I can't find a citation, but I believe that I read that a 20 minute addition to your commute has the same long-term quality of life impact as losing function in a limb.
This is for two reasons: firstly, the long term impact of losing function in a limb is far less than people think, and the long term impact of an increased commute is far more than people think.
I'm having trouble seeing that. When the company I worked for moved 15 miles closer to home, my commute dropped from about an hour to less than 10 minutes. It had very little impact on my QOL.
Likewise, when I decided to move 20 minutes farther away, my QOL actually improved, since I liked the area I lived in much more and there was more stuff to do after work.
I find that surprising you say that. I also work ~10 minutes from my home and also ~15 from where I practice martial arts and go the gym at. For me, being able to wake, get cleaned-up, dressed and out the door...then leave work go straight to the gym and go home makes a drastic difference in how I feel. Even just 20 minutes saved on each end of the day is an extra half-hour to get home and start getting settled. As they say...different strokes for different folks!
Because when it was taking me 1 hour to get to work it was about 20 minutes walking to train station, wait 5-10 mins for train, 20 minute train ride reading books/magazines, 5-10 minute walk to work. Fairly enjoyable.
After the move, it was about a 7-12 minute drive to work. Much shorter, but I liked being able to walk before and I could read or nap on the train. Had I been driving to work (instead of taking the train) before, it would have been a 1-2 hour stressful commute in heavy traffic.
As I read what I just wrote, I wonder if the reason for the "loss of limb" comparison is that the 20 minute commute they used as a reference is in heavy traffic. I have a 35-45 minute drive to work 2x a day now and again, dropping it to 15 minutes wouldn't be a big deal for me, but it is a very relaxing commute mostly along country roads where I get to drive at a consistently high speed.
Not saying that I agree or disagree with the hypothesis, but it does assume that all other variables remain the same. By moving to a different area with more stuff to do, you invalidate the experiment. That's akin to saying exercising everyday for an hour did not improve your health because you got hit by a car one day while running.
Ah, the study I was talking about was covering car commuting, only. Public transit has a different cost curve, clearly - one more related to how long you spend waiting than how long you spend riding.
[anecdotal] Last year I would allocate 4 hours a day for commuting to Chicago via train. I now commute 2-4 hours via car to work. I thoroughly enjoyed my commute to Chicago for quite/reading time and predictability. I hate my commute to work now. I will be moving closer soon.
I envy everyone who has access to public transportation to work. My commute is 1 hour maximum, but usually around 30-40 minutes, but even then, I daydream sometimes about being able to read or write while commuting.
I have started listening to podcasts on my commute, and it's much more enjoyable than my music collection or any of the radio options here. I definitely should have started doing it earlier.
This is for two reasons: firstly, the long term impact of losing function in a limb is far less than people think, and the long term impact of an increased commute is far more than people think.