COLUMN: Solar energy a safe, cheap alternative
Earlier this month, news reports claimed scientists once again may have mimicked “cold fusion,” the process by which the sun produces its energy. The San Francisco Chronicle suggested that the research “… may one day provide humanity with a long-sought-after and much-needed new form of renewable, decentralized, non-polluting energy.”
Sounds good. Let’s spend a few billion dollars on further research and debate the topic for another decade or two. In the meantime, maybe the “hot fusion” lab at the National Ignition Facility in California will solve our energy problems first. This lab, which seeks to use lasers to create fusion, is currently the single most expensive item in the Department of Energy’s research budget and is years behind schedule.
But no matter, while our armies of scientists work on the problem we have safe and cheap nuclear power plants to provide us with electricity. “Safe,” until you ponder the 41 million tons of highly radioactive waste produced by these plants so far. “Cheap,” unless you factor in the waste storage costs and the $7 billion in government subsidies the nuclear industry will receive over the next decade.
Well, at least the coal and oil industries will continue to create plenty of inexpensive electricity, especially when tax breaks and loopholes total $11 billion each year (Ever hear of Enron? They paid no corporate income tax for the last four of five years), not to mention the hidden costs of air pollution, lung disease and ravaged landscapes and global warming, to name just a few.
The funny thing about all this is that the “long sought after … much needed new form of renewable” energy already exists. It’s called the sun. You know, that fiery orb which lights up our days and is currently melting away the snow and feeding the trees outside. You’ve all seen it before I’m sure.
Contrary to what Dick Cheney and his toxic task force might say, solar power could be supplying much of America’s electricity right now. The technology already exists. I’ve been inside houses with computers, refrigerators, washers, dryers and all the other amenities of a suburban home without a single power line running to them. The cities of Phoenix, Los Angeles, San Diego, Las Vegas and Albuquerque, among others, could be powered almost exclusively by sunshine if only they would install solar panels on all buildings and homes.
On the average, solar powered buildings can create a kilowatt hour of electricity for 10 cents, about the same as current grid prices. But as noted, coal and nuclear power is highly-subsidized by the federal government, which makes the price appear much lower than it really is. Furthermore, solar-powered buildings are immune to blackouts, price hikes and industrial collapse. And once installed, the system is virtually maintenance free.
Solar-powered systems can be integrated with existing power grids, meaning any excess electricity produced in sunny areas could be shared with cloudy places like Seattle. And what about all the power lines stretched across America? Each power pole could have a solar panel mounted at the top, capturing any available sunlight and channeling the energy right into the power grid. This would substantially decrease the need for coal or nuclear powered energy, which could still supplement the solar power when necessary.
The problem with all this is that it’s too simple. Our leaders can only think in terms of grandiose and expensive projects like Hoover Dams and nuclear reactors. The concept of decentralized, locally produced power challenges their paternalistic mindset, not to mention undermining the profits of the Enrons and Exxons that got them elected in the first place.
Our fearless leader, Mr. Bush, likes to tout the benefits of a “free market” economy: Innovation, increased production and lower prices on consumer goods. According to this theory, government should keep its regulating hand out of the process. Just let supply and demand do its thing and industry will produce electricity at fair prices, and consumers will get what they want.
But by providing vested interests with billions in annual subsidies, the Bush administration is undermining the very market system it claims to believe in. The system is skewed, for no one in their right mind would pay the real price for energy produced by the fossil fueled and nuclear power plants.
Who of us would pay extra for Peabody Coal to create more acid rain? Would you send a dollar to a nuclear power plant so they could make more cancer causing waste? On a truly level economic playing field, consumers will choose cheap, clean and renewable solar power every time.