On 2016-12-15 09:01, Brian Inglis wrote:

On 2016-12-14 14:22, Brian Inglis wrote:

...

On the final day of the fall sitting on Tuesday, Alberta Progressive Conservative leadership candidate, Vermilion-Lloydminster MLA Richard Starke presented a petition to the legislature calling for repeal of the Daylight Saving Time Act and a move to Central Time (from Mountain Time), to be decided by a referendum. The stories linked below are all from the same news org and under the same byline. The latter two have a vote button at the bottom to poll readers' opinions, each currently running about 80/20 in favour of dropping DST, and/or possibly also of switching to permanent CT, depending on whether the voters read the question or just clicked.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/pc-leadership-candidate-starke-calls-... http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/leadership+candidate+starke+cal... http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/12/14/to-keep-or-ditch-daylight-saving-time-a... http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/12/14/to-keep-or-ditch-daylight-saving-time-...

In follow ups, with content and headlines changed under the previous links, the Alberta NDP government had the issue as part of their platform, and now they are looking at abolishing Daylight Saving Time and changing the time zone, possibly without a referendum: NDP government "very interested" in scrapping Alberta's twice-yearly time change: http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/pc-leadership-candidate-starke-calls-... NDP looking at abolishing Daylight Saving Time, changing time zone: http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/12/14/to-keep-or-ditch-daylight-saving-time-a...

Now question is: Do we want to stay on Mountain Standard Time all year, do we want to go to Mountain Daylight time? About time: Alberta's youngest MLA to table bill aimed at ending daylight saving time: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-daylight-saving-time-bill-abol... -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

On 2016-12-17 10:34, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

"Brian" == Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca> writes: Brian> Now question is: Do we want to stay on Mountain Standard Time Brian> all year, do we want to go to Mountain Daylight time? It has never made sense to call something "Daylight time" if it's year-round. Just pull the neighbor standard time. And if that makes even less sense that also tells me that you hate "the sun overhead at noon" for unjustified (to me) reasons.

It's a pull quote from the article subhead, which I thought summarized the state of the public discussion at the moment. Aren't we used to seeing these pronouncements by politicians, bureaucrats, and journalists about keeping "daylight" time year round? Saskatchewan, fixed on CST -0600, is often referred to as switching from CST to MDT in summer, and is shown as such on the NRC official time Summer Time Zones map at: http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/services/time/time_zones.html If Alberta changes, there could possibly be further changes north in the North West Territories. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 09:13:38 -0800 From: merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) Message-ID: <86vauhdut9.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> | I can't tell you how many crazy people I've dealt with who claim "the US | should just stay on DST all year... I really hate going coming home from | work in the dark." Head bang on desk. They're actually less stupid than you imply - it can be almost impossible for many employers to alter their employees work times, because they're all intertwined with all kinds of external relationships, and attempting to adjust them all, at the same time, would be a task beyond comprehension - but it is easy to alter the position of the sun wrt the value shown on the clock - for everyone - at the stroke of a pen. kre

On 18/12/16 18:43, lester@lsces.co.uk wrote:

That is the whole case for summer and winter offsets. The problem is some people would prefer just to use the summer offset all year. I'm not convinced either way. Using a 'summer' setting may simplify some things and switching to it in spring gives two periods when one is blinded driving into the sun in the morning. Just using the unadjusted time is equally right in many latitudes? No compeling case for any one option :(

Even in the UK which is not especially huge nor especially northern there's a big difference between North and South. There was a short period when we stuck with "summer time" all year round (you can look up the dates). I remember the village policeman coming round and issuing us all with rather smelly PVC fluorescent vests to wear on the way to school in the morning while it was still dark. We were promised we could play outside when we got home because it would stay lighter longer. Yeah, right. This was the north of England. In the middle of winter it made next to no difference because (a) it was dark by the time we got home and (b) it was winter, it was bloody cold[1]. In the south of England there's a regular clamouring to stay on "summer time" all year round forgetting while today, here in Reading, sunset would be just before 5pm, in the north where I lived sunrise won't be until about 9.30 and in Scotland it'd be even later. It may make sense to stick with "summer time" all year round in the balmy (barmy?) south of England but not in the north where its a choice between school kids going to school when it's more-or-less light and going to school when it's completely dark[2]. And it's nothing to do with energy saving. What we really need are huge orbital mirrors to extend the daylight.[3] jch [1] http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/emley-moor-mast-fell-46-8... Ignore the headline date, it was 1969. [2] My late mother-in-law claimed the year-round summer time experiment died when a car ploughed into a bus stop where kids were waiting for the morning school bus in the dark. [3] xkcd or what if? I'm sure.

Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 12:38:37 -0700 From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Message-ID: <0113fd16-8392-7446-be54-e13f6ecf96ea@SystematicSw.ab.ca> | Probably less positive impact of DST on those in sub-tropical | southern latitudes That's assuming you're referring to the northern hemisphere of course. But yes, in tropical areas summer time makes essentially no sense, as there's almost no variation in the day length year round - what's more, in mid tropical areas, summer typically is not near the actual equinox - in Thailand for example, mid summer happens in mid April - just after the equinox - which is just after the sun passes overhead (goes from being south to being north). There would (should) presumably be another summer at the start of September, but that's a monsoon season, the clouds reflect the sunlight, and it doesn't get so hot. But just like the rest of the northern hemisphere, winter (if you can call it that - but it is cooler) is January - so there is quite rapid transition from winter to summer, and then a longer intermediate period from summer to winter again. This doesn't mean that the clocks have to be on "natural" time though, Singpapore and Malaysia "should be" UTC+0700 (and were for a long time) but use UTC+0800 so they're running in the same zone as Hong Kong (and closer to Japan) for example. (tzdata has Singapore as 06:55:25 LMT before stadardised time, and Kuala Lumpur on 06:46:46 - yet they're both +0800 now - since 1982 - just as if they have "year round daylight saving") | If I understand correctly what you're saying, I must disagree, as | anyone involved in North American dealing with stocks, currencies, | commodities, energy, works from before 9ET until after 3ET, | regardless of where they are across the country, No, that is exactly what I was saying. The point was that sometimes there are arguments by people opposed to summer time (or sometimes by those in favour) along the lines of "if you don't like what time you have to work, just go earlier/later, don't move the clocks and affect everyone else" - where for most of the population, that simply isn't possible (which is just what you said). External forces control the clock hours at which people must work, and it is very very hard to change that - either for indivisuals, or the employers they work for, however the government can adjust the clock setting wrt the sun, which affects everyone, leaving those who have to deal with international issues to find a way to cope. Note that I am not arguing in favour (nor against) summer time, just against some of the arguments that are sometimes made against (and sometimes for) it. Also, if the head banging that Randal referred to was more because people want to call an adjusted time zone "daylight saving time all year" instead of just calling it "standard time" then that's (the head banging) is just as pointless ... it doesn't matter in the slightest what anyone calls the time, it is just a label, and arguing for one label over another is mostly wasted effort, and certainly isn't worth getting upset about, no matter how stupid you think it. What clock times the sun sets and rises, and whether or not that should be adjusted during the year are things you can argue about, what any of that is called affects nothing (provided that people understand what is meant) and arguing about it isn't worth the effort - this said despite that I sometimes comment on the stupidity of calling anything "daylight saving time"! kre

On 2016-12-20 08:38, Paul Eggert wrote:

Brian Inglis wrote:

...

Now question is: Do we want to stay on Mountain Standard Time all year, do we want to go to Mountain Daylight time? As it happens, a week ago Nicholas Rivers of the University of Ottawa published the best work I have seen on the subject of DST-based energy savings in Canada. Rivers found that in Ontario, DST reduces electricity demand 1.5% during the couple of weeks after the transition (he studied transitions, not year-round consumption). Like Havranek et al., which I cited a couple of days ago, Rivers hypothesizes that DST-based electricity savings is most pronounced at high latitudes, and notes that he does not estimate the costs of DST (e.g., due to increased traffic accident rates).

Havranek et. al. I found a wee bit annoying as it made it clear that there was no benefit at lowest and highest latitudes, but did not provide sufficient data on numbers and locations to nail down the "Goldilocks" latitudes where it does provide a benefit to say 35-50. My own experience here is that the dates are far enough from the equinoxes that we drive to and from work into the sunrise and sunset for two months instead of one, so what we lose in spring we gain in fall, but still don't see daylight at home except April to September, and the days are short enough at the changes that energy consumption likely depends more on weather than time. Given that the UK is also all above 49N I can sympathize with the Scots, most of whom live at or above 55N, complaining about the time change impact.

Rivers N. Does daylight savings time save energy? Evidence from Ontario. 2016-12-13. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2772048 Cash C. Spring forward, fall back ... screw up? Reconsidering Alberta's clock revolt. National Post 2016-12-19. http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/colby-cosh-spring-forward-fall-bac...

Most of the eastern Canadian population is just north of the border on the Great Lakes and St Laurent, well south of the 49N western border, nearly 10 deg S of western cities, uses a lot more domestic electrical heating and air conditioning with probably lighter insulation, than western areas which use electricity mainly for industrial processes and air conditioning for commercial premises with heavier insulation which helps in both winter and summer extreme temperatures ("it's a dry heat|cold"). Rivers seems to show that electricity demand is most highly correlated with high temperatures and presumably air conditioning load, possibly because he seems to be using Toronto as a proxy for Ontario, despite its size, for some variables, and does not seem to control for the reduction of demand by high costs driving dependent industries out of province, generation facilities going offline for maintenance reducing supply, wind generation providing supply greater than demand driving prices negative, commercial and industrial load shedding and peak to off peak consumption shifts by heavy users during high demand and cost, and contingent generation facilities brought online to take advantange of high demand and prices i.e. the drivers of consumption. For tariff reasons, heavy lighting consumption is tracked separately from domestic, retail, light and heavy commercial, and industrial users, so it should have been possible to look at consumption and calculate differences for each group, and look at factors behind differences more closely. I find it difficult to believe that very predictable lighting demands would be so heavy as to allow a 1.5% reduction of overall provincial demand without other factors being in play - I could believe it for Toronto during clear sunny weather, but across a province spanning the Great Lakes and N to Nunavut in early spring, I have grave doubts as to the likelihood of that being possible without further checks on the assumptions. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

On 2017-02-22 13:14, Brian Inglis wrote:

On 2016-12-20 15:58, Brian Inglis wrote:

...

On 2016-12-20 08:38, Paul Eggert wrote:

...

Brian Inglis wrote:

Update:

Don't go changing? Alberta MLA wants to drop daylight saving time http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-mla-daylight-saving-1.3990569

Bill is still on the legislative schedule for March with widespread support.

Latest: Time hasn't run out on Alberta debate about twice-yearly clock changes, premier says http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-daylight-saving-clocks-rachel... "[A]n all-party legislature committee unanimously rejected a private member's bill that proposed ditching the twice-yearly time change in Alberta." "The five-member committee said the bill has merits in terms of health, but decided there would be too much of an economic impact on business at a delicate time." "I think it was about 20,000 Albertans, maybe more, who responded, and the vast majority were in favour of moving forward on it," the premier said. "MLAs will get another chance to debate the bill in the legislature. "I still think there are questions to be asked and some deliberations to be done," Notley said, not long after the committee rejected the bill. "I also believe it's still a pretty open vote in the legislature, and the matter's not over yet." -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada