March 31, 2006

Government in our Bedrooms

Not another abortion post -- I'm talking about alarm clocks.

Only government could spend 90 years tinkering with the clocks, with no proof of efficacy

Michael Downing has written a book, and a guest editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal. He considers Daylight Savings Time "a cynical substitute for sensible energy policy. Even if we all eat breakfast in the dark in March and November, we won't save much oil because less than 5% of domestic electricity is generated by oil. We will consume more gasoline. When Americans go to the ballpark or the mall, we hop in our cars."

While ThreeSources farmer JohnGalt came out for it last year, Downing claims it was a political triumph of city merchants over rural farmers, who hated it.

They used morning light to stimulate their dairy and dry dew off their cereal crops. When sunrise arrived an hour later, opening times for city markets didn't change. Farmers had one less hour to deliver the goods. Along with coal miners and clergymen, they complained that daylight saving severed our connection to the sun and God's time.

To appease the rural interests, Congress repealed daylight saving in 1919. Only another world war persuaded Congress to try it again. The Roosevelt administration claimed that War Time -- the year-round daylight saving that lasted from January 1942 until September 1945 -- reduced energy consumption by many kilowatts. This was harder to substantiate, however, than newspaper photographs of schoolchildren waiting for buses at trafficky intersections on dark winter mornings. And the farmers still hated it. Congress did not dare to pass a peacetime daylight saving law until 1966.

New York City was not cowed. Urban merchants had profited by daylight saving, and Wall Street wanted it after World War I because London had it, which put London six hours ahead of New York. Stock markets in both cities were open from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Without daylight saving, their trading hours didn't overlap, and they had no opportunity for arbitrage.


I had always though Silence's hero, Ben Franklin, was to blame, but his name or century fail to come up in this account:
William Willett proposed the idea of falsifying clock time in 1907. A golfer, hunter and horseman, Willett was trotting through London at dawn and noticed that windows were shuttered, blocking the summer sun. He wanted to shift that unused hour of daylight from morning to evening, when people could spend it on leisure, including increased "opportunities for rifle practice." Parliament repeatedly shouted down Willett's proposal. But in May 1916, with World War I underway, Germany adopted daylight saving, hoping later sunsets would reduce demand for electric illumination. In response, Britain immediately passed the 1916 Daylight Saving Act as an austerity measure. It wasn't easy to squeeze a lump of coal out of a clock, but this siphoned the fun from Willett's idea.

President Nixon brought it back full time for two years, now they're at it again. If nobody can show any proof that it works, should we not just leave the clocks alone?

Posted by jk at March 31, 2006 11:11 AM

Damn. It's this weekend, isn't it?

Let's not dick around with moving "to save energy" as if Congress can regulate the angle of the axis of the earth or something.

Either pick "standard time" or "daylight savings" and stick with it all year long.

How about a switch to GMT worldwide? ;)

Posted by: AlexC at March 31, 2006 12:24 PM

Nonsense. Udder (joke intended) nonsense. I lived on the farm and if you saw the sun come up before getting out to the barn to tend the heard, you were friggen late.

Posted by: mdmhvonpa at March 31, 2006 12:51 PM

I believe what I "came out for" was year-round Daylight Time. When I get back to the farm from my city job I want at least a few minutes of daylight to feed the horses in. But it was just a preference, not a cause celeb.

What gets me is how much of a bulldog you are on this issue. During private moments in an elevator car you tell dagny and I that we are too "down" and "academic." In the midst of weighty topics like French 'utes' labor riots, illegal immigration debate in the legislature, FISA warrant contratemps (not really a good example of "weighty") and, to top it all, an avowed genocidal maniac as president of a nation with the means and determination to develop thermonuclear explosives, you want to gripe about setting your clock forward an hour?

Am I the pragmatist here, saying that "we've been doing it my entire life so far and can keep on for the rest of it for all I care?"

Posted by: johngalt at March 31, 2006 4:26 PM

I suspect that it is a productivity loss to reprogram computers and miss meetings and show up late and wonder if your Indiana office is open...

As for stridency, I suppose that I worry about it intensely once a year for about an hour, so that's only .01% of my time on it.

Also, the routine change I grew up with is fine and I could dig the rhythm. It is Congressional and Nixonian meddling: thinking we can add a month here or take off a month there and it will save us energy.

I do remember you wanted year-round daylight time, effectively putting us on Central. I could go for that.

Posted by: jk at March 31, 2006 5:52 PM

I guess I'm with William Willett and JohnGalt - I like the extra hour of daylight after work, though I use it for bike riding, not for rifle practice or tending to my livestock. I would have some concern if there was evidence it was causing us to waste energy, but I'm not concerned if it doesn't save us energy. I guess I like it for totally selfish reasons, which is what the free market is all about, eh? Maybe I've been converted!

I guess this one would be on par with JK's argument that our defense budget is appropriate ... Daylight Savings Time, enjoyed by free people with votes to choose their level of support for an hour-shifted part of the year is a very good thing. Protecting our evening daylight hours is a very good thing. Hmmmm, I seem to like the argument when it suits me, and not when it doesn't. Funny, that.

Posted by: LatteSipper at March 31, 2006 6:14 PM | What do you think? [5]