"DST", or Daylight Savings Time, is a tradition where every spring people set their clocks forward 1 hour, and in the fall people set their clocks back one year. There are several benefits to "DTS" as well as negative effects. It's in my belief that "DTS" is more helpful than not. Having that 1 extra hour of daytime can be very helpful to people that work outside like carpenters, and farmers.
To begin with, one could argue that a 2007 study in California indicated that "DST" had little or no effect on energy consumption that year. Similarly, another study showed 227 pedestrians were killed in the week following the end of "DST", compared with 65 pedestrians killed the week before "DST" ended, and that drivers need more time to adjust. Firstly, research in the 1970's found that "DST" saved about 1% per day in energy costs, even a little energy saving is better than nothing. Just because a 2007 study showed it didn't help, doesn’t mean it will be that way the next year. Similarly, the state of California is a very busy and big state …show more content…
Studies have indicated that traveling home from work or school in daylight is safer. So the argument that drivers need more time to adjust is invalid, "DST" has been around for decades, if you can't adjust to something that has been around longer than you have than you have, and can't simply pay attention why driving, rather than texting and/or doing other things that take your attention from the road, as well as passing the blame rather than taking responsibility, than you have no business driving a car, or any other vehicle.
To conclude, while there both pros and cons to "DST", there are far more pros than cons. Similarly, most the cons stated in the argument were invalid, and more so related to poor driving and laziness, than "DST." "DST" is necessary for more reasons than most realize, and should stay
To begin with, one could argue that a 2007 study in California indicated that "DST" had little or no effect on energy consumption that year. Similarly, another study showed 227 pedestrians were killed in the week following the end of "DST", compared with 65 pedestrians killed the week before "DST" ended, and that drivers need more time to adjust. Firstly, research in the 1970's found that "DST" saved about 1% per day in energy costs, even a little energy saving is better than nothing. Just because a 2007 study showed it didn't help, doesn’t mean it will be that way the next year. Similarly, the state of California is a very busy and big state …show more content…
Studies have indicated that traveling home from work or school in daylight is safer. So the argument that drivers need more time to adjust is invalid, "DST" has been around for decades, if you can't adjust to something that has been around longer than you have than you have, and can't simply pay attention why driving, rather than texting and/or doing other things that take your attention from the road, as well as passing the blame rather than taking responsibility, than you have no business driving a car, or any other vehicle.
To conclude, while there both pros and cons to "DST", there are far more pros than cons. Similarly, most the cons stated in the argument were invalid, and more so related to poor driving and laziness, than "DST." "DST" is necessary for more reasons than most realize, and should stay