RSS 2.0 FeedThe Daylight Savings Time Boondoggle
by Doug MataconisWhen Congress passed a law last year providing for an earlier start, and later finish, to Daylight Savings Time, the primary justification given was the assertion that it would lead to decreased energy consumption as people spent more time outside during the extended daylight hours.
Well, now that we’ve made it through the three extended weeks of DST, the evidence is out and it’s not very convincing:
NEW YORK (Reuters) – The early onset of Daylight Savings Time in the United States this year may have been for naught.
The move to turn the clocks forward by an hour on March 11 rather than the usual early April date was mandated by the U.S. government as an energy-saving effort.
But other than forcing millions of drowsy American workers and school children into the dark, wintry weather three weeks early, the move appears to have had little impact on power usage.
“We haven’t seen any measurable impact,” said Jason Cuevas, spokesman for Southern Co., one of the nation’s largest power companies, echoing comments from several large utilities
This shouldn’t come as much of a surprise, since the Energy Department told Congress this would happen last year:
That may come as no surprise to the Energy Department, which last year predicted only modest energy savings because the benefits of the later daylight hour would be offset.
For example, households may draw less electricity for lights at night, but will use more power in the early in the day as they wake to darker and chillier mornings.
One would have thought Congress would’ve figured this out on it’s own……..
One would have thought Congress would’ve figured this out on it’s own…
Really? What evidence, based on their prior behavior, do we have to suggest that? ;-)
Comment by Brad Warbiany — April 2, 2007 @ 9:52 pmsomebody, somewhere, had an axe to grind and they managed to convince enough politicos (with junkets and dinners and such) that we ended up with this crap.
Comment by Adam Selene — April 2, 2007 @ 11:55 pmWow. Even Reuters get it wrong.
It’s not Daylight SavingS, it’s Daylight Saving. If it were SavingS, that would imply that we’ve banked hours and hours of daylight somehow.
Comment by Jim — April 3, 2007 @ 12:00 amWell Jim, now that we’ve dispensed with that bit of trivia, was the time, effort and money invested into this change worth it? That seems more important to me than whether there’s an S in there, or not.
Comment by Adam Selene — April 3, 2007 @ 12:03 amI’m just happy that my cellphone has the right time now. It’s one of those Motorola Q’s, and it’s been an hour off for the last three weeks because the software wasn’t updated.
Comment by Brad Warbiany — April 3, 2007 @ 12:50 am