Now let me generalize from Califor:nia to the national scene. Since 1975, solar energy has made amazing progress from obscurity to a real option. There are solar panels on the White House roof, an official commitment to achieving 20 percent of our energy from the sun by the year 2000, a decent solar tax credit, a solar bank, a billion-,dollar solar budget, and literally thousands of applications • springing up.from Alaska to Florida. • · • But let us also remember that Presictent Truman's official commission, chaired by William Paley in J.95-2, foresa"¥ the possibility ·v of 13 million solar applications by the mid-1970s. The 20 percent goal actually means less than a one percent annual increase in solar usage, a snail's pace. More important, no independent solar experts believe that even the 20 percent goal will actually be reached by the end of the century, at.the present rate of progress. The reasons for this are institutional, economic, political and c~ltural, not technical. . From a technical standpoint, according to the 1979 Domestic Policy Review, it is possible to nearly double the 20 percent goal in the coming two decades. More disturbing, perhaps, is the fact that much of the existing budget for solar-up to 40 percent in ~ome estimates-goes to the expensive, high-technology and futuristic "power tower" and "satellite" projects while more immediate, • practical solar possibilities are ignored or short-changed. Moreover, the Secretary of Energy, iri a memo leaked to the press, has pro-_· jected a reduction of solar·energy spending over the coming five- . year period. • . We are not gathered here, however, to rail at dangerously outmoded attitudes, qr place-the blame for solar's slow acceptance at the feet of federal bureaucracies or oi1 company conspiracies. There· is no attitude so rigid, no vested interest so irrational, that it cannot be modified or changed when a positive ·alternative to,disaster exists. Our task, as important as any in the nation, is to argue for, • promote, and above all create the solar alternative. . • Let me then talk about ourselves, as the advocates and architects of a solar age. We are a strange band of refug~es, some from the • 1 '60s, some front the engiheeril)g and military worlds, some from business-or-govern~ent-as-usual, all drawn together by·an un- • spoken, hardly-describable commitment to this new sour~e of energy. · , As an observer of social reform in American history, I would say that one of the most..i;triking aspects of the solar energy sto,,ry is that it has not really involved a typical social movement. By the usual definition, such a movement mobilizes milliol).S of people for clear goals and includes.tactics ranging from civil disobedience to elec- · toral politics. The anti-nuclear movement is an example, the antiwar movement of tbe.'60s another. There are solar advocates, solar enthusiasts, solar do-it-yourselfers, solar researchers, even a solar philosophy and lifestyle. But: there is no solat..,movement. No one, to my knowledge, _has gone to Tf-!ere }s no attitude s9 tigid, no vested interestso irrational, that it cannot be modified.or:changed when a·positive alternative to . disaster exists. - jail for solar energy. No one.has been-elected to office on a solar platform. . • . I think certain obstacles to a strong solar.movement are rather . obviously built into who we, the solar advocates, are. And if we want.a soiar movement, we will have to consider changes in our own approach to the !Ssue. - 1. The sqlat business community (manufacturers, installers, . architects, etc,) is largely imbued with a free enterprise mentality, including an ideological hostility to government and often a·conservative attitude that inhibits making alliances.with liberals, labor, co_nsumer groups~the anti-nuclear-forces, a!'d so on/ -W:ith some November 1980 RAIN Page 5 The possibility of a movement is being replaced by a professional bureaucracy which sorrie might even callan elite. ... Even if solar hasn't made it, we have. ' . . . exceptions, most 'solar business people are primarily involved in .solar as a business·, are willing to sell themselves to a larger corn- .- pany, and see the marketplace as the arbiter of decisions about • solar's future. - • • • The problem with this view of twofold: a) 'solar is not like the home insulation or refrigerator business because·it involves national security, the health of our entire economy, and profound moral a~d philosophical choices; and b) the marketplace is rigged against solar because of government decisions favoring oil, gas, coal, syn-fuels and nuclear power. . The solar entrepreneur is thus faced with a deep dilemma: to be successful in the jungle of the market, itis necessary to act with the ·''bottom line''·as the crucial standard; but to advance the general prospects of solar, the business person has to be aligned with those who often favor government intervention, strong regulations on oil <::ompanies, rejection of the syn-fuel program, phasing out of.nuclear power plants, and policies which favor the interests of con-_ sumers, workers and communities more than tl}e multi-national corporations. The solar entrepreneur µ1ust work by the standards of cut-throat capitalism by day, and economic democracy by night, a seeming contradiction few·can embrace. • • •. 2. The solar activist is a seq;nd party in our community caught in. several dilemmas. If there is such a thing as the "solar lifestyle," or "the solar experience," the activist is living it. It isno accident that so much of the impetus towards solar energy comes from iitdivid.: uals who live in college towns and rural areas, adopting voluntary simplicity as an ethic, sustaining themselves on natural foods, jog- ~ing or practicing tai chi, priding themselves on their ~oodstoves, breadbox collectors, bicycles, backyard gardens, and reading • Mother Earth N eivs. ,Whether we call them qrop-outs or ecotopians, it is clear that they are trying to already !iv~ in the future, like a new generation of pioneers creating their own environment beyond the physical frontier. • At the·same time, the_se "solar lifestylers" often remain mar- _ginal, eveh alienated, from the mainstream of America as lived from the slums to the subµrbs. And the philosophical and nearattitudinal objections of many solar activists, to the bruising realities of big cities, marketplace competition, and political struggles place •them at a disadvantage as a functioning force for social change. ' . Their role is' as utopians 1n the polluted world of Sodom and Gomorrah, waiting for the example of Davis, C:aliforrtia, to attract the "sinners'! of Los Angeles. Somehow the solar lifestylers will have to decide whether it is a • personal salvation they seek, or a change by moral example, or whether the larger global crisis _calls on them to meet mainstream Americans half-way, at the point where idealism and self-interest converge to create a pressure for alternatives. While solar energy is a question of philosophy and lifestyleto many of us, it is also a , pocketbook rriatter of jobs, lower prices arid economic stability to others. While solar energy is a moral cause to many of us, it is also a practical matter of hard power-oriented bargaining in the halls of goverIJment. Perhaps the solar activists are numerous and confident· enough today to begin broadening t,heir appeal and sharpening their tactics: Otherwis~, the promise of,an idyllic experience will be no match for the blackmail and browbeating of powerful lobbyists. 3. The solar bureaucracy (federal, state and local energy officials, planners, research scientists, "technology transferers,"___etc.) arises • from, and has achieved, a degree of respectability that is double- . edged. Many of the new solar bureaucrats are form~r solar activists, who have made the transit~on to the mainstream without compro-, ' mising their values·. On the one ha:r,d, their resp~ctability is well- _ cont. /
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz