Imagine waking up before the sun: at 8:30 a.m. or even later.
On Tuesday, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would keep daylight saving time year-round — giving the nation later sunrises but more evening sunlight during the darkest months of the year. But despite growing support for abolishing semiannual clock changes and making our winter evenings brighter, permanent daylight saving time probably would benefit some parts of the country more than others.
All states except for Arizona and Hawaii observe daylight saving time, with the clocks “springing forward” in early March and “falling back” in early November. If the Senate bill is approved by the House and signed by President Biden, we would set the clocks ahead in March 2023 and then keep them there permanently.
While millions of Americans would no longer complain about switching the clocks — and no doubt many would enjoy more evening daylight in the winter — permanent daylight saving time might end up being a dark wake-up call during the winter months, especially in some parts of the country where the sun already tends to rise late.
No matter where you live in the United States, year-round daylight saving time means the sun would rise and set an hour later than we’re used to from November to March. With daylight shifted toward the evening, most of the nation would see sunset after 5 p.m. around the winter solstice in December. D.C., for example, would see its earliest sunset at 5:45 p.m. (instead of 4:45 p.m.), and the latest sunrise would shift to 8:27 a.m. (from 7:27 a.m.) in early January, according to timeanddate.com.
In some places, keeping the clocks ahead in winter makes a lot of sense, especially in cities such as Boston and Chicago, which lie on the eastern edge of their respective time zones. Much of New England, which experiences some of the earliest sunsets in the country, would experience winter daylight more reasonably, from about 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. instead of 7 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Boston’s earliest sunset would occur at a more work-friendly 5:11 p.m., instead of at 4:11 p.m. Similarly, Chicago and Los Angeles would still have daylight after 5 p.m. in December and January.
No more early sunsets in the 4 o’clock hour, and an extra hour of sunlight for running errands or exercising after work sounds like a no-brainer.
Press Enter to skip to end of carousel
How permanent daylight saving time would change sunrise and sunset times
What’s the catch? Well, winter days are inherently short, and keeping the clocks ahead from November to March would mean our mornings would be noticeably darker for several months of the year. In Washington, sunrise would occur after 8 a.m. from around Thanksgiving until Valentine’s Day.
Later sunrises might make sense for residents of Rhode Island, Maine or Massachusetts, where the sun already rises and sets early throughout the year. These states are on the eastern edge of the Eastern time zone, so the sun rises fairly early even in winter. But for people who live in the western edge of a time zone (such as western Indiana, Michigan or North Dakota), year-round daylight saving time would mean very dark mornings for a good portion of the year.
Sleep experts say Senate has it wrong: Standard time, not daylight saving, should be permanent
In Indianapolis, for example, the sun already rises after 8 a.m. around the winter solstice. With permanent daylight saving time, the sun would never set before 6 p.m., but the latest sunrise would occur after 9 a.m. In fact, Indy residents would see sunrise after 8:30 a.m. from mid-November to mid-February if the nation permanently ditches standard time. In Bismarck, N.D., the sun would not rise until almost 9:30 a.m. in December.
(The Washington Post)
Darker and colder winter mornings are one reason the Senate’s “Sunshine Protection Act” supporting permanent daylight saving time might never become law. But, considering all the grumbling we hear each year about switching the clocks back and forth — and the fact that we already observe daylight saving time for eight months of the year — perhaps it’s worth once more experimenting with brighter evenings in the winter, even if it comes at the expense of morning light.
On Tuesday, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would keep daylight saving time year-round — giving the nation later sunrises but more evening sunlight during the darkest months of the year. But despite growing support for abolishing semiannual clock changes and making our winter evenings brighter, permanent daylight saving time probably would benefit some parts of the country more than others.
All states except for Arizona and Hawaii observe daylight saving time, with the clocks “springing forward” in early March and “falling back” in early November. If the Senate bill is approved by the House and signed by President Biden, we would set the clocks ahead in March 2023 and then keep them there permanently.
While millions of Americans would no longer complain about switching the clocks — and no doubt many would enjoy more evening daylight in the winter — permanent daylight saving time might end up being a dark wake-up call during the winter months, especially in some parts of the country where the sun already tends to rise late.
No matter where you live in the United States, year-round daylight saving time means the sun would rise and set an hour later than we’re used to from November to March. With daylight shifted toward the evening, most of the nation would see sunset after 5 p.m. around the winter solstice in December. D.C., for example, would see its earliest sunset at 5:45 p.m. (instead of 4:45 p.m.), and the latest sunrise would shift to 8:27 a.m. (from 7:27 a.m.) in early January, according to timeanddate.com.
In some places, keeping the clocks ahead in winter makes a lot of sense, especially in cities such as Boston and Chicago, which lie on the eastern edge of their respective time zones. Much of New England, which experiences some of the earliest sunsets in the country, would experience winter daylight more reasonably, from about 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. instead of 7 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Boston’s earliest sunset would occur at a more work-friendly 5:11 p.m., instead of at 4:11 p.m. Similarly, Chicago and Los Angeles would still have daylight after 5 p.m. in December and January.
No more early sunsets in the 4 o’clock hour, and an extra hour of sunlight for running errands or exercising after work sounds like a no-brainer.
Press Enter to skip to end of carousel
How permanent daylight saving time would change sunrise and sunset times
What’s the catch? Well, winter days are inherently short, and keeping the clocks ahead from November to March would mean our mornings would be noticeably darker for several months of the year. In Washington, sunrise would occur after 8 a.m. from around Thanksgiving until Valentine’s Day.
Later sunrises might make sense for residents of Rhode Island, Maine or Massachusetts, where the sun already rises and sets early throughout the year. These states are on the eastern edge of the Eastern time zone, so the sun rises fairly early even in winter. But for people who live in the western edge of a time zone (such as western Indiana, Michigan or North Dakota), year-round daylight saving time would mean very dark mornings for a good portion of the year.
Sleep experts say Senate has it wrong: Standard time, not daylight saving, should be permanent
In Indianapolis, for example, the sun already rises after 8 a.m. around the winter solstice. With permanent daylight saving time, the sun would never set before 6 p.m., but the latest sunrise would occur after 9 a.m. In fact, Indy residents would see sunrise after 8:30 a.m. from mid-November to mid-February if the nation permanently ditches standard time. In Bismarck, N.D., the sun would not rise until almost 9:30 a.m. in December.
(The Washington Post)
Darker and colder winter mornings are one reason the Senate’s “Sunshine Protection Act” supporting permanent daylight saving time might never become law. But, considering all the grumbling we hear each year about switching the clocks back and forth — and the fact that we already observe daylight saving time for eight months of the year — perhaps it’s worth once more experimenting with brighter evenings in the winter, even if it comes at the expense of morning light.
