Changing the clock is a practice that has had a major impact on the daily lives of citizens of the European Union for more than a century. This process, where the clock changes twice a year, was created to make better use of daylight hours and save energy. However, after decades of discussion and concerns about its effects, many European countries are considering abolishing this change. So why is it still such a hot topic and what could happen in the future?
The history and purpose of changing the clock
In the early 20th century, the idea of changing the clock was proposed as a measure to take advantage of the longer hours of sunlight during the summer months and to save energy. The aim was to make better use of natural light, thereby reducing the use of artificial lighting and contributing to energy savings. This concept was popularized during World War I and later, during World War II, and eventually became common practice in most European countries and beyond.
What has changed?
In recent years, many studies have shown that the economic and energy benefits of changing the clocks are smaller than previously thought. While the idea of saving energy was very important in the 1970s and 1980s, today changing the clocks no longer has the desired impact on reducing energy consumption, as technology has advanced and energy use is much more efficient. Furthermore, people's daily lives have changed, and the impact on lifestyles has become increasingly visible.
One of the most notable consequences is the impact this change has on people's biological rhythms. The time change has been shown to disrupt sleep cycles, causing stress, fatigue, and other mental and physical health disorders. This has particularly affected people who have a busy work schedule or those who travel regularly due to the time changes.
Today's debate: Should we abolish daylight saving time?
In 2018, the European Commission opened this debate up further, proposing to eliminate clock changes altogether. The proposal suggested that each country decide whether to observe summer time or standard time all year round. This proposal was supported by a survey conducted across the European Union, where many citizens expressed the opinion that clock changes are an unnecessary intervention and harmful to health and productivity.
However, some EU countries are still unclear about what to do. Some countries, such as Germany, France and Spain, have been prepared to abolish the clock change, while others have hesitated due to the potential impact on the domestic economy and coordination with other countries that still maintain the clock change. For example, some industries such as air transport and tourism are dependent on the clock change, as the changes can cause confusion and complications in international schedules.
Why is it so important?
While many arguments have been made in favor of ending daylight saving time, some experts suggest that we should not rush into such a decision without considering the long-term consequences. There are still concerns about the impacts that this change could have, especially for those living in areas further from the equator, where changes in the sun are more visible and likely. Also, for some economic sectors, such as agriculture and tourism, changing the clocks could have a positive effect, increasing opportunities for outdoor activities and summer tourism.
What can we expect from the future?
Given the will of citizens and concerns for health and well-being, it is possible that many EU countries will move away from this system in the near future. Some may choose to maintain standard time to have a more natural rhythm, while others may choose summer time, to take advantage of the longer summer days. However, this is an issue that requires coordination and a careful decision on the part of EU countries and all its citizens.
In conclusion, the clock change is a practice that was born with a specific purpose, but which has now raised many questions and concerns. The debate about its abolition is lively and could end up with a significant change for the citizens of Europe and for the way daily life is organized. Is it time to leave this practice behind and adapt our lives to the natural rhythm? That remains to be seen.
