SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
73–325PS
2001
ENERGY CONSERVATION POTENTIAL
OF EXTENDED AND DOUBLE
DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
MAY 24, 2001
Serial No. 107–30
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/science
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HON. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York, Chairman
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
JOE BARTON, Texas
KEN CALVERT, California
NICK SMITH, Michigan
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
DAVE WELDON, Florida
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota
CHRIS CANNON, Utah
GEORGE R. NETHERCUTT, JR., Washington
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
GARY G. MILLER, California
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
MIKE PENCE, Indiana
FELIX J. GRUCCI, JR., New York
MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia
RALPH M. HALL, Texas
BART GORDON, Tennessee
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
JAMES A. BARCIA, Michigan
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
LYNN N. RIVERS, Michigan
ZOE LOFGREN, California
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
BOB ETHERIDGE, North Carolina
NICK LAMPSON, Texas
JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
MARK UDALL, Colorado
DAVID WU, Oregon
ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington
JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania
JOE BACA, California
JIM MATHESON, Utah
STEVE ISRAEL, New York
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
DENNIS MOORE, Kansas
MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
Subcommittee on Energy
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland, Chairman
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
KEN CALVERT, California
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
GEORGE R. NETHERCUTT, JR., Washington
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania
SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
DAVID WU, Oregon
JIM MATHESON, Utah
NICK LAMPSON, Texas
RALPH M. HALL, Texas
HARLAN WATSON Subcommittee Staff Director
TOM VANEK, KAREN KIMBALL, JOHN DARNELL Republican Professional Staff Members
CHARLES COOKE Democratic Professional Staff Member
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
TOM HAMMOND Staff Assistant
C O N T E N T S
Energy Conservation Potential of Extended and Double Daylight Saving Time
May 24, 2001
Opening Statement by Representative Roscoe G. Bartlett (MD–6), Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives
Opening Statement by Representative Lynn Woolsey (CA–6), Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives
Opening Statement by Representative Vernon Ehlers (MI–3), Member, Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives
Opening Statement by Representative David Wu (OR–1), Member, Subcommittee on Energy, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives
Panel I:
The Honorable Brad Sherman (CA–24), U.S. House of Representatives
Oral Statement
Prepared Statement
Biography
Panel II:
Ms. Linda Lawson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Oral Statement
Prepared Statement
Biography
Mr. James Benfield, Bracy Williams & Co., former Executive Director of the Daylight Saving Coalition
Oral Statement
Prepared Statement
Biography
Discussion
The Effect of Daylight Saving Time on School Children
Estimating the Effects of Double Daylight Saving Time
Advantages and Disadvantages of Year-Long Daylight Saving Time and Double Daylight Saving Time
Increasing Public Awareness
Effects on the Dairy and Wine Industries
Considerations: Number of Time Changes Per Year, Informing the Public, Importance of Uniformity
Effect on AM Radio Stations and Canada and Mexico as Trading Partners
Reliability of Past Studies
Concluding Remarks and Limiting Time Changes to Twice Per Year
Appendix 1: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions Submitted by the Majority Staff
Ms. Linda Lawson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation
Changes to Current Daylight Savings Time Arrangement
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Double Daylight Savings Time
A New Western Time Zone
Alternative Daylight Savings Time Options
Possible Daylight Savings Time Confusion
The California Energy Commission and Mr. Harris' Testimony
Mr. James C. Benfield, Bracey Williams & Co.
Changes to Current Daylight Savings Time Arrangement
Double Daylight Savings Time
A New Western Time Zone
Alternative Daylight Savings Time Options
Possible Daylight Savings Time Confusion
The California Energy Commission and Mr. Harris' Testimony
Mr. William J. Keese, Chairman, California Energy Commission
Changes to Current Daylight Savings Time Arrangement
Double Daylight Savings Time
A New Western Time Zone
Alternative Daylight Savings Time Options
Possible Daylight Savings Time Confusion
The California Energy Commission and Mr. Harris' Testimony
Mr. William R. Harris, Attorney
Changes to Current Daylight Savings Time Arrangement
Double Daylight Savings Time
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
A New Western Time Zone
Alternative Daylight Savings Time Options
Possible Daylight Savings Time Confusion
The California Energy Commission and Mr. Harris' Testimony
Appendix 2: Additional Material for the Record
Mr. William J. Keese, Chairman, California Energy Commission
Letter to Chairman Roscoe Bartlett
Staff Report, ''Effects of Daylight Saving Time on California Electricity Use,'' May 2001, P400–01–013
Mr. William R. Harris, Attorney, ''Double Daylight Saving Time and Extended Daylight Saving Time: Uncertain Energy Conservation for the Nation or for States with 'Rolling Blackouts' ''
CRS Report for Congress: Daylight Saving Time, by H.G. Yacker, 98–99C, updated August 1, 2000
Hearing Charter for Hearing on Energy Conservation Potential of Extended and Double Daylight Saving Time, Committee on Science, Subcommittee on Energy, U.S. House of Representatives
Letter from Congressman Roscoe G. Bartlett, Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy, House Committee on Science to Ms. Mary Hutzler, Acting Administrator, Energy Information Administration, June 15, 2001
Response from Mary J. Hutzler, Acting Administrator, Energy Information Administration, to Congressman Roscoe G. Bartlett, July 31, 2001
ENERGY CONSERVATION POTENTIAL OF EXTENDED DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME AND DOUBLE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
THURSDAY, MAY 24, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Energy,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:14 a.m., in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Roscoe G. Bartlett [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Chairman BARTLETT. Let me call our hearing to order. The Ranking Minority Member is on her way here. She just finished 1 minute on the Floor and she should be here momentarily.
Today, we will be examining the potential for energy savings which could result from extending the duration of Daylight Saving Time as well as from Double Daylight Saving time. We will also be looking at how other areas of society may be affected, both positively and negatively, by such changes.
Our witnesses will address the lessons of history and their practical implications today, especially, regarding the potential for energy savings nationwide beyond their immediate application to the current situation in California and our western states.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We will first hear from our distinguished colleague, Congressman Brad Sherman of California, who introduced H.R. 704, the Energy Time Adjustment Authorization Act, on February 14, 2001. The provisions of Mr. Sherman's bill have been included in H.R. 1647, the Electricity Emergency Relief Act, which was introduced by Representative Joe Barton on May 1, 2001. H.R. 1647, as amended, is now before the Energy and Commerce Committee. The purpose of this bill is to allow states in the Pacific time zone, California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington, to temporarily adjust standard time in response to the energy crisis.
We will then hear from a panel composed of Ms. Linda Lawson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation, and Mr. James Benfield of Bracy Williams and Company. I might add that in a former life, Mr. Benfield was founder of the Daylight Savings Coalition, which led to a successful campaign to extend Daylight Savings to its current duration.
We have also requested written testimony from two witnesses who were not able to appear before us, Mr. William Keese, Chair of the California Energy Commission, and Mr. William Harris, attorney and consultant on energy and Daylight Savings. Mr. Keese has indicated that significant savings could be possible with Double Daylight Savings in California based on preliminary findings from a study they are conducting. Mr. Harris testified before Congress in 1973, when year-round Daylight Savings were being considered. We now have both of their testimonies. They are being reviewed by staff and will then be available to the public.
I realize that this hearing will be revisiting a subject that appears to have been thoroughly covered in the past, as well as recently, including Mr. Sherman's proposed legislation to address the California situation. Our purpose here is not to reinvent the wheel but to investigate to what extent Daylight Saving Time energy savings may apply more broadly, nationwide, not just in California. Also, since many changes have occurred in patterns of use since the first use of Daylight Saving time as an energy saving measure in World War I, we would like to get an estimate of what overall energy savings might be anticipated today.
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Daylight Savings has a long history as energy-saving strategy in wartime, and more recently, during the oil embargo of the 1970's. The potential for reduced electric power usage was clear during the First and Second World Wars when the main use of electricity was the incandescent lighting. The shift of the beginning of the workday to 1 hour earlier resulted in an hour less electric light usage in the evenings, assuming people kept to their usual schedules. It is easy to see how this would have reduced total energy consumption and possibly peak energy demand as well.
It is important to recognize that our patterns of energy use have changed considerably since then so that it is not a foregone conclusion that significant energy savings will result from extended Daylight Savings today. Indeed, incandescent lighting is no longer the primary use of electricity and its use does not always peak after sunset. Peaks are now likely to depend on weather-related heating and cooling and vary from one region to another.
Even if overall energy savings are not substantial, it may still be worth trying extended Daylight Savings. For example, California's electricity demand problems could be addressed by shifting peak demand to spread out loads resulting in lowering peak demand. Further, an additional virtue of Daylight Saving Time at a time of crisis is that it can help to increase awareness of the problem and remind people of other ways to save energy.
Finally, before we prescribe a cure, we must be careful that we have properly diagnosed the condition we seek to cure. This hearing will attempt to understand the problem of lowering peak demand as well as achieving energy savings and to consider whether Daylight Saving Time is an effective option to address these problems.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I look forward to hearing today's testimony and pursuing these subjects in greater detail.
Before we get started, I would like to remind the Members of the Subcommittee and our witnesses that this hearing is being broadcast live on the Internet, so please keep that in mind during today's proceedings.
I would also like to ask for the unanimous consent that all Members who wish may have their opening statements entered into the record. Without objection, so ordered.
I now turn to the distinguished Ranking Member, Ms. Woolsey, for her opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Bartlett follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN ROSCOE BARTLETT
Today we will be examining the potential for energy savings which could result from extending the duration of Daylight Savings Time as well as from ''double daylight savings time''. We will also be looking at how other areas of society may be affected, both positively and negatively, by such changes.
Our witnesses will address the lessons of history and their practical implications today, especially regarding the potential for energy savings nationwide, beyond their immediate application to the current situation in California.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We will first hear from my distinguished colleague, Congressman Brad Sherman of California, who introduced H.R. 704—the Energy Time Adjustment Authorization Act—on February 14, 2001. The provisions of Mr. Sherman's bill have been included in H.R. 1647—the Electricity Emergency Relief Act—which was introduced by Representative Joe Barton on May 1, 2001. H.R. 1647—as amended—is now before the Energy and Commerce Committee. The purpose of this bill is to allow States in the Pacific Time zone (California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) to temporarily adjust standard time in response to the energy crisis.
We will then hear from a panel composed of Ms. Linda Lawson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation and Mr. James C. Benfield of Bracy Williams & Co. I might add that, in a former life, Mr. Benfield was founder of the Daylight Savings Coalition which led a successful campaign to extend Daylight Savings to the its current duration.
We have also requested written testimony from two witnesses who were not able to appear before us: Mr. William Keese, Chair of the California Energy Commission and Mr. William R. Harris, attorney and consultant on energy and Daylight Savings. Mr. Keese has indicated that significant savings could be possible with double daylight savings in California, based on preliminary findings from a study they are conducting. Mr. Harris testified before Congress in 1973, when year round Daylight Savings were being considered.
I realize that this hearing will be revisiting a subject that appears to have been thoroughly covered in the past, as well as recently, including Mr. Sherman's proposed legislation to address the California situation. Our purpose here is not to ''re-invent the wheel'' but to investigate to what extent Daylight Savings Time energy savings may apply more broadly, nationwide, not just in California. Also, since many changes have occurred in patterns of use since the first use of Daylight Savings as an energy saving measure in World War I, we would like to get an estimate of what overall energy savings might be anticipated today.
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Daylight Savings has a long history as energy-saving strategy in wartime and, more recently, during the oil embargo of the 1970s. The potential for reduced electric power usage was clear during the First and Second World Wars when the main use of electricity was for incandescent lighting. The shift of the beginning of the workday to one hour earlier resulted in an hour less electric light usage in the evenings—assuming people kept to their usual schedules. It is easy to see how this would have reduced total energy consumption and possibly peak demand as well.
It is important to recognize that our patterns of energy use have changed considerably since then, so that it is not a foregone conclusion that significant energy savings will result from extended Daylight Savings today. Indeed, incandescent lighting is no longer the primary use of electricity and its use does not always peak after sunset. Peaks are now likely to depend on weather-related heating and cooling and vary from one region to another.
Even if overall energy savings are not substantial, it may still be worth trying extended Daylight Savings. For example, California's electricity demand problems could be addressed by shifting peak demand to spread out loads resulting in lowering peak demand. Further, an additional virtue of Daylight Saving Time at a time of crisis is that it can help to increase awareness of the problem and remind people of other ways to save energy.
Finally, before we prescribe a cure, we must be careful that we have properly diagnosed the condition we seek to cure. This hearing will attempt to understand the problem of lowering peak demand as well as achieving energy savings and to consider whether Daylight Saving Time is an effective option to address these problems.
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this hearing today. With my constituents in California in the midst of an energy crisis, it is only reasonable that we explore every single possible way to solve this energy crisis.
My California colleague, Brad Sherman, has introduced legislation, H.R. 704, that he is going to speak to us about, I am sure. His legislation would allow states in the Pacific time zone to adjust their standard time to help alleviate some of the energy crisis. And I am proud to say that I am an original cosponsor of Mr. Sherman's bill.
This morning, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on the practical effects that adjustments to Daylight Saving Time would make. In particular, I am interested in the energy savings that can be realized through the use of this option, not just in California, but in all states; not just short-term, but possibly, long-term.
It is also important that we hear about the negative effects that adjusting Daylight Saving Time could have on various groups. We have to make sure that the benefit outweighs any negativity.
Mr. Chairman, efforts to help solve California's energy crisis and prevent it from occurring in other parts of our country are an important matter. What is happening now in California can and will have national implications because California, the sixth largest economy in the world, sets a precedent. As California goes, so goes the nation. That is why I am pleased that today we have this opportunity to learn more about one option to address our energy situation, and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and hearing their perspectives. Thank you.
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The prepared statement of Lynn Woolsey follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LYNN WOOLSEY
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for holding this hearing today. With my constituents and California in the midst of an energy crisis, it's only reasonable that we at least explore all possible ways to help solve this crisis.
My California colleague, Brad Sherman, has introduced legislation, H.R. 704, which would allow states in the Pacific Time Zone to adjust their standard time to help alleviate the energy crisis. I am proud to say I am an original co-sponsor of this bill.
This morning I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on the practical effects that adjustments to Daylight Savings Time would make. In particular, I am interested in the energy savings that can be realized through use of this option—not just in California, but in all states. But, it's also important that we hear about negative effects that adjusting Daylight Savings Time could have on various groups—including school children, farmers or business groups.
Mr. Chairman, efforts to help solve California's energy crisis—and prevent it from occurring in other parts of our country—are an important matter. What's happening now in California can have national implications. . .because, as goes California, goes the nation.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
That's why I am pleased that today we have this opportunity to learn more about one option to address our energy situation. I look forward to hearing our witnesses perspectives.
Thank you.
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you very much. We are joined at our hearing by two of our other colleagues, Dr. Vernon Ehlers, the other Ph.D. scientist in the Congress. Dr. Ehlers, do you have opening comments?
Mr. EHLERS. Very briefly, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the hearing and I am reminded of the closest election in Michigan history when the states originally had to decide whether to go along with the new Federal law. We were in the far end, western end, of the time zone. The original, it went to a referendum, because the people weren't happy with it. The original vote, out of 2.5 million votes cast, there was a 44-vote difference, the closest election in Michigan history. The recount lasted almost as long as Florida's recount, and it, eventually, reached a difference of several hundred, and we joined the rest of the nation in having Daylight Saving Time.
I recite this only to point out how emotional this issue can become; particularly, if we ever reached the point where we would also increase the Daylight Saving Time, shift yet another hour during the winter. The parents have great concerns about their children going to the buses or walking to school early in the morning, and the first time such a child gets hit by a car, there will be an explosion. So it is truly an emotional issue and not one easy to persuade the people about.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I yield back.
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you. You mentioned emotion, and that reminds me of the farmer's response when you ask about a time, and he says, is that Government time or God's time?
Mr. Wu is also with us. Mr. Wu?
Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Dr. Ehlers has reminded us, this is a very serious topic, both from a policy perspective and from the viewpoint of everyone who pays very close attention to this. It is as serious as a heart attack, but I wanted to welcome my friend and colleague, Brad Sherman.
I think, Brad, that one of the reasons why you can propose legislation like this is because, from my perspective, you are always one or 2 hours early for everything that you do. And I did notice, Brad, that you were speaking on the Floor around midnight last night, and here you are looking fresh as a daisy, as ever, and we look forward to your testimony.
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you very much. Congressman Sherman, we are really pleased that you are here and have an interest in this subject, and the floor is now yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRAD SHERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for holding these hearings. I thank you for the opportunity to put my statement in the record so that my presentation will not be as long as the 1 hour special order from last night.
Chairman BARTLETT. Without objection.
Mr. SHERMAN. I got involved in this issue because of the crisis facing California and the other western states. Daylight Saving Time began as a method of saving energy during World War I and has been used both in Europe and in the United States to save energy during World War II. Then in this country, we extended Daylight Saving Time during the 1970's oil crisis.
When I talk about saving energy, energy for these purposes is really two different things. First, it is the fuel that we use to create electricity. Now, there are a number of sources of electricity that are available 24 hours. You may have hydroelectric or nuclear, that is simply available on a continuous basis. But in every region of our country, we have to burn fuel to generate some of the electricity we need, and so reducing demand for energy, even if you have plenty of electric generating capacity, saves the fuel.
The other crisis, though, or the crisis we have in California, is one of generating capacity. And there, saving fuel is not as important, although, it is a good thing from a number of perspectives. Also, although it is not publicized, California may have a fuel shortage toward the end of this summer, as we deplete our natural gas stocks. So while the focus is on saving electricity during the peak usage times, saving electricity at any time is helpful.
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The studies seem to indicate that we would save 1 or 2 percent of our total electric usage with increased Daylight Saving Time. Now, 1 or 2 percent doesn't wound like much until you realize that when there is a ''blackout'' in California, that usually means 1 or 2 percent of the consumers are being blacked out, that demand has exceeded supply by 1 or 2 percent.
I have introduced H.R. 704, and your Ranking Member had the wisdom to be an original co-sponsor. I want to stress, this bill is in reaction to the California State Legislature passing a resolution asking, please, give us control over the clocks during this energy crisis. And all the bill does is just that. It gives the western states the right to change their clocks. They are in the best position to decide whether the energy savings is worth the hassle that their people need to go through. This is a crisis that California has been called upon to try to solve itself. California and the other western states should be given all the tools.
Not only is my bill a freestanding bill, it is included in H.R. 1647. But my hope is that we are able to get it on the Floor as a freestanding bill, because I don't have to tell you, the freestanding bill is a lot less controversial than all of the other proposals that deal with how to solve this energy problem, both short-time and long-term.
Now, even if we are just granting this power to the states, it is appropriate for us to look at whether Daylight Saving Time is beneficial and in what manner. My own proposal, were I in Sacramento and should California get this authority, is that we have Double Daylight Saving Time from the first Sunday in May until the Sunday before Labor Day. The reason for this is two-fold. First, that is when we have the energy generation capacity crisis in California, during the summer air conditioning needed months.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Second, that the chief argument against Daylight Saving Time, one that I hope to rebut in my statement here today, is that school children may face additional risks getting to school early in the morning. Double Daylight Saving time in California, as a chart attached to my statement will show, will make sure that it is light by 7 in the morning on every school day. So Double Daylight Saving Time during the period I have outlined doesn't have the chief disadvantage, or alleged disadvantage, brought up by critics.
Double Daylight Saving Time for California would help save energy in several ways. First, it would mean that homeowners and residents wouldn't need to turn on the lights in their home until it was time to watch West Wing reruns at 9 p.m. It would be light that late. Second, there are a number of factories that have gone on a special schedule, where they try to conclude their business activities by 1 or 2 in the afternoon. With Double Daylight Saving Time, those concluded activities would conclude by the time that chief—we would have the highest demand for Daylight Saving Time. Because under the—we would have the highly sized demand—excuse me—for air conditioning because 2 p.m. under Double Daylight Saving Time is, actually, God's time, noon. And chief air conditioning use begins roughly at 2 p.m., God's time, which would be 4 p.m. under Double Daylight Saving Time, when many factory workers would have already locked up their factories and be on their way home, where, hopefully, they are not turning on the lights when they get there because it is still light outside.
Now, Daylight Saving Time has been shown to reduce crime in the evening, to reduce traffic accidents in the evening. There was one unfortunate student death I am told about in Florida that is attributed to Daylight Saving Time. Let me point out the politics of this, and I hope we rise above the politics. If you are going to change the clocks, this is a huge country. Somewhere it is going to be dark in the morning when it would have been light, and somewhere a reporter is going to take a camera and take a picture of a victim and say that victim would not have been hurt if only you hadn't changed the clocks, and that is a story. You may have 50 or 100 traffic accidents that didn't happen that evening because it was still light while people were going home. You may have 50 robberies, rapes, burglaries that don't occur at 8 p.m. that evening. But how do you take a picture of the traffic accident that didn't occur? We have to be mature about this and get our press to be mature enough about this to focus on statistics rather than individual stories. And it may be difficult to get them to do that. The cheap shots are out there. I guess we could go out there and take a picture of somebody who was victimized by crime in California at 8:30 p.m. tonight, and say, if only we had had more Daylight Saving Time, that wouldn't have happened. But it is much harder.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I should also point out that—and I am not familiar with everything that happened in Florida, but if that accident happened during the winter, it was lighter in Florida during the winter under Daylight Saving Time than it was in Minneapolis if they didn't have Daylight Saving Time. I, personally, find it confusing to live on a round planet, because you have got to deal with both the latitude and the longitude. But to say that a winter death in Florida is attributable to Daylight Saving Time is to say that if you choose to move to Minneapolis, you are endangering your children, and I, frankly, have not seen any warning signs as you cross the Minnesota State border.
But I will say the idea that there will be a problem for students is exemplified by the slogan behind you there ''Where there is no vision, the people perish.'' And that saying may be used in some cheap shot story if there is an early morning accident, and in a big country, there will always be an early morning accident somewhere and evening accidents, both those that occur and those that are avoided.
I have included in my statement estimates of the electricity that we are likely to save, a chart that shows when the sun would rise and set in Los Angeles, and just for comparison, what the current sunrise and sunset times are in Minneapolis, perhaps, the metropolis that is furthest to the north in the 48 contiguous states.
So I do think that at a minimum during a short-term crisis, we ought to give temporary extraordinary powers to the states affected so that they can decide what can do best for their state and deal with this energy crisis. I would commend, also, to the Committee, exploring alternatives on a permanent basis or on a national basis, and perhaps Double Daylight Saving Time or year-round Daylight Saving Time would be helpful to the nation, but that is beyond what I have studied. Thank you.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sherman follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BRAD SHERMAN
Energy Conservation Potential of Extended and Daylight Savings Time
Mr. Chairman, thank you holding this hearing on the energy conservation potential of extended and double daylight saving time. I appreciate you affording me the opportunity to testify on what I believe to be an important tool to address the energy crisis in the West.
We all recognize that the crisis facing California and the other Western states is a complex problem that no single action will resolve. One step that I believe would prove helpful to the West involves an adjustment of the time. History has shown—and I believe that the other panelists today will concur—that energy consumption can be reduced through a variety of adjustments in the standard time.
I have introduced legislation in this Congress which would allow California and other Pacific Time Zone states to adjust their time if the legislature of the state makes a finding that such an adjustment would help alleviate an energy crisis. The bill has 20 bipartisan cosponsors and its language has been incorporated in a bill that Congressman Joe Barton has introduced.
My legislation simply gives these states the authority to adjust their time. Should the bill be enacted, I would suggest to the California legislature that California move to double daylight saving time during the summer months—from the first Sunday in May until the Sunday before Labor Day. This would, in effect, put Los Angeles on Mountain Daylight Time for a three month period during which time demand for electricity is the highest. History has shown that year round daylight saving time can save between 1% and 2% of energy consumption: I believe that taking this additional step during the summer will result in even greater savings.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I would like to briefly describe the legislation that I have introduced as well as my understanding of the historical effects of extended daylight saving time.
H.R. 704—The Emergency Time Adjustment Authorization Act
Last year, the California State Legislature passed Assembly Joint Resolution (AJR) 56 asking Congress to permit California to move immediately to daylight saving time in order to help solve the energy crisis. Congress has yet to act. California State Senator Betty Karnette introduced the resolution and she asked me to introduce legislation at the federal level to allow California to lengthen daylight saving time.
H.R. 704, the Energy Time Adjustment Authorization Act (ETAAA), which I introduced on February 14, 2001, would authorize California and the other Pacific Time Zone states to adjust their time if the legislature of a state finds that an adjustment would help alleviate an energy crisis. If one state makes a finding that an adjustment would lead to energy conservation and adjusts its time, the other states in the time zone could make an adjustment without making a similar finding. The bill extends this authority to the Pacific Time Zone states until December 31, 2003. The Speaker has referred this legislation to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Mr. Chairman, despite the fact that my bill has been referred to another committee, I am hopeful that, as your subcommittee considers the effect of daylight saving time and double daylight saving time, you remember a number of important points about my bill: (1) H.R. 704 does not require California or the other states to make adjustments to their time; (2) it does not mandate what adjustment the states must make; (3) the bill is temporary in nature, to allow California to deal with the crisis at hand; (4) historical and contemporary analyses of the effects of daylight saving time indicate that extended daylight saving time does indeed save significant energy, in addition to other ancillary benefits. In short, it gives a temporary authorization to the California and the other Western states to adjust their time to deal with a very specific problem.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 704 Gives the Authority and the Responsibility to the State Legislatures
The President has indicated that the energy crisis is a state issue which demands a state response. H.R. 704 does not require California or the other states to make adjustments to their time. Rather, the bill authorizes the States to adjust their time if they make a finding that such an adjustment would ''help alleviate the energy crisis.''
H.R. 704 gives the state legislatures a tool needed to address the energy crisis, specifically, the authority to adjust the time in a manner which benefits the state the most. The State legislature is the appropriate body to consult with the transportation authorities, broadcast corporations, school districts and other interested parties in the State regarding the adjustment of time.
There Is No Congressional Mandate for Action
The Energy Time Adjustment Authorization Act authorizes action; it does not require it. The California legislature has asked for this authority, so it is likely that they would use this authorization. By granting the authority without giving the state a mandate, the bill provides California with the tools to ease the burden. The bill opens the doors for action; it does not tell California which door to walk through.
My suggestion to California is double daylight saving time—standard time plus two hours—from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Under this plan, it will be light by 6:52 a.m. during the school year and well before 7:30 a.m. in the August and pre-Labor Day period. Also, the warm summer months are when we will have the greatest electrical shortage.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Authority to Adjust the Time Is Temporary and Specific in Its Rationale
The authority that the bill grants to the states is temporary and its purpose is limited in nature. The bill gives the states the authority to adjust their time until December 31, 2003.
Other Pacific Time Zone States
H.R. 704 gives other Pacific Time Zone states the same authority as California. These states face many of the same electrical shortages as California. Even if they did not, some Pacific Time Zone states may feel the need to keep time with California. I am pleased that Representative Shelley Berkley of Nevada is a co-sponsor of my bill.
Brief History of the Effects of Daylight Saving Time
Mr. Chairman, throughout history, Congress has adjusted daylight saving time to conserve energy in times of crisis. The energy crisis that grips California calls for this unusual, but not unprecedented, step to ease the burden on the California power grid.
When daylight saving time was first enacted by Congress in 1918, its purpose was to conserve resources for the war effort. During World War II, the United States observed daylight savings time year-round from 1942 to 1945 for the same reason. And, in the 1970's, Congress extended daylight saving time in response to various energy crises.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Following the extension of daylight saving time in 1974, Congress directed the Department of Transportation (DOT) to conduct a study on the effects of the extended daylight saving time. The DOT study released in 1975 made a number of conclusions. The following list is not inclusive of the entirety of the report conclusions.
Daylight saving time saves energy. DOT estimates that observing daylight saving time in March and April saved the equivalent in energy of 10,000 barrels of oil each day—totaling 600,000 barrels each year in 1974 and 1975.
Daylight saving time saves lives and prevents traffic injuries. Daylight saving time allows more people to travel home from work and school in the daylight, which is much safer than darkness. And, according to the DOT report, except for the months of November and December, daylight saving time does not increase the morning hazard for those going to school and work.
Daylight saving time prevents crime. Because people get home from work and school earlier and complete more errands and chores in daylight, daylight saving time seems to reduce people's exposure to various crimes, which are more common in darkness than in light.
Daylight Saving Time Saves Energy
Daylight saving time saves energy because it alters the time at which demand for electricity is at its peak. One of the peak demand periods for electricity occurs between 5:00 p.m.–8:00 p.m., when the sun sets and people come home from work. As people come home from work, their first inclination is to turn on a light. If people come home and it is light outside, there is less of an inclination to turn a light on. But pushing the sunset back one hour does not save the energy alone. Energy savings is realized because even with the time adjustment, people tend to go to sleep at the same time under daylight saving time as standard time. And, in the morning, whether it is light out or not, lights are turned on. People get ready for work and school. And, it takes the same amount of time to get ready to go to work or school under daylight saving time as it does under standard time.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Data analyzed by the DOT and the California Energy Commission (CEC) supports the claim. The 1975 DOT report estimated that year-round daylight saving time resulted in approximately 1% reduction in energy consumption.
When I introduced H.R. 704 earlier this year, I contacted the California Energy Commission and asked them to consider the effects of extended daylight saving time and double daylight saving time in the summer. I understand that they will provide written testimony for the record; however, I want to note two point of information that they shared with me when I made my initial inquiry.
According to CEC econometric analysis, daylight saving time would save California about 500 MWh in the spring months with extended daylight saving time.
Results of the CEC study on daylight saving time's ancillary benefits during the spring months are consistent with the 1975 DOT report.
Daylight Saving Time Saves Lives and Prevents Traffic Injuries
Daylight saving time saves lives and prevents traffic injuries, allowing more people to travel home from work and school in the daylight, which is much safer than darkness. And, according to the DOT report, except for the months of November and December, daylight saving time does not increase the morning hazard for those going to school and work.
The 1975 DOT report states that ''after the nation goes on daylight saving time there is one hour more of darkness in the morning and one hour less in the evening.'' The DOT hypothesized that there should be an increase in morning fatal accidents and a decrease in evening fatal accidents. Since there are more fatal events in the evening, daylight saving time should produce a net decrease in the total number of fatal accidents.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
According to the report, as a result of daylight saving time, there was a net reduction of .7% in fatal motor vehicle accidents during the daylight saving time period, March and April 1974, compared to the non-daylight saving time period March and April 1973. It is estimated that 50 lives were saved and 2,000 injuries avoided during this two month period as a result of daylight saving time.
The report found daylight saving time negatively effected the rate of school children fatalities in November and December only. In fact, the report demonstrated that daylight saving time reduced the number of school children fatalities by between 18%–40% in March, April and October 1974.
Daylight Saving Time Prevents Crime
The 1975 DOT study included the results of a study that was conducted on Los Angeles and Washington, DC by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA). While the data on Los Angeles were inconclusive, the Washington, DC data show consistently less violent crimes (–10%––20% decline) for daylight saving time periods when compared with similar periods of standard time. Statistics on other crimes were less significant and less reliable.
Keeping Our Children Safe
Extended daylight saving time proposals are often criticized because in some parts of the country they cause children to wait for school buses in the dark—or at least go to school in the dark. I would like to take a moment to note that under the double daylight saving time proposal that I advocate this would not be the case.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Under the proposal that I advocate, the sun will not rise later in Los Angeles during double daylight saving time periods than it does in Minneapolis, MN during standard time. Simply put: if California were to move to double daylight saving time from the first Sunday in May through the Sunday before Labor Day, the sun would rise at approximately 7:16 a.m. at the latest point in August. During the cold of winter, when Minnesota observes standard time, it is not unusual for the sun to rise at 7:44 a.m. or later.
The following charts illustrate this point further. The first chart describes the average sun rise and sun set times in Los Angeles for year-round Standard Time (ST), year-round Daylight Saving Time (DST) and year-round Double Daylight Saving Time (DDST). Bold indicates the average sun rise and sun set under current law. The average time does not take into consideration the effect of partial DST in April and October. The table treats April and October as being on DST the entire month.
The second chart describes the average sun rise and sun set times in Minneapolis, MN, factoring in daylight saving time as it is observed under current law. As you can see from comparing the charts, if we move California to double daylight saving time in the summer months, the sun will rise earlier than it does at the latest time in Minnesota. Indeed, the sun would rise in Los Angeles under my double daylight saving time proposal earlier than Minnesota's average sun rise in three different months.
73325b.eps
73325a.eps
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Conclusion
Mr. Chairman, the subcommittee will hear testimony today which will—in greater detail than I can address—describe the scientific effects of extending daylight saving time or providing for double daylight saving time in the summer. This issue is important to California because of what is likely to happen in the months ahead: people in my state are going to die this summer as a result of the energy crisis, and I firmly believe that taking a step such as changing the time could save lives.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing and receiving my testimony. If I can be helpful to you on this issue in the future, please do not hesitate to call upon me.
BIOGRAPHY FOR CONGRESSMAN BRAD SHERMAN
Education: Harvard Law School, J.D., 1979 Magna Cum Laude; UCLA, B.A., 1974, Summa Cum Laude
Licenses: Certified Public Accountant (CPA) California; Attorney, California State Bar; Certified by California State Bar as Tax Law Specialist
Public Service: 1991—
Elected to the U.S. House of Representatves in 1996 from California's 24th Congressional District, which stretches from Sherman Oaks to Thousand Oaks.
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Serves on the Committee on Financial Services, and its
Subcommittee on Capital Markets Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises
Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade
Also serves on the Committee on International Relations, and its
Subcommittee on Europe
Subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia
Served on the Budget Committee, 1997. On that Committee, authored the Sherman Amendment to the Budget Resolution providing an additional $700 million for the acquisition of environmentally important lands in FY '98. The Sherman Amendment was included in the Joint Budget Resolution and effectuated by a $699 million appropriation. Sherman also secured $6 million to complete the Backbone Trail through the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.
Strong advocate for fiscal responsibility, a balanced budget, federal aid to education, the interests of working families, strong environmental standards, expansion of national parks, and policies to expand U.S. exports.
Elected to the California State Board of Equalization in 1990, re-elected in 1994. Chairman of the Board 1991 to 1995. Lead the successful fight to repeal the snack tax.
Private Sector Experience: 1974–1991
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Participated as a staff member of a big-six CPA firm in the financial audits of large businesses and governmental entities; provided tax law counsel on multi-million dollar transactions; provided tax and investment advice to entrepreneurs and small businesses; helped represent the Government of the Philippines under President Aquino in a successful effort to seize assets of deposed President Marcos. Instructor, Harvard Law School International Tax Program. Member of the Board of California Common Cause, 1985–1989.
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you very much for your testimony. You mentioned the benefits to the factory worker of Double Daylight Saving Time. In a former life, I ran a homebuilding company, and in the summer, we started our work at 6 a.m. and worked through without lunch until 2 to get in our 8 hours because it was more comfortable to forego lunch and avoid the heat of working after 2. So this is just one of the benefits that would accrue to people who work without air conditioning. And obviously, you build houses without air conditioning.
Let me turn now—the bells have gone off for a 15-minute vote, but we have at least 5 minutes. Let me turn to my Ranking Member for her comments and questions.
The Effect of Daylight Saving Time on School Children
Ms. WOOLSEY. I will just be short because Brad has to go vote, also.
You did acknowledge that Daylight Saving Time could have some negative benefits to schoolchildren. Is it at all reasonable to consider moving the start of the school day? Would that raise more problems than it would solve?
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. SHERMAN. Frankly, I think very few schoolchildren start so early that it would be a problem at all. As I say, Double Daylight Saving Time beginning in May, it would still be lighter in May than it was on a school day in February. So I don't think the Double Daylight Saving Time during the late spring and during the summer would run into this problem at all. But you are absolutely right, every school district needs to adjust its schedule to the needs of parents, students, safety, and everything else. And if you happen to be in an area where due to, perhaps, year-round Daylight Saving Time, which is another proposal, it didn't get light in your community until 7:30, then maybe you don't want to start class until 8:30, and an awful lot of classes don't start until 9 a.m., and then it is not a problem at all.
Mr. EHLERS. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. WOOLSEY. Yes.
Mr. EHLERS. I thank you for yielding.
Just a quick comment on that. There is a growing movement to start schools later on the basis that many children are not getting enough sleep, particularly, in the junior high and senior high years, because they tend to stay up too late the night before. And so there is a movement to start school later, regardless of this. The difficulty, of course, you get into then is another political problem. A lot of parents, where you have two-parent families, they both work. They do not want the kids going to school later. They want to take them to school on their way to work. So it is very difficult to change society, but of all the many decisions we make around this place, and spending billions of dollars for various things, the issues around this will probably be far more emotional and better understood by most citizens than anything else we do.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I yield back.
Ms. WOOLSEY. All right, and I yield back, too.
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you. I saw an analytical analysis of probable schoolchildren deaths, and that indicated that Double Daylight Saving Time would produce fewer deaths, and that was simply because in the morning, drivers are rested with probably little alcohol in their blood. It is a more condensed rush hour than in the afternoon, and their judgment was that it would save lives rather than put lives at risk.
Mr. SHERMAN. I think if you focus on both the morning, where you are giving up an hour of daylight, hopefully, before people are out on the street anyway; but if you weigh that with the tremendous savings you have in accidents and crime in the evening, that on balance, either proposal, year-round or double in the summer, will save lives and reduce accidents.
Chairman BARTLETT. Or both. You can have year-round Daylight Saving Time, and then Double Daylight Saving Time in the summer, and so there are several different options to look at.
Mr. SHERMAN. Yes.
Chairman BARTLETT. Mr. Wu, do you have an observation or question?
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think that my question for Congressman Sherman is, really, based on my personal experience with year-round Daylight Saving Time during the energy crunch of 1973-75. And this is, admittedly, based on the biorhythms and schedules of an early stage college student at the time. But it is my distinct impression that I experienced a whole lot more darkness at that time because I was getting up in the dark and finishing up in the dark. Is it correct that, analytically, the accident rates and death rates are actually lower with year-round Daylight Saving Time as opposed to the system that we have right now, as the Chairman indicated just a moment ago?
Mr. SHERMAN. The studies I have cited in my statement indicate that, yes. You seem to have been working extraordinary hours during those student years.
Mr. Wu. I was misguided in the hard work direction, I think, in my youth.
Mr. SHERMAN. Perhaps we would need the experience of someone who lived during that period and led a more typical life to evaluate the effects.
Mr. Wu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman BARTLETT. Dr. Ehlers, do you have other comments before we recess?
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. EHLERS. No, Mr. Chairman. In view of the fact that we have a vote on, I will withhold any further questions or comments.
Chairman BARTLETT. Well, let me thank our witness. Thank you very much for your foresight in proposing this legislation and thank you very much for your testimony today.
And we will be in recess now until after the vote.
Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you for holding these hearings.
[Recess]
Chairman BARTLETT. Let me reconvene our hearing and welcome our second panel. And we have just had good news for you, maybe bad news for us. There will be no votes until 5:00, and then at 5:00, we will learn whether we are here all weekend or not. But at least our hearing will not be further interrupted by votes.
We welcome Ms. Linda Lawson, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation; Mr. James Benfield of Bracy Williams and Company. Thank you very much for coming to testify. Ms. Lawson?
Oh, let me note that, without objection, your written testimony will be included in the record, and we would encourage you to limit your verbal remarks to 5 minutes, with the assurance there will be more than enough time during the question and answer period that follows to amplify anything that you wish to amplify. Thank you very much. You may begin.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
STATEMENTS OF LINDA LAWSON, ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POLICY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES C. BENFIELD, BRACY WILLIAMS & COMPANY
Ms. LAWSON. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am pleased to appear before you to discuss the energy conservation potential of Daylight Saving Time.
My testimony concerns U.S. Department of Transportation studies of extending Daylight Saving Time from the last Sunday in April to the first Sunday in March. We did not look at extending Daylight Saving Time beyond this period or at Double Daylight Saving Time. I want to note that these studies are over 25 years old and were based on a limited sample. Congress captured many of the benefits identified in our studies in the legislative changes enacted in 1986. There have been changes in lifestyle and commerce since we completed our studies.
Time observance affects almost every aspect of life. Any proposed time change will have consequences beyond impacts on energy conservation. Following the use of Daylight Saving Time during the World War I and II, states and local jurisdictions were free to begin and end Daylight Saving Time on any dates they chose. This resulted in a crazy quilt system of observance. For example, 1 year in the Twin Cities, St. Paul, Minnesota observed Daylight Saving Time while Minneapolis did not.
Because of the widespread confusion and detrimental impact on commerce, Congress adopted the Uniform Time Act of 1966. The Act provided national uniformity for the beginning and ending dates of Daylight Saving Time and an opt-out provision for any state that does not want to observe. In response to the oil embargo in the early 1970's, Congress legislated that the U.S. observe Daylight Saving Time from January to October 1974 and from February to October in 1975. Congress also directed DOT to study the effect of extending Daylight Saving Time to the first Sunday in March. After a decade of discussions and Congressional hearings in 1986, Congress changed the beginning date of Daylight Saving Time from the last Sunday in April to the first Sunday in April.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Let me briefly summarize the most important findings of our studies. We concluded that Daylight Saving Time might save—might result in electricity savings of 1 percent in March and April. These savings were calculated from Federal Power Commission data for only four Daylight Saving Time transitions. Lack of data precluded estimation of net energy savings.
We were able to identify a .7 percent reduction in traffic fatalities due to Daylight Saving Time in March and April 1974, resulting in 50 lives saved. There was widespread public concern over the safety of children traveling to schools in dark mornings. 1974 public opinion polls found that 38 percent of respondents expressed concern for school age children safety during year-round Daylight Saving Time compared to only 7 percent concerned in March and April.
From January to April 1974, the Department studies found that school age children were not subject to greater involvement in fatal accidents than the general population at any period of the day. However, a 1976 National Bureau of Standards study concluded that morning school age children fatalities increased during January and February. Therefore, the Department took the position that Daylight Saving Time in January and February might increase school age fatalities in the morning.
The DOT studies found a reduction in violent crimes of 10 to 13 percent in Washington, D.C. Popularity of extended Daylight Saving Time varied widely among different age groups and geographic locations. Most people oppose Daylight Saving Time in winter; especially, in January and February, because it resulted in late sunrises. In addition to parents' concerns about the increased risk to school age children, parents of young children found it difficult during the transitional periods to get their children to sleep. Members of some religious faiths objected because their observances were tied to sunrise and sunset. Farmers preferred earlier sunrises.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Based on historic experience, the Department believes that it is critical to have national uniformity for Daylight Saving Time observance. Under the current system, an area either observes Daylight Saving Time on the federally mandated dates or stays on Standard Time year-round. Clear and consistent time observance is crucial for maintaining transportation schedules. It is also critical for ensuring safety when, for example, the same railroad tracks are used for trains heading in both directions. Consistency has become more important over the years with globalization, just in time delivery, and the widespread use of computer programs with embedded Daylight Saving Time changeover dates. Daylight Saving Time observance has important consequences in many contacts and agreements.
Before making changes to Daylight Saving Time, we suggest that further study and consultation with affected constituencies is needed. Because of the impacts on transportation scheduling and telecommunication, we would recommend that any change be publicized in advance with public notice both in the U.S. and worldwide.
This concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any questions that you would have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Lawson follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LINDA L. LAWSON
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the energy conservation potential of daylight saving time.
Part of my testimony today concerns U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) studies of the effect of extending daylight saving time. I want to note that these studies are over 25 years old and were limited in scope. Congress captured many of the benefits identified in our studies in the legislative changes to daylight saving time enacted in 1986. There have been dramatic changes in lifestyle and commerce since we completed our studies that raise serious questions about extrapolating conclusions from our studies into today's world.
Time observance affects almost every aspect of life and any proposed time change will have many consequences beyond any impacts on energy conservation. Any change needs to be carefully and fully considered at a national level after consultation with all the affected constituencies. Because of the impacts on transportation scheduling and telecommunications, any change needs to be made well in advance with plenty of public notice both in the U.S. and worldwide. Before taking any legislative action, we suggest that further study and consultation with affected groups is needed.
Current Statutory Requirements
The Uniform Time Act, as amended, gives the Secretary of Transportation two different responsibilities concerning time observance. First, the Secretary has authority to change a time zone boundary if he or she finds that such a change would ''suit the convenience of commerce.'' Under DOT procedures, the Department only begins a time zone change rulemaking proceeding upon the request of a State or local jurisdiction. Normally, DOT holds one or more hearings in the area and provides 60 days for the public to comment in writing to the docket.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Second, the Secretary has responsibility to make sure that states that choose to observe daylight saving time begin and end on the Congressionally-mandated dates, which are the first Sunday in April to the last Sunday in October. A State may, however, exempt itself from daylight saving time observance and observe standard time year-round. If a State is in two time zones, it may observe daylight saving time in the portion of the state that is in one time zone and standard time in the other portion of the state. Currently, Arizona, Hawaii, the Eastern Time Zone portion of Indiana, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam do not observe daylight saving time.
There are nine time zones in the United States, and four in the contiguous 48 States. When a State observes daylight saving time, it is the equivalent of moving one time zone to the east.
History of DST
The United States observed Daylight Saving Time during World War I, and year-round daylight saving time during World War II. In the post war periods, States and local jurisdictions were free to observe, or not observe, daylight saving time, beginning and ending on any dates they chose. During this period, there was a ''crazy quilt'' system of observance in which you could drive less than 100 miles and change back and forth in time observance many times.
Because of the widespread confusion and detrimental impacts on commerce, Congress adopted the Uniform Time Act of 1966. The Act provided national uniformity for the beginning and ending dates of daylight saving time, an ''opt-out'' provision for any State that does not want to observe, and an enforcement mechanism whereby DOT may go into Federal District Court to obtain an injunction against any jurisdiction not observing the correct time.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In response to the oil embargo in the early 1970s, Congress enacted the Emergency Daylight Saving Time Energy Conservation Act of 1973. As a result, in 1974, virtually all of the U.S. observed daylight saving time from January 6 to October 27, and in 1975, from February 23 to October 26.
Extended daylight saving time had very different impacts in different parts of the country. Its popularity also varied widely among different age groups and geographic locations. Most people opposed daylight saving time in winter, especially in January and February because it resulted in very late sunrises. Many parents were concerned about their children waiting for morning school buses in the dark as a result of any extension of daylight saving time. Others opposing daylight saving time included parents of young children who found it difficult during the transitional periods to get their children to sleep; members of some religious faiths, whose observances are tied to sunrise and sunset; and farmers.
In response to a Congressional request in the early 1970s, DOT prepared several comprehensive studies of the effect of extending daylight saving time from the last Sunday in April to the first Sunday in March. As I will discuss in a moment, the studies found that extending daylight saving time into March would provide modest energy savings, reduce traffic fatalities, reduce crime and provide afternoon light for recreation and chores.
After a decade of discussions and Congressional hearings, the most recent change to national daylight saving time observance occurred in 1986 when Congress changed the beginning date of daylight saving time from the last Sunday in April to the first Sunday in April.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
To put this in an international perspective, most other countries in the world that are not located near the equator observe daylight saving time. Countries that are close to the equator do not have large seasonal variations in daylight and generally have little need for daylight saving time. Most of the Canadian provinces and Mexico begin and end daylight saving time on the same dates as the U.S. The European Union begins daylight saving time a week earlier on the last Sunday in March and ends at the same time as the United States.
Findings of the DOT Studies
Let me now briefly summarize the technical findings regarding daylight saving time benefits. The studies are over twenty-five years old and have not been updated.
Energy Savings
Our 1975 study concluded that daylight saving time might result in electricity savings of 1 percent in March and April, equivalent to roughly 100,000 barrels of oil daily over the two months. These savings were calculated from Federal Power Commission data for only four daylight saving time transitions—in the winter, spring and fall of the 1974–1975 experiment. Due to the limited data sample, the findings were judged ''probable'', rather than conclusive. Theoretical studies of home heating fuel consumption identified small savings due to daylight saving time. No potential increases in travel demand and gasoline use due to daylight savings time were identified at that time. The lack of actual data precluded an estimation of net daylight saving time energy savings.
Traffic Fatalities
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
With respect to traffic fatalities, we were able to identify a 0.7 percent reduction due to daylight saving time in March and April 1974 compared to the comparable months in 1973 when we were under standard time. At the time, DOT analysts believed that these estimates were conservative and that their calculations understated the real reduction due to daylight saving time, which they judged to be on the order of 1.5 percent to 2 percent.
School-Age Children Safety
Following the first-year's experiment with year-round daylight saving time in 1974, we recommended that only March and April be included in the second year's experiment because of the public's concern over the safety of children traveling to school in dark mornings. Results of public opinion polls conducted in 1974 showed that 38 percent of respondents expressed concern for school-age children's safety during year-round daylight saving time compared to 7 percent of respondents concerned with the issue during the 1975 March-April experiment.
Our final study contained results of both the Department of Transportation and the National Safety Council studies indicating that for the January-April 1974 period (i.e., under daylight saving time), school-age children were not subject to greater involvement in fatal accidents than the general population at any period of the day. A 1976 study of school age fatalities performed by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) used the same database as the Department of Transportation, but analyzed only a subset of the data and employed different statistical techniques. The National Bureau of Standards concluded that morning school-age children fatalities increased in January and February 1974 when daylight saving time was being observed, compared to the same period in 1973 when daylight saving time was not observed. No comparable increase in morning fatalities, however, was found for the March and April period. While the increase was statistically significant, the National Bureau of Standards judged it impossible to attribute it to daylight saving time or to some other factor (such as weather) or combination of factors. Because of the Bureau's findings, the Department subsequently took the position that daylight saving time in January or February might possibly increase school age fatalities in the morning.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Crime
With respect to the incidence of crime, study of daylight saving time impacts on the incidence of crime revealed reductions in violent crimes of 10 to 13 percent in Washington, D.C. throughout a 3-year period. Due to time constraints, only data for Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles were obtained for analyses. The data for Los Angeles were not sufficiently detailed to reveal a daylight saving time effect.
Changes in School Hours
The Department of Health, Education and Welfare advised that only a small number of schools in two Midwest and Western States adjusted school hours during March and April 1975 as a consequence of daylight saving time.
Other Effects
There were no measurable effects of daylight saving time reported by Federal agencies in the areas of agriculture, labor, and Federal park and recreational activities. Neither were there any reported effects on domestic or international commerce, with the exception of opposition to year-round daylight saving time by the construction industry, which favors an April through October period.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) reported that daylight saving time caused audience losses of 2.5 percent of AM daytime radio stations from January through April 1974 and 1.5 percent during March and April 1975. Since the Commission's primary concern was daylight saving time's curtailment of AM morning radio service to listeners in certain areas of the country served by approximately 500 daytime stations operating on U.S., Canadian and Mexican clear channels, it supported the traditional six-month daylight saving time system or the enactment of specific provisions enabling the FCC to take remedial steps as appropriate.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
As part of the 1970s studies, the Governors of the twenty-five States bordering or divided by time zone boundaries were asked whether these boundaries should be changed. It is significant that even though these States experience the latest in daylight saving time sunrises, the Governors, with one exception, favored retaining the present time zone boundaries. The exception advocated having only two continental time zones. Based on this survey, the Department did not recommend any change in the existing time zone boundaries.
Potential Impacts of a Change in Observance
There are a number of possible different daylight saving time observances. Another possibility is to move whole time zone boundaries to the west, which, in effect, would give those, changed areas year-round daylight saving time. Each has benefits and drawbacks.
There are a number of potential anomalies to some of the ideas being considered. Arizona currently does not observe daylight saving time. If California, or all of the Pacific Time Zone states, observes ''double daylight saving time'' while Arizona remained on Mountain Standard Time, those states would be one hour earlier than Arizona. A portion of Idaho is in the Pacific Time Zone, but is not covered by pending legislation that would allow west coast states to make whatever changes to time observance they deem necessary. Finally, a small portion of Oregon is in the Mountain Time Zone.
Based on historic experience, the Department believes that it is critical to have national uniformity for daylight saving time observance to prevent confusion and to facilitate commerce and communications. Under the current system, an area either observes daylight saving time on the federally-mandated dates or stays on standard time year-round. Before the Uniform Time Act of 1966, one could never be sure, especially in advance, what dates a jurisdiction might be observing. Clear and consistent time observance is crucial for maintaining bus, train, and airline schedules. In addition, consistent time schedules and observance are critical in assuring railroad safety because the same tracks often are used for trains heading in both directions. Consistency has become more important over the years with globalization, ''just in time'' delivery, and the widespread use of computer programs with embedded daylight saving time changeover dates.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Any change requires adequate lead-time and notice to accommodate transportation, telecommunications, and other schedules. Time observance also has important consequences in many contracts and agreements. Finally, we need to be mindful of impacts on international trade and commerce.
Before making changes to daylight saving time, we urge the Congress to consider the costs and benefits of such changes. As I have noted, DOT's studies are over 25 years old. New studies must consider impacts on uniformity, impacts on coordination of transportation and commerce, impacts on transportation safety, and net energy impacts. The studies must consider the impact of changes on electrical lighting use, heating energy use, air conditioning use, and transportation energy use, including the potential for increased travel demand resulting from more evening daylight and increased gasoline use.
This concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
BIOGRAPHY FOR LINDA L. LAWSON
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy; Director, Office of Transportation Policy Development
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 10305, Washington, DC 20590
Experience:
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
1998–2001 Director, Office of Transportation Policy Development, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation
1988–1998 Senior Policy Analyst, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation
1978–1988 Director, Office of Management and Data Systems, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation
1968–1973 Computer Programmer, Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce
Education:
1976 BA, George Washington University
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you very much. Mr. Benfield?
STATEMENT OF JAMES C. BENFIELD, BRACY WILLIAMS & COMPANY
Mr. BENFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Jim Benfield, and I am a partner with Bracy Williams and Company. In 1984, I founded the Daylight Saving Time Coalition, which led the successful effort to move the starting date of DST to the beginning of April. However, I am speaking today as a private individual.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
During our 2-year campaign, we never used the argument that more DST would save energy. The energy savings, it was said, would result from the reduced use of electric lights because of the delayed sunset.
Part of the reason Arizona chooses not to observe DST is that many people go outdoors after sunset, when it is cooler. Observing DST in Arizona could encourage people to remain indoors longer and, perhaps, use more air conditioning.
A way to learn the benefits of year-round DST might be to study the energy consumption of counties on both sides of the same time zone boundary. Or compare the last week of March to the first week of April in regions where the weather conditions are very similar during that period.
I want to make a few broad observations. First, you cannot please everyone by changing DST. There are only so many hours of daylight. Some folks prefer it in the morning and some in the evening.
Second, most people do prefer to have their daylight in the evening, as long as they don't have to wake up in pitch darkness. If you can see the sunrise sneaking up, that is fine, but to wake up in total darkness is not popular.
Third, we should try to keep time relationships consistent with other parts of the country and the world. And I associate my remarks with yours. In that context, earlier this year there was a major effort in Indiana to start to observe DST, not to achieve more evening daylight, but to harmonize Indiana's clocks with the rest of the nation's.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Let us look first at the idea of year-round DST. Daylight Saving Time is used to alter our daily schedules by tricking ourselves every spring into keeping the same clock schedule, but altering that schedule's relationship to the sun. That is obvious. We are diurnal creatures, which means we are active during the daylight hours. To suggest that we can trick our daily schedules 12 months a year belies logic. We would move our schedules, almost unconsciously and slowly, back to the natural rhythms of the sun, and thus, over the long-term, defeat the intended purpose of Daylight Saving Time.
Many people hated DST during the Arab oil embargo in 1974 and 1975, and I expect it would be equally unpopular again. Early January sunrises in Marquette, Michigan, Bismarck, Boise, Louisville, and Atlanta would occur after 8:40 a.m. and as late as 9:30 in Marquette.
Remember, millions of Americans already observe year-round DST because they have chosen to live in the wrong time zone. Can we see the map up there? We have got this facing the camera here. The orange areas of this map show how the time zone boundaries have been drawn to give these people lots of evening daylight. Year-round DST would face strong opposition from these areas.
School children safety would be enhanced—and I emphasize enhanced—with more DST, and I would welcome a question to expand on that point.
What about street crime? Because people feel safer on the streets with more daylight, they would feel more safe. And because more leisure time is spent outdoors in the evening than in the morning, we might see a slight reduction in street crime.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Most farmers' work days are controlled by daylight. DST tends to delay the start or end of their work days by 1 hour, often making it more difficult to hold a second job in the evening.
What about Double Daylight Saving Time from, let us say, Memorial Day to Labor Day? We would have to change our clocks four times a year with the little intendant jet lag that we all experience, and I think it would be very unpopular.
I want to emphasize that Congress must retain all decision-making authority regarding the start and end dates of DST. State governments should retain only the authority to observe or not to observe DST, as stipulated in the Uniform Time Act, once again, associating my views with the Department's.
Finally, what about permanently merging the Pacific Time Zone into Mountain Time Zone? This, actually, kind of makes sense. This would, effectively, put the Pacific Coast on permanent DST. And this has, I think, real possibilities. This new zone, for clarity, should be called the Western Time Zone.
This change would facilitate commerce and communication in such areas as airline schedules, trading on the financial markets in New York, live television events such as Monday Night Football. It would mitigate the reporting of Presidential elections on the east coast, and it would help tourism. And the best part is it would eliminate almost 1,000 miles of time-line boundaries, which are always inconvenient if you live near them.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In summary, year-round DST should not be observed unless the energy savings can be clearly proven to the public. Even if they can be proven, as is the case with 55 mile-an-hour speed limits, year-round DST will be unpopular in many regions of the country, particularly, in the western portions of each zone.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Benfield follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES C. BENFIELD
My name is Jim Benfield. I am a partner with Bracy Williams & Company. In 1984, I founded the Daylight Saving Time Coalition, which led the successful effort to move the starting date of DST from the last Sunday in April to the first Sunday in April. We have observed that change since 1987. I am speaking today, however, as a private individual.
I am not here to advocate for or against any of the changes in DST that have been proposed. Rather, I want to identify some of the unintended consequences that will result from changing DST, some of which deserve further study before any action is taken. Some of the unintended consequences are positive, some negative and some neutral.
During our two year campaign to extend DST, we never used the argument that more DST would save energy because, in part, April is not a high-demand period for electricity. The energy savings, it was said, would result from the reduced use of electrical lighting because of the delayed sunset. Most experts will tell you, however, that home heating and cooling, refrigeration and water heaters consume far more energy than illumination.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
A potential methodology to learn the benefits of year round DST is to study the energy consumption of counties on both sides of the same time zone boundary. For example, northwest Indiana, western Kansas, central Idaho/Oregon, Arizona/California. Or compare the last week of March to the first week of April in regions where the weather conditions were very similar during that period.
Part of the reason Arizona chooses not to observe DST is that many people go outdoors after sunset, when it's cooler. Observing DST in Arizona would encourage people to remain indoors longer—and, perhaps, use more air conditioning.
My purpose today is to focus on the unintended consequences of extending or doubling DST. However, I want to begin by making few broad generalizations. First, you cannot please everyone by changing DST. There are only so many hours of daylight. Some folks like it in the morning—like joggers; and some like it in the evening—like softball players.
Second, most people prefer to have their daylight in the evening, as long as they don't have to wake up in pitch darkness. Should you doubt this, simply look at the theoretical time zone boundaries, which lie 7b degrees to the east and west of the meridian used for each zone. That would be 75 W. (Philadelphia), 90 W. (St. Louis/New Orleans), 105 W. (Denver) and 120 W. (California/Nevada border). Millions of Americans, through local action (not Congressional), choose to live in a more easterly time zone permanently because they like afternoon daylight. Most of Indiana observes Central Daylight Time year round. But calling it that would be illegal under the Uniform Time Act of 1966. So Indiana moved itself into the Eastern Zone, then opted not to observe DST. Clever.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Third, if we're going to tinker with our clocks, we should try to keep time relationships constant with other parts of the country—and the world. There is now a strong movement in Indiana to observe DST, because Hoosiers are tired have having the time zone boundaries bounce back and forth between the Illinois and the Ohio borders, tired of watching Monday Night Football at different hours, and tired of having their schedules dictated by out-of-state time schedules—airlines, New York Stock Exchange hours, live television events, etc. See www.hoosierdaylight.com.
YEAR ROUND DST FOR THE WHOLE NATION
Daylight saving time is used to alter our daily schedules by tricking ourselves every spring into keeping the same clock schedule, but altering that schedule's relationship to the sun. We are diurnal creatures (as opposed to nocturnal), which means we are active during the daylight hours. To suggest that we can ''trick'' our daily schedules 12 months a year belies logic. We will move our schedules, almost unconsciously, back to the natural rhythms of the sun.
Many people hated extended DST during the Arab oil embargo when it was observed from January 6 to October 27, 1974, and from February 23 to October 26, 1975. Most people can handle getting up at dawn, but not in total darkness. Here are sunrise times under DST as they would occur during the first week in January, not on December 21, the winter solstice. Year round DST would be very unpopular.
73325c.eps
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
School Children Safety. Year round DST could save lives. The morning rush hour is shorter than the afternoon rush hour. Children and traffic follow a highly regimented routine in the morning. Drivers are rested.
By contrast, in the afternoon, many children are riding bicycles and enjoying unsupervised outdoor play. More drivers will have alcohol in their bloodstream in the afternoon than in the morning. The rush hour is longer and more irregular in the afternoon. And drivers are tired and in a hurry to get home. Fortunately, sun light improves the vision of these tired drivers.
Here is the problem. If a child is killed in the morning hours, there will be finger pointing at the bus driver, the school principal, the superintendent and at YOU for having voted for this change.
However, the fatal accident that is avoided because of more afternoon daylight will never be reported. The child whose life is saved because a driver slammed on the brakes in the nick of time will never see his photo in the news. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety said in a 1993 report that about 200 lives could be saved annually if we observed year round DST—mostly pedestrians.
Street crime. People feel safer on the streets with more daylight. Because more leisure time is spent outdoors in the evening than in the morning, we might see a slight reduction in street crime. People will have more peace of mind taking evening walks.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Daytime AM Radio Broadcasting. Morning sign-on for daytime AM radio broadcasters will be delayed by one hour. This will hurt advertising revenue during drive-time in many parts of the country, particularly during the Christmas season. At a minimum, Congress should exempt the daytimers from having to delay sign-on for the additional hour caused by extending DST. However, the potential mixing of pre-sunrise radio signals is controlled by the laws of nature, not by Congress.
Farmers. Most farmers' work days are controlled by daylight. DST tends to delay the start or the end of their work days by one hour, often making it more difficult to go to meetings in the evening or hold a second job in town to make ends meet. Many farmers living in the western reaches of the Central Time Zone (ND, SD, NE, KS, OK and TX) prefer to live in the ''wrong'' time zone and enjoy de facto year round DST. If they preferred early sunrises, the time zone boundary between Central and Mountain Time could be moved east by administrative action. These farmers could be expected to be strong opponents of either double DST or year round DST.
Dairymen dislike DST because the change between DST and standard time causes disruptions in milking schedules. Some dairymen change milking schedules by five-minute increments over a two week period in April and October.
DOUBLE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME
(Some people have suggested a second hour of DST from Memorial Day weekend to the Labor Day weekend.) The worst part of DST is changing clocks. It is disruptive to our bio-rhythms, and many people experience a form of jet lag for a week or more following the change in clock time. Under double DST, people would experience this jet lag four times a year. Many people find changing video tape players, automobile and computer clocks, stove clocks, and even digital wrist watches to be very difficult. For the visually impaired, changing ''talking'' wrist watches is virtually impossible.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Northern-tier states have enough seasonal variation in sunrises to theoretically justify double DST, but opposition would be strong in southern states.
Congress must retain all decision-making authority regarding the start and end dates of DST. State governments should retain only the authority to observe or not to observe DST, as stipulated in the Uniform Time Act of 1966. The underlying reason for passage of the Uniform Time Act was to eliminate different start and end dates for DST. Local option double-DST would be a disaster. Interstate and international communications, not to mention air travel, live television schedules and all kinds of weird inconveniences would crop up. If this committee is serious about considering this option, in-depth studies and extensive hearings need to be held.
Indiana/Arizona. If Congress should approve double DST, Indiana and Arizona should be forced to observe single DST because a two-hour time zone border would result along eastern and northern Indiana as well as between Arizona and New Mexico.
PERMANENT PACIFIC DST + MORE DST FROM APRIL TO OCTOBER
Moving the Pacific Time Zone into the Mountain Time Zone would effectively put the Pacific coast on permanent DST. This would have some positive benefits.
There is precedent for this action. Indiana effectively gave itself permanent DST by moving from the Central Zone into the Eastern Zone.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Nomenclature. This new zone, for clarity, should be called the Western Time Zone. Nevada must join California, or be one hour behind both Utah and California, which would be very strange.
Pedestrian Safety and Crime. Same benefits as discussed previously.
Stock Markets. Brokers who now have to begin work when the New York Stock Exchange opens at 6:30 Pacific Time would get an extra hour of sleep, but they would have to work an hour later in the afternoon. Child care arrangements would have to be altered.
Airline Travel. The apparent clock time of a non-stop flight from Washington to Los Angeles would be three hours instead of two, while the return flight would be seven hours instead of eight. Airlines would have to modify arrival times to comply with late night noise abatement programs.
Live Sports. Monday Night Football would air from 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. in the far western states instead of the current 6:00 to 9:00 p.m.
Tourism. Generally, vacationers prefer their daylight in the evening rather than in the morning. This would help tourism in California.
Visually Impaired. People who suffer from retinitis pigmentosa and other retinal degenerative diseases (''night blindness'') likely would welcome this change.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Voting. During Presidential elections, early reporting of election results on the East Coast would have less of an impact on the West Coast because of the two-hour time differential between coasts.
Arizona Anomaly. California and Arizona would enjoy the same time for five months during the winter, but California would spring AHEAD of Arizona for the seven summer months.
Let's be clear about this. When it is 2:00 p.m. in Los Angeles in the summer under ''Western Daylight Time'' (WDT), it will be 2:00 p.m. Western Daylight Time in Denver (WDT) and 1:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time (MST) in Phoenix. Arizona would be the only state observing Mountain Time.
If the other three states now in the Pacific Zone join California and Nevada in the new Western Zone, this would facilitate communication. In particular, all of Idaho and all of Oregon would observe the same time. Currently, Oregon and Idaho have portions of their states in both Mountain and Pacific time zones.
SUMMARY
Year round DST should not be observed unless the energy savings can be clearly proven to the public. Even if they can be proven (as is the case with 55 mph speed limits), year round DST will be unpopular in many regions of the country, particularly in the western portions of each zone.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
More DST likely would save lives on the nation's highways—mostly pedestrians, according to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. In addition, the fear of street crime could be reduced in urban settings.
The option of moving the Pacific Time Zone into the Mountain Time Zone would permanently reduce the number of zones observed in the continental United States. Initially, the public would take time to adjust, but in the long term, this action could prove quite popular with many people. This change should not be done under the belief that it necessarily will save energy, however.
Prior to 1883, we observed about 55 times zones! We reduced the number to four by law in 1918. Merging the Pacific Zone into a new Western Zone (same as Mountain Time) would result in three zones.
China, which spans the distance of five time zones, and India, which spans the distance of three time zones, both observe a single time.
NON-ENERGY CONSIDERATION FOR MORE DST
Start DST on the last Sunday in March. The starting date for DST should be moved to the third Sunday in March, which would harmonize the observance of DST in the United States with the starting date of DST in western Europe. Because the last Sunday in March falls after the vernal equinox, the mornings would still be lighter than those observed under DST during late September and October.
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The provinces of Canada likely would follow our lead on DST, as they did in 1986 following our decision to observe DST in April. DST decisions are made at the provincial level in Canada. Mexico likely would adjust its schedule also, even though latitudes that far south do not justify DST, and the time zones in Mexico are skewed very far to the west, giving most Mexican states a de facto DST, already.
73325d.eps
The views expressed in this testimony are those of James C. Benfield and do not necessarily represent the views of the associations listed here.
BIOGRAPHY FOR JAMES C. BENFIELD
1982–present Founding partner, Bracy Williams & Company
1984–1986 Administered and lobbied on behalf of the Daylight Saving Time Coalition. Primary funding for the coalition was provided by The Clorox Company (parent of Kingsford Charcoal) and 7-Eleven Corporation (formerly The Southland Corporation).
Registered Lobbyist
The Business Alliance for International Economic Development (supporting increased foreign assistance)
The Campaign for Home Energy Assistance (supporting LIHEAP)
The Coin Coalition (supports broad circulation of the new $1 coin)
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In September 2000, I provided technical background used for the movement to bring daylight saving time to Indiana. I did not lobby members of the U.S. Congress or the Indiana legislature on this issue.
I have received no federal grant or contract that is relevant to this testimony.
James C. Benfield, Bracy Williams & Company, 601 13th Street, NW, Suite 900-South, Washington, DC 20005; 202–783–5594; jcbenfield@aol.com
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you both for your testimony. Let me turn now to our Ranking Member, Ms. Woolsey.
The Effect of Daylight Saving Time on School Children
Ms. WOOLSEY. I am more confused than I was when we started.
I would like to give you the opportunity, Mr. Benfield, to expand on child safety and Daylight Saving Time.
Mr. BENFIELD. Thank you very much. One of the positive events is that it could save lives. The morning rush hour is shorter than the afternoon rush hour. Children and traffic follow a highly regimented routine in the morning and drivers are rested. Contrast that with the afternoon. Many children are riding bicycles and enjoying unsupervised outdoor play. More drivers will have alcohol in their bloodstream, the rush hour is long and more irregular in the afternoon, and drivers are tired and in a hurry to get home. Now, fortunately, sunlight improves the vision of these tired drivers. So if you can choose, where should we—how can we reduce these accidents, you would choose to put sunlight in the afternoon.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Here is the problem, and Congressman Sherman hit it right on the head. If a child is killed in the morning hours, there will be all kinds of finger-pointing, at the bus driver, at the school principal, at the superintendent, and at you for having voted for this change. However, the fatal accident that is avoided because of more afternoon daylight, it will never be reported. The child whose life is saved because a driver slammed on the brakes in the nick of time will never see his photo in the news. And even with all this education, I encounter people who are afraid to fly, and they like to drive a car—''because I just don't feel safe in an airplane''. You can show them all the statistics in the world, and at the end of the day, they are going to get in their car and drive because they just don't like to fly—and I think you will experience the same type of thing that parents will object to the dark mornings and they will petition their school boards to change the start dates of schools. And that is what I was talking about. You can change the clocks, but there will be this gradual push to get it back to the way it was before.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Ms. Lawson, do you have any comments on child safety beyond what you have already said?
Ms. LAWSON. I really don't have any additional comments.
Estimating the Effects of Double Daylight Saving Time
Ms. WOOLSEY. You know, I have done a very unscientific survey in my district by just asking everybody I know, what would you think of Double Daylight Saving Time? And every single answer has been not what they think of it but what they think other people will think of it. Well, yeah, that would be all right, but you will hear what the opposition will be. So I found that very curious. Of course, I am in California, and we are having an energy crisis, and I came at it from a way to save energy.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
How are we going to find out how much energy this could save, because that is what it has got to be based on if we are going to, you know, argue the benefits, we have got to know what those benefits are. And your data, Ms. Lawson, is too old?
Ms. LAWSON. I would say it is very old and it was also for a very limited time. We only looked at four transitional dates. I would suggest that my colleagues at the Department of Energy might be able to provide more information on this.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Okay. Thank you. And Mr. Benfield is going to show us something.
Mr. BENFIELD. This is what I meant in my testimony when I said compare counties. One might take a county—you wouldn't want to pick a state border, because they might be served by a different energy company, but let us take these four counties in Kansas. You might look at these counties in the white area and these counties in the orange. These people here have almost an hour more daylight every evening, so one would expect to see an energy saving in these households, but not in these households.
Up here in Oregon, you have a huge county in Oregon that is in Mountain Time. Maybe you could compare these counties to this county. They are cheek to jowl, they are served by the same energy company, and so if there are energy savings, we ought to be able to detect it here, and here, maybe in an industrial area up in Indiana versus a Chicago area, you would see people would be saving more energy than these.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. WOOLSEY. Just as it is right now?
Mr. BENFIELD. Yes.
Ms. WOOLSEY. I mean, using—not changing anything.
Mr. BENFIELD. You don't have to change anything, because there is an hour difference in sunsets between these two points—maybe about 58 minutes or 55 minutes, but very close to an hour difference. So if you can detect energy savings, go for it. Personally, I will be very, very surprised if you do. But that would be a mechanism.
The other would be something that we actually did when we looked at economic benefits. I remember the fast food industry, Hardees, looked at the first week of May versus the last week of April, Standard Time versus Daylight Saving Time, and they were blown away when they saw the difference. They saw an increase in sales of $880 per store per week on the last week of Standard versus first week of Daylight Saving Time, and as a result, McDonalds and a lot of those organizations became extremely active in our effort to pick up April. I was able to get both Idaho senators to vote for Daylight Saving Time on the basis of selling more French fries because they supply potatoes.
So it is kind of humorous and you can laugh at it, but it shows that I was able to get two votes from Idaho based on French fries and connected it to Daylight Saving Time. And if you can see the economic patterns as being highly complex and all these unintended consequences, I suggest that the energy issue may be every bit as complex, that you will push it down here, and it will pop up over here for another reason.
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask a question after you ask your question.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Year-Long Daylight Saving Time and Double Daylight Saving Time
Chairman BARTLETT. Thank you very much.
I think it would be productive to kind of prepare two columns; one, the potential advantages of year-long Daylight Saving Time and Double Daylight Saving Time in one column, and in the other column, the disadvantages. Let us first try to list the advantages or potential advantages of increased Daylight Saving Time.
Clearly, the issue that brought us here is energy, and I have read all of the testimony, and from everything I can hear and understand, there is a potential to save energy, both overall energy use and peak demand. And peak demand may be more important than overall energy use since that is what is causing the brownouts and blackouts in California. So we can list that as a positive.
What other—reduced crime—I think there is no question but that crime is going to be reduced. I also understand that highway fatalities are reduced. Okay? So we have got reduced energy demands, we have got reduced crime, we have got reduced highway fatalities.
Are there other certain positive benefits that accrue to it?
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BENFIELD. I want to step on—or make a comment on the highway safety. That is a very, very good study. That is not too theoretical. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, I think, looked at a 5-year period. They looked at the fatalities in 3,000 counties. That is not theoretical at all. They were working with real numbers, and they said it was about 200 lives per year would have been saved if there were year-round Daylight Saving Time; mostly, pedestrians. However, they avoided saying whether they were children or not, but that is probably the best number. So it is a very powerful argument to argue against the schoolchildren safety issue. I just wanted to emphasize that.
Chairman BARTLETT. Well, thank you. So those are three pretty potent positives. Most of the other things that I can think of are emotional things. Lots of people would prefer to have more sunlight in the evening. Most people don't want to get up in the dark in the morning. But those are more emotional things and they are objective things. Are there some definitive objective things that can be placed in the negative column, reasons you wouldn't want to do it?
Ms. LAWSON. Well, we really don't know about the energy use, and there is a potential for increased travel demand and, therefore, increased gasoline consumption. We don't know whether that exists or not. Our data was not good enough to identify any increased travel demand. So there is a potential there for increased energy use overall.
Increasing Public Awareness
Chairman BARTLETT. There is one positive that I would like to mention, and I don't know how potent it would be. I think it is real. And that is that it would remind people that we have an energy problem, that they need to pay attention. And when we look at the enormous benefits that accrue to conservation and efficiency after the Arab oil embargo, that is, potentially, the best reason for doing it, because it would get peoples' attention. They would say, oh, yes, we do have an energy crisis. Don't we? And they would change their behavior.
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
If you look at a graph of energy use as it would have been if things had gone on as usual after the Arab oil embargo and what it is now, you see enormous reduction in energy use as a result of two things. One of them is unfortunate; that is, the movement of industry overseas, energy using industry overseas. Ultimately, we will pay a price for that, because we all breathe the same air, and there are less environmental constraints over there, which is one of the reasons they went there. But the other really big thing is efficiency, conservation. And it is kind of hard to separate those two. People are negative about conservation. They view that as freezing in the dark while efficiency is a good thing that is making better air conditioners and refrigerators. But we have a lot of conservation. I don't know anybody who froze in the dark after the Arab oil embargo.
So I think that getting peoples' attention is important. It could have even bigger benefits than the actual net savings that result from the time shift.
Mr. BENFIELD. I agree 100 percent. That is a very, very good point.
Ms. LAWSON. That was the reason, I think, that the action was taken by Congress in 1973. I would just like to remind Congress that there was in effect then, originally, when the Daylight Savings went in in 1974, it was supposed to be year-round, and Congress then changed it to have a period of time, of Standard Time, from November 1974 through January 1975, because people did dislike Daylight Saving and the dark. So I mean, did dislike Daylight Saving Time during the winter months. So there was a reaction. There was exactly the response that you mentioned. There was more attention to energy conservation, however, there was a change by Congress at that time.
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman BARTLETT. But don't you think that with the knowledge that we face a real energy crisis in this problem, that there might be a different reaction to that today? The oil embargo went away pretty quickly; as soon as oil started coming in, there were no more lines at the gas pumps, and the prices dropped, and so forth. I think that today's problem is going to be more sustained and will keep the attention of the people over a longer period.
Let me turn now to my colleague for her comments and questions.
Effects on the Dairy and Wine Industries
Ms. WOOLSEY. My district is made up of, besides high tech companies, wine and dairy industry.
Mr. BENFIELD. Let us talk about dairy. You have to separate them from other farmers. And I got a lesson when I was on a TV talk show and I had a dairy farmer, and he said, you have never been on a dairy farm, obviously, Mr. Benfield. They say that if you alter the milking schedule by 1 hour, you will see a production change. And so what the dairy farmer does is he alters his milking schedule by 5 minutes a day over approximately 2 weeks to get back to that, let us say, 7 a.m., 7 p.m. milking schedule, and he does that twice a year. In order to stay on his clock schedule, he moves the cow's milking schedule over this 2-week period. He will tolerate doing that twice a year. Do it to him four times a year and he is going to be a very unhappy camper.
Chairman BARTLETT. If the lady would yield? I ran a dairy so I know about dairy, and none of the cows that I had could read a clock. So I am not sure why the dairyman is changing his hours at all. And the fellow who came to get the milk, you know, he came when he came. If it was during milking, he picked up the milk while I was milking. So you know, I don't know why this should be a problem to the dairymen, you know. Just keep the cows on a schedule that they are happy with, and they can't read the clock, and they won't know.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I yield back.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, Mr. Chairman, the cows in my district, because we have the best educated district in the country, probably can read the clock. No.
But when I asked my casual question to my dairy friends, they also say, well, you know, we have done it for Daylight Saving Time, we could do it year-round. I didn't ask about Double Daylight, though.
Considerations: Number of Time Changes Per Year, Informing the Public, Importance of Uniformity
Mr. BENFIELD. Year-round, as long as you go on once a year and come off once a year, you haven't really changed anything for the dairymen, so it would be a moot issue.
Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, year-round, they don't have to go on and off at all; they just go. I mean, once they are on. But then we change the double, and that would be, you know, on and off, once a year, because the double would not be year-round.
Mr. BENFIELD. That would be fine. Four times a ye