The Effect on Energy Usage of Extending British Summer Time

House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee The effect on energy usage of extending British Summer Time

Written evidence

Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed Thursday 28 October 2010

Published on 21 November 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00

The Energy and Climate Change Committee

The Energy and Climate Change Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department of Energy and Climate Change and associated public bodies.

Current membership Mr Tim Yeo MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) (Chair) Dan Byles MP (Conservative, North Warwickshire) Barry Gardiner MP (Labour, Brent North) Ian Lavery MP (Labour, Wansbeck) Dr Phillip Lee MP (Conservative, Bracknell) Albert Owen MP (Labour, Ynys Môn) Christopher Pincher MP (Conservative, Tamworth) John Robertson MP (Labour, Glasgow North West) Laura Sandys MP (Conservative, South Thanet) Sir Robert Smith MP (Liberal Democrat, West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test)

The following members were also members of the committee during the parliament:

Gemma Doyle MP (Labour/Co-operative, West Dunbartonshire) Tom Greatrex MP (Labour, Rutherglen and Hamilton West)

Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.

Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/parliament.uk/ecc. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the back of this volume.

The Report of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in a printed volume. Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only.

Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Sarah Hartwell-Naguib (Clerk), Dr Richard Benwell (Second Clerk), Dr Michael H. O’Brien (Committee Specialist), Jenny Bird (Committee Specialist), Francene Graham (Senior Committee Assistant), Jonathan Olivier Wright (Committee Assistant), Edward Bolton (Committee Support Assistant) and Nick Davies (Media Officer).

Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Energy and Climate Change Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 2569; the Committee’s email address is [email protected]

List of unprinted written evidence

1 Department for Business Innovation and Skills, the Department for Energy and Climate Change, and the Department for Transport Ev w1 2 Mayer Hillman Ev w4 3 Lighter Later Ev w7 4 Dr Michael Morrison Ev w8 5 Harry Hayfield Ev w11 6 Saga Ev w12

Oral and written evidence

Oral and written evidence (submitted by witnesses who gave oral evidence) has been printed as House of Commons paper HC 562 and is available in electronic format at www.parliament.uk/ecc. Oral evidence was taken on the following date:

Thursday 28 October 2010 Page

Dr Elizabeth Garnsey and Dr Simon Hill, University of Cambridge, and Alan Smart, Energy Operations Manager, National Grid Ev 1

List of written evidence from witnesses

National Grid Ev 11

cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [SO] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence Ev 1

Written evidence

Memorandum submitted jointly by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Department for Energy and Climate Change, and the Department for Transport The following memorandum provides written evidence from the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and the Department for Transport (DFT) on the effect on energy usage of extending British Summer Time. The current summertime arrangements for the UK involves moving the clocks forward one hour on the last Sunday of March each year so that were are on Greenwich Meantime (GMT) +1 and then back an hour on the last Sunday of October back to GMT. While on GMT+1, this is classed as British Summer Time. The twice- yearly change in time occurs in accordance with EU legislation The 9th EC Directive on Summer Time which harmonised the dates clocks change across EU member states. In response to the Committees request for evidence in relation to the effects on energy usage of extending British Summer Time which would mean being on GMT +2 during he summer and GMT +1 during the winter, the following is provided.

Summary 1. In summary, although we might expect overall energy use to be reduced by extending British Summer Time (“BST”) the effects are likely to be small in magnitude, and may even be uncertain in direction. The most significant effects are likely to be associated with lighting demand as demand switches from the evening to the morning. 2. However the evidence quantifying these effects is not strong enough to conclude either way what the impact on the overall demand would be. On the one hand the working day is more aligned with natural daylight leading to reduction in demand, however there are also complex behavioural factors to consider such as such as the fact that households may be more likely to turn lights on when it is dark than off when it is light. 3. Evening peak electricity consumption may flatten (i.e. peak evening demand shifts to the morning) as a result of extending BST during the winter months which could be beneficial to security of supply. However, evening peaks between Great Britain and France may become more aligned, with implications for prices and security of supply in situations of low generation capacity margin. 4. The impact on gas demand for space heating is likely to be limited, but a flattening of peak electricity consumption, could, depending on the relative fossil fuel prices, result in a fall in gas demand for electricity generation which again could be beneficial for security of supply. 5. The effect on carbon budgets is dependent on the change in overall demand and is therefore likely to be limited. To the extent that extending BST reduces energy consumption, this may reduce the cost of meeting the renewables target.

DECC Introduction 6. Extending British Summer Time (“BST”, or “GMT+1”) would result in later sunrises and sunsets, when compared to a reversion to GMT during the winter months. This may affect annual and peak electricity and gas demand, and thereby carbon emissions and security of supply. This note sets out the potential effects that might be expected and the available evidence quantifying them. 7. Extending BST would be likely to lead to shifts in the pattern of demand for gas and electricity. However the extent to which this will lead to material changes in the level of annual or peak demand is not clear: (a) The impact on gas demand for space heating will depend on the extent that slightly increased demand from marginally colder mornings are offset by reduced demand from marginally warmer evenings. However the overall heat requirement remains the same suggesting that we would not expect any significant impacts on the overall level of demand. (b) There is likely to be a more significant impact on patterns of electricity demand due to potential changes to the usage of artificial lighting. The main effect would be a switch in artificial lighting demand from the evening to the morning. To the extent that the (traditional) working day would be more aligned with natural daylight, there may be an overall reduction in artificial lighting demand. A change in the pattern of electricity demand may indirectly affect the pattern of gas demand (for base- and peak-load electricity generation). 8. The following sections: — discuss available evidence we have on the effect in the UK of extending BST on overall energy demand; — highlight specific additional considerations for electricity and gas markets; cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Ev 2 Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence

— note the implications for carbon budgets and renewables targets; and — highlight other relevant considerations.

Overall Energy Demand 9. As outlined above one would expect overall energy demand to reduce as a result of the change, and indeed a recent study (Hill et al, 2010)1 that considered the impact of moving the clocks forward in winter (from GMT to GMT+1) did estimate an annual saving of approximately 0.5 MtCO2e per year. 10. The analysis is based on actual half-hourly electricity data from the National Grid. The authors construct a demand profile by fitting observed weekday electricity demand to time, temperature, daylight (illumination) and baseline electricity consumption. By fitting observed data to a model, it is possible to forecast what the impact of changing the clocks (all other factors staying constant) would be on UK energy use. 11. The authors found the following: — During a trial period, in 1968—1971, where GMT+1 was applied year round, energy consumption was reduced overall. — The modelled results suggest that electricity savings would be observed throughout the period November to March. The emissions reduction associated with such a change is estimated at 0.45 MtCO2e per year. 12. However, there may also be complex behavioural factors that need to be considered, such as the fact that households may be more likely to turn lights on when it is dark than off when it is light. This effect could conceivably lead to an increase in energy demand as a result of the change which was found by studies commissioned by Defra from the Buildings Research Establishment (BRE) in 19902 and 20063. 13. These studies are based on simulation modelling of lighting, heating and cooling in UK domestic and non-domestic building stock, rather than observations. These reports came to the somewhat counter-intuitive conclusion that moving the clocks forward by an hour would lead to an increase rather than decrease in energy consumption. This is because, in the models, lights were turned on more in the mornings (because mornings were darker) but not off later in the day, because individuals are less likely to turn lights off when it is light than they are to turn lights on when it is dark. 14. Projecting simulation results onto the UK buildings stock, the 2006 BRE study found an overall increase in energy use from extending BST of 0.9%, resulting in an increase in UK territorial emissions of 1.3 MtCO2e4 per year. This is due to “perverse” human behavioural patterns linked to an eagerness to switch lighting and heating on when needed, but less care in switching lighting and heating off when not needed 15. Most of this is driven by lighting across both sectors, whilst heating also contributes to this effect but to a lesser extent. Estimated energy use increased for non-domestic lighting by 3.6% and for domestic lighting by 1.8%. Increases in energy use for non-domestic and domestic heating were estimated at 1.2% and 0.2% respectively. The smaller magnitudes for heating are consistent with the greater within-day variation of natural light compared to temperature, and the ability of buildings to store heat. 16. The evidence therefore suggests a mixed picture and is not strong enough to conclude either way what the impact on demand would be.

Effects on Electricity Markets 17. Evening peak electricity consumption may ﬂatten (i.e. peak evening demand is shifted to the morning) as a result of extending BST during the winter months, but peaks between Great Britain and France may become more aligned, with implications for prices in situations of low generation capacity margin. 18. Hill et al’s (2010) work also examined the impact of extending BST on peak electricity demand. They found the following results: — There is an observed measurable drop in peak electricity consumption in the spring, when the clocks go forward by one hour, and a similar jump in peak electricity consumption in the autumn when the clocks go back. — The modelled results also show that the impact of extending BST would reduce evening peak electricity demand (and increase morning demand), with the most pronounced effect in the spring (with peak demand reduced by 4%). 19. Reductions in peak electricity consumption bring beneﬁts for security of supply, however there are potential adverse effects associated with interconnection to France. Typically the interconnector between the UK and France may be in import or export mode depending on the relative demand/supply position and hence 1 The impact on energy consumption of daylight saving clock changes, Hill et al., Energy Policy (2010) 2 The Effects of clock change on lighting energy use, Littlefair, BRE ref 285/89 (1990) 3 The Effect of clock changes on energy consumption in UK Buildings, Pout (2006) 4 Note, for the purposes of carbon accounting, any change in UK territorial emissions as a result of changes in electricity demand would not represent a change in (global) emissions savings, as the UK power sector is covered by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (“ETS”) “cap”. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence Ev 3

price signals, and can switch for each half hour period. Under current arrangements for GMT/BST, the peak periods in France and the UK are offset and there is only a limited common, overlapping period, when demand in both countries is simultaneously at peak. 20. Extending BST may affect ﬂows through the interconnector between Great Britain (“GB”) and France, in particular by aligning peaks in electricity demand between the two countries during the winter months. Loss of capacity margin in either system (caused either by large loss of capacity or severe weather events), would be expected to lead to an increase in prices due to scarcity of capacity. With the two peaks aligned, this could exacerbate the peak in GB prices in the event of French demand for GB electricity exports. 21. With greater physical integration of European markets in future this issue will grow in importance. A credible future scenario could be one with a much greater need for European wide balancing, particularly reliant on Norwegian Hydro, due to the higher level of intermittency from wind. Therefore, coincident peaks in Northern European countries could have the potential to place the system under stress.

Effects on Gas Markets 22. The impact on gas demand for space heating is likely to be limited, but a flattening of peak electricity consumption, could, depending on the relative fossil fuel prices, result in a fall in gas demand for electricity generation. 23. In the context of daily energy use, gas demand is driven by two distinct factors: — indirectly through power generation to meet base and peak-load electricity demand; and — directly through space heating in both the domestic and non-domestic sectors. 24. Reductions in peak energy demand may lead to a reduction in demand for gas. The section above highlighted that the evidence on the effect of extending BST on average electricity demand was mixed. To the extent that peak electricity demand is reduced, this may reduce the need for peaking plant. Depending on the price of gas relative to coal, gas-fired generation is sometimes used to meet peaks in electricity demand. 25. The impact on gas demand for space heating will depend on the extent that slightly increased demand from colder mornings are offset by reduced demand from slightly warmer evenings. However the overall heat requirement remains the same suggesting that we would not expect any significant impacts on the overall level of demand. 26. In the gas market there is a need to balance the system over the course of the day rather than the half- hour, therefore shifting the demand for gas during the day without affecting the overall level of demand is unlikely to have the same consequences as for electricity in terms of security of supply.

Implications for Carbon Budgets 27. The effect on carbon budgets of extending BST is likely to be limited. 28. The government’s “interim” carbon budgets require a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by at least 34% by 2020, relative to 1990 levels. These interim budgets can be met: — through domestic effort in the sectors not covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (“EU ETS”); and — through purchase of international credits. 29. Power generation is covered by the EU ETS, so any change in electricity demand will not contribute to achieving the UK’s carbon budgets. Peaking generation plant tends to be relatively high carbon intensity so extending BST could reduce the UK’s purchases of EUAs5 through ﬂattening peaks in electricity demand, especially during the “shoulder months” (November and March). 30. To the extent that annual gas demand for domestic heating is affected, there may be some effect. As discussed above in paragraphs 14 and 15, this effect is likely to be limited.

Implications for Renewables Targets 31. To the extent that extending BST reduces energy consumption, this may reduce the cost of meeting the renewables target. 32. The EU Climate and Energy Package creates a target proportion of energy consumption which is to be delivered from renewable sources. The target follows a rising trajectory to reach 15% of capped gross final energy consumption by 20206. 5 “EUA” stands for “European Union Allowances”, the name given to tradable emission credits under the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. 6 As defined in the Renewable Energy Directive, the definition of gross final energy consumption (gfec) in the target is capped by setting a maximum value on the level of aviation within gfec at 6.18% of the uncapped level of gross final energy consumption. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Ev 4 Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence

33. Changes in final energy consumption in 2020 (with the exception in most cases of changes in aviation consumption7) will change the absolute level of renewable energy supply that the UK is required to achieve. Reductions in energy consumption in 2020 will therefore be associated with an avoided cost of renewables. DECC/HM Treasury appraisal guidance8 suggests that an illustrative figure for the avoided cost of renewables from reducing energy consumption by 1 MWh in 2020 would be approximately £18/MWh (in 2009 prices). However, the guidance notes that there is uncertainty around this figure.

Other Considerations 34. It is important to note that neither Hill et al (2010) nor the BRE study look at the impact on emissions from transport or other sources. If a change in clocks led to changes in behaviour (the tourism industry, for example, believes changing to European time would lead people to spend more time outdoors) or economic activity, this would affect emissions. 35. Furthermore, neither paper considers the impact of the latest energy efﬁciency measures. In particular, the introduction of more energy efﬁciency lighting will drive down emissions from this source and therefore the impact (positive or negative) on lighting use will be diminished. 36. Smart meters with Time of Use (“ToU”) tariffs are likely to provide a more targeted future source of changes in consumption patterns through encouraging a shift of energy demand from peak times to off-peak times. For example, in DECC’s most recent impact assessment on domestic smart metering roll-out9, we assume a 20% take up by consumers of the ToU tariff (in addition to the existing group using this option) and a resulting overall 3% electricity bill reduction and 5% peak use reduction for these customers.

DFT

Street Lights 37. Any extension of British Summer Time (BST) into the winter would result in the hours of darkness shifting backwards. It is expected the effect on energy usage from the operation of street lights would be minimal as the number of hours of darkness and therefore the period of time street lighting is in operation would remain the same. 38. This view is shared by ofﬁcials at the Highway Agency who are responsible for the motorway and trunk road network. The Institution of Lighting Professionals likewise considers the effects on energy usage to be minimal. In addition, the mere shift in the hours of darkness should have little impact on the use of light by road vehicles, which are not powered by sustainable energy sources.

BIS

Wider Considerations 39. A change in the time zones would need to take into consideration the potential wider implications of such a move including the regional impact for Northern Ireland and Scotland. 40. The devolved administrations have all expressed opposition to such a move mainly due to the effects that the move would have to their enjoyment of the available light. 41. The Scottish Government is against any change the current arrangement for a number of reasons. These include, safety of children travelling to school in the morning and the potential detrimental effect on rural outdoor workers and businesses. They believe there are no compelling arguments in favour of making the change so the position of being against such a move has been maintained. 42. Northern Ireland would also be opposed to such a move as this would have a signiﬁcant impact on the lighting during the summer and winter months with it not getting dark during the height of summer until around midnight and it not getting light mid winter until around 10 am. Northern Ireland is much further north and west then England. Northern Ireland so this move would be felt far more here. In addition, being on a different time zone to the Republic of Ireland would cause particular problems because of the land boundary and such a move would cause difﬁculties with cross-border transportation and communication links. 43. Wales are aware that there are a range of opinions, however, there is no real strength of feeling to support any proposed change to the current position. October 2010

7 A change in UK aviation consumption in 2020 that leaves the level of aviation consumption above 6.18% of gfec will not have any effect on the level of the renewables target. Changes that bring the level below 6.18% would reduce the target. 8 Valuation of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for appraisal and evaluation, DECC/HM Treasury, June 2010 9 http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Consultations/smart-meter-imp-prospectus/221-ia-smart-roll-out-domestic.pdf cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence Ev 5

Memorandum submitted by Dr Mayer Hillman University of Westminster My name is Mayer Hillman. I am Senior Fellow Emeritus at Policy Studies Institute (formerly known as PEP—Political and Economic Planning) where I have been engaged for 40 years in social scientiﬁc research. In the mid-1980s, following the observation on our “waste of daylight hours”1, I undertook a comprehensive study of the wide-ranging social and environmental consequences of aiming to achieve a better matching of our daily and waking hours. By examining all facets of daily life and working practices, it established that the advantages would far outweigh the disadvantages. The ﬁrst report on it was published by Policy Studies Institute in 19882. This was followed by a Government Green Paper on the subject a year later3 and, in 1993, an up-date of the 1988 PSI report4. A further study which is focused exclusively on the implications of such a change for Scotland is to be published at the end of this month5.

Summary 1. Energy consumption would be affected in four ways if clocks were put forward by one hour in summer and winter. After exploring available evidence on these aspects, this Memorandum concludes that the overall outcome would be likely to be favourable, albeit marginally. The only reliable way of determining this precisely would be to undertake a trial period with the clock change. However, it would appear to be extremely unlikely to affect the judgement that the UK’s adoption of the SDST (Single Double Summer Time) clock regime would be highly desirable as the beneﬁts outweigh the disadvantages to such a marked degree.

Introduction 2. The great majority of the UK population get up well after sunrise for most of the year, but are then denied opportunities for outdoor activity by the onset of darkness at the end of the day. The most realistic and studied proposition rectify this anomaly has been to move UK clocks ahead of their current setting to GMT+1 in winter and GMT+2 in summer—essentially advancing them by one hour throughout the year. 3. The proposal, sometime known as SDST (Single Double Summer Time), would enable UK citizens to make better use of the available daylight. In reality, for the great majority of the population, it would entail the loss of an hour of morning daylight in the winter months only, but this would be substantially offset by the additional hour of late afternoon or evening daylight on every day of the year. 4. Over the last 20 years, politicians have been looking at this issue more closely, with an eye to possible reform. Many Early Day Motions on the subject have been put forward and many unsuccessful bills proposed to Parliament. They have included the one by Tim Yeo, MP in 2006 (Energy Saving [Daylight] Bill) which called for a three-year experiment to advance the clocks by one hour throughout the year—similar to what happened during World War 2 though this was achieved with four annual clock changes. Earlier this year, the Daylight Saving Bill has been taken forward by Rebecca Harris, a newly-elected MP. 5. This short Memorandum has been undertaken to highlight the likely effects of this clock change on policy concerned with drastically limiting the use of fossil fuels and ensuring the security of the UK’s energy supplies.

Energy Consumption 6. The relationship between our waking hours and daylight hours affects energy consumption in four distinct respects: — first, demand for artificial lighting in homes, offices, industrial and commercial premises, streets, and so on; — second, hourly changes in demand affecting the efficiency with which electricity power generators can balance daily peaks in the morning and afternoon; — third, during the heating season, the variation in demand due to changes in the external ambient temperature through the day; and — fourth, in the absence of legislation controlling the extent of petroleum use, the availability of daylight enabling more activities outside the home, especially daylight-dependent ones, thereby affecting the demand for transport fuel, .especially for leisure travel.

The Demand for Artificial Lighting 7. Demand for artificial light in the home is higher in the winter than in the summer, reflecting principally the monthly variation in the hours of the day between sunset and going to bed. Most people get up well after sunrise for about nine months of the year, and therefore do not need to switch on lights in the morning. But they are highly likely to go to bed after sunset throughout the year, making the need in the evening sensitive to the time at which sunset occurs. Advancing clocks by one hour would lower this demand on every evening of the year whereas demand in the mornings would only rise in the winter months. 8. A detailed study by the Cambridge University Centre for Technical Management of the likely changes in electricity use in the home if clocks were maintained on GMT+1 hour during the winter months alone concluded that average demand would reduce by at least 0.3%6. Further reductions on a not dissimilar scale could be predicted if clocks were put forward by the additional hour during the seven months of summer time cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Ev 6 Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence

from the end of March to the end of October. In a just-published study by the author on the subject, it was established that the effect of the clock change would be to reduce the number of hours for which artificial lighting would be required by about 0.8%5. 9. At present, lighting accounts for about 13% of all domestic electricity consumption in the UK7. It could be expected that the effect of putting clocks forward by an hour throughout the year would result in an overall saving of electricity bills. Calculations based on data in the report referred to in the previous paragraph5 show that the effect of this would be to lower demand for lighting in the region of 9% and therefore to annual savings for domestic consumers in the UK of over £100 million. 10. Lighting demand in offices, industrial premises, and public buildings accounts for about 30% of electricity used in them. Some small reduction in this sector is also likely to be achieved with the clock change as the number of hours during which it was needed would decrease. However, it is difficult to estimate with any precision the consequent savings as published statistics do not differentiate between electricity used in offices and shops within the commercial sector and, in any case, people working in offices tend to be less careful about switching off lights when they are not needed. 11. At present, the clock change would not lead to reductions in railway stations and other public places such as for street lighting due to the now-common practice of leaving lights on all night for security reasons. (Having said that, trials are now taking place across the UK which should ensure more efficient use of street lighting.)

Balancing the Two Daily Peak Demands for Electricity 12. The Cambridge University Centre for Technical Management study cited earlier also examined the impact on the peak demand for electricity of maintaining clocks throughout the year one hour ahead of GMT. This showed that the lighter evenings would reduce peak demand by just over 4%6. 13. At present, the higher peak demand for electricity in the late afternoon than in the morning results in it being met either by using less efficient spare generating capacity (such as oil-fired stations and pumped-storage facilities) or by imports from France by cable under the English Channel (accounting for little more than 2% of total electricity used in Great Britain). Owing to the peak demands in France and Great Britain differing by price and time of day, it would be difficult to determine the outcome of the clock change for generating companies’ costs. To do so, it would be necessary to compare the price of imported electricity with that of using the less efficient spare capacity at the specific time it was needed. However, there is sufficient understanding of the likely consequences of achieving a better balance between the morning and evening peak to anticipate a small beneficial outcome. A “conservative” estimate for the UK as a whole indicated that CO2 emissions from power stations would drop by about 450,000 tonnes if clocks were advanced by one hour solely in the winter months from the beginning of November to the end of March6. Thus, further consumer savings on electricity bills are possible though they would be dependent on the generating companies passing these on to their customers.

The Demand for Heating 14. The better matching of waking hours with the hours of daylight could also affect the extent of heating needed in the home during the winter months owing to the relationship of the time of the day when people are “up and about” and the changes in the ambient outdoor temperature. Advancing the clocks by one hour would mean that people would be getting up closer to sunrise. 15. Two consequences of this need to be borne in mind: ﬁrst, in the study referred to earlier, the temperature at 8am during the winter months requiring central heating is identical to the current winter GMT clock as it would be with the clock advanced by the one hour and very similar at 5pm, that is around the time of sunset5. Although the analysis was limited to data collected at the Meteorological Ofﬁce station situated between Edinburgh and Glasgow, there is no strong reason to believe that dissimilar results would be found from data collected in other regions of the UK. 16. On the other hand, it can be predicted that there would be an hour’s marginal increase in demand in the morning as the average temperature at around 8am is between 1° and 2°C lower than the early evening average around 5pm. A special study would be required to establish whether, as expected, the consequent change in heating costs would be more than minimal.

Demand for Fuel for Travel 17. Another impact of the clock change on fuel use is likely to stem from an increase in travel mileage (and therefore transport fuel consumption) resulting from the wider opportunities for leisure activities in the evening. In the UK as a whole, people spend about 60% less time watching television in summer than in winter, suggesting a strong relationship between such sedentary activities and available daylight hours. 18. The PSI report just published included the ﬁndings of special tabulations commissioned from the National Travel Survey on monthly changes in the incidence of travel to participate in sports. It revealed that during the cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence Ev 7

two months in the spring and in the autumn, over a quarter more of these types of journey was made with the summertime clock on GMT+ one hour than with the wintertime clock on GMT. 19. Whilst part of the explanation for this is obviously attributable to temperature differences, daylight also clearly plays a signiﬁcant role. It is pertinent then to note that the report also established that the clock change would increase the annual number of what it called ‘accessible’ daylight hours for adults by around 300 hours—these are typically the hours between 10am and sunset on the two weekend days and between 5pm and sunset on the ﬁve weekdays. (The equivalent for children is less -in the region of 200 hours—as for part of the year, they go to bed before sunset). However, no studies have been undertaken to reveal the extent to which lighter evenings would lead to more leisure activity making use of cars.

Conclusion 20. It is clear that, in respect of the four themes addressed in this Memorandum, energy consumption would be affected by setting clocks forward by one hour in summer and winter. In the case of the first two, the benefits would be positive whilst in the latter two, they would be negative. In the absence of evidence from a systematic and detailed evaluation of all four effects, it could be surmised that the overall outcome would be favourable, albeit marginally. The only reliable way of determining this would be to undertake a trial period with the clock change. However, on the basis of the evaluation above, it would appear to be extremely unlikely to affect the judgement that the UK’s adoption of the SDST (Single Double Summer Time) clock regime would be highly desirable as the benefits outweigh the disbenefits so markedly4. October 2010

References 1 Hillman, M, A Waste of Time: a Time of Waste, Annual Conference of ASSET (Association for Social Studies of Time), Cambridge, (Unpublished), 13 April 1985. 2 Hillman, M, Making the Most of Daylight Hours, Policy Studies Institute, 1988. 3 Home Ofﬁce, Summer Time: A Consultation Document, Cm 722, HMSO, 1989. 4 Hillman, M, “Time for Change-Setting Clocks Forward by One Hour throughout the Year: A New Review of the Evidence”, Policy Studies Institute, 1993 5 Hillman, M, Making the Most of Daylight Hours: The Implications for Scotland, Policy Studies Institute, (in press). 6 Hill, SI, Desobry, F, Garnsey, E W, Chong, Y-F The impact on energy consumption of daylight saving clock changes, Energy Policy, Elsevier, 2010. 7 Department of Energy and Climate Change, Digest of Energy Statistics 2010 and Energy Consumption in the UK and Regions: Domestic data tables 2010.

Memorandum submitted by Lighter Later The Effects on Energy Usage of Extending British Summer Time According to the latest peer-reviewed research, conducted by Dr. Elizabeth Garnsey et al. at the University of Cambridge, advancing the UK’s clocks by one hour in the colder months (from GMT to GMT+1) would lead to “energy [in this context meaning electricity] savings of at least 0.3% of daily demand in Great Britain”. Garnsey predicts that a further saving would be made if the clocks were similarly advanced in the warmer months (from GMT+1 to GMT+2) though this prediction is impossible to model in the same way as the winter savings. 10:10’s Lighter Later campaign supports a three-year trial of SDST (GMT+1 in the colder months and GMT+2 in the warmer months) so that an empirical assessment of the beneﬁts can be made.

The Effect of Extending British Summer Time on Achieving UK Renewables and Emission Reduction Targets The paper described above suggests that a conservative estimate of the associated reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be “approximately equivalent to 450,000 tonnes of CO2” for the winter shift alone. This reﬂects the fact that in addition to reducing demand for energy, the change could reduce the average carbon intensity of electricity by reducing peak demand. The clock change could impact on renewables targets in two ways. First, reducing demand necessarily makes it easier to hit a percent-based supply target for renewables. A second possible impact would be to make domestic solar power more ﬁnancially attractive. The Energy Saving Trust states that “with more sun light in the afternoon and evening (as would happen with DST cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Ev 8 Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence

throughout winter), households with solar photovoltaic systems could beneﬁt from having more electricity from their panels available to them at times when they are more likely to require it.” If this turns out to be true, then the structure of the feed-in tariffs would mean higher rewards for solar-panel owners further incentivising uptake.

The Effect of Extending British Summer Time on the Wider Climate Change Narrative In the popular imagination, climate policies are often associated with austerity and frugality. These negative frames hinder action and lead, in our opinion, to lower levels of support for climate change mitigation. 10:10 aims to challenge this perception, not only by showing what’s possible in the short term, but also by promoting a positive, inspiring vision for how much better a low carbon society could be. This positive narrative helps to unlock public support for wider green initiatives. It was in this spirit that 10:10 launched the Lighter Later campaign in March 2010. Changing the clocks to align daylight with waking hours is a policy which, for minimal cost, reduces emissions whilst promising a wide range of co-beneﬁts—from tackling obesity to creating jobs in the tourism sector. In other words it’s a concrete demonstration that cutting carbon and improving people’s lives go hand in hand. This approach has been vindicated by the extensive positive coverage Lighter Later has received from organisations as diverse as Mumsnet, the RAC and the Sun. It is our belief that success with Lighter Later will open the door to a range of new policies from warmer homes to better power generation. October 2010

Memorandum submitted by Dr Michael B. Morrison Time for more light? Useful Daylight versus Inconvenient Darkness

Executive Summary This short paper has been prepared to investigate the effects of different clock arrangements on available daylight in the UK using sunrise and sunset data for northerly and southerly locations. I introduce the concepts of Useful Daylight (daylight when you need it) and Inconvenient Darkness (darkness when you wish it were light). Four clock patterns are compared: GMT (Greenwich Mean Time), GMT/BST (British Summer Time), GMT/DST (double summer time) and CET (Central European Time). Of the options considered, Double Summer Time offers the greatest beneﬁts and the least inconvenience.

Introduction 1. It’s that time of year again. The sun shines brightly, yet the air is cooler. Most apparent of all, as they say in Scotland, “the nights are fair drawin’ in”! Summer and more specifically British Summer Time (BST), officially ends at 1:00 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) on the last Sunday in October when the clocks are moved back one hour once again. 2. We are not alone. The entire European Union undertakes the clock change at exactly the same time. This has been the case since 1996 (the 9th EC Directive10 passed in January 2001 prescribed indefinitely the start and end dates of summer time as the last Sunday in March and the last Sunday in October respectively). Where the UK (along with the two other westerly EU member states, Ireland and Portugal) differs is that it remains one hour ahead of the bulk of the EU population which is on Central European Time (CET) throughout the year11. 3. Time Zones12 provide two principle benefits. Firstly, they are a way of organising time so that people living in a large area (a country or part of a continent) share the same clock settings. Secondly, they provide a means to organise economic and social activity around the typical hours of daylight for that region. Within this geographic framework of time zones, countries may nevertheless choose to set a different time from the zone in which they reside for political, economic and/ or social reasons. For example, Spain has adopted CET even though Madrid lies 4 degrees to the west of London. 4. Within a given Time Zone, in many regions around the world (typically those that are distant from the equator and hence have large seasonal variations in daylight), the clocks are moved forward in summer months to further enhance the alignment of economic and social activity with the daylight hours. Hence we have the British Summer Time arrangement of today. But is BST the best we could do? This short paper investigates whether greater economic benefits could be derived from adjusting the clocks to make even better use of daylight hours. For example, the clocks could be moved forward two hours in the summertime (Double Summer 10 Directive 2000/84/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 January 2001 on summer-time arrangements. 11 Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Greece and Cyprus are on Eastern European Time (EET) which is one hour behind CET and two hours behind the UK, Ireland and Portugal. 12 There are 24 World Time Zones from -12 through 0 (GMT) to +12. Each one is 15° of Longitude as measured East and West from the Prime Meridian of the World at Greenwich, England. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence Ev 9

Time). Or, the UK could converge with the bulk of the EU population and move from GMT to CET (i.e. with the same summer time adjustments as at present). 5. Such changes would have a multi-facetted impact on life in the UK. There would be important effects in: — Energy use and costs (especially lighting)

— Environmental effects (CO2 emissions); — Road safety (road deaths and injuries); — Leisure time and activities (physical health); — Individual wellbeing (mental health); — Crime (personal and family safety); — Tourism (within the UK). 6. CET clock time convergence might also bring additional economic benefits to UK business. The 1-hour time difference may have a detrimental impact on trade and its removal could lead to improved business effectiveness, productivity and UK competitiveness. 7. Such proposals to change the clocks are never without controversy. Indeed, all attempts in recent times to introduce such changes have failed in Parliament. The crux is darker winter mornings and their perceived impact on people who rise early for work (e.g. farmers) and people in more northern latitudes (northern England, Northern Ireland and Scotland). Successful lobbying of “northern” MPs has ensured that political debate has focused on the divisiveness and inequity of changing the clocks. As a consequence, past Governments have shied away from such a potentially contentious policy change. These issues rightly need to be addressed, but also re-examined in the light of important ongoing changes in UK society, politics, the economy and the environment. 8. All of these effects, both potential benefits and costs, need to be considered carefully and weighed up in order to assess whether there are compelling reasons to contemplate such a major change to British life. In this paper, we first look at the fundamental data to understand how much daylight that we receive in the UK. Then, we consider, how much of this available light that we actually make use of. Finally, we consider different clock change arrangements and their impact on useful daylight (as well as inconvenient darkness).

How Much Daylight do we get? 9. The Earth rotates about its polar axis (24 hours per day) as it orbits around the Sun (365 days per year). The Earth’s rotation results in diurnal cycles of daylight and darkness with the Sun appearing to rise in the east and set in the west at any given point on the surface. Proximate to the Equator, there are 12 hours of daylight each day throughout the year. However, because the Earth’s polar axis is tilted (23.5 degrees) to the plane at which the Earth orbits the Sun, all other points on the planet’s surface experience significant variation in the amount of daylight received. The number of hours of daylight and darkness within each day varies depending upon latitude (the tilt effect) and the season (the Earth’s location in its elliptical path around the sun). At the poles, the Sun is either up for the full 24 hours (summer) or down for the full 24 hours (winter) for around 6 months each year. 10. In between these extremes, the hours of daylight follow a seasonal pattern through the year. On 21 March, the Vernal Equinox, the sun rises exactly in the east travels through the sky for 12 hours and sets exactly in the west everywhere on Earth(on the Greenwich Meridian, 0 longitude, the sun rises at 6:00 am GMT and sets at 6:00 pm GMT). After the Spring Equinox, the sun increasingly follows a higher path in the sky until 21 June, Summer Solstice—the longest day. After the Summer Solstice, the sun follows a lower and lower path until it reaches the point where it is in the sky again for exactly 12 hours. This is the Autumnal Equinox which occurs on 21 September. After this the sun continues to follow a lower path each day until it reaches its lowest path on 21 December, Winter Solstice. The path then lengthens until Vernal Equinox is reached, once again giving exactly 12 hours of daylight. 11. The amount of daylight experienced between the two Equinoxes is dependent on the latitude at which you are located. The further you are from the Equator (i.e. in the northern hemisphere, the further north you are) the less daylight hours per day experienced in the winter period and the more daylight hours per day in the summer period. 12. The bulk of the UK lies in latitude between 50 degrees and 60 degrees north of the Equator. Whether you live in Lerwick in the Shetlands or Truro in Cornwall (nearly 10 degrees of latitude apart) you experience on average about 12.5 hours of daylight per day over the year13. However, the amount of daylight varies significantly through the seasons and between the south and the north of the country. In December, Lerwick only averages 5.9 hours of daylight per day compared with 8.1 hours in Truro. On the other hand, in June it hardly gets dark in Lerwick which experiences 18.9 hours of daylight while Truro gets 16.4 hours. 13. The sun obviously rises earlier the further east your location. However, the UK, being a relatively narrow country, fits comfortably into one time zone—Norwich 1.3 degrees east of Greenwich, sees sunrise about 35 13 In fact, Truro averages about 12.3 hours/ day while Lerwick averages 12.5 hours/ day. The Scots actually receive about one day’s worth of daylight more than much of the English population. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Ev 10 Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence

minutes before Londonderry, 7.3 degrees to the west of Greenwich. About 95% of the UK population lies within a 5 degree zone of longitude, equivalent to 20 minutes difference in sunrise time. 14. On the other hand sunrise and sunset times vary signiﬁcantly from north to south through the year. In Aberdeen in late-December the sun rises at around 08:45 GMT and sets around 15:30 GMT, whereas in mid- June the sun rises at 03:15 GMT (i.e. 4:15 BST) and sets at 21:10 (i.e. 22:10 BST). In London in December the sun is up about 45 minutes earlier than in Aberdeen, at 08:00 GMT and sets about 30 minutes later at 16:00 GMT giving about 1 hour and 15 minutes more daylight. In contrast, in mid-June the sun rises about 30 minutes later in London (03:45 GMT) than in Aberdeen and sets at 20:20 GMT, 50 minutes earlier, giving London about 1 hour 20 minutes less daylight. 15. In total, Aberdeen receives 4,501 hours of daylight per year (51% of the total number of hours in the year), while London receives 4,477 hours, 24 hours less daylight due to its lower latitude.

How Much Daylight Do We Use? 16. Clock changes have no impact on the number of hours of daylight and darkness at any given location. It is our lifestyles and the constraints within which we live our lives that determine how we make use of the available daylight or choose to carry out activities when it is dark. 17. Most people prefer to be active when it is light and to sleep when it is dark. We value daylight for a range of reasons—it reduces costs (less energy use for lighting), it increases safety (less accidents on the roads), it increases scope for outdoor leisure pursuits, and it has a positive psychological effect. 18. We would also expect the value of daylight to vary over the course of the day. Prior to waking from our slumbers it presumably has zero value14. On weekdays, its value increases as the population heads off to work, school, etc. then probably falls somewhat during the period while most people are obliged to work indoors. Its value will again pick up as people depart their place of work and with the commencement of the evening’s leisure hours. Later in the evening, the value of daylight will decline again as people tire and ultimately retire to bed. On weekends, the value of daylight would presumably vary less through the day and may even have a higher value than on weekdays given the greater time available for leisure. It is for these reasons that it is of national interest to consider the compatibility of our daylight hours with the lifestyles that we lead (as well as the constraints that are imposed upon our lifestyles) in the UK. 19. A signiﬁcant research effort would be required to investigate and assess the value of daylight in the UK. Alternatively, a relatively simple model of “Useful Daylight” could provide important insights into alternative clock change arrangements. For the purposes of such analysis, I have adopted a deﬁnition of Useful Daylight for the bulk of the population as between 08:00 (or sunrise if it is after 08:00) and 22:00 (or sunset if it is earlier than 22:00). Based on a calendar year of sunset and sunrise times for London and Aberdeen, I have calculated the amount of useful daylight that each city receives under different clock change arrangements. It is also possible to determine the number of morning hours of “Inconvenient Darkness” (i.e. on those winter days when the sun rises after 8:00). The results of this analysis are reported in the following section.

Clock Changes, Useful Daylight And Inconvenient Darkness GMT 20. First, let’s consider the situation with no clock change arrangements in place, i.e. the time in the UK would be GMT all year round. In London and Aberdeen, as noted earlier, there would be 4,477 hours and 4,501 hours of daylight per year respectively. However, when we impose our Useful Daylight deﬁnition, London would have 3,693 hours of useful daylight while Aberdeen would have 3,719 hours, both amounting to around 83% of the available daylight. 21. Under GMT, London would only experience a total of 1.6 hours of Inconvenient Darkness in the mornings over the year, i.e. during those winter days when the sun rises after 8:00. Aberdeen, on the other hand, experiences 40 hours of inconvenient darkness in the mid-winter months.

GMT/ BST 22. Now let’s turn to the current arrangements in the UK, where the clocks are set to GMT during the winter months and to GMT plus one hour (i.e. BST) in the summer months. Obviously there is the same number of total hours of daylight. However, the number of useful hours increases from 3,693 in London to 3,903, an extra 210 hours of useful daylight. Aberdeen also beneﬁts, with useful daylight increasing from 3,719 hours to 3,926 hours, an extra 207 hours. In both cases, this approximates to an average of one extra hour of daylight per day during the summer period. 23. Since the clocks are unchanged in the winter months from the previous example, there is no change in the number of hours of inconvenient darkness. 14 It may even take a negative value if you are woken up by the early morning light before you wish to get up in the summer months! cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence Ev 11

GMT/ DST 24. In the next example, we continue to maintain the clocks at GMT in the winter months, but put the clocks forward by two hours in the summer months. This is Double Summer Time, or in effect the UK would move onto CET during the summer months. 25. Under this arrangement, London would experience 4,099 hours of useful daylight, i.e. a further 196 hours of useful daylight over and above BST and making use of 92% of the total available hours of daylight in the year. Aberdeen would experience 4,067 hours of useful daylight, an increase over BST of 141 hours and accounting for 90% of the total available hours of daylight. Aberdeen beneﬁts less than London because during the mid summer months, the sun sets after 22:00 for a longer period (i.e. deeming the light that is available “not useful” under our assumption). 26. Again, since the clocks remain at GMT during the winter months, there is no change in the number of hours of inconvenient darkness.

CET 27. In the ﬁnal example, we move the clocks forward by one hour throughout the year so that the UK moves onto Central European Time. 28. This arrangement results in London receiving 4,180 hours of useful daylight, 277 hours more than under the current GMT/ BST arrangement (93% of total available daylight) and 81 hours more than under the GMT/ DST arrangement. These extra 81 hours of useful daylight arise in the winter months since the clocks are identical during the summer months. Aberdeen receives 4,104 hours of useful daylight under CET, 178 hours more than under the existing GMT/ BST arrangements but only 37 hours more than under GMT/ DST. 29. However, under CET there are also big changes in the number of hours of inconvenient darkness. Whereas in the previous examples, London experienced virtual no inconvenient darkness (1.6 hours in total for the year), under CET there would be 75 hours of inconvenient darkness on winter mornings (i.e. an extra 73 hours). This almost offsets the extra 81 hours of useful daylight obtained over and above the GMT / DST arrangement. Aberdeen, on the other hand, experiences an increase from 40 hours of inconvenient darkness to 158 hours, an extra 118 hours compared with only 37 hours of extra useful light under the GMT/ DST arrangement.

Conclusions 30. The benefits of BST are clear—over 200 hours of extra useful daylight throughout the UK compared with remaining on GMT throughout the year. Also importantly, inconvenient morning darkness is unchanged between the two arrangements, with there being almost none in the south increasing to around 40 hours in northern latitudes. The benefits of DST are even greater throughout the country with the south experiencing nearly a further 200 hours of useful daylight and the north an extra 140 hours resulting in the country benefitting from over 90% of the total hours of daylight available. DST would seem to be unequivocally better than BST—significant extra useful daylight and no increase in inconvenient darkness. CET is more debatable. About 80 further hours of useful light are obtained in the south compared with the GMT/ DST arrangement but this is offset with around 70 extra hours of inconvenient darkness. The analysis provides a clear explanation for the antipathy towards a switch to CET in northern latitudes of the UK with only 40 extra hours of useful daylight (compared with GMT/ DST) but with around 120 extra hours of inconvenient darkness on midwinter mornings.

Acknowledgement Daily sunrise and sunset data used in this paper were obtained from the website www.adventist.org . I acknowledge the Seventh-day Adventist Church for providing this service. September 2010

Memorandum submitted by Mr Hayfield Mr Chairman, my name is Harry Hayfield and I am a resident in the constituency of the honourable member for Ceredigion Mr Mark Williams. I am a member of an online astronomy forum and am also a self taught timezone expert and would like to contribute to the debate about extending BST in the United Kingdom. Having read the discussions since the formation of the coalition government, the clear impression that I am getting is that the more northerly you are the less in favour you are of the scheme having read comments from the honourable member for the Western Isles (and I wish to apologise for not being able to spell or pronounce the Gaelic name for the honourable member's constituency) and the more southerly you are, the more likely to be in favour of it. My evidence therefore will be to address this by comparing the sunrise and sunset times using GMT, BST and the proposed SDST timezone for the locations of St. Mary's in the Isles of Sicilly and Lerwick in the Shetland Islands on Midsummer's and Midwinter's Day and comparing them with other locations on a similar latitude. I wish to declare first of all that both those locations are in constituencies represented by cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [18-11-2011 16:23] Job: 006471 Unit: PG01

Ev 12 Energy and Climate Change Committee: Evidence

the Liberal Democrats and that I am also a member of that party (but have decided on those locations as being the most northerly and southerly parts of the United Kingdom)

St. Mary’s on the Isles of Sicilly: 50° N 6°W Midsummer’s Day: Sunrise: 0416 GMT / 0516 BST / 0616 SDST Sunset: 2122 GMT / 2222 BST / 2322 SDST Midwinter’s Day: Sunrise: 0821 GMT / 0921 BST / 1021 SDST Sunset: 1704 GMT / 1804 BST / 1904 SDST

Port Cartier in Quebec, Canada: 50° N 65°W (all times local to Quebec time) Midsummer’s Day: Sunrise: 0417 Sunset: 2040 Midwinter’s Day: Sunrise: 0723 Sunset: 1605

Lerwick in the Shetland Islands: 60° N1°W Midsummer’s Day: Sunrise: 0240 GMT / 0340 BST / 0440 SDST Sunset: 2135 GMT / 2235 BST / 2335 SDST Midwinter’s Day: 0909 GMT / 1009 BST / 1109 SDST Sunset: 1459 GMT / 1559 BST / 1659 SDST

Seward in Alaska, United States: 60°N 150° W Midsummer’s Day: Sunrise: 0432 Sunset: 2327 Midwinter’s Day: Sunrise: 1001 Sunset: 1551 I hope that the committee will consider this evidence when recommending a bill to Parliament and I would be more than happy to attend a committee hearing in the future on this subject. October 2010

Memorandum submitted by Saga Group Summary Results from a recent Saga Populus poll have shown that over two thirds of over 50s are against the clocks turning back in the autumn. The effect of the clocks changing causes many problems for older citizens including isolation, disruption to routine, and depression. Also, 39% of those polled found their energy bills rose as a result of the clocks going back.

Background 1.1 Saga has built its highly successful British business on niche marketing to the over 50s—our customer base numbers 2.6 million. Our robust and highly popular brand is based on trust, quality, dependability and value for older people. We focus on understanding and designing bespoke services to meet the changing needs and demands of our target market of people aged 50+ in the UK, a demographic group comprising about half the electorate and forecast to grow from 20m to 25m people by 2015. 1.2 We routinely survey our membership to gauge the issues that are close to their heart. Our poll ﬁndings help to shape business direction as well as educate key decision and policy makers on the issues that affect this growing and inﬂuential age demographic.

Poll findings show opposition to darker evenings in current system 2.1 Research conducted by a Saga Populus Poll in 2009 of 17,065 people aged 50 and over showed that two thirds (63%) of over 50s support a switch to European time. Another recent poll by Saga motor insurance in 2010 found that 40% of the 13,000 polled say they are forced to change their routine as a result of the clocks going back in the autumn. As more people are forced to stay inside in winter, energy bills inevitably rise. 2.3 These findings are compounded by longer term reactions to the prolonged winter and dark nights. Two thirds of people over 50 find their feelings change in winter with almost half (41%) feeling more depressed and a quarter (24%) feel grumpier. Interestingly, it is the younger over 50s who feel the effects of Winter more, with two thirds of people aged 50–54 saying their feelings change, compared to under half of those aged 75 and over. 2.3 We welcome the Daylight Saving Bill proposed by Rebecca Harris MP which seeks to investigate the effects of advancing time by one hour for all or part of the year. October 2010

Fig. 1 Research conducted by a Saga Populus Poll of 17,065 people aged 50 and over between 13th and 20th November 2009

Fig. 2 Research conducted by a Saga Populus Poll of 12,943 people aged 50+ between the 10th and 17thSeptember 2010