Daylight saving time, not saving anything

I’m grumpy. Perhaps it’s because I didn’t get enough sleep last night. Possibly it’s because I almost slept through my newly early 8 a.m. class (I’m sure I’m not alone). But maybe, just maybe, there is a legitimate problem with the clock resetting associated with daylight saving time.

Note: the proper phrasing is daylight saving time, sans the plural S on saving. However, it seems that daylight savings time is a colloquialism endemic in the states, especially in the Northwest.

Many folks will tell you that Ben Franklin advocated for the resetting of clocks twice a year. I think it’s unfair of history to pin this one on him. When serving as ambassador in Paris, he simply noted how much more the (insert adjective of choice here) French would accomplish in the daylight if they arose an hour earlier. He also made the observation that if people accordingly went to bed an hour earlier, there would be a marked decrease in consumption of candles for light.

We should instead place the blame on a Brit named William Willett, who lobbied most of his life for our present time change. He was an avid golfer, and was frequently upset by having to cut his evening game short due to darkness. That’s right – most of the world’s lives were interrupted this weekend because an Englishman wanted to have a later tee time. Why couldn’t he just force himself out of bed an hour earlier? I can think of a few worse things to suggest he could do …

Back when daylight saving time changes started, I agree that there were legitimate justifications. It began during the tail end of WWI as a method of leaving more energy for the industrial sector to provide for and recover from the war effort. This is back when light bulbs were almost the primary consumer of energy for residents in the U.S., and it made sense to turn them off an hour early.

Fast forward to 2005, when Congress decided that things weren’t complicated enough already. It was at this point that our representatives opted to extend daylight saving time by a solid month. If you are thinking the hour change feels earlier this year, that’s because it is – three weeks, to be precise. It also continues into November. Together, these changes effectively invalidate the “spring forward, fall back” mnemonic, since both changes are now in winter. Good luck explaining that one to your grandkids. Oh, Congress, why must you toy with us so?

The rationalizations have changed over the years, but have recently shifted into the realm of barely-believable. The reason with most apparent staying power is that the change is “good for the farmers.” Well, every farmer I’ve talked to has expressed the sentiment that this is a load of horse pucky. They have to work X number of hours each day, and they’re going to do it in the light, regardless of what time it is.

There is also a renewed hype about energy savings. Why, we could save the country billions! At least that was Congress’s reasoning for the decision to extend daylight saving time. However, the study used as a guide was performed in the 1970s – antiquated by today’s standards. Nobody considered the huge changes in energy consumption over the last 30 years; think of computers, air conditioning and electric everything. Turning off the lights an hour earlier no longer makes a big dent. In fact, recent studies have shown the savings of the time change to be statistically insignificant, and one has even shown increased spending in warmer areas due to use of central air for those longer sunlit evenings.

If we’re going to continue this thing, we need to be upfront about our reasons for doing so. Put simply, the American consumer spends more money when there’s more daylight in the later hours. Don’t get me wrong; I’m not necessarily against this, we just need to be honest with ourselves. After all, we do live in a place where capitalism is king.

Instead of doing away with daylight saving time, I say we abandon the time change. After all, it’s the weeks surrounding the change where we see the consequences: increased traffic fatalities, decreased productivity, huge costs associated with coordinating our out-of-sync airlines with international airports, and extended effects of seasonal depression are a few worth mentioning. The economic ramifications far outweigh any money we might save by turning out the lights a little early.

Probably the best solution for us as a nation is to set the clocks forward an hour and never look back. Why should we change our clocks back an hour for just over four winter months? To be honest, I don’t care whether my five hours of winter daylight start at 10 or 11; all that time is going to be occupied anyhow.

As much as I enjoy the extra hour at bar time during those fateful November nights, this is a sacrifice I’m willing to make.

Cedric Jacobson is a senior in cellular and molecular biology.