SUN BUST, OR WHY SPS WILL NEVER GET OFF THE GROUND David Steven Pate Solar Energy Coalition - Alabama Space Platform Solar advocates have lost any sense of social responsibility. Possibly this loss occurred during their educational training, a form of trained incapacity (paralysis by analysis). Or perhaps due to greed and the systematic rejection of any type of metaphysical, theological, or philosphical training. The form of technical determinism exhibited by these proponents at the expense of fellow human beings is to be abhorred by all. After finally achieving recognition and a certain degree of respectability, the solar advocates are faced with an even more perplexing problem. How to explain to the general public, how some solar technologies are to be desired, and some to be ignored. The technological trance exhibited by the SPS community reflects memories of the "bullish" years of the 50's and 601s (which in many cases has evolved into the nightmares of the 70's). >. Technical feasibility of the SPS proposal is uncontested. Science is no barrier to weird and seemingly wonderful ideas. However, the technical feasibility of SPS does not increase one iota, the desirability on a social, economic, or energy basis. Careful examination of projected population and energy needs for the time frame involved with SPS development eliminates any argument for continued R&D. To this end, there are sentiments in Congress to eradicate any SPS funding. NASA officials, in Congressional hearings, have testified that they do not think additional funding is needed, but they have not called for ansend to SPS funding either. With this in mind, consider who will use the tremendous amounts of electricity which 60 SPS units would generate. On the other hand, then consider with projections of U. S. energy consumption for 2000 varying from 33-124 quadrillion BTU's, the impact that the decentralized, terrestrial solar technologies can provide. Who then stands to profit from SPS R&D and Evaluation (not to mention implementation)? Surely, the private vested interest and not the American public. We have the know-how, but do we have the know-why? The SPS advocacy demonstrates that they do not. What we need is not technology, but appropriate technology — and lots of it. Earth based technologies developed or being developed (in every community in the world) are the long-term answers to our energy needs. The SPS concept fails at being a long-term solution due to micrometeorite bombardment and the resource and capital intensity it entails. SPS is an exotic (which is exactly what the large energy corporations have told us all along) solar technology, which defies the competitive nature of solar energy utilization that the American public hopes for. SPS promotion by the industrial/aero- space groups is an active attempt to keep energy supply controlled by the vested interest and for the vested interest. This concept is a far cry from the ideological base which has brought solar energy into credibility and acceptance by the general public. The justifiable criticism of the D.o.E. (Department of Entropy)/NASA "megalevel" approach to solar energy development is credenced by the disparity between "hard" technology and "soft" technology funding. The fact of the matter, is that for every dollar and resource going into SPS development or evaluation, there is one less dollar available for the more sane, terrestrial applications. Another thorn in the side of solar advocates is that controversy over such capital/ material intensive solar technologies keeps the man in the street from accepting
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==