“One of the last things to do for
reduction of energy use is start summertime”
1) There’s little proof that this measure really results in an essential reduction of energy use. Often heard in this context is the objection that it may be so, that as a result of summertime the lights inside residences is turned off an hour earlier at night, but on the other this leads to turning them on one (more) hour early in the morning during some three or four months of the seven. Also in those months earlier in the morning it is that much colder that the chance heating will be turned on is proportionally bigger, whereas at night the last hour there usually still is enough warmth from sun or earlier heating present, to leave, resp. turn the heating off then already.
2) This measure leads to a relatively grave disruption of essential natural day-and-night rithm with humans as well as the other elements of nature. To many persons it’s important that so to say the sun allways is on top at twelve o’clock, and not only in five months any more, whereas during the other seven months she is at one in the afternoon. Especcially for persons who are relatively close to nature (and as a result already do as much as they can to reduce their energy use) this break in the day-and-night rithm can cause a significant emotional setback, with adventitious awfull consequences for society in general.
To animals and other kinds of living beings it also must be very disturbing, that from one day in the year on the other humans start their noisy and polluting schlepping around, while breaking the serenity of nature, one hour earlier in the morning.
3) There are several if not many other, more efficient and less startling ways to reduce general use of energy than this one.
a) No more or conciderably less lighting of highways would additionally lead to more cautiously driving and so reduce both accidents and use of fuel.
b) Fun fairs are just for fun and so not necessary, but they take a lot of energy for all those little lights and big attractions. One might seriously concider the question in how far it nowadays is still responsable to maintain this more or less antique folly that in fact is good for nothing.
c) Making the light in staircases of flat buildings where it now burns constantly at night, only burn as long as sensors on every floor register that the staircase is in use by a person.
d) Discouraging so called “gaming” (individually playing games on a computer). Certain other negative aspect of this relatively new phenomenon from time to time are highlighted (such as the fact that it can turn out to a real addiction), but the question how many nuclear plants could be closed down worldwide, if nobody would game any more, seems not to have been posed yet.
Playing in general can be very usefull, but isn’t, when it’s done in a way that involves serious consequences, such as environmental and mental damage.
Alternatives like playing cards don’t have this kind of negative aspects and moreover are a social way of playing, whereas patience can bring a solution in case there are no others to play with).