Study: Daylight Saving Time actually raises utility bills
Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:06PM EST
See Comments (2000)
It's official: Daylight Saving Time is a bust. Designed (and recently extended) as a measure to save energy in a period of inflated electricity prices, an in-depth University of California study has now shown that DST doesn't save anyone any money at all. In fact, it's costing consumers extra, to the tune of $3.19 in extra utility bills per year.
The study was made possible because of the peculiarities of the state of Indiana, which was only partially on DST until 2006. When the whole state finally went DST (to sync with the national business day), some comparisons vs. the prior method were made apparent. The study calculated that the shift costs Indiana residents an extra $8.6 million in electricity bills in total.
Why? Shouldn't they be, well, saving daylight -- and burning fewer light bulbs?
They are, said the study. But while lighting bills were reduced, air-conditioning units had to run more often, because people were home on hot afternoons when they'd otherwise be still at the office. Heaters had to be run on cool mornings, too, when people got up and it was still dark outside.
Professor Matthew Kotchen, who pioneered the study, noted, "I've never had a paper with such a clear and unambiguous finding as this."
This isn't the first time the energy-saving rationale of Daylight Saving Time has been attacked. The first was in 1976, when the National Bureau of Standards found that there was no significant energy savings after the switch. The recent expansion of DST to a few extra weeks was also revealed to have saved no energy during its run. And yet here we are...
In related news, it was also revealed that Daylight Saving Time actually creates no additional daylight.
Top 5 Posts
More About Miscellaneous
Comments on Study: Daylight Saving Time actually raises utility bills
Post a Comment
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
-
7 Posted by rustins on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:56PM EDT Report Abuse
What I've heard about DST and believe, is that it was found that giving people an extra hour of daylight in the evening caused them to go out more and spend more money. It has nothing to do with saving energy, it might have originally been intended to be that, but it isn't causing any real savings.
-
8 Posted by b_harris265 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:16PM EDT Report Abuse
THEN GET UP AN HOUR EARLIER
-
9 Posted by rogueist on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:49PM EDT Report Abuse
Sounds like someone needs to protest this waste of time and money and energy...
-
10 Posted by mommarock_2000 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:25PM EDT Report Abuse
I don't honestly care which way it goes (EST or DST), I for one would just like for them to pick one AND STAY WITH IT! Yes, yes.... I know uppercase is equal to yelling, but that is the way I feel. Twice a year my bio-sync is messed up for weeks adjusting to the new 'time' and I just wish they would choose one and leave it alone. If they keep extending DST, it may just run year round as it is. I haven't talked to one single person that prefers DST, but I have plenty of people that hate the twice yearly change. We need to get vocal and get rid of an idea that was well-intentioned, but erroneous from its inception.
-
11 Posted by ryebread45014 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:57PM EDT Report Abuse
Doesn't DST have something to do with the farmers. Allowing them to get up earlier when it's light out during the growing season?
-
12 Posted by sshappyjackk@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:38PM EDT Report Abuse
I think this article may be a little bit misleading. I read another article about the same Indiana Report a few days ago, and in it, it was stressed that the findings only apply to the particular area they studied. It did not show "that DST doesn't save anyone any money at all." On the other hand, it also said that our changing energy use, such as more widespread use air conditioners among other things, probably has reduced the effectiveness of DST, But more studies are necessary.
-
13 Posted by ben.dekko on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:05PM EDT Report Abuse
If the sun rises at 6am and sets at 6pm (standard time), and you adjust your clocks by one hour so it rises at 7am and sets at 7pm (DST), guess what people... you still have 12 hours of daylight and 12 hours of darkness!! For all you "pro" DST-ers out there, here's a question for ya. If adjusting the clocks by one hour is good, wouldn't adjusting them by 2 hours be better? Or by 3 hours be best? heck .. why stop there? Adjust everything by 12 hours so we turn our lives completely upside down!!
-
14 Posted by zmon400 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 11:01PM EDT Report Abuse
As I recall, the farmers didn't like it, especially the dairy farmers, because the doggoned cows couldn't tell time and still wanted to be milked at the same time of day, no matter what the clocks said!! The farmers can plant crops when they want to, no matter what the clock says. It's a city-folk thing. I personally HATE it! If you want extra daylight in the afternoon, figure out how to go to work an hour earlier in the summer!! Leave the clock alone, or consider splitting the difference.. move it 1/2 hour and then don't mess with my internal body clock!!! Maybe I have more in common with those poor ole dairy cows!!!!!!!!
-
15 Posted by rorbincalendar on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:51PM EDT Report Abuse
How stupid. You can't put any price on the extra daylight enjoyment I get with my son and wife when I get home from work.__________________CFL lights? NEVER!
-
16 Posted by fcs25 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:59PM EDT Report Abuse
Typical government incompentence.
-
17 Posted by fastsurf636 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:58PM EDT Report Abuse
IN politicols are twice wrong: First, DST is worthless for the alleged benefits. Second, we are in the wrong time zone (EST) as the State of IN is entirely within the 75 degree west longitude that determines Central Time. Two wrongs is All Wrong.
-
18 Posted by chachagirl29708 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:21PM EDT Report Abuse
keep it longer in the evening......not for shopping..."mandatory" family time...and no shopping on sunday...just for emergency's....study that one!! enrgy savings....give me (us)a break!
-
19 Posted by reisis@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:35PM EDT Report Abuse
Also, creates more stress due to the adjustment the body must make due to time changes. Thehuman body needs a time regiment to avoid stress.
-
20 Posted by jakjag39 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:27PM EDT Report Abuse
From what I read, the study never addressed the potential energy savings of the businesses where the people spend their business day It just said that households end up spending more in energy costs as a result. Concluding from the fact that households don't save any energy that the overall community doesn't save energy seems extraneous. I'm not arguing that daylight savings actually saves energy, but I don't believe that they can come to that conclusion from the very limited research done in the study.
-
21 Posted by robeko1 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:45PM EDT Report Abuse
Is anyone counting all the stress and fatigue that DST causes; all due to this twice-yearly biological clock disturbance... I don't really care much which time we use, just keep it locked down. Don't move it back and forth as a darn swing. It makes a zombie out of me every spring for two or so weeks. Once I got into an accident because of sleep deprivation. Stop the DST stupidity now! Hold the time steady, wherever it is.
-
22 Posted by paullatta on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:03PM EDT Report Abuse
How about factoring in the lost productivity due to having to contend with the shifting of the biologic clock? I feel like crap for weeks each time they switch back and forth. Then, just when I'm set in a pattern, its time to switch again!
-
23 Posted by paullatta on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:03PM EDT Report Abuse
You know, another thought would be to cut the difference. Just shift the cloack by a half hour and keep it there. That way both pro DST'ers and con DST'ers would be happy and I could regulate my biological clock.
-
24 Posted by jgray44@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:34PM EDT Report Abuse
I live is Texas highest electricity in the country...I don't need an extra hour of hot summer day. Get rid of DST.
-
25 Posted by jackson4205 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:26PM EDT Report Abuse
I'VE NEVER OBSERVED ANY SCHOOLS OR RETAIL STORES OR FACTORIES TURNING OFF ANY LIGHTS REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT OF "DAYLIGHT"/SUN LIGHT! I THINK IT IS ANOTHER "FEEL-GOOD" IDEA THE POLITICIANS CAME UP WITH TO MAKE VOTERS FEEL LIKE THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING!
Sponsored Links
My Tech
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
Also on Yahoo! Tech
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 Posted by dozent100 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:47PM EDT Report Abuse
The original rationale was to have an extra hour of daylight during the business day, primarily for agriculture workers. It was a good idea and was supposed to be from June to September. Individual States and in some case counties were able to opt out of the DST plan. It has only been since 1976, when President Carter, who knew more about everything than anyone else, decided that DST would reduce energy consumption. Along with a host of federally mandated restrictions on home and office temperatures, reduced lighting, etc. All of which increased energy use as lamps were installed on desks, Small heaters appeared under desks, and everybody cursed his name. So a known fallacy was expended by Congress to be seen as "doing something." After all, the public had accepted the thought for years, s increasing the amount could only be see as "doing something" without it visibly costing more. Once again the Liberals have successfully pulled the wool of their world "as they want it to be" expectations, over the eyes of an unthinking populace, including as the ultimate joke, the Republicans. In the modern world, with our ability to adapt the world to our desires and needs, DST is an anachronism! Liberals want to enforce their controls up on us by denying us the ability to live as we want, while they continually violate there own strictures. after all they are entitled and must not be inconvenienced, by the rules they expect the rest of us to live by. I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. The most difficult choice of all. Thinking about what you are being being fed by the liberal media. William Buckley is dead! Reason has lost its best Champion!