Each spring and each fall, we wander around our homes and reset all of the clocks. We don’t question, we just do.
Two years ago, when our clock changing made it darker in the morning, our sleepy-eyed, 4-year-old daughter walked into our bedroom holding her Cinderella alarm clock and asked: Who set my alarm for when it’s still dark out?
Great question. I think I blamed George Bush. How else do you explain to a child that politicians think they can “save daylight”?
Last night was supposed to be that glorious night we snuggle into our beds and turn back the clock one hour, retrieving the hour we gave up in the spring and enjoying an extra 60 minutes of snooze.
Yet in 2005, Congress tinkered with the laws of nature and started “daylight saving time” three weeks earlier and ended it one week later in the fall, starting this year. So next Saturday, we fall back an hour.
The idea — and really the motive behind all of the tinkering for nearly a century — is to save on energy. If more of our waking hours are spent during daylight, we’ll use less energy. Or so goes the theory.
But a government study in the 1970s found only a 1 percent dip in energy use during daylight saving time, and only one utility noted a decrease in consumption this past spring with the extra sunlight.
So why bother?
Modern-day daylight savings can be traced back to the early 20th century and a Brit named William Willet, who apparently didn’t like cutting short his golf game at dusk. He authored a pamphlet called “The Waste of Daylight” and pushed his clock-changing proposal before Parliament for years. British leaders finally caved in an effort to save fuel during World War I. The concept jumped the pond two years later as U.S. leaders sought ways to shore up the war effort at home. (Apparently President Wilson never thought to just tell people to go shopping.)
Congress repealed the law after the war, but reinstated it year-round during World War II. After that, it was left up to states and local communities to decide whether they wanted that extra hour of summer daylight, which created a confusing patchwork of rules. So in 1966, Congress stepped in again and said if you’re going to change clocks, it must be done at the same time everywhere, ensuring that future generations of Americans would waste time winding clocks for no apparent reason.
Then, 40 years later, what does Congress do with its failed policy? Expand it, of course.
The theory apparently made sense a century ago. But Americans have such wildly different lifestyles and work habits in the 21st century. Now, it only seems to help retailers who keep their stores open later with those convenient “summer hours.”
If we do make it home to enjoy those extra hours of sunlight, we flip on air conditioners to cool our homes from that extra sunshine. And then we spend the evening washing clothes and running the dishwasher and tapping on the computer until the wee hours.
So much for saving energy.
The time change even affects our bodies. Just this past week, a new study confirmed that the time change throws our body one heckuva curveball. The country of Kazakhstan ended daylight saving time in 2005, citing health complications in its people, including insomnia and spikes in blood pressure. I never thought I’d utter these words but maybe it’s time to follow Kazakhstan’s lead.
Let’s spring forward and never look back. I’m all for saving energy, but there are more sophisticated ways to do it than blindly following rules set for early 20th century lifestyles.
Besides, I hate when it’s dark at 4:30 in the afternoon.
Dan Haley can be reached at dhaley@denverpost.com.
