Which timezone should the UK be in?

[Scotrail12]

I'd go for option 2. I hate how it gets dark by 4.30pm at some points in the Winter.

 

[cjmillsnun]

The way I see it, there are currently three possible answers to the question proposed in the thread title (the question assumes the same timezone is kept all year and ignores daylight saving. I do not wish to debate whether we should adapt daylight saving in this thread but rather, assuming we didn’t, discuss which timezone is most appropriate).

1) GMT - This is the timezone we adapt to throughout the course of winter. It allows for light much earlier in the morning, at the expense of light in the evening. This is the “natural” timezone for our location on earth and allows for the “astronomical” times to align most with our actual times.

2) BST/GMT+1 - This is the timezone we assume for the majority of the year (March - November) and allows for much more daylight in the evening at the expense of daylight in the morning. Despite not aligning perfectly with the astronomical times, this timezone does tend to align better with the “behavioural” aspect of time (ie waking up around 7-8am when it’s light and making the most of the daylight later in the day, up to almost 10PM close to the summer solstice!)

3) GMT + 30 - Not a currently used timezone, but a proposal I read recently which makes the use/benefit of both GMT and BST. Essentially halfway between the two currently used (GMT + 30 minutes and BST - 30 minutes) This timezone doesn’t quite align with natural astronomical cycles nor does it align with societal behavioural patterns, but it “meets in the middle” of these two concepts. It’s an interesting concept I hadn’t considered until recently, however, to save the hassle of changing the clocks twice a year, I would definitely be up for the concept if trialled!

Personally, I’m a supporter of (2) mainly, as I feel it aligns with the daily life of the majority of people better than the other options, however I’d be open to trying (3)!

Point of order we adopt BST from the last weekend of March to the last weekend of October. It has never been BST in November.

 

[dangie]

If would like BST all year round, but if we were to keep the clock change I’d go for changing from GMT to BST on the last weekend of February not the last weekend of March.

 

[MikeWM]

And then tried again in 1947, with 4 time changes in the year - from GMT to BST (GMT+1) for a few weeks before BDST (GMT+2) for high summer, then reversing the process as we returned to GMT for the depths of winter: https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zone/uk/london?year=1947 for details

That one sounds like it would suit me just fine, I'm going to support another go at that

 

[scarby]

If would like BST all year round, but if we were to keep the clock change I’d go for changing from GMT to BST on the last weekend of February not the last weekend of March.

Interesting point.

Is there a reason why the clocks don't move forward until the end of March?

The point being, the clocks go back just under 2 months before the shortest day (December 21), but they don't go forward until over 3 months after the shortest day.

 

[sannox]

I'm very much a fan of the lighter evenings in the summer you get with BST. I love daylight until 10pm, sitting outside at pubs or after work. To move to GMT all year round and having sunlight at 3am but darkness at 9pm would seem bizarre and worse for energy needs / traffic given more people are up and about at 9pm than at 3am.

My only concern with GMT all year is the darkness of winter mornings. Sunrise in Glasgow would be well after 9am which does seem very late.

 

[Magdalia]

Is there a reason why the clocks don't move forward until the end of March?

Yes. When we joined the EEC we moved to their date in the spring, they moved to our date in the autumn. It was a compromise.

the clocks go back just under 2 months before the shortest day (December 21), but they don't go forward until over 3 months after the shortest day.

The shortest day isn't relevant. What matters are sunset and sunrise times. The earliest sunset is around 12 December, and the latest sunrise is around 30 December. We are much closer to symmetry on latest sunrise.

 

[yorkie]

I'm very much a fan of the lighter evenings in the summer you get with BST. I love daylight until 10pm, sitting outside at pubs or after work. To move to GMT all year round and having sunlight at 3am but darkness at 9pm would seem bizarre and worse for energy needs / traffic given more people are up and about at 9pm than at 3am.

My only concern with GMT all year is the darkness of winter mornings. Sunrise in Glasgow would be well after 9am which does seem very late.

But it's very early to be dark around 1530!

But a late sunrise doesn't mean we are missing out on that much sun during waking hours, but an early sunset does!

The tail really is wagging the dog with the current system

Interesting point.

Is there a reason why the clocks don't move forward until the end of March?

The point being, the clocks go back just under 2 months before the shortest day (December 21), but they don't go forward until over 3 months after the shortest day.

Yes. When we joined the EEC we moved to their date in the spring, they moved to our date in the autumn. It was a compromise.


The shortest day isn't relevant. What matters are sunset and sunrise times. The earliest sunset is around 12 December, and the latest sunrise is around 30 December. We are much closer to symmetry on latest sunrise.

It is based on an illgocal obsession purely over sunrise times, even though most people are out and about for much longer after Sunset than are out and about before sunrise.

 

[Magdalia]

It is based on an illgocal obsession purely over sunrise times, even though most people are out and about for much longer after Sunset than are out and about before sunrise.

It isn't illogical.

When we have daylight is far more important in winter, when daylight is scarce, than in summer, when daylight is abundant.

The 1968-71 British Standard Time experiment demonstrated that the majority of people don't like dark mornings in winter, and don't like having to be out and about before sunrise.

 

[edwin_m]

What I don't understand is people objecting to adjusting their clocks twice a year: how on earth do they cope with holidays abroad necessitating a clock-adjustment twice in a relatively short period of time? So I'm very much in favour of maintaining the status quo. But if forced to choose I would go for GMT+30mins.

Adjusting clocks is inevitable when travelling to a different time zone, though it would be needed much less if we were on the same time as most of our European neighbours.

However, I consider it is unnecessary for everyone to adjust their clocks twice a year. This causes an effect akin to jet lag. Some people appreciate an extra hour's lie-in in October but some of the people that need it most don't get it - a small child doesn't know the clocks have changed and will wake up (and wake their parents) at the same biological time.

However, to come back on topic I'd note there is an interaction with Ireland - if we changed time zone then would they change too, or end up with Northern Ireland being on a different time zone from the Republic or from the rest of the UK?

 

[swt_passenger]

Adjusting clocks is inevitable when travelling to a different time zone, though it would be needed much less if we were on the same time as most of our European neighbours.

However, I consider it is unnecessary for everyone to adjust their clocks twice a year. This causes an effect akin to jet lag. Some people appreciate an extra hour's lie-in in October but some of the people that need it most don't get it - a small child doesn't know the clocks have changed and will wake up (and wake their parents) at the same biological time.

However, to come back on topic I'd note there is an interaction with Ireland - if we changed time zone then would they change too, or end up with Northern Ireland being on a different time zone from the Republic or from the rest of the UK?

Scotland likely wouldn’t change, I expect that would be the nearer issue than Ireland...

 

[HSTEd]

I see no reason we should not be in the "geographically correct" timezone. Midnight should be at midnight, midday should be at midday.

If people want to get up earlier that is there perogative, no reason to put the entirety of the UK on Berlin time.

And the supposed energy benefits of BST vanished with the adoption of energy efficient lighting.

 

[gswindale]

Could we not keep GMT all year round, but simply start work an hour later/earlier (so from end of March - end Oct, the working day is 08:00 to 16:30 whilst end Oct - end Mar it is 09:00 to 17:30)?

 

[PTR 444]

Whatever option is chosen, there will always be winners and losers.

1. This will benefit people who regularly work early shifts starting before 8am since they have more daylight hours to wake up to, but could be an annoyance if they fancy a lie in on their day off and get a rude awakening from the sun at 3am.

2. This will benefit the usual 9-5 and late shift workers more since they have more daylight time after work, but when daylight hours are scarce during the winter months it might be a safety concern having more of the morning rush hour in the dark.

3. Probably a reasonable compromise on the two points above, but I think it would be weird as the prime meridian country to not be an Hour apart from the majority of other countries.

4. Maybe not something I’d advocate, but one idea that might work is the entire world adopting a Universal Standard Time which would essentially be Greenwich Mean Time everywhere by default. Local businesses could then simply adjust their trading hours to align with the sun rising and setting in their area. In a globalised Society with better air and high speed rail links than ever, this will reduce complexity for multinational businesses and frequent travellers.

 

[kristiang85]

BST for sure. I much prefer lighter evenings, and it is utterly depressing finishing work in the winter and you're already well into darkness by 5-6pm, but it is made up for by a long summer evenings. I'd hate to lose that.

Light mornings do nothing for me, as I am not an early riser!

 

[sannox]

But it's very early to be dark around 1530!

But a late sunrise doesn't mean we are missing out on that much sun during waking hours, but an early sunset does!

It is dark early that's true, but would move the morning commute into darkness too which doesn't benefit schoolchildren. Most people doing the 9-5 would be working anyway and going to and from work in darkness.

What also doesn't help is you also get a big difference between the north of the UK and the south over this matter.
In London shortest day is 8.04-15.53,
Manchester is 8.23-15.51,
Glasgow is 8.46-15.44,
Inverness is 8.57-15.33,

I can see how benefit might be to move London and the south, most of the winter it would get bright around 8am and that 4/5pm hour sunset would be great. Glasgow and Inverness are however not far off an hour shifted already!

 

[yorkie]

It is dark early that's true, but would move the morning commute into darkness too which doesn't benefit schoolchildren.

But schoolchildren would benefit by increased daylight hours in the afternoon/evening. Why can schoolchildren not go to school in the dark, but can go home in the dark in the evening?

Also it is already the case that schools such as Portree High School open before sunrise in the darkest months, so the idea that kids can't go to school in the darkness is a fallacy.

I can see how benefit might be to move London and the south, most of the winter it would get bright around 8am and that 4/5pm hour sunset would be great. Glasgow and Inverness are however not far off an hour shifted already!

BST all year round would overall incrase the usable daylight hours in those places though.

Yes I know some people are keen to avoid dark mornings, and then accept the dark afternoons/evenings but there is no compelling reason why this should be the case. It's just common convention that we hjave the current system; it's not inherently better.

 

[dangie]

I have never understood this connection between safety & darkness. To average it out over the year, half of the day is light, half of the day is dark. Isn’t it about time we learned to cope with both?

 

[sannox]

BST all year round would overall incrase the usable daylight hours in those places though.

It wouldn't increase, but move surely. Morning daylight is more than useable!

In anycase it was done, scrapped and everytime it's proposed it gets no further forward and goes round in these same arguments!

 

[yorkie]

It wouldn't increase, but move surely. Morning daylight is more than useable!

You misunderstand the point I am making; for most of the year, most people do not wake up until after sunrise but do go to bed after sunset.

In anycase it was done, scrapped and everytime it's proposed it gets no further forward and goes round in these same arguments!

That's because people who are opposed to BST make spurrious arguments. I think some people who oppose it genuniely don't understand the concepts.

 

[sannox]

You misunderstand the point I am making; for most of the year, most people do not wake up until after sunrise but do go to bed after sunset.

That's because people who are opposed to BST make spurrious arguments. I think some people who oppose it genuniely don't understand the concepts.

Understood. Not sure it matters when it's only 6 or 7 hours of daylight. My personal feeling is that for Scotland travelling to work in darkness would be rubbish to give a meaningless hour of daylight when most people are working.

 

[PeterY]

BST all year round would be great

I'm with you Yorkie.

The dark mornings don't really worry me and I'm usually still asleep especially in the winter. I find it quite depressing when it's dark by 4.30 in the winter. At the end of the day, we're only going to get 7 hours daylight in the winter .

 

[duncanp]

I'm with you Yorkie.

The dark mornings don't really worry me and I'm usually still asleep especially in the winter. I find it quite depressing when it's dark by 4.30 in the winter. At the end of the day, we're only going to get 7 hours daylight in the winter .

The 7 hours daylight in the depths of winter applies to the South of England and the Midlands.

Further North, this figure starts to decrease, and less than 6 hours daylight is not unknown in the North of Scotland, with the latest sunrise in Lerwick (Shetland Islands) at 09:08, and the earliest sunset at 14:56.

And in the depths of winter, it doesn't make a huge difference that it stays light until 5:30pm rather than 4:30pm.

Whereas it does make more of a difference that it is still dark when most people are travelling to work and school.

Try going to a country on C.E.T. shortly before Christmas, when it is only just getting light at 9am.

 

[AM9]

What I don't understand is people objecting to adjusting their clocks twice a year: how on earth do they cope with holidays abroad necessitating a clock-adjustment twice in a relatively short period of time? So I'm very much in favour of maintaining the status quo. But if forced to choose I would go for GMT+30mins.

Clock adjustments when travelling is totally different to having to set clocks twice a year at home because:
1) inter-time zone travel is optional and many don't do it
2) when travelling, it is usully only a watch that needs changing. Smartphones normally obtain local network time so don't need attention, at home, every clock (unless a radio controlled type) needs setting. Then there's central heating and those awful electromechanical* cooker timer clocks to fiddle with.

* newer electronic types don't seem any better.

 

[PeterY]

. Then there's central heating and those awful electromechanical* cooker timer clocks to fiddle with.

* newer electronic types don't seem any better.

I,ve heard it's best not to bother with those type of clocks. You need a degree of some sort to change them.

 

[AM9]

I,ve heard it's best not to bother with those type of clocks. You need a degree of some sort to change them.

The biggest problem is if something gets inadvertently disturbed, it can end with the Oven being locked out of use.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

People are - on average - much more active at 7pm than 5am, and so on.

And that most definitely applies to me. A very early morning walk - no thankyou. A lovely post dinner walk at 7.00pm - yes please.

 

[edwin_m]

And that most definitely applies to me. A very early morning walk - no thankyou. A lovely post dinner walk at 7.00pm - yes please.

But you're six hours behind us, so I don't think you should get a vote .

 

[GRALISTAIR]

But you're six hours behind us, so I don't think you should get a vote .

I am in Georgia so Eastern so 5 hours behind but LOL

 

[DelW]

The argument goes that children, particularly teenagers, have a little difficulty in raising their concentration levels in the first part of the morning. Accordingly their journeys to school could have the associated (traffic-related) risks reduced if they were undertaken with at least a modicum of daylight. Suffice to say that the statistics for this are inconclusive so it ends up as a matter of opinion. But having lived through the aforementioned experiment with clocks being an hour later than now all-year I much preferred things when the experiment was terminated.

Having also lived through the British Standard Time era, I agree, though IIRC it wasn't meant to be an experiment at the time. It was meant to be a permanent change, which was only abandoned when it turned out to be so unpopular.

Other issues about safety in the mornings were (i) suburban street lights were then often only on in the evening, they turned off around midnight and didn't have a morning cycle, and (ii) roads were more likely to be icy in the morning than in the evening. I believe that the flashing amber lights at school crossings were introduced at that time to mitigate the increase in early morning accidents at them.