This weekend we lose a precious hour of sleeptime, but the evening is ours again. For me, the “fall back, spring forward” routine is a mixed bag. But I do love the extra evening daylight for two-thirds of the year. To be able to come home from work and not have to flip on all of the lights is a nice feeling indeed.

For Indiana, however, Daylight Savings Time doesn’t give people the same warm fuzzies. Until 2006—almost 90 years since Daylight Savings Time (DST) was first tried during World War I to save on artificial lighting costs in the afternoon—the state had resisted the program primarily to accommodate farmers who didn’t want to work in the dark. Now, a study of Indiana’s reluctant transition by two Univ. of California, Santa Barbara researchers has put DST under renewed scrutiny.

The switchover gave scientists a perfect field study opportunity, and they even had controls: 15 counties around the state’s perimeter already abided DST. Their findings show that setting the clock forward in Indiana used an extra $8.6 million worth of energy. Why? Air conditioning. Few people had such a luxury during World War II, much less World War I.

The original reasoning for DST (to save energy) thus seems false. But is this reason enough to abolish the program? I say no. The system makes sense in mid to high latitudes as way to minimize the effects of seasonal variations on rigid human work schedules. Sure, it’s useless in Alaska, but standardization is part of what helps the country stay efficient. Perhaps we should try using our air conditioning less, and go outside to enjoy those long summer nights.

E-mail the editor