It's 5:00 p.m. and Jumbos are sprawled on the President's Lawn. The sky is yellow, and on the library roof, some students study, still reading by sunlight.
Such was the scene on the Hill during the week leading up to spring break, after an earlier-than-usual daylight-saving time began on Sunday, March 11. Based on a provision in Section 110 the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Americans set their clocks back several weeks early this year, with the goal of helping conserve energy nationwide.
The act moved the beginning of daylight-saving time from the first Sunday of April to the second Sunday in March and moved the end from the last Sunday of October to the second Sunday of November, extending the length of daylight-saving time on both ends.
But though Jumbos enjoyed the late-hour sunshine - in spite of cold weather and snowstorms during break - some sources on the Hill say they're skeptical about the new daylight-saving time system.
According to English Lecturer Michael Downing, who is the author of "Spring Forward: The Annual Madness of Daylight Saving Time," changing clocks is one of America's noble - but unfortunately useless - traditions.
"Daylight-saving is an amazingly elegant solution, and for 100 years, people have been trying to figure out what problem it solves," he said. "It doesn't do the one thing Congress claims it does, which is to save us any energy."
According to Downing, the goal daylight-saving time actually accomplishes is much less noble. He said it's all about consumerism.
"Daylight-saving is a fantastically effective retail spending plan," he said. "More light at the end of the day forces Americans out of their houses, and it has been effective at getting us to do two things. We participate in sports and recreation more, and we go shopping."
Amanda Knapp, a volunteer for the environmental advocacy organization Environment Massachusetts who was canvassing near campus during the first week of daylight-saving, said she feels similarly skeptical.
"I would like to know how [Congress] propose[s] that it conserves energy," she said. "Daylight-saving was invented based on how [Americans] farmed, and now it's basically useless."
Knapp said the change was an empty gesture.
"It's like - they're messing with the clocks, but for what purpose?" she said. "What difference would an extra hour in your day make - it's all the same sunlight, but now you put a different label on it. 4:00 instead of 3:00."
The idea behind the switch was simple. By making sunrise an hour later by Americans' clocks, the hope was that people would be awake for more of the sunlit day, and would not have to turn on as many lights when they came home from work.
The act's wording left room for doubt, however, requiring that the Energy Secretary report to Congress on the actual energy-saving effects of the change, and retaining "the right to revert the Daylight Saving Time back to the 2005 time schedules once the Department study is complete."
Downing said he doesn't think the results will be positive. He thinks Congress is wasting its time on a public gesture with limited, if any, tangible effects.
"It's a cynical substitute for real energy policy," he said.
The early time change also affected many electronic devices, according to University Information Technology (UIT) Associate Director of Outreach Dawn Irish. She said in an e-mail to the Daily that, because many calendar-dependent electronics, such as PDA's, personal computers and smartphones, were made before the Energy Policy Act was passed, many of the devices were not built to compensate for daylight-saving time until the first Sunday of April.
Irish said the UIT Web site links to patches from many major electronics vendors, which will help fix problems students may have experienced. They can also visit the UIT office in 009 Ballou Hall for individual help.
But some students, like senior Sheena Keller, aren't very worried. They're just happy to have that extra hour of daytime.
"I think it's great," Keller said as she lounged on the library roof, studying in the late afternoon. "Having more sunlight is just putting everyone in a better mood."
She said that saving energy is an important goal. Even if daylight-saving time doesn't accomplish it, though, Keller still sees the time changes as positive.
"For college students, they probably care less about saving energy than [the sunlight]," she said. "But I don't think anybody would disagree that it's a good thing."
Downing, however, said he didn't think the change had any positive effects.
"I'm a fan of late summer sunsets," he said. "But I think when we have daylight-saving in winter, the days are not long enough to provide the benefits."
