So in Indiana thermostats are regulated by clocks instead of thermostats as in the rest of the country? What kinds of morans live in Indiana anyway?

^^ What???

@GiltProto: Erin Moran?

@GiltProto: You spelt moron wrong.

F-DST! We should all switch to TZ/UTZ/GMT.

Whoa, this is heavy

I know that getting up an hour earlier doesn't save any of MY energy...

What's especially annoying is all the energy and effort we had to put in to making sure everyone's computers reflected the new DST schedule, all for questionable energy savings....

twice a year, we have to change our clocks and twice a year, we get to hear geeks complain about it.

Me? I'd rather do away with this protocol and always dobserve Daylight savings. I'd rather have one extra hour of daylight throughout the year so I can experience more of the day after the work day stuck in a cubicle staring at a computer screen all day.

I never thought it was a good idea for modern times. Back in the day, sure. But as the article states, A/C uses a lot more energy than lights, especially since we've been making the transition to cfl's

my boss just told me about this and tommorrow i have to come in an hour early!!! grrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@Amiash: i think i misspelled the word "tomorrow"

I love how daylight saving is always described as 'adding an hour of daylight', as if there is literally more day time. Funny that governments can dictate when we sleep and wake though...

Yeah, I spelled moran incorrectly like in the infamous photo on the web. It was intentional to introduce some humour here.

[politicalhumor.about.com]

And I also meant to type "So in Indiana furnaces and air conditioners are regulated by clocks instead of thermostats..."

So sue me for rushing my typing all you morans. I must have been excited about getting the first post on a weekend when hardly anyone is here. Morans!

They extended DST before even bothering to analyze whether it saves money.

Ya know, this reminds me of the intelligence behind of a military operation I was part of. During the invasion of Grenada, we erected a 50,000 watt AM radio station. *Then* someone asked, hey, does anyone on this island even *have* a radio? Turned out, not very many. So, we shipped in a few planeloads of radios and gave them away, so they could hear our radio station. Then someone thought to ask, hey, do they sell enough batteries in this country for this many radios? Turned out, no they did not. So in came more planeloads, of batteries this time. Is our government always this dumb? Looks like the answer to that is, yes, they are.

I thought it was about saving daylight, not energy...I wonder where I got that idea...

you morans spelt jigawatts wrong

Why are we worrying about this? 6 million people in Indiana, estimated cost $13.9 million= $2.32 per person. That's cheaper than a latte.

@jamstigator: that sounds a lot like another military operation the US has been involved in recently.

@GiltProto: so we are wrong for being right?
I'm sorry but if correcting you is wrong, then I don't wanna be right.
I lived in Indiana for 5 years and I could do without the DST jiggamathing. It's like a nationwide agreement to fool ourselves.

@GiltProto:
OMG!

@GiltProto:
I dunno about you guys, but when I'm out of the house, I turn off my AC. It saves a lot of energy and it would explain why Indiana's AC is "regulated by clocks".

@jamstigator: Our government at work.

@GiltProto: actually, here in GA my thermostat is regulated by BOTH temperature AND time.
During the day, my thermostat goes to like 65 in the winter and 80 in the summer. Then when I'm home it kicks on and makes the house comfortable again. For people without a programmable thermostat they just turn the A/C off when they leave for work.

Though it sounds like you leave your a/c on all the time.

Daylight Saving Time has been called a farce since it was first proposed in 1907, so this ain't news, kids.

But these updated numbers are rather humorous and continue to prove the point that changing back and forth is pretty much a disaster.

Oh well.

I have never liked daylight savings.I always dread it every year. It makes me so tired for a whole week. I love it when it ends in the fall because you gain an hour of sleep and its closer to winter for ski season and more sleep! I notice everyone is so grumpy and there is more road rage around this time of turning your clocks foward at least here in Southern California. Also as for the so called experts say it cuts down on crime?? I don't think so. People are bolder these days and committing crimes in broad daylight. Anyway, thanks for letting me whine. Have a great day!

I hope to god our next president reverts DST back.

It's all Bush's fault.

@gforce: You might want to check your electric bill. It usually takes far more energy to re-cool your place than if the AC was left on to tweak the temp every once in awhile.

Energy savings or no - I look forward to Daylight Savings every year. I love the extra hour of daylight at night.

Even though you lose an hour when the clocks are set ahead, I get more sleep during the DST months. My kids wake up with the sun, so that extra hour until sunrise really pays off in the mornings on weekends...

Now whether things like this are the federal governments business - that's a totally different question.

see, another reason to choose Hillary over Obama. Obama supports change...

The correct way to misspell moron is "maroon"

I wish we could stay on the summer schedule all year 'round. Really, don't more people benefit from evenign light than crack of dawn light?

I f%&king hate this clock changing game we do twice a year. I've always had sleep issues and this screws me up even more twice a year.

There is a good article about it here: [www.fdlreporter.com]

Consider that this study found that the average household spent an extra $3 for 6 months. That is $0.50 per month or about $0.12 per week.

It also does not point out changes for businesses, safety for evening driving, additional family time available. It also didn't take any crime changes into consideration though.

I hate the effect the fall shift causes. I used to live near the eastern border of the Central Time Zone and dealt with sunset at 4:30 PM even in Florida.

can't believe sisedi's comment went unnoticed. Daylight Savings Time wasn't created in modern times to conserve energy or anything like that.

"During his time as an American envoy to France, Benjamin Franklin, author of the proverb, "Early to bed, and early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise", anonymously published a letter suggesting that Parisians economize on candles by rising earlier to use morning sunlight.[14] This 1784 satire proposed taxing shutters, rationing candles, and waking the public by ringing church bells and firing cannons at sunrise."

i have no idea why DST would save energy at all. i mean, the sun's already rising at (technically) 7AM in the summer, and with the clocks set forward, it's bloody fucking 6AM, i'm still trying to sleep and yet the sun's getting into my eyes. i don't even need, nor want that daylight until 8.

how is DST "saving" daylight in any way?

But think of all the candles we're saving...

@Galley: if Bush caused Katrina..then Kayne causes AIDS in africa..

DST is a joke..

@92BuickLeSabre:
why do i need to save on candles? IKEA sells a 100-pack for 4 bucks. sometimes $2.50 if it's on sale.

=P

@willyolio: Hey, whatever. It's your dime.

Literally, probably a dime.

ABOLISH THAT SH!T.

It was created for the farmers and they stopped using it. Why doesn't the government take a hint?

Daylight savings was not started for farmers at all, even though that is what they would like you to think. It was created for Wall Street.
It was New York City (not the nation's farmers, as many incorrectly believe) that rallied for its reinstatement. Pressured by bankers and brokers who wanted to capitalize on the hour of arbitrage daylight saving allowed with the London markets, the New York City Board of Aldermen lobbied it into law in 1920...

Every day, I honestly have less and less faith in mankind. Especially in the US.

@RockoWasTaken:
Actually, that's a common misconception.
[michaelbluejay.com] :

"It's a myth that leaving the AC on while you're away at work uses less energy than turning it on when you get home. Here's why:

Heat goes to where it's not. With the AC off, your house will absorb heat from outside, but at some point it will be so hot it can't absorb any more heat. When you come home and turn the AC on, the AC has to remove the accumulated heat only once.

But if the AC is on when you're gone, then your house is constantly absorbing heat because your AC is constantly cooling down the house. The AC has basically turned your house into a heat magnet. So your AC is removing absorbed heat over and over and over again.

Let's say you leave the AC off, and your house absorbs 20k BTU's of heat and then stops, because that's all it can absorb.

Now let's say that you have the AC running instead. The house absorbs 5k BTU's of heat, so the AC kicks in and removes it. Then it absorbs another 5k BTU's, and your AC kicks in and removes that. Repeat that process several times during the day.

This is not a gray area, and there's no question about it: running the AC when you're not home wastes energy, period."

Just when I'm getting used to waking up at (near) daylight, now they're taking it away again for another month.

@man_in_gauze: That's your problem, having faith in man-kind at all. Oh, I have hope, but I've never had any real faith in man-kind. Nor do I expect the government to get around to solving the ten ton gorilla that is SSI, manage resources responsible (ya know like water, that icky stuff that people don't really drink anymore despite being the corner-stone of human existence), or payback China anytime soon despite who we get as our next President. Just go with the flow, make sure you get your own in return and do your best reguardless and enjoying the comedy of stupidity that is the human race. We've got one thing going for us at least, we're pretty darn entertaining as a species at least.

I like the extra hour of boozing that the second DST change allows, so count me as a fan. morans!

@gforce: that may be partially true, but i'm sure there's some law of economics, if not thermodynamics, that says removing 5 at a time is more efficient that removing 20 all at once.

plus with some degree of insulation, hopefully your house won't absorb enough heat where it reaches some equilbrium and can't absorb any more. even if it doesn't, that equilibrium occurs way above 80F in many parts of the country, and that means your house will be uncomfortable for quite a while until it cools!

@@drewheyman:

I have to side with you here. Don't forget about the items in your home heating up as well, so you have residual heat to get rid of in addition to cooling the air. I believe this is the culprit for making it take so long to cool down your home or your car after having the AC off all day. Likewise, leaving the AC on all day keeps everything at a uniform temperature. I would recommend raising the temperature during the day and turning it off for extended absences. Ceiling fans also help a lot with circulation and keeping the temperature more uniform.

Studies have been done that even the most well insulated house will absorb energy, the only difference is that better insulated house delay the absorbed energy from reaching inside. By that it can take advantage of the cool outside temperature at night to dissipate the heat instead of your A/C (in summer time). The reverse is true in winter.

Either case, my point is that turning down / off your A/C when you are out will save you money, period. And if you don't believe, I have checked my energy bill too.

We installed a timer based thermostat 3 years ago, and our heating and cooling bills have both been consistently lower in the past 3 years - despite last year was one of the coldest winter for us. And before you fire back, no we have not upgraded any windows, re-seal any gaps, or blown in more insulation at the roof. The house is the same, just a new thermostat.

Also keep in mind the service-life extension of your AC / furnace. Your unit may has to run for 30 min. straight when you get home, but compare to kicking on for 5 min. 3 times an hour all-day, in total it will run for less time. In addition, most (if not all) appliances (and electronics gadgets for that matter) wear out faster if you keep turning them on-and-of-and-on-and-off-and-so-forth.

Peace.

@man_in_gauze: Oh, and if you still have faith in humanity. You should seriously look into Stanley Milgram's, Charles Sheridan and Richard King on obedience studies. Or the intentional study by Carney Ladis which similarly convinced people to do very evil things despite not being evil people.

And here I thought only people over here in europe were insane enough to implant a scheme like "make one day of the year an hour short and one an hour long and we will save energy and get more workpower".

@RockoWasTaken:
So many people don't understand that and I found out it's useless to try explaining it to them. If you keep your house at a somewhat constant temperature, your AC/heater doesn't have to work very hard to keep it that way, usually saving energy.

If you let your houses temperature go to an extreme, then tell it to bring it to a comfortable temp, you'll most likely be using much more energy. Not only does it have to work extremely hard to regulate the air in the house, but everything else that has absorbed all the hot/cold air.

People are just talking about energy here but that's not the only reason why DST would be used. In high latitudes in the summer there's completely wasted sunlight in the morning before people wake up. By shifting it by an hour you get a larger proportion of the day when people are awake to be sunlit. This means that kids can go out and play soccer after school for another longer in the evening, it means that when you drive home from baseball practice the sun will still be up and you don't have to drive in the dark, and so on.

Even if there are no savings in energy there are still big benefits of DST in terms of its effect on quality of life in high latitude areas. If you live in Florida then you obviously don't understand the impact of it, but trust me - if you're in Alaska or Canada on northern Europe then it's a pretty big deal.

Also keep in mind that in a lot of high-latitude places, air conditioning is not an issue because even at the hottest the temperature will only be around +20C in the summer. Most of the time-bound energy consumption is from lighting - not temperature control.

DST might be stupid in lower latitude places such as California, but it's not stupid in high latitude places.

@Darkest Daze:
Funny thing that it's actually you who are wrong.

Suppose the energy it takes to retain the steady temperature is 1 units per hour. And suppose that if you let the temp go to extrems and only then turn on the A/C, it will take 5 units (and for simplicity say it takes an hour) to cool it down again.

Now with very simple math you can calculate the overall consumption. Let's suppose two caes, A and B where A always keeps the A/C on and steady and consumes 1 unit per hour. And B always keeps the A/C off and then turns it off at the end of the test.

With a test duration of 3 hours, case A will have consumed 3 units of energy and case B will have consumed 5. But if the test duration is 8 hours then case A will have consumed 8 hours of energy and case B will have consumed 5. Thus, all other things being equal the duration of the period of A/C off will have an effect on which strategy is better.

This is very easy to understand if you take it to extremes. Imagine 6 month of running the A/C vs. being away from the home for 6 month and then coming home and turning the A/C on. Surely you aren't suggesting that the 1 hour of A/C running after 6 months will consume as much energy as a whole 6 months worth?