That time is upon us again: the twice yearly switching of the clocks, and the griping that comes with it. Europe made the switch last week, and North America will do so this Sunday. But in a world where people from far flung places are more connected than ever, does daylight saving time (DST) do more harm than good?
A special commission on time zones in Massachusetts thinks so. Yesterday, the group recommended that the state and do away entirely with the back and forth of daylight saving. The proposed shift is a bit of legal acrobatics: US states can legally opt out of DST, but there is no legal framework to let them observe DST year-round. To do that, Massachusetts will have to move to Atlantic Time and ignore the clock changes.
So why the change? Staying on summer hours would give Massachusetts more daylight in the evenings – currently, winter sunsets start as early as 4.11 pm.
Advertisement
The US first observed DST during World War I, modelled off a German plan to move clocks forward in order to reduce energy use by providing more sunlight in the summer mornings. Savings in electricity costs and stress on the electric grid have been cited as reasons for changing clocks between summer and winter. But since energy demand actually peaks in the early afternoon in winter, longer evenings would actually relieve the grid by reducing the need for artificial lighting. A by the Department of Energy found that in 2005, when the US extended summer hours for a few more weeks into autumn, electricity use decreased by a small amount.
Retail sales would also likely increase. A compared the behaviour of shoppers in Los Angeles, which observes DST, and Phoenix, which doesn’t. The end of summer hours in Los Angeles led to a 3.5 per cent drop in spending relative to Phoenix.
The times, they are a-changing
Ah, but what about those dark winter mornings caused by a permanent clock change? Supporters of DST say they could affect children waiting for a bus or walking to school. The commission recommends delaying school start times, which has been shown to better align with adolescent sleep patterns driven by hormones. Later school start times also result in higher test scores and fewer teen car accidents.
If Massachusetts acts alone on this, it could be disruptive to interstate travel and shipping, as well as national broadcasting schedules. Maine and New Hampshire have made similar decisions to adopt Atlantic Time if other states in the region do as well, and the Massachusetts commission recommends that the state should only make this move if a majority of other states in the north-east US join in.
But why stop there? It’s time we all gave up this arcane practice, and maybe time zones entirely. , a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, has an idea for how we could do just that. He suggests we use one universal 24-hour clock, followed by everyone on the globe. Pilots already use it, and so do stock exchanges.
It would mean that in some places, the sun would rise at, say, noon, instead of 7 am. It works in China, which has one official time zone for the whole country, despite covering five time zones geographically. Local custom dictates at which hour work begins and ends. Hanke thinks it’s only a matter of time before this practice is adopted globally, and our increasing reliance on technology may lead us there.
In the 19th century, the railroad connected people across distances so great that time zones needed to be implemented to align rail schedules. In the 20th century, the airplane eliminated all time zones, at least for pilots and airport personnel. Time is about coordination, and universal time is the ultimate expression of that. But let’s start with small steps: first, let’s get rid of daylight saving time.
Read more: Changing clocks twice a year is bad for health and energy use
