New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Exclusive: International timekeepers to vote on changing the leap second to a leap hour

To align Coordinated Universal Time with Earth’s rotation, a second occasionally gets added to the year. That may change in 2027

A graphic of the earth with clocks over it

William Whitehurst/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

International timekeeping authorities are preparing to vote on a proposal to make the leap second—an extra second that is occasionally added to the year to keep Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) in tune with Earth’s rotation—into a leap hour as early as 2027.

The leap second was introduced in 1972 by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) to match UTC with Earth’s gradually slowing spin. Every time UTC becomes one second too fast for Earth, timekeepers add a leap second to UTC.

This fix has “always been a problem,” says Judah Levine, a former physicist for the Time and Frequency Division at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


It particularly affects computer systems, which require precise time to send and receive messages in the correct order. Adding a second to the clock has caused Meta, Reddit and Cloudflare outages, grounded planes, and affected high-frequency stock trading. As digital networks demand faster processing speeds, some developers have ignored the BIPM’s leap second standard and instead implemented their own fixes, such as “smear seconds” that jive better with computers.

In 2016 Earth’s rotation started speeding up, so leap seconds have not been added since then. The accelerating rotation is fast enough, however, that timekeepers foresee the need for the first ever negative leap second—which could cause unknown and potentially catastrophic infrastructure problems.

Timekeepers know the system has to change. Every four years, the annual General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) brings together timekeeping authorities from around the world to discuss efforts to maintain UTC and its associated standards. In 2022 the 64 member states agreed to find a way to extend the allowed difference between UTC and Earth’s position from one second to a higher time limit by 2035.

Recent projections suggest that the need for a negative leap second is likely to hit before 2035. As the 2026 CGPM meeting approaches, the “leap hour” proposal could be the solution. Some experts say that a leap hour likely wouldn’t need to be added for hundreds of years, effectively abolishing the leap second.

Patrizia Tavella, director of the Time Department at the BIPM, says that there is sufficient urgency to put the leap hour into effect as soon as possible. The proposal under consideration would aim for it to go into effect next year.

“We estimated that if we wait till 2035, we have 30 percent risk of a negative leap second,” Tavella says. “So we went to our users, stakeholders and other organizations and said, ‘What do you think? 30 percent risk of a negative leap second is an issue, or you can accept [it]?’ And they said, ‘No, even 10 percent risk is too much.’”

Emma Gometz is a journalist and artist based in Queens, N.Y. Before becoming associate newsletter editor at Scientific American, Gometz was a digital producer for WNYC’s Science Friday. Their favorite musical is A Little Night Music.

More by Emma Gometz

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe