SOLAR
ENERGY:
THE
JAMES
ULTIMATE
L,
ENERGY
TURNER
RESOURCE
SOLAR ENERGY: THE ULTIMATE ENERGY RESOURCE
Problems in Environmental Law
Professor Frank Skillern
Prepared by: James L , Turner
May 1979
99?
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
P. 1
BACKGROUND
P. 2
DIRECT SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
Passive Systems
Active Systems
Low Temperatur Collectors
Agricultural and Industrial
Process Heat
Solar Thermal Power Systems
Photovoltaic Systems
Hydrogen Production
Environmental Effects
Land Use Effects
Effects of Manufacture of
Solar Components
Fossil Fuel Backup Systems
....
.............
P.
P.
P.
P.
3
3
k
5
P.
P.
P.
P.
P.
P.
6
7
9
11
11
12
P . 13
P . Ik
POLITICAL ECONOMY OF SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
P . Ik
LEGAL ISSUES
Federal Incentives
.............
The Solar Heating and Cooling
Demonstration Act of 197**
.............
The Solar Energy Research, Development,
and Demonstration Act of 1974
The Agricultural Solar Energy Research,
Development, and Demonstration Act
of 197^
The Solar Photovoltaic Energy R e s e a r c h ,
Development, and Demonstration Act
of 1978
The National Energy Plan
Access to Sunlight
.............
Energy Pricing and Utility Regulation
Other Legal issues
P . 1?
P . 17
P.
P.
P.
P.
P.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
P . 31
FOOTNOTES
P . 33
2?3
P . i8
P . 18
P . 20
20
21
2k
28
30
INTRODUCTION
Most of the available energy on this planet is derived directly,
or indirectly from the sun. The sun' t? energy drives the earth's
hydrologic c y c l e . It is the main determinant of climate, and it is
the driving force behind the earth's w i n d s , r i v e r s , and ocean
currents. The global solar energy system is in a state of equilib r i u m , with incoming radiation, in the form of infrared, ultraviolet,
and visible r a d i a t i o n , equalled by outgoing radiation.
1
Solar
energy also makes possible the phenomenon of photosynthesis, and
in this stored form h a s been responsible for most of mankind's
energy supply since the beginning of time. Stored photosynthetic
energy consists of direct forms, such as w o o d , grass, and cowehips;
and i n d i r e c t fossil fuels, such as coal, natural gas, o i l , and
tar sands, which derived from long since decayed organic m a t t e r .
Until about i860, wood was the major fuel in use in the United
States.
4-
From 1880 until about 1950, coal was the nation's pre-
dominant energy source. Since 1950, coal has been supplanted by
oil and natural gas,-
5
It should be n o t e d , however, that wood is
still the major source of fuel in much of the w o r l d .
The amount of direct solar energy that reaches the earth's
surface has been estimated at
X 10'~' BTU's per y e a r , or
about 18,000 times all of the energy consumed by all the world's
man made devices during a year's t i m e . This i s about
less
than that amount of solar energy that strikes the earth's
outer atmosphere, according to scientific estimates.^ Such a
phenomenal amount of essentially unharnessed energy cannot be
- 2 -
i g n o r e d , as conventional energy supplies are rapidly b e i n g
depleted,and energy use per capita continues to skyrocket.
It is the technological, political-economic, and legal problems
associated with harvesting this vast reservoir of direct solar
energy that constitute the focus of this a n a l y s i s . Photosynthetic fuels, or b i o m a s s , and indirect solar energy forms 5
such as w i n d , ocean currents and thermal gradients, and
hydroelectricity, will mot be. discussed in this p a p e r , although
they may be mentioned in p a s s i n g .
BACKGROUND
Solar energy h a s been considered at the forefront of
energy planning for the future by most experts. As recently
as 1966, h o w e v e r , a presidential commission consisting of the,
h e a d s of nine federal departments and agencies, projected U . S .
energy requirements for the period i960 to 2 0 0 0 , and solar
energy was not even listed as a s o u r c e . ^ Solar energy's rise
to prominence has been the result of a combination of circ u m s t a n c e s . Energy consumption h a s been one of t h e m . It h a s
continued to rise over the past several decades and i s expected
r
to continue doing s o .
At the same time there has been great
uncertainty about the reserves of conventional energy sources
(i.e., coal, p e t r o l e u m , n u c l e a r ) , coupled with tremendous
increases in the price of these conventional alternatives.
F u r t h e r , the political and economic stability of many of the
worlds major oil producing regions i.;-. In question. World
population has continiued to rise at an alarming rate (estimated
(y-K
O
A-
- 3 -
to be anywhere from 6 to 7 billion humans by the year 2 0 0 0 ) ,
and at the same t i m e , the environmental impacts associated
with conventional energy sources have multiplied.'
7
To illus-
trate further, the energy consumption growth problem alone
may be demonstrative of the gravity of the situation. If all
the world's energy resources were estimated to last for 10,000
years at current rates of consumption, these reserves would
be reduced to 170 years if a '3.5% annual grov/th rate in the
use of energy p e r s i s t e d . To make matters w o r s e , the Stanford
Research Institute projects an annual energy use grov/th rate
Q
of about k % ,
It i s in this context that direct solar energy
becomes an important energy a l t e r n a t i v e .
DIRECT SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
Passive Systems
The sun's rays can be harnessed for use as an energy
source by passive solar energy systems. In such systems, the
thermal flow of solar radiation is utilized by natural m e a n s
such as convection, conduction, and r a d i a t i o n . This contrasts
with active solar systems, which involve mechanical d e v i c e s ,
i . e . , compressors, p u m p s , fans, and heat transfer
fluids.^
Passive systems rely primarily on innovative architectural
design of homes and other buildings to take maximum advantage
of the suns energy-- for winter heating and summer cooling
and ventilation. Passive systems characteristically involve
large areas of south-facing windows and massibe structural
ro
-
k
-
elements, such as thick walls and floors made of c o n c r e t e .
There i s an absence of north facing w i n d o w s , and energy saving
insulation is liberally i n s t a l l e d , Atriums and greenhouses
are commonly integrated into the passive solar energy d e s i g n s .
10
Passive systems are advantageous because they involve little
or no additional investment, when compared to conventional homes
and b u i l d i n g s . They can deliver energy to buildings at l e s s
cost than active solar systems, and they have no equipment
certification problems and a very small likelihood of equipment m a l f u n c t i o n .
11
Materials required to install such systems
are often the same as for conventional b u i l d i n g s . Passive systems
can provide from 2 5 % to 8 0 % of a buildings heating and cooling
needs dpending on location and c l i m a t e . Data from several
states backs up these figures. The biggest barrier to widespread
usage of passive systems has been i g n o r a n c e — on the part of
12
architects, b u i l d e r s , and c o n s u m e r s .
energy savers that potential demand
These systems are such
Tor them could be e n o r m o u s .
Passive systems work well anywhere in the United States; and they
have been successfully into existing dwellings in P r i n c e t o n , N , 13
J.,
Seattle, W A , , Denver, C O . , and other equally diverse l o c a t i o n s .
Active Systems
"Active Systems" collectively refers to a variety of types
that are designed to mechanically harness solar energy. These
systems can utilize solar energy on site for space heating and
cooling and water heating} or they can use the sun's energy to
1
generate electricity, directly or i n d i r e c t l y . ^
OV*y
- 5Low Temperature Collectors
Low Temperature Collectors (LTC) arc examples of solar energy
technology to which many of u s have become accustomed, o r at
least we are familiar with the concept. They are characterized
by absorber p a n e l s , usually b l a c k , covered with g l a s s , within
which the solar radiation i s t r a p p e d . This energy is then pumped
to storage and distributed by a heat transfer fluid, such as
15
water or glycol, o r by a i r . " Because of the low maximum heat
level a t t a i n a b l e , about 250 F , such systems are not readily
adaptable to production of electricity, but are convenient
for heating w a t e r , space heating and space cooling. T y p i c a l l y ,
L T C ' s have a conventionally powered backup system for off p e r i o d s ,
since energy storage can be cumbersome and expensive. Due to
the large amount of Federal support and research and development
these systems have been r e c e i v i n g , and the skyrocketing cost
of alternative conventional energy sources, the use of L T C ' s
has begun to expand r a p i d l y . The costs of installing L T C ' s
have b e e n projected to decline sign!ficantly during the period
of 1978 to 1985 by the Department oT Energy (DOE), both for
1
water heating systems and total heating and cooling s y s t e m s . ^
As of May ?978, there were over 50,000 solar installations
of v a r i o u s types (mostly L T C ' s ) in the United S t a t e s , T o t a l
sales of solar industries exceeded $2.00 million in the first
five months of 1978. The total surface area of manufactured
collectors has been doubling about every nine m o n t h s . ^ M a n y
small businesses have become involved in the manufacture of
2S8
- 6
solar collector s y s t e m s . American Heliothermal C o r p . of
Denver, Colorado, which had solar systems sales of over
$800,000.00 between March 1976 and June 1977, is an example
18
of one of these small b u s i n e s s e s .
Some large corporations
are also actively involved in the manufacture of sola? p a n e l s .
Grumman Aircraft C o r p . is One1Q o f these large businesses involved in the solar p r o g r a m .
7
Agricultural and Industrial Process Heat
Much of the energy required by industry and agriculture
i s in the form of hot
20 w a t e r , hot air (for drying), and low
temperature steam.
The U . S . D e p t . of Agriculture had some
k9 agricultural projects in 29 states utilizing solar energy,
as of May 1978. These included a variety of such activities
as heating greenhouses and livestock shelters, grain d r y i n g ,
crop drying (i.e., p e a n u t s , forage, and tobacco), and food
21
processing.
Most of the current research and development projects
involve low temperature collection systems. Besides the LTC
technology, DOS i s funding several projects geared to 22provide
industrial process heat up to a temperature of 600 f.
Potential industrial applications for solar energy include
furniture, glass, l u m b e r , m i n i n g , pulp and p a p e r , p e t r o l e u m ,
pharmaceuticals, textiles, chemicals, concrete block,and
brick p r o c e s s i n g . The list goes on and o n . To cite an example
of the energy involved., one soybean processing plant in
Decatur, Alabama i s representative. This plant consumes about
1,3 million gallons of fuel a y e a r , which i s used chiefly for
23
drying.
Industry and agriculture consume about half of the
total energy used in the United States every y e a r , and about
half of this i s in the form of process heat that could easily
be supplied by solar e n e r g y .
Solar Thermal Power Systems
Solar thermal power systems (STP) are designed to convert
solar radiation into thermal energy that i s in turn utilized
to generate e l e c t r i c i t y . Present STP systems involve two types
of configurations: one system utilizing a central
receiver and
PL1
one system utilizing distributed r e c e i v e r s . ^
In the central receiver s y s t e m , a large field of dual-axis
tracking mirrors called heliostats are used to collect and
direct solar radiation toward a large tower-mounted receiver
unit ("The Power T o w e r " ) , which contains a working heat transfer
fluid. Designs that are currently in use can achieve fluid
temperatures above 600 C , and high temperature storage capacity
i s available to smooth 2.5out the output of such plants during
the daily solar c y c l e .
Sandia Laboraties near Albuquerque,
New Mexico, is currently evaluating an STP unit with a central
receiver design for D O E , This test facility is designed to
produce five megawatts of electricity; and a ten megawatt
facility i s planned 26
for Barstow, California, that will feed
into a utility g r i d ,
A design of this type would require
approximately a square mile surface area of heliostat collectors
230
- 8 -
in order to generate fifty megawatts of electricity, or about
27
enough electricity to power a city of 50,000 people.
Honeywell,
Inc., which manufactures heliostats h a s been working on a plan
which would utilize 7k,000 h e l i o s t a t s , each about 10' X 2 0 ' ,
focused on a 1,500' central receiver t o w e r . Temperatures in
excess of 1,000 F would predictably be generated, andpa this
STP system would supply electricity for 40,000 homes.
The second type of solar .thermal system is the distributed
receiver system. It concentrates solar energy within a large
number of individual collector m o d u l e s . These mirrored m o d u l e s
are either disclike or spherical in shape, or are parabolic
t r o u g h s . In such a system, the sun's rays are concentrated on
a heater/absorber unit containing a heat transfer
fluid*that
pa
is located at the focus of the module m i r r o r .
The Crosbyton Solar Demonstration Project that will be
constructed near Crosbyton, T e x a s , i s planned to utilize
such a configuration, according to project head D r . John
Reichert of Texas Tech University's electrical engineering
department,
0
This p r o j e c t , financed through D O E , i s designed
to culminate in an electrical power generating facility with
a capacity of five megawatts at a date no earlier than 19?'
The Crosbyton facility would be a hybrid o n e , using conventionally powered (gasoline or o i l ) generators to supplement
the solar units during off periods of the solar c y c l e . This
STP system would utilize approximately ten spherical mirror
m o d u l e s , 200 feet in apertive diameter, with the focal point
along
the center line of c u r v a t u r e . The mirrors would have
a 15 degree south facing tilt. This facility is designed to
supply all of Crosbyton's electrical needs (currently estimated
at 3.2 m e g a w a t t s ) , with the remaining 1.8 megawatts of power
to be sold to local agricultural users (i.e., for irrigation)
or to be fed .into a power g r i d . Total cost of the project is
estimated at approximately $30 million, including the R & D p h a s e .
The Solar Thermal program is aimed primarily at three potential market applicationss large scale electricity g e n e r a t i o n ,
small scale electricity g e n e r a t i o n , and small scale on-site
total energy application (involving electric power generation
32
and production of h e a t ) .
Current costs are high for Solar
Thermal energy. Eventually, this technology is expected to
show its initial market penetration
33 in the Southwest due to the
optimum conditions in that a r e a .
Photovoltaic Systems
Photovoltaic (PV) solar energy systems are those that use
a semi-conductor material, such as t-silicon or cadmium sulfide,
Oil
to c o n v e r t sunlight directly into electricity.
This energy
system g o t its start in the space program, powering a satellite
35
as early as 1 9 5 " .
The first totally solar powered residence
in the world was NASA's S k y l a b , which carried two 8^0 square
foot PV cell a r r a y s , tiven though one of the PV arrays was crippled on launching, the other array was easily able to m a i n t a i n
support systems for nine astronauts for 1?1 days in o r b i t . When
- 10 -
the array was shadowed b y the earth, the craft operated on
36
batteries which were later recharged by the PV a r r a y .
The silicon cells that are involved in PV conversion of
solar energy, are ultrathin wafers thai are a b o u t the size of
an a v e r a g e political campaign b u t t o n .
37
Maeh "cell has a thin
n (negative) layer (phosphorusesilicon) and a p (positive)
layer (boron-silicon). W h e n sunlight delivers energy to the
p l a y e r , electrons are knocked out of some of the silicon
a t o m s , leaving holes in the electronic structure. These free
and energetic electrons move across the junction to the n layer
and then through a w i r e to the l o a d , where their energy is
converted to useful w o r k . The electrons then go to the p layer
and re-enter its electronic structure at the holes."
18
It takes a b o u t forty of these silicon solar cells connected
together to produce enough electricity to charge an ordinary
39
twelve v o l t b a t t e r y .
A twenty foot by thirty foot photovoltaic
array operated at 10$ effiency (about average conversion efficic i e n c y for PV systems) would have a peak output of 5,000 volts
at midday and would supply more than enough power for an average
0
American household's electrical need:s.'' Photovoltaic energy is
c o s t l y , and uses much surface area per watt p r o d u c e d . Current
applications are confined to space and remote spots on e a r t h ,
such as a Forest Service radio repeater an. a Col ifornia
mountainhi
top and U . S . Coast Guard buoys on Lof^f Island sound.
One idea under consideration by DOg and NASA is the installation
- 11 of photovoltaic energy farms in s p a c e . These gigantic
satellites
would be able to produce in the neighborhood of 5»000 to 10,000
megawatts of electricity and would beam this power to earth via
42
microwaves.
Such a space power station would require a PV array
43
of about 32 square kilometers at a location above the equator.
Hydrogen Produetlon
One aspect of solar energy production that makes it even more
promising is the possibility of producing hydrogen fuel as a byproduct of solar electrical p r o d u c t i o n . Hydrogen is a clean
fuel,
yielding only water when combusted with o x y g e n . Although it takes
up more space than natural g a s , its energy per pound is almost
three times that of gasoline; and it is safer than e i t h e r . Further
it is one of the most abudant of all substances, being a major
component of w a t e r .
Hydrogen can be produced by using electricity produced from
solar energy systems to separate It from water,using electrolyte
c e l l s . Solar Energy could also be use. to produce hydrogen more
directly by a process known as p h o t o l y s i s — t h e process by which
1ight decomposes m a t e r i a l s . Electrodes made of semi-conductor
materials (similar to photovoltaic eel3s) could absorb sunlight
and split water at the surface of the electrodes, requiring
little electricity. As a further m e t h o d ,
thermochemical
cycles (the series of chemical reactions that can produce
hydrogen and oxygen from water and heat) could be coupled
45
with concentrated solar energy to split w a t e r .
Environmental Effects
Solar Energy technologies are essentially benign in their
-12-
impacts on the environment, when compared with conventional
s y s t e m s . The primary environmental effects of solar energy
systems are positive effects that are associated with the
concomitant reduction of the adverse effects created by conv e n t i o n a l power systems (including n u c l e a r ) . The main a d v e r s e
environmental effects of solar energy systems fall into three
areas * (l) land use (2) manufacture of solar components and
, X
(3) fossil fuel backup s y s t e m s .
Land Use Effects
Solar collectors require proportionally larger amounts
of land area than do conventional power systems for an equivalent amount of power generation, although the effects o n the
land are far more benign than, for example, those of coal strip
m i n i n g . In fact, the effects of solar collectors on the land
would be similar to those associated with the construction of
b u i l d i n g s , r o a d s , and parking l o t s . Land is essentially precluded from other u s e s . Disturbance of natural areas (i.e.,
fifty square miles of desert covered with solar collectors) and
destruction of forests and ground cover could severely
impact
local environments.
Innovative d e s i g n in urban planning could greatly reduce
the amount of rural lands required for power generation. Examples
of such designs would be south-facing large roof areas covered
with solar c o l l e c t o r s , buildings d e s i g n e d to passively use solar
energy, collectors on top of coverpd parking lots and big buildings,
n 5
- 13 -
and collectors on the south-facing sides of high rise b u i l d i n g s .
It is estimated that by using such solar planning, an equivalent
o u t p u t of 17-28 megawatts of electricity could be achieved in
the c i t y of O m a h a , Nebraska, or 23-37 megawatts in A l b u q u e r q u e ,
New M e x i c o . This would significantly reduce the need for rural
48
land areas for power g e n e r a t i o n .
For a simple illustration of the effects of land use decisions
o n solar power impacts, if all U . S . highways as of 1975 were
covered with low temperature solar collectors, 39 Quads (quadr i l l i o n BTU's) of energy could have b e e n p r o d u c e d . In 1 9 7 6 , total
49
U . S . electricity production was 6.8 Q u a d s .
Effects of Manufacture of Solar Components
Because solar component manufacture is a capital intensive
industry, it is thought by many to generate more pollutants than
the manufacture of c o n v e n t i o n ^ system components. There is,
h o w e v e r , an energy pollution payback when these systems are ins t a l l e d , since their effects are relatively b e n i g n . For example,
for a typical residential home in O m a h a , Nebraska, using a coal
generated electrical baseboard h e a t , there would at l e a s t be a
payback in one year of: (1) 1^0- 480 pounds of sulfur o x i d e s ,
(2) 160- 33° pounds of nitrogen o x i d e s , (3) nine pounds of hydroc a r b o n s , (4) 50- 630 pounds of parfciculates,and (5) nearly two
tons of solid w a s t e s , some t o x i c . These figures vary according
to the level of anti-pollution technology employed a t the gen50
erating p l a n t .
- 14 It is also important to keep in mind that a s solar
tech-
nology becomes cheaper and more sophisticated, more manufacturing industries w i l l be utilizing solar energy. This could
greatly reduce the amount of pollution in the manufacture of
solar c o m p o n e n t s .
Fossil Fuel Backup Systems
Fossil fuel backup systems may be necessary for some solar
energy equipment's off line periods i'i.e, nighttime). These
backup systems may result in generation of on-site p o l l u t a n t s —
gaseous and s o l i d . Such emissions would probably be close to
urban a r e a s , possibly aggravating already poor urban air quality
in many a r e a s . '
1
The possibility of energy storage devices and
feedback into power grids could help eliminate, or a t l e a s t
m i t i g a t e , the potential problem.
POLITICAL ECONOMY OF SOLAR ENEROY SYSTEMS
T h e greatest barrier to the widespread use of solar energy
systems is their comparatively high cost vis-a-vis conventional
s y s t e m s . There are many reasons for this d i s p a r i t y — t e c h n o l o g i c a l ,
p o l i t i c a l , and economic. However, as the cost of conventional
energy alternatives (including the cost of extornalities)continues
to c l i m b , it would be safe to say that the likelihood of increased
use of solar energy will climb proportionately.
Some solar energy systems are already cost competitive with
conventional energy systems. Passive systems are such an example.
Low temperature collectors are a n o t h e r . In many areas of the
237
- 15 -
country where conventional energy coots are high, the use of
low temperature collectors is spreading r a p i d l y . The positive
environmental benefits associated with such systems enhance
their desirability.. Furthermore, as collector designs become
more aesthetically pleasingand more easily integrated into
various architectural schemes, solar collectors become more
attractive to the consumer. Initial investment is h i g h , however,
when compared to conventional s y s t e m s . Installation costs for
a n average space and water heating system were $6,00.0.00 to
52
$8,000.00 in 1 9 7 6 .
Especially costly are. retrofits of conven-
tional systems to solar s y s t e m s .
Solar thermal systems and photovoltaic systems are Still
on the energy horizon in terms of c o s t . Given current develop*
ment p l a n s , solar thermal is estimated by DOE to be cost competitive as a n electricity producer at 6-8 cents per kwh during
53
,
the early 1 9 $ 0 s .
With big increases in the cost of alterna-
t i v e s , such as recent OPEC activity might indicate, solar
thermal could conceivably become cost competitive sooner.
Photovoltaic energy is very costly at the p r e s e n t time, running
about $12.00 to .>30.00 per peak' w a t t .
This is down from a
figure of about $80.00 p e r peak watt for photovoltaic s y s t e m s
produced at the h e i g h t of the. space p r o g r a m . Furthermore t a
new semi-conduci^Ci' material,cadmium sulfide, may bring this c o s t
down to $1.00 per peak watt in the near f u t u r e . DOE estimates
55
PV costs as low as •$.05 per peak w a t t by the late '1980*s.
m
- 16 Solar energy is expected to b e n e f i t from increased
government r e s e a r c h , development, and demonstration p r o g r a m s ,
discussed l a t e r . This increased government support would
greatly benefit solar energy due to the effects of research
and development on production costs and economies of s c a l e .
Until v e r y r e c e n t l y , solar energy w a s the poor b o y of government f u n d i n g . As late as 1970, direct «ovornment funding of
solar energy projects was only .$1.2 m i n i o n . In FY 1 9 7 8 , this
57
figure was approximately $500-million.
liven with these big
increases, solar energy lags behind other energy sources in
direct funding and indirect incentives. Nuclear p o w e r , for
example, was estimated by DOE to have received a total of 15-3
to 17.1 billion58 dollars in direct funding and indirect incentives
prior to 1 9 7 6 .
These figures do not measure the effects of the
military nuclear weapons program and the Price-Anderson A c t ,
limiting liability for nuclear a c c i d e n t s . Indirect incentives
that are measured include such things as low interest l o a n s ,
tax credits and deductions, acclerated depreciation, and
depletion allowances.
Solar energy has suffered oven further as a result of
government disincentives. An example of a government disincentive
for solar energy is the continuing control of interstate prices
c
of natural g a s — a fact noted b y Senator
Gary Hart of Colorado
.9
in Senate hearings on solar energy.
Not only does this a f f e c t
the installation of solar collectors on homos, but it also
m
- 1? affects the possibility of hydrogen fuel production from solar
energy d e v i c e s . Hydrogen
60
per 1,000 cubic feet
fuel can b e produced at about
by electrolysis, and the decontrolled
intrastate price of natural gas is approaching this f i g u r e .
Government control of domestic oil p r i c e s has probably also
had a depressing effect on solar energy production. Similarly,
the Price-Anderson A c t , direct subsidies, and government agreements to handle radioactive waste products have been some of
the factors w h i c h have g i v e n nuclear power a competitive e d g e ,
to Solar's disadvantage. In fact.it has been "... hypothesized
that the market for energy has b e e n significantly distorted
by the creation of federal incentives to stimulate energy prod u c t i o n . . . . Policy decisions affecting solar energy development
that are based on subsidized prices of competing energy sources
could prevent realization of optimum national energy efficiency."
LEGAL ISSUES
Federal Incentives
Since the v a s t majority of statu Lory incentives fot solar
energy have been originated a t the federal l e v e l , state incentives will not be discussed in d e t a i l . State incentives have
mostly been in the form of tax credits or deductions for on-site
installation of solar equipment. A s of 1 9 7 8 , some twenty-two
62
states had passed such m e a s u r e s .
Any analysis of federal incentives should b e prefaced b y the
following observation. This observation is that, while federal
statutory incentives for solar energy production have h a d , and
should continue to h a v e , a positive effect on the use of solar
energy, any incentives directed toward competing energy sources
-
IP.
-
63
may have a negative effect on the use oP solar energy.
Federal statutory incentives for solar energy have had
a definite developmental and demonstrative flavor to t h e m .
Not surprisingly, the solar legislative impetus began in 1 9 7 4 ,
following on the heels of the worldwide jump in oil prices
due to the OPEC oil e m b a r g o .
64
The Solar Heating and Cooling Demonstration Act of 1974
The Solar Heating and Cooling Demonstration A c t ^ threw the
w e i g h t and power of the federal government behind the developm e n t of solar energy for the first time. It is
aimed primarily
a t residential use of solar power for space and water heating
and space c o o l i n g . The basic idea was to use the resources
of
the federal government to create a commercially viable solar
heating and cooling m a r k e t , ^ P i l o t projects and demonstration
programs were established under this
67 a c t through various
federal departments and a g e n c i e s .
Contracts arid grants with
private entities for new systems development arc authorized
63
under the a c t .
Dissemination of information within and without
the government is a u t h o r i z e d , as is the establishment of a
69
solar heating and cooling data bank .
Studies on building c o d e s ,
70
zoning, and building modifications are directed;
and federal
71
assistance to housing construction is a u t h o r i z e d .
Small
7?
business participation in the Act's programs is encouraged.
The Secretary (now of DOE) is directed to monitor and evaluate
the performance of a l l systems and programs under the A c t . " ^
The Solar Energy R e sAct
e a r cof
h , 1974'
Develonment
, and Demonstration
''
241
- 19 -
Following on the heels of the Heating and Cooling A c t , the
Solar Energy R e s e a r c h , Development, and Demonstration
Act^
expanded government involvment in solar energy beyond residential
76'
uses.
This A c t stresses research and development programs into
77
the full realm of solar energy p o s s i b i l i t i e s .
Joint involv-
m e n t of several f e d e r a l agencies and departments in the solar
energy p r o g r a m is directed, in the form of a solar energy
coordination and management p r o j e c t , 78with NASA directed to
carry out the experimental p r o g r a m s .
Comprehensive research
and development is directed, including such areas as solar
heating and c o o l i n g of housing, solar thermal energy c o n v e r s i o n ,
photovoltaic c o n v e r s i o n , and industrial process heat (all
p r e v i o u s l y discussed) and windpower conversion, biomass
conversion, and ocean thermal gradient
79 conversion (none of
which are discussed in, this r e p o r t ) .
The Secretary is auth-
orized to set up demonstration projects in a n y of these
technological a r e a s , or any other areas found to be f e a s i b l e .
Production, of electricity is authorized at from one to ten
megawatts per plant* and production
of synthetic fuels, such as
80
h y d r o g e n is also a u t h o r i z e d .
The A c t goes on to establish
a central data bank for solar energy information, with information available to all government s o u r c e s — federal;
state,
81
l o c a l , and e d u c a t i o n a l — and to private c o n c e r n s .
A Solar
Energy Research Institute was established b y the A c t , and this
'
.
institute is now located in Golden^ C o l o r a d o .
262
82
International
- 20 83
cooperation is directed,
and the chairman of the solar
energy coordination and management project is directed to
84
deliver a n annual report to the President and the C o n g r e s s .
The Agricultural Solar Energy Research, Development
and Demonstration Act of 107?
J
This act basically applies the provisions of the earlier
two acts to the field of agriculture. It j>rovides agricultural
r e s e a r c h ^ and extension^
programs involving solar applications
to agriculture.A competitive grant program is authorized to
provide R&D funds to individuals and organizations involved
in a g r i c u l t u r e .
88
Model farms and demonstration projects were
89
authorized under the A c t ,
and regional solar energy R&D centers
90
for agricultural applications were established.
The Solar Photovoltaic Energy Research, Development,
91
and Demonstration A c t of 1978
Similar to its predecessors in many respects, this A c t
focuses directly on the technology associated
with photovoltaic
92
conversion of sunlight into e l e c t r i c i t y .
The Act contemplates
a ten year expenditure of 1 .5 billion dollars beginning in FY.
1979 for photovoltaic energy research and demonstration.
Further, it calls for an annual doub]ins of production of FV
systems beginning in FY 1 9 7 9 , so as to reach an annual PV electrical output of 2 million KW by 1988 at a cost of $1.00 per
peak w a t t . 93 The A c t authorizes joint demonstration projects
94
b e t w e e n the government and public and private u t i l i t i e s .
Act also directs the formation of a multi-disciplinary
<lLi.O
The
advisory
- 21 -
committee to inform the Secretary o f Energy of the scope
and p a c e of photovoltaic research and development, the need
for photovoltaic demonstration projects, the need for changes
in photovoltaic K&'D p r o g r a m s , and any possible economic and
95
environmental consequences of photovoltaic use.
The Secretary
of Energy is directed under the Act to investigate the effects
of widespread photovoltaic use on util ity rate structures a t
v a r y i n g l e v e l s Of use, and to examine the effect of existing
utility rate structures, building coded, zoning ordinances,
and other laws on the useage of PV energy systems. The
S e c r e t a r y is directed to make recommendations based on t h e s e s
findings within one year of enactment. Further, the Secretary
is required to identify
legal alternativesto insure PV access
96
to direct sunlight.
This A c t obviously reflects the increase
in experience with solar energy systems, and the concern with
practical and legal p r o b l e m s resulting from widespread solar
energy u s e .
The National Energy Plan
Several a c t
s
97
were passed, b y Congress in 1 9 7 8 , which had
been collectively p a r t of the President's National Energy P l a n .
There are many provisions in these acts which will affect the
use of solar energy and thus m e r i t discussion. Those provisions
of significance in the Public Utility Regulatory Policies A c t
90
o f 1978",
which are important to solar energy p r o d u c t i o n , will
be discussed in the section o n utility regulation?
- 22 -
A substantial incentive to promote Urn use of residential
solar heating and cooling is included in the Energy Tax A c t of
99
1.978,
an amendment to the Internal Revenue C o d e . This incentive
is the Residential Energy Tax Credit provision, and it provides
for direct credits against f e d e r a l income tax for expenditures
on renewable energy sources for any dwelling u n i t . The credit
is up to 30jo of the f i r100
s t $2,000.00 of such systems and 20$
of the next $ 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 .
Such a credit is i m p o r t a n t , when one
considers many of the tax credits and deductions available to
producers of conventional p o w e r . Furthermore, it helps the homeowner to mitigate the substantial capital outlay that is involved
in installation of residential solar energy
systems. The credit
101
was made retroactive to April 2 0 , 1977.
The Energy Tax Act
also provides for increased business investment credit for
installation, of solar or wind energy p r o p e r t y . 102
Also passed in. 1978 and a part of the National Energy P l a n ,
103
was the National Energy Conservation Policy A c t .
Sections 241
and 244 through 248 of the Act provide for federal institutional
backing for homeowners104wishing to install solar energy and energy
conservation systems.
These incentives are provided in several
w a y s . Purchase of loan agreements for solar energy systems by the
105
Government National Mortgage Association is authorized,
as i s
loan insurance for solar energy systems for both single and multi10'6
family u n i t s .
Secondary financing of solar energy systems by
258
- 23 -
two federal lending agencies i s provided for.
107
Finally,
increases in mortgage limits under the Federal Housing Act i s
authorized to cover the added to cost of solar energy system
• , n
installation.
In Title
1 0 8
VI of the National Energy Conservation P o l i c y
109
A c t , The Federal Energy Initiative,
a federal solar program
i s established to demonstrate the application of solar technology
to federal b u i l d i n g s . Section 523 directs the Secretary of E n e r g y ,
in consultation with the GSA, to establish requirements and
criteria for agency and departmental proposals to implement
solar energy systems in their buildings. The Secretary i s
required to evaluate such proposals on a cost/benefit analysis
110
in terms of present v a l u e .
Section 524 authorizes 1100,000,
111
000.00 for FY 1980 to carry out the p r o g r a m .
Sections 54-1 through 550 of the Act direct that studies be
made of the energy efficiency of all federal buildings and their
potential for implementation
of solar energy and other energy
112
efficient systems.
Section 545 establishes the "Life Cycle
1 1 3
Cost Method" as the method of evaluating building efficiency.
The "Life Cycle Cost" simply refers to the total cost of o w n i n g ,
operating, and maintaining a building over i t s useful life by
comparison of alternative energy systems. This section r e q u i r e s
all federal buildings be analyzed by the "Life Cycle Cost Method"
and further requires that all federal buidings be certified as
"Life Cycle Cost Effective."
1
246
24 -
Section 546 of Act establishes a. requirement for the development of energy conservation performance standards for all.
115
federal b u i l d i n g s .
Section 547 sets a target date of January 1,
1990 for retrofit of all federal buildings greater than 1,000
square feet in a r e a , to include solar energy and other renewable
resource energy systems, energy conservation measures, and other
energy-related modifications deemed appropriate. The retrofit
i s to be accomplished so as to insure minimum "Life Cycle Costs."
The program i s to proceed in, stages b e g i n n i n g in FY 1979> and
energy audits are directed as part of the program in order to
establish program goals.
Sections 561 through 569 of the Energy Conservation P o l i c y
Act set forth a program for acclerated procurement and installation of electricity producing photovoltaic devices in federal
facilities.
116
The purpose of this program is to help stimulate
the rapid growth of a commercially viable photovoltaic
electrical
117
systems i n d u s t r y .
Section 567 authorizes procurement of 'photo-
voltaic systems capable of producing up to thirty megawatts of
electricity by the Secretary of Energy in FY 1979, FY 1980, and
FY 1981.
118
Section 567 also establishes an interdepartmental
committee on photovoltaic energy for the purpose of advising the
119
Secretary on the implementation of the program.
These provisions
are in addition to those of the Solar Photovoltaic Energy R e s e a r c h ,
Development, and Demonstration Act of 1978, already d i s c u s s e d .
Access to Sunlight
The universal rule in this country, concerning access to
- 25 -
sunlight, i s that "adjoining landowners have an equal right
under the law to b u i l d to the line of their respective tracts
and to such height as is desired by t h e m , in the absence, of
course, of building restrictions or regulations ...."120 This
rule was invoked by the Illinois Supremo Court in denying a
plaintiff relief from interference with television signals
121
caused by the 1,^50 foot Sears T o w e r ,
a problem directly
analogous to interference with solar a c c e s s . The prevailing
rule was similarly stated by the Florida Supreme Court in. a
case where an addition to the Fontainbleau Hotel in Miami Beach
was going to overshadow the pool area o C the neighboring Eden
Roc H o t e l . 122 Plaintiff Eden Roc argued that the addition would
interfere with, a prescriptive easement that its property had
123
to light and a i r .
Eden Roc based its argument on its right
to the free flow of light and a i r , on the codified English
common law "DoctrinevJ/)°
of Ancient Lights." The essence of t h i s
doctrine i s that one'Vhad enjoyed such a, free flow over a property
adjoining his o w n , aquired a prescriptive right to the light
12/f
and air after a period of twenty y e a r s .
The Florida Supreme
Court rejected any notion of such a prescriptive easement,
noting that no American court had acknowledged
125 such a r i g h t ,
absent a contractual or statutory provision.
The American
rule flows from an English rule that predated the "Ancient
L i g h t s Doctrine." This r u l e , articulated i n a sixteenth century
c a s e , stated that "he who owns the soil, also owns to the heavens
262
- 26 -
and to the depths."
126
Texas follows tho general American r u l e .
The point of all this is that the owner of solar energy
equipment has no way of protecting his access to sunlight, absent
statutory or contractual protections (i.e., purchasing easements,
restrictive covenants). The U . S . Supreme Court has recognized
public policy limitations on the rights of property owners to the
use of air space. In the case of United States V . Causb.y,
128
a
property owner asserted a due process argument to the effect that
low flying military aircraft over his property constituted a
"taking" without compensation. The court held for the o w n e r , but
it noted that there are limits to the use of airspace that are
129
based on public p o l i c y .
Causb.y is a two edged sword with respect
to sola? access, h o w e v e r , because it also affirmed the right of the
land owner "to exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the
enveloping
1
atmosphere." ^
Zoning might be one answer to the seeming dilemma of no
guaranteed, access to sunlight. Height limitations, southerly setback requirements, and lot size restrictions would have to be
131
changed drastically from what they are in most localities t o d a y .
As a result, this traditional approach to residential zoning
will probably not fill the b i l l . A homeowner's solar collectors
cannot function properly next to a ten story building, or even a
large t r e e .
Transferable development rights (TDR) are one possible approach
132
to t h i s p r o b l e m .
TDR hinges on a view of real estate that is
- 30 -
not unitary, but rather a bundle of interests. Development rights
are those that the owner of property has to develop unused space
within the confines of applicable zoning l a w s . .These rights are
similar to a negative easement. TDR would require that the
burdened property could not be developed, while the benefitted
property c o u l d . For example the development potential of a given
133
lot would be restricted due to a neighbor's solar p e r m i t .
TDR allows the burdened owner to transfer this development right
to another site not objectionable. This idea has been used for
134
historic preservation in New York and C h i c a g o .
Traditional
blanket zoning, while desirable in some a r e a s , might compete
with other energy saving techniques in others (i.e., compact
and contiguous development). It would not take into account the
individualized nature of solar access the v/ay that TDR w o u l d ,
135
possibly hindering its development.
Contract zoning i s another possible answer to the access
question. In contract zoning, a landowner would enter into a
contract with a third party, usually the city, agreeing to place
certain restrictions on his land in return for a promise, such as
r e z o n i n g . In such a scenario, the municipality could use t h i s
zoning power as a bargaining
tool that could be a solar energy
136
development i n c e n t i v e .
Other property law tools are available as possible r e m e d i e s .
As previously m e n t i o n e d , solar owners might purchase easements
from adjoining landowners that would run with the l a n d , or
covenants restricting development rights on adjoining land could
262
- 28 -
be agreed t o . Also available to the solar property owner might
be the common law nuisance action, where an adjoining landowner
137
has unreasonably interfered with sunlight.
Also important in the solar access issue is whether the
legislative impetus would come from the federal, state, or
local governments. Certainly the nation has a great stake in
the future of solar energy. P u b l i c policy
would, indicate the
need for a change in the traditional approach of the law
to
solar a c c e s s , in view of the tremendous national interest in
both energy and environmental preservation. Sunlight must be
looked at by the law as an energy source, not just a source of
138
illumination.
The uncertainty of access is already b e c o m i n g
a serious p r o b l e m , and it will probably grow as rapidly as solar
i n d u s t r y . It creates a negative incentive at a time when the
nation needs positive incentives 139
for solar energy growth. Some
states have begun to take action,
done at
' but much remains to be
all l e v e l s — f e d e r a l , state, and l o c a l — and within the
judiciary.
Energy P r i c i n g and Utility Regulation
Energy pricing regulation c a n , and does, have a major impact
on solar energy development. It is important to recognize, as
previously alluded to in a quote from Senator Gary Hart of
Colorado, that government regulation of conventional energy
prices at an artificially low level serves as a disincentive
for solar e n e r g y . Laws that are designed to facilitate the use
of coal and other alternate sources of enrgy may also hurt solar
262
- 29 -
power by offering a cheaper substitute.
Similarly, state laws and regulations governing the relationships of public and private energy utilities with, owners of on
site generating equipment may also have a perverse effect on
production of solar energy. Present lows in many states, for
example, might permit utility companies
to discriminate in
their rates to solar customers if the cost of providing service
to thorn exceeds that of other customers (i.e., in providing power
for conventional backup u n i t s ) . ^ ^ Typical .is the "declining
1
block rate ,' where a customer might pay $4.00 for the first KIVH
and then $.04 per KWII for the next hundred, and so o n . This
rate scheme favors the bigger u s e r , and it would slap tho solar
energy user with heavy charges for his backup system. !'Standby
power" r a t e s , based on premium l e v e l s , for providing
backup
pot/er have "also been proposed: b y some in the utility i n d u s t r y .
Other utilities have proposed such perverse schemes as "demand
charges" to solar customers to cover market losses'
142
due to widespread solar u s e .
The power grid interconnection
poses another problem for solar p r o d u c e r s . If solar power producers could feed into a power grid all excess p o w e r , r a t h e r
than, storing i t , costs could be greatly reduced. Few utilities
have expressed a willingness to purchase
such feedback, and
143
state l a w s do not require them to.
Another question in. the public utility area Is whether onsite solar energy systems are subject to regulation as p r o d u c e r s .
Such regulation would probably prove COG t prohibitive for most
- 30 -
solar equipment o w n e r s .
Yet, "Host state statutes define a
public utility to include any p e r s o n , corporation, p a r t n e r s h i p ,
or other legal entity
Federal regulations enter the
picture when the wholesale r a t e for interstate electricity i s in
question.Whether or not energy is produced for public u s e , i s
the federal test to determine if one i s a p r o d u c e r . The law i s
vague in this general a r e a , h o w e v e r .
The promise of,and the need for, solar energy,demand that
the issues of energy pricing and utility regulation be a d d r e s s e d .
One promising sign in this arena is the recently passed Public
147
Utility Regulatory Policy Act of 1978.
It requires the FPC
148
to encourage small power production from renewable sources,
and it grants the FPC the p o w e r to order interconnection of
small power producing facilities into
149 power grids where i t would
be in the public interest to do s o .
Much remains to be d o n e .
Other L e g a l Issues
Other legal issues that concern the development of solar power
are
- building codes and performance standards for solar equip-
m e n t . Building c o d e s , as they are presently conceived in most
l o c a l i t i e s , seldom contain any provisions covering solar energy
equipment for space
150 or water h e a t i n g . So far this has not been
a major b a r r i e r ,
but these codes do need to be altered to
r e f l e c t solar equipment demands and performance standards for
solar equipment. F u r t h e r , solar customers must not be deterred.
- 31 -
from purchasing solar equipment duo to questionable reliability
and efficiency. Assurance should be provided in the form of
151
performance and reliability standards.
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
Various scenarios have been drawn of the energy options for
the United States into the next century. None of them paint a
very rosy picture of our energy f u t u r e . This is especially so
if no slowdown occurs in the growth of energy consumption.
Common to most of the scenarios, official and unofficial, is a
large role for solar energy. These scenarios generally include
the input of solar power forms not discussed in this r e p o r t , such
as wind power and b i o m a s s .
Council on Environmental Quality, in, an April 1978 r e p o r t ,
predicted that anywhere from 8.6 to 2 3 % of all U . S . energy
demand would be satisfied by solar energy b y the turn of the
century, and about 4 3 % b y the year 2 0 2 0 . The CEQ report stated
that solar p o w e r could supply 2 5 % of U . S . energy demand in 2000
152
and 50% by 2 0 2 0 , if given a large amount of government s u p p o r t .
Scientist Amory Lovins has predicted a solar energy share of
9 2 % of all energy supplied by the year 2 0 2 0 , whereas an NSF/NSA
study predicted a solar input of 3 6 % by the year 2020. An E R D A
study predicted a solar share o f 6.7% In 2000 and 24% In 2 0 2 0 ,
153
respectively.
The Stanford Research Institute did three detailed energy
simulations for E R D A in 1977 entitled, " t h e reference case."^
- 32 -
"the solar e m p h a s i s c a s e " , and "the l o w demand case." T h e s e
three s t u d i e s called for y e a r 2020 lev ells o f solar p o w e r o f
5.6%t
22%, and 13.7%, r e s p e c t i v e l y , in relation to a g g r e g a t e
154
U . S . energy d e m a n d .
There i s a wide range of possible out-
c o m e s in m a n y of the scenarios p o s t u l a t e d by the "experts."
Some of t h e scenarios are b a s e d on a forecast of lowered
total
energy demand l e v e l s p e r c a p i t a , while o t h e r s are based on
p r e d i c t i o n s of v a s t i n c r e a s e s in energy u s e . One t h i n g i s
abundantly
clear in all of these s c e n a r i o s . Solar energy
m u s t sustain a m a s s i v e economic arid technological thrust
f o r w a r d . In order for t h i s to happenj. our l e g i s l a t u r e s and
courts m u s t adjust to a new n a t i o n a l energy p o l i c y with a
strong e m p h a s i s on the u l t i m a t e r e n e w a b l e r e s o u r c e .
-
;>:>
-
FOOTNOTES
1. Energy Research and Development Administration, Solar Energy
in America? s Future; A ' ^reTxmTnary"' 'Assessment! Second h'dition^ 1-2
(1977)(hereinafter cited as Solar Energy in America's F u t u r e ) .
2 . J . L . Wilhelm, Solar E n e r g y , the Ultimate Powerhouse, 149
National Geographic 583 (197b).
'
3.
I d . at 3 8 3 .
Council on Environmental Quality, e t . al._, Energy Altern at I v e s ,
A Comparative Analysis 11-1 - 11-3 (1975) (hereinafter cited as
Energy Alternatives).
5 . Executive Office of the President:, Energy R & D and National
Progress 5 (1966).
6.
Solar Energy in American's Future, supra note t, at 2 .
7.
I d . at 2 - 3 .
8.
I d . at 2 - 4 .
U . S . Dep't of Energy, S o l a r Energy. A Status Report
(19787 (hereinafter cited as ''status'' ReportV.'
13-14
10. I d . at- 13- 14.
11. I d . at 13- 14.
12. I d . at 1 A .
13. I d . at 14.
14. I d . at 14.
15. I d . at 14.
16. I d . at 15- 16.
17. I d . at 16.
18. Solar Energy: Joint Hearing Before the Gubcomms. on Energy
Production and Supply and Energy Research and Development of the
C o m m . on Energy and Natural Resources and the Select C o m m . on
Small Business'. U . S . Senate, 95th Cong., 1st S e s s . 67 (1977J
(statement of Bill L . Phillips, President and Director, American
Ileliothermal Corp., Denver, Colo.) (hereinafter cited as Solar H e a r i n g ) .
230
- 34 -
19. Solarcal C o u n c i l , Toward a So'lar California, The Solarcal
Council Action Program 22 (1979) (hereinafter cited as Solarcal)
2 0 . Status R e p o r t , supra note 9» at 18.
2 1 . I d . at 18.
22
*
Dep't of E n e r g y . Solar Energy for Agriculture and
Industry 6 (1978).
2 3 . I d . at 6 - 7 .
2 4 . Status R e p o r t , supra note 9j at 2 0 .
2 5 . U . S , D e p ' t . of E n e r g y , Solar Energy 10-11
(1978).
2 6 . Status R e p o r t , supra note 9j at 2 1 .
2 7 . U; S; Dep't. of Energy, Solar Energy 11 (1978).
2 8 . 149 National Geographic at 3 8 9 .
2 9 . Status R e p o r t , supra note 9 , at 2 1 .
3 0 . Texas Tech University, Dep't.of Electrical Engineering,
telephone interview interview with Dr. John Reichert, April 1979
31. Id.
3 2 . Status R e p o r t , supra note 9 , at 2 0 .
3 3 . I d . at 2 1 .
3 4 . I d . at 2 1 .
3 5 . Energy Alternatives, supra note /j, at 11-9.
3 6 . 149 National Geographic at 3 9 4 .
3 7 . I d . at 3 9 4 .
3 8 . U . S . Dep't. of E n e r g y . Solar ftricrgy from Photovoltaic
Conversion 4 ( ) ("herelnalTer cited a s P V Conversion).
3 9 . I d . at 11.
4 0 . I d . at 4 - 5 .
- 35 -
4 2 . Status R e p o r t , supra note 9 , nt 3 8 .
4 3 . Energy Alternatives, supra note 4 , at 11-9.
4 4 . U . S . Dep't;. of E n e r g y , I-Iydrogen Fuel (I978)(hereinafter cited
as F u e l ) .
45.H:
Z|6. Office of Technology Assessment, Application of Solar
Technology to Today's Energy Needs^ V o l .
222 (1978)
(hereinafter cited as Solar T e c h n o l o g y ) .
4 7 . I d . at 2 2 7 - 2 2 9 .
4 8 . I d . at 2 2 7 - 2 2 9 .
4 9 . I d . at 2 3 2 .
5 0 . I d . at 2 2 3 - 2 2 5 .
5 1 . I d . at 2 2 5 .
5 2 . 149 National Geographic at 3 8 1 .
53. Status R e p o r t , supra note 9» at 21.
5 4 . I d . at 2 4 .
5 5 . PV Conversion, supra note 3 8 , at 6 - 7 .
5 6 . I d . at 6 - 7 .
5 7 . U . S . Dep't. of E n e r g y , An Analysis of Federal Incentives Used
to Stimulate Energy Production 261 (1978) (hereinafter cited as
Federal Incentives).
5 8 . I d . at 2 6 3 .
5 9 . Solar H e a r i n g , supra note 18, at 53 (statement of H o n . Gary
H a r t , a U . S . Senator from the State of Colorado, as Presented by
Lon M c C a i n ) .
6 0 . Fuel, supra note /|4.
1 1
6 1 . IFederal
— — — — Incentives,
aaia, i 11—nTjuLiaaa ' supra note 5 7 , at 14.
6 2 . I d . at 13.
6 3 . Id. at 14-15.
258
- 36 -
6 4 . 42 U . S . C . 5501
et.seq.
6 5 . 42 U . S . C . 5501 e l . seq.
6 6 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 0 1 .
6 7 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 0 3 - 5 5 0 8 .
6 8 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 0 4 ( d ) .
69. 42.U.S.C. 5510.
7 0 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 1 0 ( b ) .
7 1 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 1 1 .
7 2 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 1 2 .
7 3 . 42 U . s . C . 5 5 0 9 .
7 4 . 42 U . s . C . 5551 e t . s e q .
75. Id.
7 6 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 5 1 .
7 7 . 42 U . s . C . 5 5 5 2 .
7 8 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 5 3 .
7 9 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 5 5 ( c ) .
8 0 . 42 U . s . C . 5 5 5 6 .
8 1 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 5 7 .
8 2 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 5 9 .
8 3 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 6 0 .
8 4 . 42 U . s . C . 5 5 6 2 .
8 5 . P u b . L-. N o . 9 5 - 1 1 3 , 91 S t a b . 1011-1016.
86. 7 U.S.C. 427.
87. 7 U.S.C. 341.
88. 7 U.S.C. 3241.
89. 7 U.S.C. 3261-262.
95Q
tj
/r1v *
37 -
90. 7 U.S.C. 3271.
9 1 . 42 U . S . C . 5581 e t . seq.
9 2 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 8 2 .
9 3 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 8 1 .
9 4 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 8 4 .
9 5 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 8 8 .
9 6 . 42 U . S . C . 5 5 8 9 .
9 7 . Executive Office of the President. The National Eneri
(197777"
9 8 . 16 U . S . C . 2601 e t . s e q .
9 9 . 26 U . S . C . l e t . seq,
100. 26 U . S . C . 4 4 ( c ) .
101. I d .
102. 26 U . S . C . 4 6 .
103. P u b . L . N o . 9 5 - 6 1 9 , 92 S t a t . 3206 et s e q .
104. I d . at 3 2 2 8 , 3 2 3 1 - 2 3 5 .
105. I d . at 3 2 3 1 .
106. I d . at 3 2 2 8 , 3 2 3 4 .
107. I d . at 3233-234.
108. I d . at 3 2 3 5 .
110. I d . at 3 2 7 6 .
111. I d . at 3 2 7 7 .
112. I d . at 3 2 7 7 - 2 8 0 .
113. I d . at 3 2 7 8 .
114. Id.
115. I d . at 3 2 7 9 .
116. I d . at 3280-282.
260
- 38 117. P u b . L . N o . 9 5 - 6 1 9 , 92 S t a t . 3 2 8 0 .
118. I d . at 3 2 8 1 .
119. I d .
120. People Ex Rel. Hoogasian V . Sears, Roebuck and Co.,
521 1 1 1 . 2d 2 4 7 , 287 N.E.2d 6 7 7 , 679 ( 1 9 7 0 .
121. 287 N.E.2d at 6 8 0 .
122. Fontainbleau Hotel Corp. V . Forty-Five Twenty-Five, I n c . ,
114 So.2d 3 5 7 , 359 (Fla. 1 9 5 0 .
123. 114 So.2d at 3 5 8 .
124. The Dawning of Solar Law.. 57 Baylor L . -Rev. 1013, at 1014
(1977). See A l s o , 1/V. A . T h o m a s , Solar Energy*and the L a w . 83
Case and Comment 3 , at 6 , 7 (197957
125. 114 So.2d 3 5 7 .
126. Bury v . P o p e , 1 C r o . E l i z . 118, 78 'Eng. R e p . ,375 (1586).
127. Harrison V . .Langlinais, 312 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. C i v . A p p . —
San Antonio 1958, no w r i t ) .
128. United States V . Causby, 328 U . S . 256 (1946).
129. 3 2 8 U . S . at 2 6 4 .
130. 328 U . S . at 2 6 4 .
131. Solar Energy; An Analysis of the Implementation of Solar
Z o n i n g , 17 Washburn L . J . 146, at 151 (1977).
'
132. A legislative Approach to Solar Access: Transferable
Development Rights, 13 New .England L . R e v . 8 3 5 . at 853
133. 13 New England L . R e v , at 8 5 4 .
134. I d . at 8 5 4 , 8 5 5 .
135. IcU at 8 5 2 .
156. 17 Washburn L . J , at 151.
137. Solar Rights: Guaranteeing a Place In the S u n , 29 O r e . L . R e v .
9 4 , at 128 (1977).
- 39 -
138. 29 O r e . I . R o v . at 134.
139. O r . R e v . S t a t , s 2 1 5 . 0 5 5 ( 0 .
140. Solar T e c h n o l o g y , supra note 4 6 , at
184.
141. I d . at 185.
142. I d . at 185.
143. I d . at 186.
144. I d . at 190, 191.
145. I d . at 191.
146. I d . at 191.
147. 16 U . S . C . 260 e t . seq.
148. 16 U . S . C . 8 2 4 ( a ) ( 3 ) .
149. 16 U . S . C . 824(1)•
150. Solar T e c h n o l o g y , supra note 4 6 , at 180, 181.
151. Federal I n c e n t i v e s , supra note 5 7 , at 8 , 9 .
152. 9 E n v i r . Rep.(BNA) 9 9 6 , 997 (1978).
153. Status R e p o r t , supra note 9 , at 4-2.
154. Solar Energy in America's F u t u r e , supra note 1, at 2 , 3 .
262