What Does The Number 22 Mean On A Le Creuset Pan

Time change: more cons than pros in what for most meaningless

I apologize for getting up in a bad mood, but every time I invariably occurs in autumn or spring time change occurs, because with all due respect to those who argue that represents a significant saving of energy, I think, as many others, many of them qualified to do so, the savings, if it occurs, is so small that in no way compensates for the disruption caused and the changes of biorhythms of people. In the case of this morning (or vice-versa), thereby sparing the late evening later, cosume morning having to turn on the lights to get up earlier. I found a job in EuroXPress, a news portal of the European Union, which refers to the subject, treating it a bit from both sides, but with sound ideas and generally not in favor. I leave you with the report:

The idea came in 1974 after the oil crisis, and became a European Directive in 1981, renewed every four years. Two decades later, it seems more to inertia than effectiveness, is still done. Some experts, doctors and environmentalists who are more negative than positive nuances.
However, the ninth European directive, which made permanent the time change, said to be supported by a study commissioned by the European Commission and Parliament in 1999, which proved its value not only on savings, but on other sectors such as transport, communications, road safety, working conditions, lifestyles, health, tourism and leisure.
In Spain, the Institute for Energy Diversification and Saving (IDEA) estimates that the time change represents a saving of 5% of spending on lighting, ie 300 million euros. Of that amount, 90 million are in households, about 6 euros per household.
No specific studies on the usefulness of the measure across Europe, only partially. For example the Agency French Environment estimates that the time change avoids the emission of 44,000 tonnes of CO2 in the country. In contrast, the British Institute of Policy Studies has produced a report that supposedly proves the advantages to Scotland of having a stable schedule similar to that in force in Central Europe.
The controversy is repeated with each change of schedule, twice a year. In France there is an association against the time change, ached, which insists that the measure upsets the biological rhythm, mood and concentration, especially in children and the elderly. The result that stands out is the increasing number of road accidents due to inattention by sleep deficit.
The same complaint made in Spain Ecologists in Action, radically opposed to changing the clocks. In addition to considering it is an assault on the human body, cites data from English Electrical Network, according to which, the saving in electricity consumption would be between 0.1 and 0.5%, coinciding with another Dutch study, Research voor Beleid, 1998. The environmental organization committed to continuous and preventive programs: "change of time does not produce net economic or energy savings, but it distracts from serious saving policies. It's time to let go their own pace to our body and begin to develop serious policies to curb energy waste ".
A more, the National Commission for the Rationalization of Working Hours in Spain (Arho). Understand that the delay of the clocks is a measure ineffective if not accompanied by other streamline the working hours.