Solar Energy. Surprisingly Subversive

I’ve been thinking about solar energy recently.

Not just because of my work in the industry - but at a more conceptual, systemic level. When you take a step back and really consider what solar energy - or specifically solar electricity - represents, a deep and abiding sense of awe takes hold.

I’m not the first to drink the solar kool-aid. Since Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House in 1979 during the energy crisis, devotees and converts and prophets have all preached on the upcoming solar revolution.

But exactly why? What makes solar electricity revolutionary?

Today, and perhaps over some additional posts, I am going to dig into this. I intend to explore how - I think - the solar revolution is more sneakily disruptive and game-changing than even its most ardent proponents imagine.

But first, solar is a simply a better mousetrap.

Ralph Waldo Emerson said “Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door.” It’s not exactly what he wrote, but the thought packs a truthful punch.

Technological innovation always draws a crowd. Any time you can increase efficiency or reduce costs or improve performance, interest and investors will multiply.

But occasionally you get a leapfrog event, a breakthrough, a disruption of the status quo. You get an instance where technology completely jumps the rails and redefines the entire concept in question. You get a better mousetrap.

An example. Consider the record player. For decades the audio technology gradually improved from Thomas Edison’s invention of the phonograph in 1877 to the gramophone, to vinyl. Vinyl records evolved from 78 rpm standards to the 12-inch record to 45 rpm singles, each representing an advancement. But the underlying technology was still the same - capturing sounds mechanically and converting it to electronic signals. 100 years went by like this, until magnetic tape (8-tracks and cassette tapes) shifted the game significantly, moving from a mechanical medium to a magnetic one.

And then came the compact disc, and digital media. That was the REAL gate-crashing technology. Analog to digital, and it turned the music industry upside down.

Solar power represents a similar breakthrough. But first…

Have you ever actually considered how electricity is generated?

Frankly, it’s a bit archaic and quaint. Almost all electricity comes from the simple act of swinging some magnets around coiled wire. That’s it.

In 1831, Michael Faraday put the process on the map and electricity generation hasn’t changed much since. Wire, magnets. Swing ‘em around like a monkey. The entire Industrial Revolution and every appliance you own are essentially beholden to that simple configuration of parts and motion.

Today, we call it a turbine. It’s the key building block of electricity generation, converting mechanical power into electrons. But there’s a catch. You need something to provide the mechanical motion, to spin the magnets and make the turbine go. You need FUEL. A source of power to generate power, and monkeys just won’t suffice.

Thus, almost EVERY form of electricity requires an external fuel source. Burning coal to generate steam, which then spins the turbines. Same with natural gas or oil. Burning, spinning.

Nuclear power, too. All the radiation, all the complex equipment in a nuclear reactor essentially is designed to boil water. Boiling water → steam → turbine → THEN electricity.

Hydroelectric - all that falling water channeled through a dam? Simply just spinning turbines.

For centuries we’ve relied on some combination of contraptions to heat water, generate steam, spin turbines, etc. This approach has served us well, but has several flaws. I’ll simplify them into two of the most important.

The first is complexity. Converting heat to steam to a turbine then to electricity (for example) is a crazy chain of events when you think about it. Fraught with inefficiencies and supply-chain troubles (you have to either get the fuel to the turbine or the turbine to the fuel) - this approach requires massive investments in infrastructure, transportation, and manpower. Again, all to swing some magnets.

The second is environmental degradation. Burning shit is bad - you know, that whole climate change thing. Plus air quality issues. Mining mishaps. Explosions. Nuclear is horrible when things go bad. And hydroelectric? Maybe the least worst option - but declining fish populations, sedimentation build-up, ecosystem decay, and the cultural devastation wrought upon native populations don’t augur well.

Enter solar. A better mousetrap.

“Why?”, you say.

A photovoltaic cell skips that whole wire/magnet crap altogether. It’s a completely different method of generating electricity. In fact, it’s not mechanical at all - it’s a chemical and physical reaction at the level of light particles.

The fuel? It’s the sun, and we have 4 billion years of supply. What’s more? It’s transported directly to the solar cell FOR FREE! No mining, no shipping, no pipelines. No oligarchs, oil spills, extended supply-chains. No black lung, dead fish, or radioactive fallout.

THAT is where the subversive nature of solar power begins. It eliminates or sidesteps a universe of supply-chain headaches. Whole-economies are built around the fossil fuel value chain, and solar just dances past all that.

Like the switch from analog to digital in the audio realm, solar overturns over a century of fuel extraction and transportation infrastructure. It skips the middle-man, and converts the fuel (sunlight) directly into electricity.

When you eliminate the fuel portion of the equation, well, that becomes revolutionary. The traditional fuel business - coal, oil, gas - is the realm of commodity markets dominated by multinational conglomerates, a particular breed of vermin with too much influence and political power. In my view, any way to loosen the grip of the fossil fuel cartels on our lives is time well spent, a revolution worth having.

A better mousetrap indeed.

I hope to explore this further in future posts - think more on what this means for society, the environment, even politics. I’ll flirt with the question Is solar power better for democracy? and maybe even get existential on the topic.

Until then, thanks.

• SIDE NOTE 1: Guess who waltzed in and had the solar panels removed from the White House in 1986 while also dismantling the clean energy infrastructure and tax incentives. Yep. Ronald Reagan, that performative snit.

• SIDE NOTE 2: For the purposes of the argument above, I am speaking about direct solar power (photovoltaics) and not indirect solar power (concentrated solar power). Concentrated solar power is another steam/turbine claptrap.

• SIDE NOTE 3: A source of electricity that is sort of an outlier is the fuel cell, which uses a chemical reaction (usually involving hydrogen) to generate power. But it still relies on a fuel and an associated supply-chain.

• SIDE NOTE 4: Yes, solar panels and the associated infrastructure have their own supply-chain issues, which shouldn’t be ignored. But as a rule, the volume of waste and materials involved is a fraction of that of traditional fossil fuels.

Lyrical Truth Bomb

When musicians say what needs to be said:

Farewell photo

A little slice of life, until next time…

Enjoying The CD Dispatch?

Please share, forward, retweet, repost, like, publish, proselytize, subscribe, praise, promote, and generally make it clear to your friends and colleagues that life is simply not worth living unless you’re a subscriber.

Why should you have all the fun?

No, seriously. Who do you think you are? Selfish bastard…

Disclaimer:

All content and opinions are solely those of the author (Jack), and not representative of my employer, former employers, anyone in Congress, my family, former college roommates, Baptists, the good citizens of Oregon, or my dog Mabel.