Debunking Daylight Saving Time

It’s not even 100 years old, but daylight saving time already seems obsolete.

That doesn’t even touch on all the sleep schedules that have been interrupted this weekend as the clocks “fell back” once more.

Originating in Germany in 1916 to conserve electricity, and adopted by most of the United States in 1918, it’s never been about letting farmers have more daylight hours to work the fields, as is commonly believed.

[lz_ndn video= 29813079]

Farmers back then, in fact, were generally against DST and lobbied to have it repealed in 1919. Interestingly, President Woodrow Wilson liked DST and disagreed. Congress ​voted to repeal all the same, then ​twice overrode Wilson’s veto and daylight saving time ended in 1919.

Individual cities, notably New York City and Chicago kept shifting clocks​, however​. But it gets more confusing: DST returned nationally during World War II and was again repealed three weeks after the end of the war.

Year-round daylight saving time began Feb. 9, 1942, to conserving energy during wartime. Yet Time Magazine reported at the time, “it was met with the mournful mooing of cows, the indignant squalling of infants and the sleepy curses of U.S. workers.” Before it was repealed at the end of WWII, it was even known as “War Time,” as President Franklin D. Roosevelt liked to call it.

Turns out it took the 1966 Uniform Time Act to standardize daylight saving time across the United States (except that Hawaii and Arizona don’t shift their clocks in the fall and spring, but that’s another story). And in 1973, the Emergency Daylight Saving Time Energy Conservation Act shook things up yet again.

It was even known as “War Time,” as President Franklin D. Roosevelt liked to call it.

​The nation’s mood in modern times isn’t in DST’s favor. Indeed, 45 percent of Americans surveyed say DST isn’t worth the hassle, compared to only 37 percent who say it is, according to a 2013 Rasmussen Reports release.

The arguments for continuing daylight saving time are energy conservation and health — both questionable at best.

Let’s consider energy, since that’s the most common justification. More hours of daylight in the evening mean less power consumed with lights and lighting. The National Bureau of Economic Research found that extra daylight led to more air conditioning use, however, and actually increased electrical bills for Indiana residents who switched in 2006 to following the time shift.

Risk of heart attacks rises immediately after the spring time change.

​And, logically, economist ​Hendrik Wolff has found that the practice does lower evening electrical use, but that it’s balanced by increased electrical use for lights and heat in the mornings. He also points out that comparing national energy usage pre-2007 (when DST was extended by a month) and post-2007 shows essentially zero difference overall.

​There’s also a health argument, but it turns out there’s some reason to believe that shifting our circadian clock can produce sleep deprivation and adverse health reactions​. In fact, risk of heart attacks rises immediately after the spring time change, due to disturbed sleep and disruption of normal biological rhythms.

​That seems like enough to jettison daylight saving time — or are we going to “fall forward and spring back” for eternity?

This article has been updated.