At dawn on Sunday, European clocks will move back one hour and enter winter time.
This convention, followed in Portugal for about a century, has been questioned in recent years. In the EU, even a proposal is being put forward to stop its following. In the absence of a decision, delayed by the unforeseen circumstances of recent years, the tradition remains.
A dead end with no end in sight
In Europe, the discussion dates back to 2018. The European Commission published a public opinion poll according to which 84% of Europeans are in favor of ending the change of time twice a year.
In 2019, the European Parliament voted to promote the measure. Everything pointed to the fact that the end was inevitable, and everything depended only on negotiations in the European Council. It was predicted that the clocks would be moved for the last time in 2021, but this did not happen.
The European Council considered that this measure lacked an impact assessment and referred the matter to the European Commission. This is where the deadlock begins, which continues to this day. On the official website of the European Parliamentthe measure is “pending the position of the Council in the first reading” and it appears that negotiations have not started yet.
Along the way, other, more pressing issues have emerged, on which European efforts have focused, from Brexit to the pandemic and, more recently, to war. However, due to the upcoming European elections, the proposal may no longer have the necessary consensus, and it is not clear when this issue will return to the Council’s agenda.
A solution for everyone will be very difficult to find
Apart from the legislative process, the practical contours of this measure will require careful discussion.
IImplementing a single measure will be difficult as it will mean more hours of sunshine for some and less for others. On the other hand, allowing each country to choose its own time (without reference to geographic location or current time zones) can lead to huge chaos. From Europe with three time zones, we could potentially have many national timetables.
Even harmonizing schedules with neighboring countries can be problematic. For example, with the UK leaving the EU, such a measure could mean different timetables in Ireland and Northern Ireland.
In addition, there are still countries, such as Portugal and Greece, who intend to keep the time change twice a year, because they believe that the constant change to daylight saving time or winter time will not bring benefits.
But where did the time change come from then?
The first local experiments in which time change was agreed upon date back to the 18th century, but the first official time change occurred in the 20th century. In 1916, due to hostilities, the German Empire changed the time in order to adjust working hours to the sundial and thus save coal. This measure was followed by other European countries, including Portugal.
Over the course of the century, a variant of this timetable has changed over time and between countries.
Currently all European countries (except Iceland) follow EU Decree of 2000 which synchronized the changes in European time to ensure consistency within the single market. Thus, it was found that changes occur in last Sunday in October (one hour behind) and last Sunday in March (one hour ahead).
Europe, however, is on the side of the minority, which still keeps the changes between summer and winter. According to Statistica, only 40% have made changes in 2021. But this was not always the case, as at some point in their history, more than 140 countries had seasonal schedules.
In addition to Europe, winter time is preserved in the United States (with the exception of the states of Arizona and Hawaii). This may change soon. In an unusual consensus, the US Congress approved on March 15 The sun protection law, which aims to abolish the change of time. The plan is to have clocks in the US reset for the last time next year, but the measure has yet to pass the House of Representatives or be passed by the president.
Why change now?
The initial argument in favor of the schedule was energy savings. However, research on this is inconclusive or shows residual savings. The energy saved at the end of the day seems to be offset by the energy wasted in the early morning when, for example, we need to turn on the light to get ready to leave the house.
At present, the protection of winter time is mainly associated with the idea of having more light in the morning, especially for children in schools and farmers in the fields.
However, the number of arguments in favor of ending temporary changes has increased. Over the years, there have been several studies linking wintertime to various harmful effects, from a decrease in labor productivity to an increase in heart attacks, street crime and traffic accidents.
Depending on the latitude, the change in time may dictate that night falls in the middle of the day in many cities and towns during the cold season. This is when, in terms of trade, later twilight is associated with higher consumption.
In recent years, the argument based on human biology has also gained weight. new evidence scientific studies have emerged that show that about half of our genes are regulated by some kind of biological clock (circadian rhythm, functions that the body repeats in cycles of about 24 hours and which are also influenced by external stimuli).