Daylight savings actually increases energy use

[Spin Echo]

Nudity prohibited

For decades, conventional wisdom has held that daylight-saving time, which begins March 9, reduces energy use. But a unique situation in Indiana provides evidence challenging that view: Springing forward may actually waste energy.

Up until two years ago, only 15 of Indiana's 92 counties set their clocks an hour ahead in the spring and an hour back in the fall. The rest stayed on standard time all year, in part because farmers resisted the prospect of having to work an extra hour in the morning dark. But many residents came to hate falling in and out of sync with businesses and residents in neighboring states and prevailed upon the Indiana Legislature to put the entire state on daylight-saving time beginning in the spring of 2006.

CLOCK WATCHING


Research on the impact of extending daylight-saving time across Indiana found:
• Residential electricity usage increased between 1% and 4%, amounting to $8.6 million a year.
• Social costs from increased emissions were estimated at between $1.6 million and $5.3 million per year.
• Possible social benefits -- enhanced public health and safety and economic growth -- were not studied.Indiana's change of heart gave University of California-Santa Barbara economics professor Matthew Kotchen and Ph.D. student Laura Grant a unique way to see how the time shift affects energy use. Using more than seven million monthly meter readings from Duke Energy Corp., covering nearly all the households in southern Indiana for three years, they were able to compare energy consumption before and after counties began observing daylight-saving time. Readings from counties that had already adopted daylight-saving time provided a control group that helped them to adjust for changes in weather from one year to the next.

Their finding: Having the entire state switch to daylight-saving time each year, rather than stay on standard time, costs Indiana households an additional $8.6 million in electricity bills. They conclude that the reduced cost of lighting in afternoons during daylight-saving time is more than offset by the higher air-conditioning costs on hot afternoons and increased heating costs on cool mornings.

"I've never had a paper with such a clear and unambiguous finding as this," says Mr. Kotchen, who presented the paper at a National Bureau of Economic Research conference this month.

A 2007 study by economists Hendrik Wolff and Ryan Kellogg of the temporary extension of daylight-saving in two Australian territories for the 2000 Summer Olympics also suggested the clock change increases energy use.

That isn't what Benjamin Franklin would have expected. In 1784, he observed what an "immense sum! that the city of Paris might save every year, by the economy of using sunshine instead of candles." (Mr. Franklin didn't propose setting clocks forward, instead he satirically suggested levying a tax on window shutters, ringing church bells at sunrise and, if that didn't work, firing cannons down the street in order to rouse Parisians out of their beds earlier.)

During the first and second world wars, the U.S. temporarily enacted daylight-saving time as an energy-saving measure. Over time, most states began changing their clocks, and in response to the 1973 oil shock, the country extended daylight-saving time in 1974 and 1975. Analyzing that time shift, a 1975 report by the U.S. Department of Transportation concluded that the change reduced electricity demand by 1% in March and April. But in a 1976 report to Congress evaluating that analysis, the National Bureau of Standards concluded that there were no significant energy savings.

Still, the Transportation Department study stuck. Speaking before the House of Representatives in 2002, Indiana Rep. Julia Carson said that under daylight-saving time, Indiana families would save "over $7 million annually in electricity rates alone."

In 2005, Reps. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts and Fred Upton of Michigan drafted legislation that would extend daylight-saving time nationwide. Congress approved the amendment, which called for clocks to be sprung forward three weeks earlier in the spring and one week later in the fall. The change went into effect last year.

The energy-savings numbers often cited by lawmakers and others come from research conducted in the 1970s. Yet a key difference between now and the '70s -- or, for that matter, Ben Franklin's time -- is the prevalence of air conditioning.

"In an inland state like Indiana, it gets hot in the summer," says Steve Gustafsen, a lawyer in New Albany, Ind., who filed a suit in 2000 in an effort to get his county to abandon daylight-saving time. "Daylight saving means running the air conditioner more."

That was borne out by the study by Mr. Kotchen and Ms. Grant. Their research showed that while an extra hour of daylight in the evenings may mean less electricity is spent on lights, it also means that houses are warmer in the summer when people come home from work. Conversely, during daylight-saving time's cooler months, people may crank up the thermostats more in the morning.

Still, the case on daylight-saving time isn't closed.

"My read on this study is that it's one data point that gives us something to think about," says Richard Stevie, an economist with Duke Energy, of Mr. Kotchen and Ms. Grant's research. "I think that additional research really needs to be done." And UCLA economist Matthew Kahn points out that even if the evidence on Indiana is airtight, the effect of daylight-saving time on other states might be different -- a point that Mr. Markey makes as well.

"One study of the situation in Indiana cannot accurately asses the impact of [daylight-saving time] changes across the nation, especially when it does not include more northern, colder regions," the congressman notes.

There may also be social benefits to daylight-saving time that weren't covered in the research. When the extension of daylight-saving time was proposed by Mr. Markey, he cited studies that noted "less crime, fewer traffic fatalities, more recreation time and increased economic activity" with the extra sunlight in the evening.

In Indiana, the debate goes on. "The simpler the issue, the more people have opinions about it," says Indiana State Rep. Scott Reske, who voted against the switch to daylight-saving time. In the aftermath of the time shift, "a lot of people who hated it now love it, and a lot of people who loved it now hate it," he says. A separate debate over whether the state should be on Central or Eastern Time rages on.

I was quite surprised when I found this out. I'm trying to figure out how moving forward an hour will affect the amount of time your air conditioner is on. You think coming home slightly later in the day would mean it's cooler and an hour less of cooling would be needed. Similarly, waking up a little later on a cool morning would mean you would need less heating.

[aerius]

I'm trying to figure out how moving forward an hour will affect the amount of time your air conditioner is on. You think coming home slightly later in the day would mean it's cooler and an hour less of cooling would be needed.

I think part of the problem is that it takes a while for the heat to soak into the home, and once it does, more time is needed to get everything cooled back down again. Even though the hottest hours of the day are say, 1-3pm, the air conditioner will have to run well into the evening to get and keep the house cool. I'm guessing the heat soak effect cancels out any advantage gained from coming home in slightly cooler weather, and that the timing may in fact make it worse.

[Knife]

I'm trying to figure out how moving forward an hour will affect the amount of time your air conditioner is on. You think coming home slightly later in the day would mean it's cooler and an hour less of cooling would be needed.

I think part of the problem is that it takes a while for the heat to soak into the home, and once it does, more time is needed to get everything cooled back down again. Even though the hottest hours of the day are say, 1-3pm, the air conditioner will have to run well into the evening to get and keep the house cool. I'm guessing the heat soak effect cancels out any advantage gained from coming home in slightly cooler weather, and that the timing may in fact make it worse.

Thermal mass.

Yeah, I despise day light savings.

[aerius]

Yeah, I despise day light savings.

Likewise, getting up at a bit past 5 in the morning is hard enough on a normal day, when the clocks go ahead by an hour is about as fun as getting kicked in the balls. If I were still working the early shift I'd probably go postal right about now, thank god I'm working reasonable hours these days.

[AMX]

I was quite surprised when I found this out. I'm trying to figure out how moving forward an hour will affect the amount of time your air conditioner is on. You think coming home slightly later in the day would mean it's cooler and an hour less of cooling would be needed.

Other way round: if you move the clock forward, you come home earlier, when it's still warmer.

[Korvan]

Personally, I can't wait for daylight savings time. My job allows me to sleep in quite a bit and I do get home later in the evening (leave work around 6). Daylight savings means I get to walk home in the sunlight which is a fairly big deal for me.

Vancouver is mild enough even during the summer, so my home needs no cooling beyond opening a few windows. At the very worst, a single fan in the bedroom at night is sufficient.

This is my own personal situation of course and I can believe that overall daylight savings would increase energy use.

[CmdrWilkens]

Just remember everyone its daylight SAVING time not daylight savings time. Neither daylight nor time is plural and saving, being the participle that it is should agree in number with the rest of the words in the phrase.

[TheKwas]

keen observation wilkens.

I can't count the amount of times I've been screwed over at University due to getting times mixed up. Aside from friends and family, the total lack of DST is one feature I constantly find myself missing ever since I left Saskatchewan.

Speaking of which, my bedside clock will finally be on-time starting tomorrow.

[Balrog]

On a similar note, car crashes go up significantly the day after 'spring forward' time. As if people are shitty drivers already.

[Tsyroc]

Just remember everyone its daylight SAVING time not daylight savings time. Neither daylight nor time is plural and saving, being the participle that it is should agree in number with the rest of the words in the phrase.

Except, you could make it "savings" if you interpret it as saving more than just light. Supposedly we're saving light and energy costs so why couldn't it be savings?

[Alferd Packer]

I wish we used DST all year 'round. Though, It would suck to be on the western edge of the time zone, as the sun wouldn't rise in the winter time until about 9 AM or so.

[CmdrWilkens]

Just remember everyone its daylight SAVING time not daylight savings time. Neither daylight nor time is plural and saving, being the participle that it is should agree in number with the rest of the words in the phrase.

Except, you could make it "savings" if you interpret it as saving more than just light. Supposedly we're saving light and energy costs so why couldn't it be savings?

Except that, again, as a present participle modifying daylight then saving has to agree in number with daylight. Its not a matter of how you interpret it but rather a matter of ensuring that the words are in number agreement. Daylight is singular and saving, serving as an adjective, must also be singular.

[Drooling Iguana]

Putting an "s" at the end of "saving" just changes it from a verb to a noun. It doesn't make it plural.

[Spin Echo]

I was quite surprised when I found this out. I'm trying to figure out how moving forward an hour will affect the amount of time your air conditioner is on. You think coming home slightly later in the day would mean it's cooler and an hour less of cooling would be needed.

Other way round: if you move the clock forward, you come home earlier, when it's still warmer.

Okay, now it makes sense. This is why I fail at time zones.

[aerius]

I wish we used DST all year 'round. Though, It would suck to be on the western edge of the time zone, as the sun wouldn't rise in the winter time until about 9 AM or so.

That would really suck since I'd rarely see the sun in the winter. Leave home in the dark, come home in the dark, that's a recipe for going postal if I ever saw one.

[Broomstick]

I wish we used DST all year 'round. Though, It would suck to be on the western edge of the time zone, as the sun wouldn't rise in the winter time until about 9 AM or so.

That would really suck since I'd rarely see the sun in the winter. Leave home in the dark, come home in the dark, that's a recipe for going postal if I ever saw one.

Working in the Chicago Loop and living in Indiana, that was the case with me for about two months of every year in the dark of the winter - the sun would rise just about the time I stepped off the train in Chicago, and would set an hour before I left work. I felt like a goddamned coal miner. They thought I was nuts for taking a lunch-time walk in sub-zero weather but I needed that 15-30 minutes of daylight, even if it was often overcast, dim daylight.

[CmdrWilkens]

Putting an "s" at the end of "saving" just changes it from a verb to a noun. It doesn't make it plural.

Its not a verb or a noun...its a participle. Moreover in this case its a participle acting as an adjective which means that it does follow number rules. "Save" is a verb "saving" is a participle. Now I am off in one respect which is that there is a noun "saving" (which is really a greund ) and "savings" is a plural form of that. In fact from merriam-webster:

Main Entry: saving
3 plural : money put by b: the excess of income over consumption expenditures —often used in plural c: a usually specified lower cost —often used in plural <a savings of 50 percent>

[Turin]

I was quite surprised when I found this out. I'm trying to figure out how moving forward an hour will affect the amount of time your air conditioner is on. You think coming home slightly later in the day would mean it's cooler and an hour less of cooling would be needed.

Other way round: if you move the clock forward, you come home earlier, when it's still warmer.

Okay, now it makes sense. This is why I fail at time zones.

My guess is that it doesn't have anything to do with residential air conditioning at all -- keep in mind that lots of large office buildings run their air even during the months when you're probably running heat at home. And a good chunk of the US is running heat still this time of year.

[Alferd Packer]

I wish we used DST all year 'round. Though, It would suck to be on the western edge of the time zone, as the sun wouldn't rise in the winter time until about 9 AM or so.

That would really suck since I'd rarely see the sun in the winter. Leave home in the dark, come home in the dark, that's a recipe for going postal if I ever saw one.

Well, as a tradeoff, the sun wouldn't set until 5:30-6:30 PM, depending upon your latitude. I mean, the tendency is to march a timezone west, anyway, because people want more daylight in the evening hours. I love the fact that sunset isn't until 7 PM now, because that means it's still somewhat daylight when I get home.

[Darth Wong]

Putting an "s" at the end of "saving" just changes it from a verb to a noun. It doesn't make it plural.

Its not a verb or a noun...its a participle. Moreover in this case its a participle acting as an adjective which means that it does follow number rules. "Save" is a verb "saving" is a participle. Now I am off in one respect which is that there is a noun "saving" (which is really a greund ) and "savings" is a plural form of that. In fact from merriam-webster:

Main Entry: saving
3 plural : money put by b: the excess of income over consumption expenditures —often used in plural c: a usually specified lower cost —often used in plural <a savings of 50 percent>

Yeah, but Daylight Saving Time is also a name rather than a descriptive term. Names don't necessarily follow strict rules (or any rules for that matter). They could have called it Wookie Farting Time and it would be as correct, as far as I'm concerned.