The advancing of the clock has been an exercise in futility in the recent past, as no significant saving of power was witnessed. I wonder how it can yield different results this time. The construction of the office premises in the cities is not in a way that sunlight could be utilised.
The offices switch on the lights at the moment people arrive and end up after eight hours on an average. Similarly, in cities most of the offices are in high-rise buildings where we don't have the ventilation arrangements to keep the air conditioners off up to 11 am.
Purchasing of fans will also raise the maintenance cost of business besides power consumption although lower as compared to air conditioners. Papers flying with air swings would also cause discomfort. So where we can find energy saving. The people in rural areas do not encounter such problems. They rise with sun and retire at sunset.
Secondly, we have not considered the social impact of advancing the clock. In the cities usually the office goers return home around 8 pm. After Isha prayers and dinner you can meet friends and relatives over a cup of tea or a glass of sharbat. Now if you go out after Isha prayers it would be too late. If you reach homes of friends, relatives before Isha prayers they have to take care of your dinner which one won't like.
Thirdly, look at the prayer timings now. Fajr at 6 am, Zohr at 2.30 pm, Asr at 6.45 pm, Maghrib at 8.20 pm and Isha at 10.15 pm. It is really hard to realign with the change in timings. Summarising the above I am sure that the desired results cannot be obtained by merely advancing the clock. It will only bring discomfort and inconvenience for the people.
Comments
Comments are closed.