Which timezone should the UK be in?

[Huntergreed]

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)!

 

[nlogax]

2 for me, personally I'm a fan of light well into the late evening and living up here that's even better.

3 - interesting idea though I can see businesses eschewing the idea simply because an on-the-hour difference is easier to handle than thirty minutes. Though India manages fairly happily so why not?

 

[87 027]

Half hour offsets are rare and believe it or not there are a couple of places with 45 minute offsets! But very much in a minority

Half Hour and 45-Minute Time Zones

While most time zones differ from Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) by a number of full hours, some time zones have 30-minute or 45-minute offsets.

www.timeanddate.com

[Link is to a webpage which lists countries having 30 minute and 45 minute offsets to UTC, and whether or not they also adopt daylight saving time]

 

[py_megapixel]

I prefer starting early in the morning rather than staying up into the late evening, but I dislike waking up in the dark, so I would vote for GMT all year round. However, I absolutely detest the rigmarole of changing the clocks twice a year, so if there are people to whom either permanent BST or daylight savings is acceptable, but permanent GMT is not, then I'd accept permanent BST.

I would also be perfectly happy with a 30 min offset. I don't see it as an issue whatsoever. Adjusting times by 30 minutes requires barely any more effort than adjusting them by an hour anyway.

There is also the slightly pedantic point that any option other than (1) leads to Greenwich not being on Greenwich Mean Time!

 

[Bevan Price]

I would like to stop the world at June (all year)

 

[yorkie]

BST all year round would be great

 

[Ediswan]

I am a happy with the current system. However, if we did decide on a fixed timezone, (2) GMT +1. The more days which are still usefully light at 8pm or later the better. Time for some outdoor activity after working hours.

(3) Should be +0:30

 

[Magdalia]

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!)

This has been tried before, in 1968-71. It was called British Standard Time, still abbreviated as BST.

It was very unpopular, especially in the north and west of the UK.

Here in the Fens dawn was after 0900 in the middle of winter, there were places in the north and west where dawn was not until about 1000. In particular there was a lot of concern about children going to school in the dark.

I don't think we will be going there again.

 

[yorkie]

This has been tried before, in 1968-71. It was called British Standard Time, still abbreviated as BST.

It was very unpopular, especially in the north and west of the UK.

Here in the Fens dawn was after 0900 in the middle of winter, there were places in the north and west where dawn was not until about 1000. In particular there was a lot of concern about children going to school in the dark.

But in some places kids come home in the dark. Alternatively there is compelling reason why the affected schools couldn't start later for the relevant period; indeed some studies suggest they should (regardless of time zones) but that's a new topic.

I don't think we will be going there again.

The status quo sees the tail wagging the dog.

 

[315801]

I would say GMT because its not the timezone that affects how much daylight we get, its the planets tilt as it goes through its yearly cycle which affects how much daylight we get throughout the year.

 

[yorkie]

I would say GMT because its not the timezone that affects how much daylight we get, its the planets tilt as it goes through its yearly cycle which affects how much daylight we get throughout the year.

No-one is suggesting we'd get more daylight if we moved to BST all year round. However more people are out and about in the evening than early morning, so we'd get more usable daylight.

At present the tail wags the dog and the majority get to experience fewer daylight hours to appease what is very much a minority.

 

[Magdalia]

But in some places kids come home in the dark.

That's true. As a child I couldn't understand why adults were more relaxed about children being out in the dark after school, but that's the way it was.

No reason why schools couldn't start later; indeed some studies suggest they should (regardless of time zones) but that's a new topic.

You're right that's a new topic. But it is far more difficult to shift the school day now then it was in 1968-71 because there are far fewer non-working parents.

 

[MikeWM]

I don't like any of the options The winter mornings stay dark too long if we have year-round BST. Conversely the summer mornings would get light too early if we have year-round GMT - they get light rather too early for 2-3 months for my liking even under BST (admittedly I'm a rather extreme night owl).

 

[Huntergreed]

I don't like any of the options The winter mornings stay dark too long if we have year-round BST. Conversely the summer mornings would get light too early if we have year-round GMT - they get light rather too early for 2-3 months for my liking even under BST (admittedly I'm a rather extreme night owl).

Would you support a move to CET with the daylight savings that incurs?

 

[MikeWM]

Would you support a move to CET with the daylight savings that incurs?

I can't see any way you can avoid changing the clocks during the year, that would make it light enough in winter mornings and dark enough very late on summer nights, that would suit me. But I don't really think anyone should be considering making policy based on the rather odd hours I keep, as nice as that would be

 

[Magdalia]

I can't see any way you can avoid changing the clocks during the year

I agree. Most countries that are a long way from the equator change the clocks in spring and autumn.

When I was young I was in favour of aligning with Central European Time, but now I'm older I prefer what we have now. The only thing I would alter is to move the clocks forward at the beginning of March not at the end, but that causes complications unless the Europeans did the same. The dates we have now are a compromise agreed around the time that we joined what was then the EEC: we went to their date in the spring and they came to ours in the autumn.

 

[Grecian 1998]

Just move the UK 300km south in October, then back to the starting point in March. Simple.

I'm quite happy with the present system, but would definitely choose BST all year round if given a binary choice. There seems to be far more grumbling about putting the clocks back in October than putting them forward in March.

Given that Scotland is someway further north and west, I wouldn't see a problem with Scotland using GMT instead of BST. Plenty of nation states have more than one time zone without lapsing into chaos.

 

[McRhu]

This has been tried before, in 1968-71. It was called British Standard Time, still abbreviated as BST.

It was very unpopular, especially in the north and west of the UK.

Here in the Fens dawn was after 0900 in the middle of winter, there were places in the north and west where dawn was not until about 1000. In particular there was a lot of concern about children going to school in the dark.

I don't think we will be going there again.

Was that not Double Summer Time? I remember it well. Living in Scotland and attending that country's leading educational establishment for the betterment of young gentlemen and ladies in Helensburgh, I watched the sun rise over Ben Bouie at 10 am from my classroom, then fell asleep at my desk again along with everybody else. The whole time thing is a thorny issue as the northern parts of the uk have their sunrise and sunset so differently.

 

[EdinRH]

Noon is by definition when the sun is at the highest point in the sky. To allow transport and broadcasting schedules to be standardised, the whole of the UK agrees to set clocks, watches etc to the time in London rather than using the accurate local times used until the Victorian era. During the summer what we in in fact doing is declaring that our workplaces, schools etc will start and finish one hour earlier from late March to late October than during the rest of the year. Rather than advertise two sets of opening hours, lesson times etc. we set our timepieces to show noon when it is actually noon in eastern Germany/western Poland during the summer and London in winter.

This was most pronounced when I visited Amsterdam in 2018. Amsterdam is less than 7.5 degrees east of London and therefore should be on London time. Due to adopting a time zone for further east and daylight saving, timepieces were actually giving the time in Moscow.

 

[Ediswan]

Was that not Double Summer Time?

Fixed GMT+1 all year round. All I recall for sure is being issued with a reflective armband for the walk to school (London).

 

[D6130]

Living in Scotland and attending that country's leading educational establishment for the betterment of young gentlemen and ladies in Helensburgh,

I take it that's an ironic description McCafferty @McRhu !

 

[McRhu]

 

[yorkie]

Noon is by definition when the sun is at the highest point in the sky...

And is rarely at 12:00, nor does it need to be.

 

[87 027]

To allow transport and broadcasting schedules to be standardised, the whole of the UK agrees to set clocks, watches etc to the time in London rather than using the accurate local times used until the Victorian era.

Whilst perhaps tangential to the main question, I think it is noteworthy that such standardisation was prompted by the advent of the railways!

FWIW I would prefer extra daylight at the end rather than the beginning of the day

 

[etr221]

Was that not Double Summer Time? I remember it well. Living in Scotland and attending that country's leading educational establishment for the betterment of young gentlemen and ladies in Helensburgh, I watched the sun rise over Ben Bouie at 10 am from my classroom, then fell asleep at my desk again along with everybody else. The whole time thing is a thorny issue as the northern parts of the uk have their sunrise and sunset so differently.

Double Summer Time was UTC+2 - used during WW2, with 'BST' (UTC+1) in winter. 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

 

[AM9]

Yep, UCT+1 all the time. If those who would get darker mornings don't like it there's nothing to stop them running schools/shops/factories/milking cows an hour later and have their own little time zone there. news, TV and comms. are 24 hrs anyway so the exact same time everywhere isn't necessary. There would be energy savings and improved safety on roads as well.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

As a child I couldn't understand why adults were more relaxed about children being out in the dark after school, but that's the way it was.

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.

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.

 

[duncanp]

Yep, UCT+1 all the time. If those who would get darker mornings don't like it there's nothing to stop them running schools/shops/factories/milking cows an hour later and have their own little time zone there. news, TV and comms. are 24 hrs anyway so the exact same time everywhere isn't necessary. There would be energy savings and improved safety on roads as well.

I don't get how there would be energy savings and improved safety on the roads.

You cannot increase the amount of daylight in the winter, whatever time zone you are in, so any decrease in energy usage in the lighter evenings would be balanced out by an increase in energy usage in the darker mornings. A similar argument applies to road traffic accidents.

 

[Magdalia]

Noon is by definition when the sun is at the highest point in the sky.

And that isn't the same time every day, because the time taken by the earth to spin on its axis varies from day to day. Some days are shorter than 24 hours while others are longer.

This is best seen in midwinter. Although the shortest day is usually around 21 December, the earliest sunset is usually about 12 December and the latest sunrise about 30 December.

Whilst perhaps tangential to the main question, I think it is noteworthy that such standardisation was prompted by the advent of the railways!

This was particularly important for the GWR which ran mainly east-west. I think I've read that local time in Bristol was 11 minutes behind London.

I don't get how there would be energy savings and improved safety on the roads.

You cannot increase the amount of daylight in the winter, whatever time zone you are in, so any decrease in energy usage in the lighter evenings would be balanced out by an increase in energy usage in the darker mornings. A similar argument applies to road traffic accidents.

It is more nuanced than that.

With regard to energy usage, it is not constant through the day. There is more energy usage in an hour of dark in the evening than an hour of dark in the morning, simply because a lot more people will still be in bed during the last hour before sunrise than in the first hour after sunset.

Similarly, road traffic accidents are not spread evenly through the day. They vary both with the level of traffic and the ability of road users to make good decisions. A lot of the very heated debate in 1971 was about road traffic accidents.

 

[yorkie]

I don't get how there would be energy savings and improved safety on the roads.

You cannot increase the amount of daylight in the winter, whatever time zone you are in, so any decrease in energy usage in the lighter evenings would be balanced out by an increase in energy usage in the darker mornings. A similar argument applies to road traffic accidents.

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