Page 18 RAIN Nov~mber/December 1984 solar water heaters" or other do-it-yourself devices discovered that theory did not translate easily into practice. "Most of the people who were interested in hands-on didn't have the technical training; they didn't understand anything about materials," says Bruce Anderson, an early solar architect and a founding director of the Solar Lobby. "It's not that they didn't care about these things; they just didn't even think about them. So with the best of intentions, they misled low-income people into building stuff that was crap, that fell apart in a few months, that didn't produce any energy, and that was a waste of everyone's time." Although solar development now rests firmly in the hands of American business, David Morris, president of the Institute for Local Self Reliance in.Washington, DC, maintains that the advent of renewable energy technologies may still lead to positive social change. In time, he says, Americans may have to make a choice: large energy systems that provide electricity for utilities to market-such as solar power towers, windmill farms, or enormous banks of photovoltaic cells-or small systems that are economical for a single home or city block. The use of small, decentralized systems will encourage a more active citizenry and a mote democratic society, Morris argues. "If the utility says it is going to build a new nuclear plant and rates will rise to twenty cents per kilowatt-hour, and you know you can generate your own power for eight cents per kilowatt-hour, you are going to enter that hearing and say, 'Wait a minute, give me some more photovoltaics and don't build that nuclear plant.' You'll be active and involved." Barnes, on the other hand, believes that worker ownership of the solar industry holds greater promise'. "Worker-owners spend a big chunk of their lives dealing with issues of fairness, understanding what taking risks is all about, learning to work with other people, and arriving at structures that are perceived as being fair by · ' the people who are having to live with them," he says. "Whereas, even if you actually lobby a public utilities commission, you don't have a lot of control there, and even if you're successful you'd only save maybe a dollar a month. It's just not going to affect your life in a major way." By itself, the trend toward decentralized ownership of energy capacity i's not likely to have a revolutionary impact. In fact, it comfortably follows a basic pattern of 20th-century capitalism-consumers adding one more product to the array of household goods they now feel compelled to own and maintain. Their monthly utility bills ~ill simply become monthly loan payments and occasional maintenance costs. If utilities lose their stranglehold on consumers because of lower-cost, decentralized energy options, a new economic power will nevertheless control the devices that harness the power of the sun, wind, and water-the renevyable energy industry. The sun has set on hopes for a radical solar future. DD Copyright CD 1.984 The Progrcssiuc, Inc. Reprinted /Jy pcn11issio11 fro111 The Progressive, .'v1adiso11, WI 53703. · Activists Spur Conservation When alternative energy became a cause celebre in the late 1970s, its advocates trumpeted the benefits of conservation as well as solar power. Both were considered as means to the same political ends: easing the burden of utility bills on the poor, decentralizing energy production, displacing environmentally destructive fuels, and challenging the power companies. But times change and alliances shift. Today, the enormous potential of energy conservation may threaten solar's biggest supporter-the renewable energy industry. "There will be perfectly good, attractive, cost-effective renewables that do not ultimately make it to the market because there won't be enough demand," says Amory Lovins, international energy consultant and author of Soft Energy Paths. "Efficiency improvements will meet it all." The industry thus has no incentive to encourage conservation; improved efficiency diminishes the need for solar. ThougJ:. today's solar lobbyists-the business leaders-are loath to spur conservation, several activist organizations have established not-for-profit conservation enterprises to provide jobs and reduce energy bills in low-income communiti~s. In Chicago, the Center for Neighborhood Technology persuaded the city government and the local gas utility to set up a $15 million rnnservation loan fund; the money will support energy improvements in 8,500 apartment buildings and homes. Eight neighborhood organizations will administer the fund, which opens hundreds of jobs for local residents. "This is the first shot in the country at getting a successful, self-sustaining conservation program run by community groups," says Scott ·Goldstein, the Center's executive director. The Jobs in Energy Project, based in the nation's capital, has spawned similar initiatives in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and, most recently, in its own backyard_. The organizers hope to provide conservation services to those most in need but least able to afford such expenses. At the same time, the operations will offer training and employment for the jobless. · "The only way people will agree to distribute the pie more equally is if they perceive there is enough to go around," says Margaret Morgan-Hubbard, director of Jobs in Energy. "In this age of scardty, conservation is.the key to making the pie big enough." -RP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz