Do we still need Daylight Savings Time?

| 1 Comment
On the surface, I say no. We spend more months with DST than without, so why not go all the way?

Well, we could. The standard timezones the US uses could all move over one so we would be on what we now call DST all year. It would work!

However, it gets really dark in the depths of winter, and having dawn/dusk offset so large parts of the commute aren't in complete blackness has a lot going for it. In Bellingham, Washington, dawn/dusk on 12/21 are about 7:45am and 4:30pm. With a permanent +1 timezone offset, that would mean the sun would rise up there at 8:45am. Not only is the drive to work almost entirely in the black, but little Jacob and Emily out there on the street corner waiting for the school-bus will be doing so in cold darkness.

We'd need a "Winter Time" offset to bring more daylight in the AM hours.

Turns out we already have that with the current system, we just call the largest part of the year the DST period rather than the shortest part of the year. I'd like to see the two reversed, but I understand why forcing the change just to make the paperwork look better is not done. It's a lot of work, as we discovered when the US changed the DST rules a few years ago.

1 Comment

Yes please! Let's just change EST to -4:00 and scrap DST altogether!

I hear your concerns about commute lighting, but I very much doubt it has the impact you assume. Besides, some parts of the country (like where I live) have Lake Effect clouds all Winter. At night, there's the dim glow of streetlights reflecting off the snow. In the day, there's the dim gloom of overcast skies. It's only a few shades of gray different across the day. We survive, so will everyone else.