Many groups and individuals are proposing that our government spend tax money on research and development of systems to utilize solar energy. They urge construction of vast solar energy collectors to convert sunlight to electricity to supply our energy needs. They would even put solar collectors on roofs of homes, factories, schools, and other buildings. Proponents of this technology claim that energy obtained from the sun will be safer and cleaner than coal, oil, or nuclear energy sources.
We view these proposals with alarm. Unscrupulous scientists and greedy promoters are hoodwinking a gullible public. We consider it rash and
dangerous to commit our country to the use of solar energy. This solar technology has never been utilized on such a large scale, and we have no
assurance of its long-range safety. Not one single study has been done to assess the safety of electricity from solar energy as compared to electricity
from other sources.
The promoters of solar energy cleverly lead you to believe that it is perfectly safe. Yet they conveniently neglect to mention that solar energy is
generated by nuclear fusion within the sun. This process operates on the very same basic laws of nuclear physics used in nuclear power plants and atomic bombs!
And what is the source of this energy? It is hydrogen, a highly explosive gas (remember the Hindenberg?) Hydrogen is also the active material in H-bombs, which are not only tremendously destructive, but produce dangerous fallout. The glib advocates of solar energy don’t even mention these disturbing facts about the true sources of solar energy. What else are they trying to hide
from us?
In addition to the known dangers cited above, what about the unknown dangers, which very well might be worse? When pressed, scientists will admit that they do not fully understand the workings of the sun, or even of the atom. They will even grudgingly admit that our knowledge of the basic laws of physics is not yet perfect or complete. Yet these same reckless scientists would have us use this solar technology even before we fully understand how it works.
Admittedly we are already subject to a natural `background’ radiation from the sun. We can do little about that, except to stay out of direct sunlight
as much as possible. The evidence is already clear that too much exposure to sunlight can cause skin cancer. But solar collectors would concentrate that sunlight (which otherwise would have fallen harmlessly on waste land), convert it to electricity and pipe it into our homes to irradiate us from
every light bulb! We would then not even be safe from this cancer-producing energy even in our own homes!
We all know that looking at the sun for even a few seconds can cause blindness. What long term health hazards might result from reading by light
derived from solar energy? Will we develop cataracts, or slowly go blind? Not one medical study has yet addressed itself to this question, and none are
planned.
In their blind zeal to plug us in to solar energy, scientists seem to totally ignore possible fire hazards of solar energy. Sunlight reaching us directly
from the sun at naturally safe levels poses little fire threat. But all one has to do is concentrate sunlight, with a simple burning- glass, and it
readily ignites combustible materials. Who would feel safe with solar energy concentrators on their roof? Could we afford the fire insurance rates?
These scientists, and the big corporations which employ them, stand to profit greatly from construction of solar-power stations.
No wonder they try to hide the dangers of the technology and suppress any open discussion of them.
Proponents of solar energy present facts, figures and graphs to support their claim that energy from the sun will be less expensive, as conventional fuel supplies dwindle and technology of solar energy systems improves. But even if this is so, what will stop the solar energy equipment manufacturers and solar power companies from raising prices when they achieve a monopoly and other fuel sources disappear?
Of course every technology has risks. We might be willing to tolerate some small risk–if solar energy really represented a permanent solution to our
energy problems. But that is not the case. At best, solar energy is only a temporary band-aid. Recent calculations indicate that the “Sun Will Go Out in
a Billion Years As Its Fuel Runs Out” (Source: newspaper headline) As that calculation was made a year ago, we now have only nine-hundred ninety-nine
million, nine-hundred ninety-nine thousand, nine-hundred and ninety-nine years left during which we could use solar energy. Wouldn’t it be better to
put our human resources and scientific brains to work to find a safer and more permanent solution to our energy needs?
The Renewable Energy Training Institute (RETI), with support from the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), the Organizacion Latino-Americana de Energia (OLADE), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), and the Instituto de Investigaciones Electricas (IIE-Mexico), is conducting a two day workshop on solar energy technologies in Mexico.
The Colorado Consumer’s Guide to Buying a Solar Electric System provides basic information about the who, what and why of financing, purchasing and installing photovoltaic (solar electric) systems in Colorado. It also includes information about financial incentives such as the Solar Rebate Program, tax credits for businesses and net metering. Net metering means that extra electricity produced by a photovoltaic system is sold back to the utility at the same rate as power is purchased from the utility. “People need easy to follow guidelines for purchasing and installing solar energy systems, and this new booklet answers that need,” said NREL engineer John Thornton, who helped write the booklet.
ACUA sells solar energy credits for $32,000
As leader of the Democrats, Senator Meg Lees negotiated the passage of the GST legislation with John Howard in 1999. She is standing for re-election in South Australia at the election for the ‘Progressive Alliance”.
ood is easily and conveniently cooked with solar energy as the “fuel” in devices called solar cookers. Solar cookers are an ideal addition
Solar energy is utterly incapable of powering the sort of heavy industry that our economy relies upon. This is yet another one of those statements which is true and meaningless. Solar energy certainly isn’t capable of powering industry directly, and central generation of electricity by solar means is not all that practical. However, solar energy can power a lot of things on which centrally generated power is wasted, such as water heating and home heating and cooling.
‘Our future depends on changing the way we use energy,’ Turner said. ‘We`ve got to move away from fossil fuels and develop long-term energy solutions that work. Using clean energy technologies, such as solar power, is the right thing to do, and it represents a tremendous business
An atmospheric general circulation model , which assimilates data from daily observations of temperature, humidity, wind, and sea-level air pressure, was compared with a set of observations that combines satellite and ground-based measurements of solar flux. The comparison reveals that the model underestimates by 25-30 watts per square meter the amount of solar energy absorbed by Earth’s atmosphere. Contrary to some recent reports, Clouds have little or no overall effect on atmospheic absorption, a consistent feature of both the observations and the model. Of several variables considered, water vapor appears to be the dominant influence on atmospheric absorption.
