Sun Day Sermon

ON HELIOS, as at Harvard, last week witnessed the most spectacular demonstration of the decade. After five-and-a-half years of inactivity, a flare scorched the solar surface, shorting out the South Atlantic and juicing up the aurora borealis as far south as Cambridge. Fortunately, most of the sun's radiant energy reaches the earth in a form more suitable for earthling endeavor.

The campaign to harness that solar energy will reach its first milestone on Sun Day, a national celebration of solar resources scheduled this week in place of Wednesday. Locally, films, exhibits, demonstrations and picnics at and around MIT and the Boston Museum of Science will present the myriad possibilities for solar energy development. There will also be a speech at Harvard by David Jhirad of the Union of Concerned Scientists, who will discuss the potential of alternative energy sources.

According to Jhirad, solar energy could provide 100 per cent of U.S. energy needs within 25 years. His position received support from a recent report of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, which concluded that electricity from one-site solar systems could be cost-competitive with that from utilities "within ten to 15 years."

Furthermore, the U.S. Office of Energy Development (OED) has stated that solar water heating is already cost-competitive with electric water heating. However, as stressed by the President's Council on Environmental Quality in a report issued earlier this month, the development of a solar-based economy depends on a national commitment "to that goal and to serious energy conservation."

Congress has begun to show willingness to back solar development projects. Eight solar energy bills were introduced this year, including proposals for low-interest equipment loans, start-up assistance for small solar firms, and requirements that federal facilities use the maximum amount of solar power. Due to a lack of support from either OED or President Carter, however, the total federal solar energy budget is seven times less than that granted for nuclear power development.

As Reps. Robert Drinan (D-Mass.) and Richard Ottinger (D-N.Y.) have pointed out, OED officials are principally former executives of nuclear and defense industries who, along with OED head James Schlesinger, continue to promote non-renewable fossil fuel and nuclear energy development while undermining the solar effort. In fields such as solar heating and cooling, where the technology has already been developed at reasonable cost, the lack of OED support is not crucial. For rapid solar electric development, however, a change in OED is vital.

The most reasonable source of solar electric power is the photovoltaic cell of the type used in satellites and light meters. The cost of power from these cells is currently high--about $11 per watt, because the volume of business is currently low--750 kilowatts of capacity produced per year. Yet 1977 reports of the United Nations and the Federal Energy Administration show that electric power from photovoltaic cells would be cheaper than that from nuclear plants if they received a total investment of only $1 billion. That is still less than the cost of a single large nuclear power plant.

Despite the need for, and advantages of, solar energy, there has not yet arisen a strong base of grassroots support for solar development. One reason is common ignorance of the continuing energy crisis and of the inability of nuclear power to safely meet national, or international, energy needs. El Camino owners still fly down the pikes doing CB 70 flashing a chrome-framed message from their jacked-up bumpers: I hope all of you ecological bastards freeze to death in the dark. A second reason is the lack of effective leadership--field representatives from national Sun Day headquarters did not begin regional organizing until just six weeks ago.

EVEN WHERE the effort has been substantial, the Sun Day campaign is likely to have minimal appeal. Americans are as unprepared for "communal, free" energy as they were for unwed mothers and organic apples. Talk about "soft" energy alternatives conjures up notions of Carvel or Dentu-creme, neither of which seems the likely source of progress and power in this country. Furthermore, Sun Day sponsors and others defined solar energy so as to include "indirect" solar sources, such as manure and windmills, that do even less to lend credence to the idea of a solar "strong America."

Organizers should limit this approach to alternative publications where the readership is more receptive. A national campaign should focus on the viability of solar power within the context of the trash compacter mentality. If solar energy really changes society away from its energy-eating technological obsession, then there is no need to force such ideas upon the general public. Nevertheless, one aspect of solar energy not linked to its technical or economic feasibility should be stressed--its potential to create jobs.

The economic viability of solar energy depends on the establishment of legislated support for both development and implementation. Tax incentives and direct loans for solar installations should be augmented and distributed promptly--1375 Massachusetts homeowners have waited for more than a year for $400 solar hot water heating grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Citizens should encourages Congress to repeal legislation that encourages fossil fuel consumption--such as that establishing federal highway funds--and urge legislatures and councils to modify those institutional arrangements--such as outmoded utility rate structures and building codes--that hinder the application of solar energy technology.

Unfortunately, most of the present pressure on legislators comes from utility front organizations, such as the Edison Electric Institute, that recognize the threat solar energy poses to their profits. Solar flares, although spectacular, won't bring us closer to solar energy either. But better presentations--along the lines of Sun Day--can inform people of the practicality and inevitability of a massive American turn towards the sun.