It’s hard to argue against an extra hour of daylight each evening, but playing with time isn’t the solution to energy consumption.
In 2005, at the suggestion of President Bush, Congress adjusted daylight-saving time for the first time since 1986. As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, daylight-saving time was extended one month — three weeks earlier in the spring, one week later in the fall — to help reduce energy use.
The original thought behind the first daylight-saving time back in 1918 was to save energy during World War I. It went into effect again during World War II and was regulated nationwide by Congress in 1966.
But this is 2007, not 1918. Today, more items run on electricity than ever before; not just lights, but TVs, DVD players, computers, phones and other electronic gizmos that we can’t live without. Just because there’s an extra hour of daylight in the evening doesn’t mean the couch potato’s going to stop watching his shows or kids are going to unplug their Xbox.
Studies show that in some places that use daylight-saving time, energy use actually spikes during that longer evening, when people are out shopping and driving around running errands.
Conversely, waking up in the dark means using more energy in the morning. Americans waking up in the dark and the cold will turn on the lights and turn up the heater.
Any savings that might be produced were offset by the amount of time and money spent to fix date and time issues with computers in businesses and homes across the country.
This extension of daylight-saving time feels like a quick fix to a long-term problem of energy consumption and fossil fuel dependence. It’s like trying to use a Band-Aid to patch up open heart surgery. Officials need to come up with solutions that will actually reduce energy reliance.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
