What do you think?
Rate this book
Who Owns the Sun?: People, Politics, and the Struggle for a Solar Economy
Narrated against a backdrop of diminishing fossil fuels, environmental degradation, avaricious corporations, and worldwide competition for natural resources, Who Owns the Sun? shows how existing solar technologies combined with local management present logical remedies for our energy gluttony.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published November 30, 1996
1 person is currently reading
9 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 31, 2024
A HISTORY AND ANALYSIS OF SOLAR POWER, AND ITS ALTERNATIVES
Authors Daniel Berman and John O’Connor wrote in the Introduction to this 1996 book, “the big trans formation never came. In the 1990s, the uproar over energy has subsided to a murmur… The greatest victory of the oil and coal companies, electric utilities, automakers, and road-builders has been to turn their former environmental adversaries into collaborators. For mainstream American environmental groups, confrontation is our and green capitalism is in. At present, the dominant idea is to give financial incentives and government subsidies to energy corporations in order to persuade them to invest in efficiency and renewable-energy technologies and ‘unsell’ their major products, fuel and electricity. The response of the fossil-fuel giants has been to take this incentive money and reinvest it … in more oil fields, more automobile factories, and more coal-fired power plants… More than ever, the world is hooked on cars and oil, natural gas, and coal.
“Yet the arguments for decentralized solar technology are more valid today than ever… the fear of a disastrous greenhouse effect, the threat of .. environmental catastrophes, and a massive oil and auto trade deficit---all necessitate a conversion to solar self-sufficiency. [This book] examines the business strategies behind the public rhetoric of the energy giants, and looks at the social reformers and businesspeople who are trying to democratize and decentralize the energy business. Our primary thesis is that local ownership and democratic control of energy are the necessary, if not sufficient, conditions for a solar economy… we argue that municipally owned electric companies and citizen electric cooperatives constitute an appropriate modal for the governance of energy. The publicly owned Sacramento Municipal Utility District [SMUD]… successfully shutdown a nuclear power plant and began to turn that city toward the sun. Today’s solar technologies … make it possible for ordinary citizens and communities to capture the solar energy they need with photovoltaics, solar water heaters, passive solar construction, wind turbines, and even solar roof shingles—without paying obeisance to the commercial energy cartels and oil-producing, authoritarian regimes.”
They note, “Historically, solar’s main opponents have been the large energy corporations. California utilities… have vigorously opposed solar hot water heating, which cuts residential gas usage by 20 to 40 percent in every house where it is installed… For a few years, solar space and water heating flourished under the friendly tax laws… Like California, Colorado became a vortex of solar activity, with hundreds of people working full-time to install solar hot water heating systems.” (Pg. 10)
They report the “reluctance union workers have shown regarding solar energy. How could union workers be expected to support a new technology that cut into the market share of an electric and gas utility that hired union labor?... [Unions] kept their distance from solar entrepreneurs and tradespeople, reasoning that a well-paying job in the hand was worth two in the bush… Many of the well-publicized stories about quality-control problems caused by ‘tax-shelter developers’ and fly-by-night solar hot water contractors were true. But good solar hot water systems installed by reputable organizations … are still functioning.” (Pg. 30-31) They add, “Rather than using the failures of fast-buck artists to destroy the reputation of solar water heating, the political challenge should be to … strengthen the reliability of solar hot water as a technological system… But solar never had a chance. The hoped-for cornucopia of clean energy and jobs was destroyed by President Reagan, whose most fervent supporters included the big energy corporations.” (Pg. 32)
They summarize, “the renewable insurgencies of the last two decades have proved several hypotheses: 1. Grassroots citizen-activists… could shut down multibillion dollar energy projects, especially nuclear power plants. 2. Strict government energy standards… could save massive amounts of energy and create hundreds of thousands of jobs… 3. Low energy prices and deregulation stifle alternatives. As long as oil, gas, and coal supplies flow smoothly… the public at large has been content to leave ownership and control of energy to its customary masters… During the last twenty years, the energy establishment has lost only one major battle---the battle for nuclear power---to its organized citizen opponents. The nuclear cartel has toiled in vain to overcome popular fear and skepticism.” (Pg. 44-45)
They caution, “In the final analysis, the public ownership and local control of utilities, per se, is hardly a guarantee against the plunder of the public legacy or the squandering of publicly owned resources. Only when combined with farsighted vision, vigorous stewardship, and democratic accountability can public power live up to its full promise of providing abundant and affordable (and eventually solar-generated) energy for all the people it serves. The further that public power entities stray from democratic control, the greater the temptation for abuses.” (Pg. 103)
They note, “historically, the energy reform movement’s biggest successes have come from public political pressure against the utilities by statute and regulation. Nationwide, tighter safety and air pollution standards as well as neighborhood resistance have driven up the cost of new power plants and extended construction lead times by years, delaying or halting the building of unnecessary plants.” (Pg. 114)
They lament, “The Solar Lobby argued seventeen years earlier for the creation of a publicly controlled Solar Energy Development Bank. As a matter of fact, it has been politically impossible to create a Solar Bank independent of the energy monopolies… But for the time being, the question ‘Who owns the sun?’ has been lost in the hubbub of collective self-congratulation surrounding the alliance between the wealthiest power brokers in electricity and environmentalism.” (Pg. 134)
They state, “Unfortunately, the ‘labor-environmental alliance’ is usually little more than a hope and a prayer in the minds of a few dedicated local activists. Where they are not outright hostile toward one another, environmentalists and labor unions manage at best a vary truce. Environmentalists pay pro forma obeisance to the notion of a Superfund for Workers and agree halfheartedly with the notion that existing plants should be operated more safely.” (Pg. 157)
They observe, “In the near future, the biggest barriers to household photovoltaic electricity will be the utilities themselves, who have a natural aversion to a technology which makes their centralized power plants and dams irrelevant. The biggest battles will be over money and property rights: who owns the sunlight, who owns the PV panels, and how and at what rate should the electricity be irrelevant.” (Pg. 183)
They say, “The pace at which utilities adopt the views of their top researchers and PV specialists will probably depend much more on political pressure and commitments from fuel suppliers than on technical feasibility. No one except coal producers doubts that the world’s supply of fossil fuels will run out eventually, but, for the time being, fossil-fuel electricity generation will always appear cheaper than adding new photovoltaic capacity.” (Pg. 189)
They again summarize, “The solar path is simple: use less energy, and make sure that the energy comes from generating with renewable sources, as close to home as possible, rather then from mining and burning the world’s accumulated energy capital. The production and distribution of electricity could become part of the solar path… By contrast, the ‘rapid expansion of centralized high-energy technologies’ to produce electricity would create ‘insuperable’ problems: sooner or later the world would run out of extractable coal, uranium, and oil. At some unknown point, the excess of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere might trigger and irreversible greenhouse effect.” (Pg. 213-214)
They conclude, “In this book, we argue that public ownership with local democratic control of utilities is a necessary if not a sufficient condition for a solar economy in the United States. We believe this for two simple reasons: unlike a large capitalist enterprise, a publicly owned utility is NOT impelled to constantly increase sales in order to increase profit margins and stock prices. Therefore, publicly owned utilities have no inherent drive to promote constantly increasing energy sales. If well managed, a public entity can supply electricity more cheaply, because it doesn’t pay inflated salaries and, most importantly, because stockholders don’t siphon off 10 percent each year in dividends.” (Pg. 240)
Since this book is more than 25 years old, it is not ‘current’; but it is an excellent resource for information up to its time of publication.
Authors Daniel Berman and John O’Connor wrote in the Introduction to this 1996 book, “the big trans formation never came. In the 1990s, the uproar over energy has subsided to a murmur… The greatest victory of the oil and coal companies, electric utilities, automakers, and road-builders has been to turn their former environmental adversaries into collaborators. For mainstream American environmental groups, confrontation is our and green capitalism is in. At present, the dominant idea is to give financial incentives and government subsidies to energy corporations in order to persuade them to invest in efficiency and renewable-energy technologies and ‘unsell’ their major products, fuel and electricity. The response of the fossil-fuel giants has been to take this incentive money and reinvest it … in more oil fields, more automobile factories, and more coal-fired power plants… More than ever, the world is hooked on cars and oil, natural gas, and coal.
“Yet the arguments for decentralized solar technology are more valid today than ever… the fear of a disastrous greenhouse effect, the threat of .. environmental catastrophes, and a massive oil and auto trade deficit---all necessitate a conversion to solar self-sufficiency. [This book] examines the business strategies behind the public rhetoric of the energy giants, and looks at the social reformers and businesspeople who are trying to democratize and decentralize the energy business. Our primary thesis is that local ownership and democratic control of energy are the necessary, if not sufficient, conditions for a solar economy… we argue that municipally owned electric companies and citizen electric cooperatives constitute an appropriate modal for the governance of energy. The publicly owned Sacramento Municipal Utility District [SMUD]… successfully shutdown a nuclear power plant and began to turn that city toward the sun. Today’s solar technologies … make it possible for ordinary citizens and communities to capture the solar energy they need with photovoltaics, solar water heaters, passive solar construction, wind turbines, and even solar roof shingles—without paying obeisance to the commercial energy cartels and oil-producing, authoritarian regimes.”
They note, “Historically, solar’s main opponents have been the large energy corporations. California utilities… have vigorously opposed solar hot water heating, which cuts residential gas usage by 20 to 40 percent in every house where it is installed… For a few years, solar space and water heating flourished under the friendly tax laws… Like California, Colorado became a vortex of solar activity, with hundreds of people working full-time to install solar hot water heating systems.” (Pg. 10)
They report the “reluctance union workers have shown regarding solar energy. How could union workers be expected to support a new technology that cut into the market share of an electric and gas utility that hired union labor?... [Unions] kept their distance from solar entrepreneurs and tradespeople, reasoning that a well-paying job in the hand was worth two in the bush… Many of the well-publicized stories about quality-control problems caused by ‘tax-shelter developers’ and fly-by-night solar hot water contractors were true. But good solar hot water systems installed by reputable organizations … are still functioning.” (Pg. 30-31) They add, “Rather than using the failures of fast-buck artists to destroy the reputation of solar water heating, the political challenge should be to … strengthen the reliability of solar hot water as a technological system… But solar never had a chance. The hoped-for cornucopia of clean energy and jobs was destroyed by President Reagan, whose most fervent supporters included the big energy corporations.” (Pg. 32)
They summarize, “the renewable insurgencies of the last two decades have proved several hypotheses: 1. Grassroots citizen-activists… could shut down multibillion dollar energy projects, especially nuclear power plants. 2. Strict government energy standards… could save massive amounts of energy and create hundreds of thousands of jobs… 3. Low energy prices and deregulation stifle alternatives. As long as oil, gas, and coal supplies flow smoothly… the public at large has been content to leave ownership and control of energy to its customary masters… During the last twenty years, the energy establishment has lost only one major battle---the battle for nuclear power---to its organized citizen opponents. The nuclear cartel has toiled in vain to overcome popular fear and skepticism.” (Pg. 44-45)
They caution, “In the final analysis, the public ownership and local control of utilities, per se, is hardly a guarantee against the plunder of the public legacy or the squandering of publicly owned resources. Only when combined with farsighted vision, vigorous stewardship, and democratic accountability can public power live up to its full promise of providing abundant and affordable (and eventually solar-generated) energy for all the people it serves. The further that public power entities stray from democratic control, the greater the temptation for abuses.” (Pg. 103)
They note, “historically, the energy reform movement’s biggest successes have come from public political pressure against the utilities by statute and regulation. Nationwide, tighter safety and air pollution standards as well as neighborhood resistance have driven up the cost of new power plants and extended construction lead times by years, delaying or halting the building of unnecessary plants.” (Pg. 114)
They lament, “The Solar Lobby argued seventeen years earlier for the creation of a publicly controlled Solar Energy Development Bank. As a matter of fact, it has been politically impossible to create a Solar Bank independent of the energy monopolies… But for the time being, the question ‘Who owns the sun?’ has been lost in the hubbub of collective self-congratulation surrounding the alliance between the wealthiest power brokers in electricity and environmentalism.” (Pg. 134)
They state, “Unfortunately, the ‘labor-environmental alliance’ is usually little more than a hope and a prayer in the minds of a few dedicated local activists. Where they are not outright hostile toward one another, environmentalists and labor unions manage at best a vary truce. Environmentalists pay pro forma obeisance to the notion of a Superfund for Workers and agree halfheartedly with the notion that existing plants should be operated more safely.” (Pg. 157)
They observe, “In the near future, the biggest barriers to household photovoltaic electricity will be the utilities themselves, who have a natural aversion to a technology which makes their centralized power plants and dams irrelevant. The biggest battles will be over money and property rights: who owns the sunlight, who owns the PV panels, and how and at what rate should the electricity be irrelevant.” (Pg. 183)
They say, “The pace at which utilities adopt the views of their top researchers and PV specialists will probably depend much more on political pressure and commitments from fuel suppliers than on technical feasibility. No one except coal producers doubts that the world’s supply of fossil fuels will run out eventually, but, for the time being, fossil-fuel electricity generation will always appear cheaper than adding new photovoltaic capacity.” (Pg. 189)
They again summarize, “The solar path is simple: use less energy, and make sure that the energy comes from generating with renewable sources, as close to home as possible, rather then from mining and burning the world’s accumulated energy capital. The production and distribution of electricity could become part of the solar path… By contrast, the ‘rapid expansion of centralized high-energy technologies’ to produce electricity would create ‘insuperable’ problems: sooner or later the world would run out of extractable coal, uranium, and oil. At some unknown point, the excess of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere might trigger and irreversible greenhouse effect.” (Pg. 213-214)
They conclude, “In this book, we argue that public ownership with local democratic control of utilities is a necessary if not a sufficient condition for a solar economy in the United States. We believe this for two simple reasons: unlike a large capitalist enterprise, a publicly owned utility is NOT impelled to constantly increase sales in order to increase profit margins and stock prices. Therefore, publicly owned utilities have no inherent drive to promote constantly increasing energy sales. If well managed, a public entity can supply electricity more cheaply, because it doesn’t pay inflated salaries and, most importantly, because stockholders don’t siphon off 10 percent each year in dividends.” (Pg. 240)
Since this book is more than 25 years old, it is not ‘current’; but it is an excellent resource for information up to its time of publication.
April 21, 2013
Whoo boy ... I think I ended up scanning some of this. Terrible title, should be "The Struggle of Solar Power." It comes across as very left-wing whiny about the big bad corporations and criticizes fellow environmental organizations ... which it then praises several chapters later. I wish it had focused more on personal town stories. It got a bit boring; doesn't do a lot to help people want to make a change.
July 2, 2021
My time would be better spent sleeping than reading this book. I was unable to get myself past the introduction, which sums the entire book up so well that reading further seems pointless. That isn't praise, as Daniel Berman and his colleague bored me more than watching paint dry. Their thesis is compelling, but their writing is plain as bread without spread.
Avoid this book unless you must read it, because there are no redeeming features worth paying for.
Avoid this book unless you must read it, because there are no redeeming features worth paying for.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews