Solar Is the Solution, Author Steve Heckeroth

Solar is the Solution, author Steve Heckeroth argues that solar energy is the key to alleviating climate change. Heckeroth builds his argument on the statement that "Solar is a promising source of future energy supplies because not only is it clean, it's remarkably abundant." Another one of Heckeroth's claims is that "relying on coal, oil and natural gas threatens our future with toxic pollution, global climate change and social unrest caused by diminishing fuel supplies." These statements are internally valid; although Heckeroth does not provide quantitative data to back up these statements, they are easy to reference. Moreover, Heckeroth establishes his own credibility as an author qualified to write about environmental science by stating "I have been studying our energy options for more than 30 years." Of course, "studying" something for thirty years does not automatically make a person an expert. Heckeroth is admitting that he is a layperson who feels passionately about solar energy. To make his case about the viability of solar energy as the best solution to the problem of global warming, Heckeroth uses a series of logical formulations.

One of Heckeroth's premises is that solar energy is "virtually inexhaustible." From this premise, Heckeroth draws the conclusion that "It is well past time to start seriously harnessing solar energy."

Another one of Heckeroth's logical claims is that solar energy is already here, therefore we should use it rather than waiting for a major breakthrough in technology. "If we choose solar we don't have to wait for a new technology to save us. We already have the technology and energy resources we need to build a sustainable, solar-electric economy that can cure our addiction to oil, stabilize the climate and maintain our standard of living."

Then, Heckeroth discusses each of the existing energy technologies in turn to provide logical cases for why each one is bad, and should be given up in favor of solar power. He first addresses coal, oil, and natural gas. Coal is inefficient, therefore coal is bad, states Heckeroth. Moreover, coal releases carbon dioxide and carbon dioxide contributes to global warming and pollution. Therefore, coal is bad.

Nuclear energy is dangerous because of the storage of nuclear waste. Therefore, nuclear energy is bad. Natural gas is devastating to the environment during the extraction process, and it also includes dependence on foreign sources. Therefore, natural gas is bad. Oil is expensive and causes political problems. Therefore, oil is bad. Furthermore, Heckeroth states that oil has volatile pricing on the commodities market, and can cause financial instability. For those reasons, oil is bad.

Heckeroth then uses a series of logical statements to show why existing alternative energy sources are less attractive than solar power. The author discusses biomass and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. He does not address wind turbine generators. First, Heckeroth states that biomass takes viable land away from agriculture, thereby contributing to the problem of poverty. Poverty is a gross social injustice. Therefore, biomass is bad.

Hydrogen fuel cells are "no more efficient than biofuels," and inefficient energy sources are bad. Therefore, hydrogen fuel cells are bad. Heckeroth also points out, "96% of all hydrogen is currently extracted from fossil fuels." If this premise is true (which is unclear because Heckeroth does not cite his sources) then the conclusion that is drawn is that hydrogen fuel cells present the same environmental problems as fossil fuels do because they are the same basic source.

To substantiate the claim that solar energy is a good option that should be taken immediately, Heckeroth also uses a series of logical statements. Some of what Heckeroth states is unsubstantiated statistics such as: "simply incorporating passive solar design strategies…energy efficiency, conservation and other active solar heating strategies in the construction of buildings can save up to 95% of the energy used in conventional buildings," (p. 3).

Heckeroth states that "Energy from the sun can be used to power our vehicles," and therefore solar energy is highly efficient and should be used. When electric vehicles are charged with solar power, emissions are reduced "altogether," (p. 3). Even when using traditional power sources, an electric vehicle is more efficient than a standard internal combustion engine. Therefore, electric cars should replace standard vehicles If the goal is reducing emissions.

The author also picks apart logical fallacies in his detractors' arguments. For example, when discussing electric vehicles, Heckeroth claims that the opponents state that batteries are not well developed enough to be viable. Heckeroth claims that cellular phone batteries started out inefficient and then became better once consumer demand for the products increased. If consumer demand for electric cars increase, then the same will happen for electric car batteries.