It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Congress may extend Daylight Savings

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:03 AM
link   
As part of the massive energy bill that the House just passed, daylight savings time may be extended another 2 months. It would run from first Sunday in March and to the last Sunday in November. It now starts in early April and ends in late October. If the Senate agrees to the bill, the amount of oil that will be saved would be "staggering" according to Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich. The added daylight would allow homes to use more sunlight, instead of uses electricity to run lights in their homes. An estimated 100,000 barrels of oil per day would be saved.
 



msnbc.msn.com
WASHINGTON - When people go through the ritual of moving their clocks forward each spring ushering in Daylight Savings Time, they’re also saving energy by using more sunlight instead of electricity in the evenings — the equivalent of thousands of barrels of oil, in fact.

The House, in approving a massive energy bill that covers more than 1,000 pages, would extend daylight saving to the first Sunday in March and to the last Sunday in November. It now starts in early April and ends in late October.

The Senate must agree — and it is likely to do so.

“We all just feel sunnier after we set the clocks ahead,” said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who along with Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., got the measure into the energy bill.

Upton said extending daylight time “makes sense especially with skyrocketing energy costs” even though farmers for years have not been all that happy about daylight time as it now exists. They complain the later daylight in the morning makes it harder for them to do their work.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I have been waiting along time for this idea to get brought up by Congress. The pros for extending daylight savings definitely outweigh the cons, IMO. I understand that farmers may lose out on working hours, and that it may become a little less safe for children waiting for school buses in the dark early hours, but we are at a point where outside of the box thinking needs to be done, and this is exactly that kind of thinking. And like Rep. Ed Markey said, "“We all just feel sunnier after we set the clocks ahead”.

Related News Links:
msnbc.msn.com




posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Personally I like the daylight savings time portion of this Bill. Unfortunately, the bill also contains an 8-10 billion dollar tax break to the Oil Companies, which Even Bush thinks is ridiculous. The Bill as it stands will die in the Senate!



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
If the entire bill does not get approved by the Senate, I just hope that they can create a new one that soley addresses extending daylight savings time. IMO, that would be Bush's greatest accomplishment in office



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Oh why not. Everything seems to be changing...why not time itself.

What next?

Here in Arizona i now go into work 1 hour earlier. We dont change the time but we have to be put out and go in earlier to accomodate the rest of the nation. Now that makes sense.

I wonder who dreams up this crapola.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Does that mean you get out an hour early also? Wouldn't extending daylight savings be worth it if it meant reducing the amount of oil used here in the states by a 100,000 barrels a day...36.5 million barrels a year?



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Like I guess that means that they don't have anything better to do HUH?



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:36 PM
link   
OMFG. DST is one of the most ignorant concepts in history. You don't SAVE anything. It is still light the same number of hours. It is still dark the same number of hours. The days won't be any hotter or cooler. NOTHING will be saved. DST needs to be done away with in general. If you cannot adjust to the fact that the days get shorter in the winter and longer in the summer then you have problems. We don't observe DST in Indiana (yet). Its amazing. Without DST it is light at about 6am in the summer and dark at around 8:30 or 9pm. Incredible. All that daylight and we didn't even need to change our clock to get it.

This is really incredible.. are you ready....

If DST were in effect we'd be light at 7am and dark at 9:30 to 10pm. I do the math and its still the same number of hours of daylight. Except now there is time wasted after 9pm. There is absolutely NO point to DST.

What is winter time like? On the shortest day of the year it gets light about 8am. It gets dark about 5pm. With DST in effect it would get light at 7am and dark at 4pm. Same number of hours at light.

So.. in the summer 1 hour of day would be wasted because who needs it after 9pm? In the winter 1 hour would be wasted because most of us don't get home until 4pm or later. So maybe it should be renamed Daylight Wasting Time.

Just an absolutely pointless concept. It saves NADA.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Daylight Savings Time makes no sense to me either. Instead of screwing with that, how about changing the work week schedule instead to save energy. Have four 10 hour work days and 3 days off for the weekend instead



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Maybe energy would be saved if we had a real choice when it comes to public transportation in the U.S. OR if mileage standards were toughened on SUV's. Or prehaps if we reconfigured our street lights to be more like they are in Europe. There is alot of wasted energy through lighting here.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Daylight savings time does indeed save enefgy by shifting unused daylight time that would occur before most people wake up in the morning into the evening when they'd otherwise have to use more electric lighting in their homes.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Think about what you just said and you weill realize it is completely wrong.

Winter for example....

It would be dark here by 4pm. That means 1 EXTRA hour of having to use light. That is one EXTRA hour of cooling outside by the time you get home from work and one EXTRA hour you will need to use the heat.

And in the summer time it is light out longer in the evening so it is warmer longer when you are home so you are more likely to need your AC to keep the house cool while you are home.

If anything DST increases energy usage.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Well, regardless, I hate it. Its not so much I hate one or the other, I just think its time we picked one and called it good. Know what I mean? I don't really see how it saves electricity because when I get up now, its still dark and we have to use more lights to get ready for the day. It makes more sense to me that we would use less in the mornings if it were daylight when we got up. I can't fathom the evening difference either. I mean, its only an hour and it actually makes the evening go faster.

It seems we'd be more able to use the daylight hours if we could use them to get ready for work in the mornings. We work outside most afternoons so we really don't use much power then. The mornings are when every light in the house is on.

I think the real reason behind it is to mess with people's natural clocks and insure more stress is added to the average citizen by telling them that not only have they had to trudge out all winter to go to work in nasty weather, but now that thats over, you have to get up an hour earlier too. Be just as easy if they sent someone to my house every morning to take me out back and kick me in the privates. If they want people to save energy, lets seriously discuss the 4 day work week. Lets have Wedsdays off. 2 days on, a break and then finish the week.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   
The only problem I see with this is that the children won't be able to go trick or treating as early as they do now and if they can't START their halloween festivities until 8 it will be tough to get them up for school the next day!

Personally I dont care if they keep it or change it. Doesn't really matter to me. I think a better way to save billions of barrels of oil a day is get people to stop driving SUV's when they really have NO reason to drive them in the first place!

Jemison



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jemison

I think a better way to save billions of barrels of oil a day is get people to stop driving SUV's when they really have NO reason to drive them in the first place!

Jemison


Well, I think the price of fuel these days is beginning to do that. Its funny that the Bush Tax breaks on SUVs got everyone to buy them and then made the oil campanies billions when they jacked the cost of oil. They could not have planned that any better. I have never had a utility vehicle because I am not a utility worker. I work in an office now and therefore have only the need for a small sedan.


The people I know who bought them for social status are now stuck with the huge cost of not only operating but maintenance as well. Something they probably did not consider before hand.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
Daylight Savings Time makes no sense to me either. Instead of screwing with that, how about changing the work week schedule instead to save energy. Have four 10 hour work days and 3 days off for the weekend instead


Yep thats the ticket Worldwatcher! Personally I telecommute...have'nt driven more than 85 mile per week all year....and 45 are to transport my kids to sporting events. The business world should wake up...people will be just as productive, if not more when working from home.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by cafeman]



posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by cafeman

The business world should wake up...people will be just as productive, if not more when working from home.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by cafeman]


I agree. But people being people, it will take much longer for this to become mainstream. In the case of where I work, I can get away with it if I have a family crisis or transportation issue but not an ongoing basis..and here's why. People put into supervisiory roles cannot seem to connect with the idea that they don't have to stand over a person 8 hours a day to know what they are doing. Of course many jobs require the facilities but many others could be done just as effectively from the home especially those in technologies. Its simple, if you don't do your work, you get fired. Thats always been anough of a reason before and would be right on.

I'd also look at kids learning from home also which would take a sizable amount of money used to transport children and allow it to be used to better equip schools. Maybe have two days per week in class and three days online learning from home. I can't imagine how much fuel would be saved by not having the buses running 5 days per week. Parents could work while the children learn and neither have to leave home.

This could also cut the school day and work day down and allow just as much to get done but the caveat is the socialist indoctrination currently underway in public schools would have more a chance to be detected by parents and might have to be scrapped altogether.

Still, the same people want less burning of fossil fuels and here's your way to get it but you might have to give up control of the student's enviromnment and settle for the information they're receiving over the line..but judging from the obvious success of this program alone by reading these boards, that should be largely suffiecient and a worthwhile compromise.



posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
If anything DST increases energy usage.


If you can prove that with anything besides opinion, I'd really like to see it. Everything I've read on the subject (from scientists and politicans) is that DST saves oil. If that's wrong, then you've stumbled on one of the largest conspiracies in history between scientists, engineers, media, professors, democrats, republicans and Saudi Oil barons to subvert the truth.



posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe


I wonder who dreams up this crapola.


Damn, i thought i came up with that word....

but back to the subject... increasing the DST won't do crap, increasing the usage of high speed PRIVATE (*gasp* deprivatization?! in the US?) train system. Hybrid cars, alternative mass travel and other usage of the technology we already have would help with the oil problem. However if Hydrogen becomes the new oil, the companies you have to watch the water companies...maybe even GE...Jack welch was working on that.



posted on Apr, 25 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep

Originally posted by cafeman

The business world should wake up...people will be just as productive, if not more when working from home.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by cafeman]


I agree. But people being people, it will take much longer for this to become mainstream. In the case of where I work, I can get away with it if I have a family crisis or transportation issue but not an ongoing basis..and here's why. People put into supervisiory roles cannot seem to connect with the idea that they don't have to stand over a person 8 hours a day to know what they are doing. Of course many jobs require the facilities but many others could be done just as effectively from the home especially those in technologies. Its simple, if you don't do your work, you get fired. Thats always been anough of a reason before and would be right on.

I'd also look at kids learning from home also which would take a sizable amount of money used to transport children and allow it to be used to better equip schools. Maybe have two days per week in class and three days online learning from home. I can't imagine how much fuel would be saved by not having the buses running 5 days per week. Parents could work while the children learn and neither have to leave home.

This could also cut the school day and work day down and allow just as much to get done but the caveat is the socialist indoctrination currently underway in public schools would have more a chance to be detected by parents and might have to be scrapped altogether.

Still, the same people want less burning of fossil fuels and here's your way to get it but you might have to give up control of the student's enviromnment and settle for the information they're receiving over the line..but judging from the obvious success of this program alone by reading these boards, that should be largely suffiecient and a worthwhile compromise.



Astrocreep:
Eventually the bottomline aspect of doing business win prevail and those supervisors who have the "need to monitor" will be replaced for a more effecient syle of management. Clearly the treat of being fired for not acccomplishing your goals as an emplyee should and will be enough for the majority of hard working folks....mostly tech related at this point....!

I agree that the current structure of the schools should and must change, and indeed, having kids participate in an online learning enviroment is much more functional to the budgetary constraints which exist in the education community. Most of the time the teachers are babysitting anyway. But I digress. I like the idea of 2 days online and 3 days in-class....think of the money it would save on transportation alone...not to mention the reduction in "social drama." Thanks for the post response.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join