Dear Doug,

It is probably time to conclude this
fascinating discussion so this will
be my final public offering (for a
while).

> A significant part of my note is
> reporting the work of others...

Indeed so.  I am familiar with most
of your citations, especially, the
report by the Cambridge Engineers.
The methodology used was an utter
disgrace in my view.

It is exceptionally difficult to
find a way of comparing like with
like without getting biased results.
Also, making predictions, especially
economic predictions, is notoriously
subject to error.

My proposal to compare two adjacent
U.S. towns in different time zones
is a better approach but I am the
first to admit that the two sets
of results would not be truly
independent (in the statistical
sense) and the results would be
biased.  For example, there will
be people who live in one time
zone and work in the other.

In terms of energy use, I don't
believe a word of the analysis.
The energy used when driving
five miles to work is the same
whether you drive in the dark
or in the light.

I suggest you study the experience
of Portugal:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_Portugal

They have switched time zones
several times and are forever
being persuaded to use CEST.

Sometimes they try it and then
find how unsatisfactory it is...

  when school classes started,
  the sun was still rising,
  which eventually had
  repercussions on students'
  school performance and their
  safety during morning trips
  from home to school.

  A company hired by European
  Commission conducted a study
  which concluded that, in fact,
  there were no energy savings
  because in the early morning,
  due to the dark, workers turned
  on lights in their offices,
  and they forgot to turn them
  off, leaving them switched on
  for the rest of the morning,
  which increased energy
  consumption.

  ...insurance companies reported
  a rise in the number of accidents.

Look, I don't believe all of this
either!  Lighting uses a minuscule
amount of energy compared with
heating and transport though, of
course, it shouldn't be wasted.

Portugal is now back on GMT and
GMT+1 just like the U.K.

Remember, the U.K. DID experiment
with year-round summer time and
then gave it up.

You may say that this was because
of grumbles from Scottish herdsman.

I have always wondered just how
Scottish herdsmen can be such a
forceful political lobby!  That
doesn't stop them being right!

> ...the middle of the effective
> day has moved to something
> like 3pm.

Given your wish to fiddle with
our clocks, this is ill-defined.
I assume you mean three hours
after solar transit?

This is a case of generalising
from yourself and those you
associate with.  Certainly
count me out!

In the 1980s I worked for a spell
in Magdeburg University, then in
the DDR.  My hosting professor
asked me if my lectures could be
the first of the day.

"Yes," I said eagerly.  "Fine,"
he replied, "our first lecture
is at 7am so I'll meet you in
my office at 06:30 tomorrow."

This suited me very well but I
had to check with my landlady
about breakfast.

I explained that I would be
leaving about 6am and I asked
whether she could set out my
breakfast the night before.

"No need," she said, "I leave
for work myself at 4am, so I
shall set out your breakfast
before I depart."

As it turned out, I was the
last person in the household
to leave for work when I left
at 6am.

I had had some misgivings
about the East German regime
but this aspect seemed truly
excellent to me!

I now see that it wouldn't
work in Portugal!

By all means reply but I
suggest "off-list".

Very best wishes

Frank

---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Reply via email to