Unthinkable? Double summertime | Editorial | From the Guardian | The Guardian

Unthinkable? Double summertime | Editorial | From the Guardian | The Guardian

Some arguments are so familiar that supporters of opposing points of view march along familiar ruts without noticing that the world is changing around them. For generations, the case in favour of double summer time – advancing the clocks two hours ahead of GMT this March, and setting them back just one hour as usual in October – has foundered on the Scottish question. Observing Greenwich mean time in the darkest months, Scots have always claimed, was essential to give farmers light enough to tend their flocks and children to see their way to school. The case against is invariably sustained by projections of carnage on the roads in the darker early mornings. This weekend, as the gloom of winter evenings descends again, new research from the Policy Studies Institute sheds, er, more light on the facts. Most farmers, for example, keep dairy cows indoors in winter these days, while teachers, sports organisations and even motorists all see the advantage of afternoon daylight rather than dark mornings when, nation of layabeds we have become, most people are still asleep. There is also much more concern now about the impact on power consumption. It was, of course, to reduce coal consumption that daylight saving was introduced experimentally in 1916 and again in the second world war. On Thursday, Cambridge experts told MPs on the climate change committee that they calculate six gigawatt hours a day would be saved if it stayed light later. Maybe it's not so unthinkable after all.