So instead of worrying about cranking up the air conditioner at home, think about what more you can do outdoors when the sun is out. Softball, anyone?
Moving the Hands Is Bad for the Heart
Springing forward may both end and save lives. Researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and their colleagues looked at myocardial infarction rates in Sweden since 1987 and found that the number of heart attacks rose about 5 percent during the first week of daylight saving time (called summer time in Europe). In the October 30, 2008, New England Journal of Medicine, they suggest that this rise may result from the disruption of sleep patterns and biological rhythms.
On the other hand, the clock shift could help prevent traffic accidents by enabling more people to drive home in sunlight. By analyzing 28 years of U.S. automobile crash data, RAND Corporation economists and their colleagues suggest that a 1986 change in federal daylight saving time law—which moved the start of daylight time from the last Sunday in April to the first—produced an 8 to 11 percent drop in crashes involving pedestrians and a 6 to 10 percent dip in crashes for vehicular occupants. They reported the findings in a 2007 B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy study.
Editor's Note: This story was originally printed with the title "Spring Forward or Not?"
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
38 Comments
Add CommentIf traffic accidents are to be considered as a factor in deciding whether DST is good to have or not, the effects of "falling back" must be considered as well.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA state by state analysis would verify whether Daylight Savings is cost effective or not. Then it would be up to every state to legislate accordingly.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDST is a waste.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisProductivity for people, as they adjust twice a year, to new schedules is not even considered.
We are a 24-hour society now, set the time and leave it alone.
I just wish we were *always* on Daylight Savings as I am not really a morning person, and enjoy the "extra" sunshine at the end of the day. As for saving energy, I've never heard a convincing argument yet.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGet rid of DST, it's pointless. It doesn't save energy. It doesn't do anything but disrupt our lives twice a year. If a business relies on daylight to make money, let them adjust their hours of operation, not the entire country to suit their needs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisjust as the sun stops blinding me on my drive eastward to work everyday, dst comes in and once again, the sun is blinding me on my way to work. I hardly think this manuver stops many traffic accidents. It seems to increase the likelyhood that I WILL be in one.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree with Nathan. DST is outdated and not useful in anyway anymore. Advancements in technology has made DST useless.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDST is an idea whose time has come ... and gone. In modern times, it is just disruptive.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPlace the question on a National ballot and let the people make the decision with their vote. It is a people problem, not for the "leaders".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf our timezones are incorrect, fix the timezones. After that leave them alone until our life patterns change enough again to warrant another change. Hopefully not in the next 100 years. Being an amateur astronomer I'd prefer to stay on standard time (I call DST DWT=Darkness Wasting Time) but I'd settle for adjusting the timezones so it's 'DST' year around. Clearly everyone is affected differently by how high the Sun is in the sky relative to the clock. But if it was really *that* critical you'd have people moving to the edges of timezones just to get that extra bit of benefit. Clearly that doesn't happen. At least I've never heard of someone who moved farther East to see the Sun come up earlier than those farther West in the same timezone.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe whole thing is ridiculous and disrupts all manner of international travel and communication especially when countries adjust DST on different dates or not at all.
Best part is that many people think farmers are in favor of DST. I think if there's one profession that couldn't care less about the clock it's farmers. They depend on day light for at least some of their operations and whether it's 6AM or 7AM is irrelevant.
If there's a measurable energy savings, let's adjust our clocks so we have this year around, shall we?
I think it strange that farmers have always opposed daylight savings time since I read that they were one of the main beneficiaries when it was implemented. The problem farmers always used to have is that they got up with the sun, whereas the people in town went by the clock. So in summer the farmers would get up early, do their chores and then hook up the horse and wagon to go in to town to do their shopping before it got too hot. The problem was that when they got there, the shops would all still be closed. With daylight savings time, the shops opened an hour earlier and were more in sync with what the farmers wanted.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCows go moo
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCows go moo
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiscows go moo! ! ! ! ! !
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi have to do one of these every month for my school.........
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi would guess with the increases in accidents related to biologically adjust to the time change daylight "savings" actually costs alot.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisgiven the increase in accidents that occur as 'we' biologically adjust to the time change i would say we do not save at all...as for "more daylight" at the end of the day...the hour on the clock is a social construct, what difference does it make if it say 7 or 8?? what REALLY changes is the number of hours the sun shines on your spot on the planet...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Department of Energy conclusion that "the four-week extension of daylight time saved about 0.5 percent of the nations electricity per day, or 1.3 trillion watt-hours" says little to nothing about whether DST reduces electrical power consumption overall.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe key word in Dowd's comment is "extension", that is, employing DST in March and at the end of October. At that time of the year air conditioning represents a relatively small part of the electric power load compared to late Summer. Even Kotchen found in Indiana that DST appeared to reduce residential electric power consumption in May, which he attributed to reduced lighting demand. And Indiana is at the western edge of the Eastern Time zone. The "payback" in terms of increased demand came in late summer.
I can see where DST would increase air conditioning load by causing people to leave work earlier in the afternoon (in terms of "local" solar time), closer to the hottest time of the day, resulting in rushes of heated air into air conditioned buildings. I could also see this straining the capacity of the power grid when loads are at their maximum putting a stain on generating capacity and the power grid. DST "savings" would appear to occur in Spring and Fall when power demands are readily met by base units and the savings are the least valuable.
DST is a commercially driven policy, supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because some of its members see increases in sales traffic from it. If Congress wants to support DST as an (energy wasting) economic stimulus program so be it. But the energy savings claimed for it are just dishonest salesmanship.
As a school bus driver I have long been opposed to DST, especially the extensions added lately. Just when kids can wait for the bus in daylight we now put them in the dark again. I don't like looking for a little guy waiting for the bus along a rural road; either he's close to the road to be well lighted or standing back in the dark requiring a stop even when there is no rider there.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFarmer (& ranchers) here have always preferred standard time making the before daylight start to move livestock somewhat less drastic. Standard time also allows the dew to leave the hay or grain before starting in the morning without losing an hour of their employees' usual workday. In fact, in the higher mountain valleys they still adhere to "hay time" which was always an hour later than standard time; this makes most afternoon trips to town for repairs futile.
I can remember when the cities were on DST, the smaller towns stayed on standard time and the rural areas used "hay time"; my did never knew what time it was in town!
I think the should switch it around and it may help more. As stated heating costs go up in winter and cooling costs go up in summer, just to save on lighting? Well if we push time forward in fall and back in spring, daylight would stick around longer in winter leaving a little more warmth and cooling off in the summer earlier with shorter days in the summer. Also seeing as how days are naturally longer in summer it might just tend to balance out. Personally i think we should do away with it all together. In any case this is just my opinion and thoughts on it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDST is a political freebee, the last time they changed it congress bragged that they had done a great thing for national energy saving. (the only thing that they did that year). I have always worked on real (sun) time, as I'm outside most of the time, and daylight is daylight. From personal experiance as a farmer DTS is a pain in the rear. Town and city people knock off an hour early so friday ends the week early if a farmer has business to do in town.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisStop using clocks! Schedules create slaves out of all of us.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI believe in natural awakening. No artificial means or methods. Think FREE.
Why does no one ever mention children when discussing DST? It is so sad to see them sealed indoors after school when old fashioned time sets in. If you have any doubts about how depressing it is to live your afternoons in the darkness look at Scandinavian society, any Bergman movie will do. If shifting time is the problem make DST permanent. Why insist on having daylight during our free time before work or school and none during our free time in the second part of the day when we are free to enjoy it? As for energy consumption, workplaces have lights and appliances on in any case. The part of the population most affected by the duration of daylight is children. If the day is longer they can be outside, and lights are out. If forced indoors due to darkness they use lights, use appliances, become sad, moody, and isolated from their peers, ultimately they become depressed adults as in Scandinavia. Why does no one ever mention the effect on children? My hunch is that the professionally successful scientist or journalist being published has no time for children and has overlooked the habits of that portion of society, or else that I'm wrong about children.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI know my wife supports your argument fully on that count. Being on the far eastern end of a timezone can sort of suck as well. ;)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree with staying on DST. I live in the sunshine state and want the extra hour of it year round. There's not much point to giving up an extra hour of daylight just because it's winter somewhere. We have only two seasons, summer and almost summer. DST messes up 'almost summer'.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBiannual time disruption is hardly an energy saver. What really needs to be considered is lost productivity of millions of people who have to adjust their biological clocks to this nonsense. Haven't any studies been done about this effect (similar to jet-lag)? This is another example of our government's misguided intrusion into our lives without real benefit.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBiannual time disruption is hardly an energy saver. What really needs to be considered is lost productivity of millions of people who have to adjust their biological clocks to this nonsense. Haven't any studies been done about this effect (similar to jet-lag)? This is another example of our government's misguided intrusion into our lives without real benefit.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBiaanual time disruption is hardly an efficient energy saver. What really should be considered is the lost productivity of millions of people who have to adjust their biological clocks to this nonsense. Haven't any studies been done about this effect (similar to jet-lag)? This is another example of our government's misguided intrusion into our lives without palpable benefit.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI apologize for the multiple comments. I had difficulty with the log-in process as a new subscriber.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI work shifts, like a lot people nowadays. It means my wakeup time can change 3 to 4 hours within a week. I understand feeling a bit groggy with a 1-hour change. But doing it once every 6 months and losing productivity? What about getting up early to go out on a Sunday picnic, how many days to get over that ordeal? I furnish images for TV news. Unfortunately people watch this stuff from 6 AM to past midnight, Christmas day included. The day you see a news item go black without a single image you'll have the proof the time shifts got to our productivity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI envy Arizona the 'courage' not to do DST. I don't trust people or Congress to agree to anything though. Yes, get rid of DST and enjoy the seasonal changes of light.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually, this research is very important to be considered by both federal and state governments. Because 9 Million Dollars is actually very huge number esp. in the recession. They have to take an action against this money waste and work collaboratively with scientists to resolve this problem.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you think about it, it doesnt really make a difference either way, its still 24 hours in a day.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEveryone has different work schedules, if you dont like where your work schedule is within those 24 hours then thats your issue with your employer. Why change the time for everyone?
Day light saving doesnt give us any more light, the earth still rotates at the same speed. If you want more daylight.....get up at sooner time.
Energy saved is, in the main, negligible. What needs to be considered is the enormous waste of man hours/ lost productivity caused by disruption of circadian rythm
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting article, I always thought DST was good for the environment wihtout a doubt. On the other hand, if American's were serious about saving energy, every house would have its own solar and small wind generators to reduce dependence on the grid. Too bad they are so expensive, but with 2009 tax breaks and Do-It-Yourself guides, many of these systems are in reach of the average homeowner. http://www.renewablehome.info
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisquin..well put...wakeup when the sun comes up....its time to get rid of this nonsense....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI DO NOT LIKE DST! Our body clocks do NOT re-adjust instantly, and I see no advantage to 10:00 PM sunsets in the summer. Now we are on DST more than half the time. Why not just adjust the time by 30 minutes and LEAVE IT ALONE!? Even better, why not just leave it alone, period?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is another instance where the healthand welfare citizens takes a back seat to profits. It doesn't save energy, causes kids to have to trek to school in the dark.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's wasteful and expensive. Stop it.