A Stitch in Haste

Congress has the solution to our energy crisis (assuming we even have a crisis) — screw up the clocks even more:

If Congress passes an energy bill, Americans may see more daylight-saving time.

Lawmakers crafting energy legislation approved an amendment Wednesday to extend daylight-saving time by two months, having it start on the last Sunday in March and end on the last Sunday in November.
...
"The more daylight we have, the less electricity we use," said [Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.], who cited Transportation Department estimates that showed the two-month extension would save the equivalent of 10,000 barrels of oil a day.

The country uses about 20 million barrels of oil a day.

Do the math: that’s 1/20 of one percent of our oil usage per day. But the extension is only for two months, so on an annual basis that’s 1/6 of 1/20 of 1%, or 1/120 of 1% of our annual oil consumption.

And of course, not all our energy comes from oil, so why should we think that all the “daylights savings savings” should also come from oil?

And of course “savings” estimates from government proposals are always exaggerated.

So Congress wants to screw up the entire country’s clocks for the smallest of potential savings?

But that’s the Politics of the Warm Fuzzy Feeling: the politicians “did something,” which — no matter how stupid, pointless or counterproductive — is all that matters nowadays.

For Discussion: We all know the obvious cost of Daylight Savings Time: the physical exertion of having to change all our clocks twice a year. What are some of the other costs of the program or, more importantly, of changing it? I can think of one: computer operating systems such as Microsoft Windows will have to be updated to change the scheduling of DST. Who can think of others? Might they add up to the equivalent value of 1/120 of 1% of our annual oil consumption? See also this Commons Blog post.