the clocks forward say 1 hour in early March and then another hour in late March.

To me the benefits far outway the downsides.

Benefits:

More daylight during time where most people are awake - for example at the moment the sun rises at 4:45 and sets at 9:21pm on June 21st here, it seems an incredible waste for the sunrise to be so early when a tiny percentage of people are awake at that time. On the contrary, the overwhelming majority of the population will be awake at 9:21. If it were to rise at 5:45 and set at 10:21, it would save energy, increase trade for businesses such as pubs e.t.c and other things.

The only downside I can see is that in Scotland sunset would be very late, after 11:30 in some places. However I think that a much larger proportion of people would prefer GMT +2 than not.

At the very least I think that the clocks should go forward earlier and go back later, it is a massive oppurtunity to save energy and increase trade, particularly with the cuts the Government is being forced to make now..

[cheeky_monkey]

you know they move the clocks forward here in Canada in early March and i find it a pain in the backside...its still dark at 8.30am but its light at 8 pm..problem is it freezing cold with snow everywhere so you get no benefit from light evenings..but the pain of still getting up in the dark!!

Edited March 28, 2011 by cheeky_monkey

[Summer of 95]

Bit of a repeat of another recent thread but anyway...

True we are indeed locked in to a fairly rigid set of working hours on the whole - and I agree it makes much more 'sense' to work around the sun.

But it isn't that simple. For example. it's no use Employer X being forward thinking in summer allowing employees to work 7 to 3 if their clients work 9 to 5 and expect support in those hours.

Just thinking about my office - we have a number of processes that run on our server at a specific time (around clients and such). Do you think it's easier to change the clock on the server (automatic anyway) or go around changing every single process schedule? The same would apply for countless other systems like transport if nothing else (e.g. a software update might be needed to update those bus/tram/train time displays at stations with new timetable information).

Our ancestors had none of this complexity to deal with.

Of course there would be ways to remedy all of the above but it won't come cheap (remember the 'Millenium Bug'?).

The clock move is a simple way to 'fool' us into having daylight at more appropriate hours for more people without having to change transport timetables, schedules and such 2 or more times a year.

Perhaps overal we need to start making midday nearer to the middle of our 'day' throughout the year? But that would mean dark mornings for large parts of the year which won't be popular.

"Noon" actually used to mean 3pm or thereabouts, it's derived from a Latin word meaning "ninth hour of the day". This is still lunchtime in Spain, and it had this meaning as late as the 12th century in English, the solar eclipse of March 1140 was recorded as occuring "about noon" when it occured around 3pm.

[Methuselah]

So the bloody clocks 'll be going back again...Oh poo!

[Great Plum]

It would be awful for those who have young children... Can you imagine getting young children to bed if the sun didn't set until gone 10! It would always be dark on winter mornings... I can't see the point of it!

[Essan]

i hope this isnt the last of GMT time as i hate dark mornings in winter if the clocks stayed BST time all year round. Next year there is talk of going double summertime meaning 1030 sunsets in june but i doubt that will happen and will prob stay BST

There are now no plans to change the current system of real time in winter and bl**dy silly time in summer.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Essan

[Bottesford]

There are now no plans to change the current system of real time in winter and bl**dy silly time in summer.

I assume by 'silly' time you mean BST. I assume you would prefer GMT year round? What would be the advantages of sunrise (London) at 0343 and sunset at 2021 during high summer because I really can't see any.

[Kentish Man]

BST could usefully start two weeks earlier in March to bring Europe into line with the start of Daylight Saving Time in the USA and Canada. It seems strange to continue with GMT into late March after the equinox. This was especially noticeable this year in particular when we had some glorious March days from the middle of the month onwards. Otherwise there's little advantage in changing things as the pro's and con's roughly offset each other.

[Argyllcraig]

its not really a question of sunrise and sunset though.... daylight hours are longer than the actual rising and setting of the sun. Its bad enough in the summer having only a couple of hours of almost darkness at night which is awful for sleep and in the winter to have daylight not occur until around 9.30am would be so depressing and even worse for areas in the mountains and north of the central belt where villages sitting in the shade of the hills pretty much get no sun anyway.

As for doing more in the evening.... why would u want to do more than sit out after 10pm?

[Derp Patrol]

its not really a question of sunrise and sunset though.... daylight hours are longer than the actual rising and setting of the sun. Its bad enough in the summer having only a couple of hours of almost darkness at night which is awful for sleep and in the winter to have daylight not occur until around 9.30am would be so depressing and even worse for areas in the mountains and north of the central belt where villages sitting in the shade of the hills pretty much get no sun anyway.

As for doing more in the evening.... why would u want to do more than sit out after 10pm?

In winter it would make no difference of being depressing as the sun sets so early, so either way pretty much everyone is awake at both sunset and sunrise - the only difference really is that if we had more daylight in the afternoon it would allow people to do more then.

[Bottesford]

As for doing more in the evening.... why would u want to do more than sit out after 10pm?

Probably not alot - but in August or April (like now) it'd mean light to almost 9pm instead of 8pm - 8 to 9 is still early/mid evening so daylight would be useful. I find in this debate people (myself included) keep bringing up the June/December extremes - don't forget the inbetween bits like now could be improved - or not - too.

[Weather-history]

In winter it would make no difference of being depressing as the sun sets so early, so either way pretty much everyone is awake at both sunset and sunrise - the only difference really is that if we had more daylight in the afternoon it would allow people to do more then.

To be honest, it wouldn't make that much difference anyway. For any benefit, the sun would need to set after 6pm and you are not going to get that over a lot of the winter period even with an hour shift and in any case, its the weather and not light levels that largely determines what people can do. Light levels are secondary, its weather that is the primary factor. No good the sun setting an hour later and its thick fog.

[Anti Boring Weather]

what if we went tho GMT -1 that would mean 7am surises and 3pm sunsets in dec i wouldnt mind that as i cant stand dark mornings but that would never happen as it would be pitch black when kids come out of school

Edited April 2, 2011 by Anti Boring Weather

[Bottesford]

what if we went tho GMT -1 that would mean 7am surises and 3pm sunsets in dec i wouldnt mind that as i cant stand dark mornings but that would never happen as it would be pitch black when kids come out of school

It'd mean 1448 sunsets here which would be horrible. And by mid Feb it'd still be something like 6am sunrise but still dark at 4pm - a big waste of daylight. It'd also add another month to me coming home in the dark from the present 4 to 5. If there's something I'd like to decrease it's definitely riding home in rush hour in darkness!

[Terminal Moraine]

To be honest, it wouldn't make that much difference anyway. For any benefit, the sun would need to set after 6pm and you are not going to get that over a lot of the winter period even with an hour shift and in any case, its the weather and not light levels that largely determines what people can do. Light levels are secondary, its weather that is the primary factor. No good the sun setting an hour later and its thick fog.

I agree entirely with this post.

It seems to me that the obsession with adding daylight long into what should be night stems from some sort of collective psyche that if you're not consuming, or engaged in some sort of activity, at every possible moment then you're failing both yourself and the nation as a whole.

40 or more years ago people would come home from work and perhaps manage an hour or two of gardening before going to bed at 10 or 10.30 ready for work the next day; maybe they'd go out for a walk or a bike ride but I don't remember anyone complaining that there wasn't enough light, and that they needed to be doing these things until 1130 p.m or even later.

Some of the reasons forwarded by M.P Rebecca Harris to justify adding yet another hour to G.M.T were quite ludicrous.

She suggested that another hour of daylight in the evening would make the nation fitter as more obese people would join gyms if there was a chance of coming back in the daylight.

She also suggested that there would be less crime as it would be light for an hour longer and that more older people would be able to take part in more activities in the evenings and get back safely.

I can imagine would be muggers and burglars relinquishing their lives of crime at the prospect of 50 minutes of extra daylight. Perhaps Ms Harris hadn't thought that they might just wait an hour longer to take adavantage of all the old people coming back from their activites at 11pm rather than 10, or that they might just wait until a bit later to go out on the rob.

Another suggestion was that the tourism industry would be boosted by hundreds of millions of pounds as people flocked to attractions late at night rather than during the day. Just how much difference can 50 minutes of daylight make in the decision to visit Alton Towers? and what about the staff running all these facilities late into the evening?

Perhaps the attitude is that they should be so grateful to have a job at all in these straghtened times that it doesn't matter how late they work provided a few tourists can indulge themselves for as long as possible.

As Mr Data mentions above, it's the weather which is the over-riding factor governing what can or cannot be done during the evenings. All the daylight in the world won't make any difference to a cloudy, wet summer and in a hot and sunny summer an extra hour is irrelevant as a warm, dark evening is just as good as a warm light one.

Perhaps it's because we live on the eastern side of the Atlantic Ocean and are subjected to large amounts of cloud that there is a national obsession with light and sunshine. The tenor of the majority of weather forecasts is that the day can only be a good one if there's sunshine to be mentioned, irrespective of any other weather parameters.

My own preference is to stay on G.M.T throughout the year. The light mornings are vastly more preferable to light evenings as there are fewer people about, less noise and more peace. The prospect or even more people out even later having barbecues, shopping or whatever else is quite horrifying.