Forget about the extra day on the calendar this year for a moment and think ahead to when we “spring ahead” and add an hour to our clocks on March 9. That’s when Daylight Saving Time (DST) goes into effect again.
If you’ve never given much thought to DST beyond replacing smoke alarm batteries, meet Steve Calandrillo. Calandrillo, a professor at the University of Washington School of Law, has thought (and written) a lot about DST and this year he would like nothing more than for the entire U.S. to spring ahead — permanently. He’s part of a growing number of individuals, organizations and government officials who support implementing year-round DST — a move that would essentially shift U.S. time zones one hour to the west.
Calandrillo’s proposal means more evening daylight when more people are active. Because humans are wired to be more active in sunlight and rest in darkness, when we “fall back” ahead of winter’s shorter days and longer nights, it means people are doing a lot of early-evening activities, such as commuting, playing sports or working outside, and doing so in the dark. But darkness contributes to fatal accidents and providing light during our most active times, says Calandrillo, will save hundreds of lives each year.
Still, the issue is contentious and involves tradeoffs — moving up the clocks an hour in the winter means early mornings will be darker and, thus, more dangerous. And Calandrillo is the first to admit his proposal is controversial and has drawbacks.
“Is an hour of daylight more important in the morning or evening?” he asks. “I acknowledge that both are important. But which is more important? Many of the critics of year-round DST say, ‘You are forgetting that there will be less daylight in the morning.’ I’m not. My question to them is: Where does daylight matter more?”
Before answering, Calandrillo offers a look at the long and curious history of DST.
The idea for DST was born from the satirical musings of Benjamin Franklin. The statesman was known for staying up late and discovered one morning in Paris, upon accidentally waking at 6 a.m., that his room was filled with sunlight. Startled, he repeated this early-morning-awakening experiment three days in a row to confirm that: (1) God gave light so early, (2) Franklin was wasting it by sleeping in, and (3) running up huge bills on candles used during evenings and night could be avoided if he — the ever-thrifty coiner of “A penny saved is a penny earned” — shifted his sleep pattern to coincide with sunset and sunrise. As a result, Franklin sarcastically proposed a government-enforced time shift that would, among other things, tax every window covered by shutters and ration the supply of candles. So doing, said Franklin, would save the city money. Alas, nothing came of his farcical plan.
In World War I, however, Germany became the first nation to realize the practical benefits of Franklin’s proposal: namely, that energy (which was needed for the war effort) could be saved by effectively shifting the populace’s schedules to when daylight was more plentiful. Britain adopted DST soon thereafter — also as a wartime measure to conserve energy — and the U.S. later joined the party on this ground as well.
World War II again prompted the U.S. to officially enact DST, referred to as “War Time,” but it was repealed by Congress when the war ended. Notably, both Franklin’s satire and wartime conversions to DST were based on the energy savings realized and not on any consideration of the toll that darkness takes on people’s lives.
However, the legislation that ended War Time did not keep local U.S. governments from enacting their own versions of DST. During the 1950s, Iowa counties had 24 different systems for starting and ending DST. In Minnesota, St. Paul observed DST while neighboring Minneapolis did not. During the summer of 1965, St. Paul police officers wore two watches because police and fire departments used separate measures of time. Airlines were inundated with calls from travelers wanting to know what time it would be in the city where they were to land. The U.S. was, as observed by the U.S. Naval Observatory, “the worst timekeeper in the world.”
To simplify this confusing time problem, Congress passed the Uniform Time Act and on April 30, 1967, national DST officially — and finally — went into effect. Still, it also is officially optional. Arizona does not observe it, having opted out in 1968 (although the Navajo Nation did not); Hawaii never has. Indiana did not universally observe DST until 2005.
Only once since 1967 did the U.S. observe year-round DST and it was an effort to save energy. The 1970s OPEC oil embargo prompted President Nixon to appeal to Congress to extend DST year-round in order to save 150,000 barrels of oil each day in the winter months. By the time what was dubbed by many as the “1974 Experiment” expired, the energy crisis was over.
Not until 2007 was DST significantly expanded. “Spring ahead” day was moved back from the first Sunday in April to the second Sunday in March and “fall back” day was moved ahead from the last Sunday in October to the first Sunday in November — got it? — in response to surging oil prices and scarce energy resources. Pending an energy conservation study, Congress may yet revert back.
Calandrillo returns to his questions: When does daylight matter more and why does year-round DST make sense?
His answer: Daylight matters more during the late afternoon and early evening, when nearly everyone is awake, driving and walking, consuming energy and living their lives. By moving one hour of sunlight from morning to evening, Calandrillo argues that year-round DST will: (1) save lives, (2) reduce crime, (3) save energy and (4) avoid the negative effects of forcing people to switch their clocks twice per year.
First, he says, sunlight saves lives. At least eight research studies have shown that darkness kills. Moving daylight into the evening may save nearly 400 American lives each year, primarily due to reduced fatalities from automobile accidents.
Second, says Calandrillo, year-round DST will reduce crime. Criminals love the dark, he says, and they prefer the darkness of the evening far more than the pre-dawn hours. Crime rates are substantially higher in the late afternoon and early evening hours than they are during early morning. Calandrillo points to studies that suggest serious crime, especially juvenile crime, motor vehicle theft, rape and robbery, could decline by as much as 20% by a shift to year-round DST.
Third, energy is indeed saved by DST. As little as a one or two percent savings in energy would save California alone $300 million-plus per year. In addition, it might have prevented the rolling blackouts that plagued the state earlier this decade.
Fourth, Calandrillo says that switching clocks twice a year is a terrible idea. Studies show a significant increase in traffic fatalities for the week following the spring time change when individuals lose an hour of sleep and have to adjust to changing light conditions. Studies also show an increase in accidents the week after the fall time change, when Americans gain one hour of sleep and again have to adjust to changing light conditions.
Calandrillo, a father of three, acknowledges that there is an increased risk to schoolchildren by moving one hour of darkness into the morning during winter, when many kids would face an increased risk of automobile-pedestrian accidents. It is a difficult challenge and Calandrillo proposes that schools consider starting classes one hour later during winter. He also recommends that the billions of dollars saved by year-round DST be used to increase funding for school crossing guards and student busing.
Ultimately, Calandrillo opines, “Congress and the President have given away the moral high ground by focusing only on the amount of oil that DST saves, which is far less important than the real benefits that year-round DST could produce: saving lives, stopping criminals in their tracks and avoiding unnecessary clock changes that mess with people’s daily rhythms.”
The bottom line, says Calandrillo, is that “no solution is perfect, but the question should be: Where and how can our laws improve social welfare the most? After all, there are only so many hours of sunlight in the day. On balance, another hour of morning darkness during winter months is a small price to pay for the far greater advantages of extended evening daylight.”
Or as British Parliamentarian Sir Henry Norman said, “The best way to lengthen the day is to steal a few hours from the night.”
n
