this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
396 points (97.8% liked)
Europe
8324 readers
1 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐ฉ๐ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I never understood the arguments people use surrounding daylight savings. The health risks, accident risks, any risks surround the actual switch, not really the what time is used. If the clocks were set forward for "summer time" then 3 months later Daylight savings was abolished and no one changes their clocks anymore (as you said, permanent summer time) there would be no ill effects from it cause everyone was already used to the time change.
I want to get rid of daylight savings. I don't care whether it's standard time that use used or daylight savings time that is used as long as the switchover stops happening.
With people mostly using clocks which don't need adjusting, we could have the best of both worlds.
Currently, 12 o'clock is defined as the sun being at its highest point at a specific location (in winter, standard time)
Imagine you take the same reference location, and define sunrise as 7:00 (am). No health issues, no sudden changes, and probably best for the biorhythm.
Yes, there would be "ill effects". Having more daylight later the day is a pure luxury/convenience (for the people not working at that time anymore...). Having to an hour more between waking up and the sun coming up however has adverse effects on your natural clock and health.