Solar Energy

By GARY ADKINS
SOLAR ENERGY

Photo credits: The Institue of Natural Resources contributed the photos of the greenhouse,
the home and the drawing of the photovoltaic module. The photo of Navy Pier is by the
Chicago Department of Public Works, and the solar hot water system is by Commonwealth Edison

IS SOLAR energy a new American frontier? If it is, it's very close to home; in fact, it begins with our homes.

Our homes, like our autos, have employed a lot of space, materials, fretwork and foot room, but not much common sense in terms of efficient energy consumption. The typical American tract house is beginning to look as funny as the big V-8 car with its protruding trunk and fins — grandly impractical. They have been designed without much regard for efficiency. Mechanical systems supported by cheap, plentiful energy supplies could adjust the interior temperature of a building no matter what the temperature, humidity or wind. Now, Americans are beginning to pay the price with higher and higher heating and cooling bills. Commercial and institutional buildings are paying the same prices, which in turn are paid through higher product prices and higher taxes.

Experts and laymen agree that solar will play a vital role in our energy future as a link in the chain of essential energy resources. Each link is as important as another in preventing shortages, but solar has a distinct advantage: it is renewable energy. Solar will be in good supply as long as the earth orbits the sun and there are human beings on this planet to capture it.

Meanwhile, the rising costs of energy for our nation are hurting the economy. Conventional supplies are at a premium, and the cost of doing business is directly related to energy. The dollar is strained as a larger and larger share of personal income and business investment must go for gasoline, natural gas, electricity and other sources of energy to drive our transportation, fuel our factories and heat our homes, businesses and institutions.

Just as the nation is suffering by importing oil and thereby sending U.S. dollars overseas rather than keeping them within our economy for investment, so are the individual states. In a speech given in Chicago this January at the Conference on Financing State and Local Government, Tom Cochran, executive director of the Northeast-Midwest Institute, noted the skyrocketing oil and gas severance revenues flowing to the energy producing states from the energy consuming states. Between 1972 and 1978, revenues from severance taxes, royalties and other sources increased from $710 million to $2 billion, he said. "However," he added, "the increases expected between 1980-1990 — the era of decontrol —

will dwarf anything we have seen so far. The [U.S.] Treasury Department estimated last year that all state and local revenue increases in the decade as the result of oil price decontrol alone will add up to more than $127 billion. Ninety percent of these enormous new sums of revenue will be concentrated in the eight major oil producing states." These estimates, made over a year ago, are "crude" Cochran said, but he also believes they are conservative. No reliable estimates have yet been made concerning revenue increases resulting from decontrol of natural gas, but Cochran cited one analyst as estimating the figure will be about $50 billion. The result for states which produce energy is an influx of dollars and reductions in state and local taxes. Meanwhile, in the energy consuming states, which include Illinois (see "Energy for Illinois," August 1980), citizens are not only paying higher prices for energy but also higher taxes as they seek to keep state and local services going on a diminishing revenue base.

12/April 1981 /Illinois Issues

At the community level, cities in Illinois and other states find more and more of their tax dollar paying for energy purchased

Energy costs as a percentage of doing business ore going up and up, driving more of the dollar into the energy economy ond leaving less for the local economy

from outside the community. And the individuals and businesses within the community pay higher taxes as well as higher energy bills. None of these funds stay within the community for investment. The problem, of course, is that energy costs as a percentage of doing business are going up and up, driving more of the dollar into the energy economy and leaving less for the local economy.

Conservation comes first
Solar energy cannot replace conventional fuels. But it does offer, as no other alternative resource, an opportunity to invest energy dollars locally.

A Harris poll last year indicated that 94 percent of Americans favor development of solar energy. A recent Associated Press-NBC News survey showed that Americans look to solar as the best source of energy for the year 2000.

Solar energy was forced into the mainstream of American energy planning by the Carter Administration's promise that the nation will get 20 percent of its energy from the sun by the year 2000. It is expected that the Reagan administration will back off that goal in favor of a greater commitment to nuclear energy, but a 1979 Harvard Business School report, Energy Future, found the Carter goal modest. The Harvard report declared that up to 10 million barrels of oil-equivalent energy per day can be supplied by solar by the year 2000, and that this could represent about a third of our nation's needs if reasonable energy conservation goals are met. According to the study, conservation is the basis for solar expansion, but not in the sense of curtailment of consumption. Instead, conservation means producing the same or better goods and services with less energy input, mainly by efficiency improvements.

Energy Future uses this definition: "Solar energy is the energy that arrived on the earth from the sun 'recently' — during the last hundred years or so." This definition specifically excludes oil, gas and coal, but specifically includes wind power, hydropower and bio-mass (burning wood for example).

An almost identical definition of solar energy is used by Denis Hayes, head of the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Research Institute (SERI) and formerly the first director under Gov. Daniel Walker of the Illinois State Energy Office (now defunct). Hayes explains: "When we speak of solar technologies at SERI, we include any equipment that will harness sunlight to human purposes within a few decades of its arrival. . . . Using this broad definition, solar energy now contributes about one-fifth of mankind's energy budget. This is mostly in the form of hydropower in the industrial world and firewood — generally burned very inefficiently in open fires — in the Third World."

Implicit in the Harvard projections for solar energy is the precondition of conservation in terms of efficiency and design. As Dean P. Wright, president of Thermal Screens, Inc., in East Peoria, puts it: "You can spend $500 on insulating your house and cut fuel bills in half or spend $5,000 on solar and do the same thing. I always emphasize the importance of conservation first."

Active Solar Heating

Six basic components to turn sunshine into heat at home

AN ACTIVE solar heating system usually contains six components: the collector, the heat transfer component, the heat storage device, the heat distribution system, a backup furnace, and control mechanisms.

The collector is usually a flat metal box containing a transparent cover (which insulates), a radiant heat absorber plate, some tubes or pipes, and insulation on back to protect the roof or wall on which it is mounted. Air or water is circulated past the blackened absorber plate, where it is heated and sent to storage. These essential principles apply for both domestic hot water heating and space heating, except that it generally takes three times as many collectors for space heating and twice the investment for installing such systems.

A typical domestic hot water solar system cuts water heating bills by 50 to 70 percent. It does not totally replace the conventional systems, but only preheats the water to around 90 degrees. The conventional backup system must heat the water another 30 degrees to raise the temperture to the desired 120 degrees for most household uses.

The inescapable feature of most domestic solar applications in Illinois is that they require backup systems. The other obvious consideration is cost.

There is a 100 percent solar house in Regina, Canada. Its active solar system provides both heat and hot water without a conventional backup system. Relying heavily on insulation in walls, shutters and ceiling, and on a large heat storage tank and a very efficient collector design using evacuated tubes, the house needs proportionately less collector space than some solar homes designed for milder climates.

Evacuated tubes are made up of three glass tubes inserted one inside another. Water or anti-freeze flowing through the two inner tubes is heated by direct sunlight and by rays reflected off a shiny backing or array behind the tubes. The space between the outer and middle tube is under vacuum pressure to prevent condensation and convection cooling. The round tubes receive radiation from varying angles better than flat plate collectors, which reject most rays that strike at obtuse angles. And reflective backing concentrates even more radiation on the tubes, from angles opposite the sun. In sum, their shape is an advantage, especially in the morning and evening or under cloudy conditions.

April 1981/Illinois Issues/13

New projections of national energy needs based on strict conservation in buildings, appliances, and by industry and transportation indicate a significant energy saving for the nation without jeopardizing productivity or American expectations. Using this presumption, the National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems (CONAES) and the Institute for Energy Studies, Stanford University, are among 10 studies now projecting lower energy needs by the year 2000 than earlier reports. Analyses of these studies are in Low Energy Futures for the United States, published by the U.S. Department of Energy in June 1980.

In 1977, the U.S. energy consumption was 76 quads (a quad is 10 British thermal units). Total primary energy demand by the year 2000 could be around 60 to 80 quads, according to the CONAES and Stanford reports, whereas the usual presumption of 2.5 percent annual growth in energy needs projects energy needs for the year 2000 at about double these low projections.

Solar energy in the U.S. now provides about 5 quads of primary fuel displacement. These lower energy projections are significant for solar energy development. If adequate conservation methods are accepted by Americans, the amount of solar energy required to heat an area would be minimized. Solar systems would not have to be as large or complex as originally thought, and it would become more feasible to design and install those systems.

If energy needs for heating homes and buildings could be reduced through conservation and design, solar energy for heating becomes feasible. At present, most of our homes have windows facing the wrong way, no insulation worth mentioning and no protection from either the summer sun or the winter wind.

The U.S. as of 1980 had 80 million residences, according to Robert Sheehan, director of economic research, National Association of Homebuilders. Of those homes, apartments and mobile homes, Sheehan estimates 80 percent will still be standing by the year 2000. In Illinois as of 1980, the association estimates 4.1 million existing residential units: 2.6 million single-family or attached units and 1.5 million apartment units. One challenge is making these dinosaur homes energy efficient; another is redesigning our new construction to eliminate the dinosaur. According to Wright, it is crucial that new homes be conservation and solar-oriented, or capable of being easily fitted with solar energy systems.

Sheehan estimates another 18 to 19 million new homes and apartment units plus 3 million mobile homes will be built in the U.S. during the decade of the 1980's. He believes solar will become a major factor in home construction: nonmechanical solar systems will come first, and — with better technology and increased cost-efficiency — the more complex systems will be a factor before the decade is over.

A solar greenhouse is 'a lot more efficient than using a fifteen hundred degree naturol gas flame to keep your house at 70 degrees'

In Illinois, where over 80 percent of the homes use natural gas for heat, new home construction with solar in mind may become very important. According to Wright, deregulation of natural gas may double the price charged consumers in four years. Wright claims that a solar greenhouse (see greenhouse box) is "a lot more efficient than using a fifteen hundred degree natural gas flame to keep your house at 70 degrees."

Solar energy becomes attractive as an investment if one assumes that conventional fuel costs will continue to rise faster than inflation. An investment today in solar heating will save the cost of future increases in the price of fuel. The payback period gets shorter as the price of conventional energy increases.

The Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 initiated federal action to gradually remove federal regulations, which had kept the price of natural gas at an artificially low level. Deregulation will ultimately put natural gas prices much closer to the costs of oil and electricity. President Reagan has suggested that deregulation be completed late this year or in 1982 instead of 1985. Whether it's sooner or later, deregulation means higher prices. Estimates made by the natural gas industry range from 30 to almost 100 percent price increases for residential use with immediate deregulation, and the Illinois Public Action Council announced in February that the price would zoom 350 percent for natural gas used in residences.

Projections made in 1981 by Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co., which assume natural gas will remain below the price of No. 2 fuel oil, show prices for residential customers increasing from the current price of $3.50 per million Btu to $4.50 in 1981, $10.00 in 1985, and to $20.00 in 1990. The American Gas Association, Washington, D.C., projects a more gradual increase with natural gas remaining lower in price than all forms of oil: $6.87 per million Btu in 1985 and $12.17 in 1990. From then on, the association predicts, the price will be keyed to the price of coal gas, reaching $25.75 by the year 2000.

These future high prices for natural gas will make conservation and solar much more attractive to Illinois homeowners since the solar payback rate by 1990 could be three to five times as fast as today.

Technologically and perhaps economically, solar energy is ready to develop. Wright, who has single-handedly built 10 of Illinois' solar greenhouses, says, "People say solar is ten years away. But it's here today. It is not as complicated as professionals say it is. People want to wait for the ultimate system to come off the assembly line. The ultimate system is simple and it's already here." The Harvard report also points out that solar energy is a "here and now" alternative to conventional energy sources for space heating and hot water in homes. Some of the other solar technologies which use direct sunlight — those which produce electricity with captured thermal heat or photovoltaic processes — are on the borderline (see photovoltaics box).

14/April 1981 /Illinois Issues

Solar experts distinguish between "active" and "passive" systems in buildings. Passive systems are those that allow the transfer of heat from one place to another by the natural movement of heat by convection, conduction or radiation. No mechanical devices, such as fans or pumps, are used. Active systems, on the other hand, use mechanical devices to distribute heat. The key to the system is the collector. A collector is basically a flat box which can be homemade or manufactured and varies in size. The sun shines through glass or another material on the top of the box and heat is collected inside the box which is coated with black paint or another heat absorbing material. They can cost from $1 to $40 per square foot.

Using the collector plus some system of plumbing or pumps or fans, the heat from the sun is collected and circulated, usually in the form of air or water. There are also "hybrid" solar systems, using combinations of both active and passive. A simple hybrid system may be a passive system with a small fan attached to a thermostat to move the heated air when necessary.

Basically, solar space heating is a matter of many variations of four basic themes: collecting the sun's heat that falls on a building's surface during winter days, storing the heat so that it can be used during the night or on sunless days, distributing the heat and reducing or eliminating the common sources of heat loss. Conservation is the last point and is the key to practical and common sense design, since the more heat a building retains, the less energy it needs to keep the temperature comfortable.

The ancient Greeks built their homes according to "passive" designs. Socrates described the building principle: "In houses with a south aspect, the sun's rays penetrate the porticos in winter, but in summer the path of the sun is right over our heads and above the roof, so that there is shade. If, then, this is the best arrangement, we should build the south side loftier to get the winter sun and the north side lower to keep out the cold winds." The principles of Socrates for passive and the 20th century technology for active can be used in new construction. The challenge is to adapt or retrofit existing homes and other buildings for solar energy.

Solar industry is ready
According to Sheldon Butt, director of solar marketing for Illinois' largest solar manufacturing firm, Olin Brass, we already have the technology, manufacturing ability and installment expertise for solar. According to a report to the Joint Economic Committee of the Congress, the emerging conservation and solar industries will lead to direct and indirect employment gains. Although employment decreases are expected in the economy because of reduced supply of conventional fuels increase from solar and conservation would produce a net increase in jobs of 2.9 million, according to the congressional report, Employment Impact of the Solar Transition, by Leonard S. Rodberg. The report also points out that the skills required in the manufacture and installation of conservation and renewable energy technologies, such as solar, are similar to those in conventional construction.

Passive Solar Heating Let the sun shine in

THE MOST SIMPLE and commonly used passive solar heat system is called direct gain heating: solar energy penetrates directly into a living space, and the building enclosure itself is used for heat storage. Heat is trapped in interior masonry walls and floors during the daytime and is gradually radiated into the living space at night.

Such systems use south side windows, generally double glazed, to lower heat losses at night and to improve overall heat gain during the day. Glass is receptive to energy in the form of shortwave light radiation, and is relatively resistant to longwave heat radiation. Sunlight entering a window is converted to heat energy when absorbed by opaque objects. By insulating windows at night with shutters or curtains in a direct gain system, more of the day's heat will be kept indoors. Materials for walls, floors and roofs must be chosen for their respective heat storage or insulating properties. Heat storage mass, in the form of walls or floors, should be placed to get direct sunlight, and should be at least 4 inches thick. Water or steel are the best heat-storing materials.

An excellent example of passive solar home design is the "Illinois Lo-Cal House," developed by engineers and architects at the University of Illinois in 1974. This design is one of the more successful and well-known in the U.S., relying mostly on "super insulation" — at least 12 inches of ceiling and 8 1/2 inches of insulation in walls, plus 6 inches below the floor and along the border of the crawl space. "What we have, in effect, is an undergound house built in the surface," according to Professor Seichi Konzo, who helped design the house prototype.

Other major Lo-Cal features include: triple glazed windows facing north and double-glazed windows facing south; a window area equal to less than 10 percent of the house floor space; a 30 inch roof overhang to let in winter sun, but exclude most summer rays; and an east-west stretching rectangular shape, leaving a generous space for south wall windows. The Washington Post reported that this design "has proved it can cut fuel bills as much as two-thirds without help from fancy solar heat-collection equipment."

Ordinarily the cost of the super insulation and solar features of the Illinois Lo-Cal House would total around $3,000 (added to the regular cost of a new home). Yet because double two-by-four wall studs, each with a 24-inch offset, are needed to accommodate the extra insulation, zoning code variances are sometimes required. Thus hundreds or even thousands of dollars in additional expenses can be incurred.

"I can't imagine why other people don't build houses like this," says Mrs. Hettie Kuhfuss, who owns an Illinois Lo-Cal House in Minier, Illinois. "We only used the furnace when our grandchildren visited, because we didn't want them near the hot stove." A wood-burning stove usually supplements the solar heating provided by direct sunshine, but any conventional heat system can be the backup.

April 1981/Illinois Issues/15

SOLAR GREENHOUSES
For existing homes, it's
the best for the money

Photos courtesy of Institute of Natural Resources

Above is the interior of a solar greenhouse in Springfield built by Community Energy Systems with a grant from IINR. It is a senior citizens' center. The greenhouse on the left was retrofitted to a home near brimfield by Dean Wright and has thermal curtains. The aim is to keep a solar greenhouse at 40degrees farenheit durring the winter, warm enough for vegetables.The nonisulated greenhouse on the left froze up, even with two 220-volt eight-foot, electric heaters.

GREENHOUSES are usually room-sized additions to existing structures and resemble a small attached cabin or shed, with a wall of large-panelled glass facing south. Most often standard home building materials and skills are used. For instance, the "glass" is generally double or triple glazed and may be made of fiberglass, acrylic, polyethylene film or other durable materials that are highly translucent. This glazing is usually situated at an angle of between 45 to 60 degrees to the floor, so as to be most receptive to the sun's rays, but even a 90 degree angle will work. There are no moving parts — if you don't count the curtains or vents.

The primary advantage of a passive greenhouse in Illinois, as compared to an active solar space heating system, is "primarily cost," according to Allen Elrod, community technology program manager at the Illinois Institute of Natural Resources. "A lot of people don't have $10,000 to invest [the cost of most active space heating systems], but they can get a $2,000 home improvement loan; and lenders are more willing to invest in a simple greenhouse design, where they might hesitate to invest in something as complicated and unproven as an active system. Also, a lot of detailed studies have shown that a greenhouse is the best investment on each dollar per Btu [British thermal unit]," Elrod says. "As a rough rule of thumb," Elrod says, an investment in a solar greenhouse pays for itself in five to ten years.

The payback period would be somewhat shorter if one considered energy savings as tax-free income each year, according to Energy Future, the Harvard report. Douglas Taff, a technical consultant for Solar Age magazine, says fuel savings from an attached greenhouse should, if properly built, equal 19.8 percent of a home's former heating needs in Chicago, and 37 percent in Springfield, based on typical heating usage of an average U.S. home. If the greenhouse is used to raise vegetables, annual production in a 10 by 12 foot greenhouse can save about $250, according to Taff, and the vegetables are tax free.

But Dean P. Wright, president of Thermal Screen Inc. and owner of Sunwood Unlimited, which has built 10 of Illinois solar greenhouses, admits that "there is definitely an overheating problem" in the summer unless the greenhouse includes proper cooling options. Wright recommends vertical walls on greenhouses to keep some of the sun's rays out, instead of slanting walls to accept as much sunlight as possible. "In the summer you can also cover greenhouse glass walls with movable covers, or simply whitewash them; also you can use a simple but practical ventilation system with a low vent for the cool air to enter and a high vent for the hot air to leave by, and in the last resort use a fan," Wright says. He believes that people can get year-round comfort from a passive solar heated and passive cooled home, but "the problem is, some people expect more heat in the winter than they need, simply because they're used to it."

Details about 15 solar greenhouses in Illinois, including photographs, locations and technical information are available in the Illinois Solar Greenhouse Compendium, co-authored by Elrod.

The solar industry in the nation includes between 400 and 500 manufacturers of solar equipment. In Illinois, according to a directory published in January 1980 by the Illinois Institute of Natural Resources, there are over 200 solar equipment suppliers and installers, 120 solar energy consultants, 16 manufacturers of collectors and component parts (presently only eight are producing) and over 30 home contractors doing passive solar.

The solar industry today is dominated by small and middle-sized firms with specialized products. Large corporations, such as Exxon, Westinghouse, General Electric and Lennox Industries, have solar divisions. "It is doubtful that any one firm has more than 5 percent of the total market for medium and high temperature collectors," according to Solar Engineering magazine in August 1979. "The large flat plate [collector] producers share the market with a large number of small producers, who may each have from one to two percent of the market." The market is not yet large enough to generate the production that large firms depend on for profits and competitive edge. At present no one knows the shape of the emerging solar industry. Will it be centralized like the auto industry, moderately consolidated like the heating and cooling industry (which itself has a major role to play in the 1980's), or decentralized like the plumbing industry?

Aside from manufacturers, there is already a large network of retailers, contractors, designers, heating and air-conditioning specialists, plumbers and community groups offering solar goods and services. The expertise and adaptability offered by these many small businesses and groups will probably thrive if demand for solar increases because of the need for on-site experts. Some, however, could be bought out or franchised by large suppliers, as happened in the auto industry in its early days. There already is competition within this amorphous network, but there is also confidence that solar can "fit in" at almost any level. Most solar

16/April 1981/Illinois Issues

advocates simply want the market to break open and have their chance to compete. One solar designer and contractor at the 8th Annual Illinois Energy Conference in November predicted: "Reagan will cut and combine [energy] programs. His emphasis on the supply end of the line will accelerate inflation and costs of energy which will make my solar business and conservation more attractive."

There are now about 2,000 solar systems in Illinois, according to Gary Mielke of IINR, but the number could be twice as high since there's no official reporting requirement. Although Mielke does not consider 2,000 systems as any breakthrough, there has been rapid growth: Illinois had only 400 such systems in July 1978. One-fourth of the present installations are agricultural applications, such as solar hog buildings and crop driers. According to Mielke, there has been an increase in passive solar and in "partial solar" such as vertical wall collectors and greenhouses or sun spaces supplying about 20 percent of a home's heating needs.

Institution redesign next
The biggest stumbling block for development of solar appears to be the cost. Yet, if everyone agreed that solar were a wise investment and the technology were perfected, another challenge — perhaps the biggest — is to redesign the institutions involved in financing, power generation, building codes and taxation.

The lending institutions for home construction and home improvement have been wary of solar systems and design. But with the price of utilities rising, many institutions granting mortgages consider the ability of the buyer to pay his utility bills along with his monthly mortgage payments and his taxes.

Only one savings and loan institution in Illinois — Home Federal Savings and Loan of Rockford — offers reduced interest rates for mortgage loans for solar-equipped homes. To qualify, the solar elements must meet specific standards, which were provided by local solar companies. The loans are made at 1 to 1.5 percent below regular lending rates, according to Jim Moore, vice president for mortgage loans at Home Federal.

A federal plan to subsidize loans at lower rates for solar and conservation home construction may be torpedoed by President Reagan. The Carter administration had proposed $800 million in its solar budget for 1981 and part of those funds are earmarked for the Solar Energy and Conservation Bank. Under the plan, as authorized under the National Energy Security Act (P.L. 96-294), a subsidy would be provided to lending institutions, who would, in turn, make loans for solar and conservation.

Another challenge is to redesign the institutions nvolved in financing, power generation, building codes and taxation

If the solar bank survives, it would be a strong indication of the federal government's active role in the development of solar. The amounts authorized for this program for fiscal 1981 are $100 million for solar subsidies and $400 million for conservation; however, the Department of Energy requested only $50 million to be spent in 1981 to subsidize solar improvements through the solar bank. It is estimated its first year would allow financing for a maximum of 20,000 solar household installations. A strong advocate of the solar bank is Bruce Green of the Solar Energy Research Institute (SERI) in Denver. Green says: "It doesn't appear that they [Reagan administration] understand the relationship between a strong solar industry in this country

and national security and energy independence. They also don't appear to understand that solar is the most job-intensive form of energy and could greatly stimulate the economy." SERI itself is facing cuts in funding. The Reagan administration proposes a 65 percent solar cut in fiscal 1982.

Solar programs debated
If the solar bank survives, it still may only be available to the well-to-do since interest rates — even with the subsidies — are extremely high. However, if rates come down, many middle-income consumers would find the solar bank loans inviting in combination with the 40 percent federal tax incentive for solar installations. Experience with federal and state solar tax credits, at least in California, indicates that nearly all the breaks have gone to households with above average incomes.

The decision by government to allow these tax credits for solar home investments is the earliest and strongest example of an active government role in promoting solar. But the federal government almost killed off the infant solar industry when it promised the income tax credit and then delayed its implementation.

The federal tax credit was approved as part of the Energy Tax Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-618). It allows a tax credit of 40 percent on the first $10,000 spent on solar or wind energy systems.

The states have also taken an active role in developing solar. Twenty-seven states have an income tax incentive and 13 states have a sales tax incentive. Illinois has neither but does provide an incentive by exempting solar heating and cooling equipment from real estate taxes (P.A. 79-943, ///. Rev. Stat., ch. 120, sec. 501d-l — 501d-3). Under the statute, a homeowner must apply to his county assessor for an "alternative valuation" to subtract the value of the solar system from the assessment of his home. Legislation that would have exempted solar equipment from the state sales tax was vetoed by Gov. James R. Thompson last fall. He said the state could not afford the revenue loss.

April 1981/Illinois Issues/17

Photo By Illinois Capital Development Board

At left are collectors being installed on new Illinois Agricultural Building at the State Fairgrounds in Springfield. It provides both heat and cooling. At top right is a Logan County machine shed which has a solar grain drying system. At bottem right is a low-cost solar wall panel which supplies 20-30 percent of home heating. It was installed in Springfield by Community Energy Systems.

Photo by Agricultural Engineering Department, University of Illinois, Urbana

The federal government's role has been active in supporting solar and conservation through tax incentives, research grants and demonstration projects — both large and small. But the feds have invested much less in solar energy than in other fuels. The federal appropriation for solar in fiscal 1980 stood at $647 million, while $88 billion in loan guarantees for synfuels were authorized by Congress last year. Federal subsidies for nuclear energy, according to a disputed and unpublished report of the Department of Energy, have reached $37 billion.

And many of the solar programs operated by state government have been funded by federal dollars. The Illinois Institute of Natural Resources has been very proud of its accomplishments in its programs to educate the public about the advantages and possibilities of solar, but most of its solar budget is federal dollars.

IINR solar section manager is David Loos and the fiscal 1981 budget for his section is $530,000 with about 80 percent from federal sources. Its accomplishments include: a solar building trades program, which built 18 solar homes in Illinois its first year with the help of 650 building trades students in 17 schools (40 more schools are expected to join the program); workshops scheduled for lenders and realtors; training, workshops, technical assistance and demonstrations of solar greenhouses; a speakers and consultants bureau providing solar displays and materials at 15 local fairs and malls in 1980 (400 groups to be contacted this year); and an agricultural solar program which last year conducted seven workshops and five tours of on-the-farm solar systems (about 500 farmers participated).

The status of IINR's solar and conservation programs now hinges on the proposed Reagan cuts.

IINR also received a $100,000 appropriation for fiscal 1980 from the Illinois Coal and Energy Development Bond Fund for 15 low-cost solar demonstration and construction projects. This fund was created in 1974 to stimulate the use of native Illinois energy resources with $5 million of the total $70 million specifically earmarked for alternative energy development.

The biggest single solar investment by the state is the new Illinois Department of Agriculture building at the State Fairgrounds. It is basically a state demonstration project of an active solar cooling system in a large building (see solar cooling box). Using evacuated tube solar collectors on the roof to heat water, this heat fuels an "absorption liquid chiller." The cooling system is still only partially solar (22 percent), but the collectors also provide the building with 45 percent of the energy needed for space heating and 70 percent of the energy for water heating. The solar portion of the 150,000 square foot building should be working by the end of May. The state and the Department of Energy each paid $555,000 for the solar system. Two other big systems funded with federal funds are at the Museum of Science and Industry and at Navy Pier in Chicago. Some critics believe the government put its funds in the wrong place.

The tendency of the federal government to finance big solar projects was noted in Energy Future: "Big solar centralized projects fit nicely into the technical and managerial practices and expertise of the nation's research establishment. Indeed, many of those directing government energy research and development programs — coming out of the Atomic Energy Commission, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Department of Defense — are accustomed to dealing with major high-technology companies. A Big Solar program is a convenient and familiar way to proceed." The report later says that "none of the Big Solar programs can be expected to achieve significant short-term (twentieth century) results. They are twenty-first century technologies."

The most controversial and most expensive big federal solar project is the so-called "power tower" for thermal electric generation. It has consumed almost one-fifth of the federal budget for solar energy. The goal of the project is to drive a 10-megawatt boiler generator directly from the sun. Sunshine is focused on the boiler (mounted on a tower) from a field of 2,200 giant mirror heliostats on half a square mile of land in Barstow, Calif.

18/April 1981/Illinois Issues

The tower is scheduled to go on-line commercially in 1990, producing electricity for Southern California Edison, which is paying up to 20 percent of the research and development costs in exchange for the right to eventually sell electricity from the plant. Once online, the utility will pay 50 percent of plant expenses. Although the power tower does not work when the sun goes down, its electrical generating capacity during daytime hours will be beneficial to the utility since peak sunshine hours are also peak hours for electrical demands to run air-conditioners. Although the power tower appears to be a good back-up system for peak loads, the cost for delivering electricity from the power tower may be $2,000 per peak kilowatt, twice as high as conventionally generated electrical power, according to an analysis by the Jet Propulsion Lab. Other big solar ideas that are even more costly and further from technical feasibility include large wind generators, ocean thermal conversion and solar laser-relay satellites.

The basic concept of all these big solar projects is to find a way for electrical utilities to harness the sun. Electrical utilities first drove their turbines with water and coal and then adapted to nuclear power. The sun, however, may be hard to harness for our conventional power plants. Energy Future states: "The power tower is, in many ways, the antithesis of on-site solar heating. Virtually everything is different: the market, the manufacturers, the time horizons, the economics, the institutional barriers, the technical risks, and the degree of fit with the national research establishment."

Utilities must decide
Caught in the middle of the energy transition and caught in the worst way are the nation's utilities. Across the nation these energy giants are wrestling with problems of price and supply. Oil-using utilities in Florida, California, New York and the New England states are hit by both the high prices of oil and the prospects of interruptions in supply. Coal-using utilities in the Midwest face the high costs of imported western coal and of installing scrubbers. Nuclear utilities everywhere are saddled with soaring costs and unresolved safety problems. Natural gas utilities are looking for new supplies and facing competition with fuel oil and electricity once deregulation occurs.

At the same time, the high costs of energy have also caused big changes on the demand side of the energy equation. Conservation and efficiency have reduced energy demand. Emerging technologies like solar could make everybody, at least in a small way, an energy producer. These new developments pose both an opportunity and a challenge for utilities. Some experts believe that before we are through this energy transition, the utilities will be radically different from what they are today and that conservation and solar will play a major part in the change.

What do these young Turks say? Roger Sant, director of the Energy Productivity Center at the Mellon Institute, Arlington, Va., believes we should completely deregulate energy generation and turn electric utilities into distributing companies similar to natural gas utilities. Electric power plants are no longer "natural monolopies" he says, because they are no longer the only feasible source of electricity. Cogeneration (the use of industrial process heat to generate electricity), he says, is already competitive with nuclear. The way to go, according to Sant, is to expand competition and experiment with new ways to deliver heat and light, power and comfort.

Modesto A. Maidique, a faculty member of the Harvard Business School, says in a Technology Review article published last May that it is time for utilities to encourage user-owned solar heating and to move into solar services. He says: "Solar energy represents opportunities for the utilities to avoid investments in new capacity . . . and to build capacity in small increments as demand requires. The responsibility for obtaining funds to invest in energy capacity would shift from the utilities to their customers as the public seeks to install on-site solar thermal generation."

Forbes magazine suggested last October that "it could make sense for the utilities to provide . . . photovoltaic systems and offer them for outright sale, long-term installment sale or rent. Big utilities could buy the hardware in big volume, producing cost savings, faster demand growth and earlier economics of scale for manufacturers." According to Forbes, what utilities lose in power sales, "they could well get back in savings from not using expensive peak generating equipment or from postponing the need to finance big central plants."

Solar
Cooling
Systems

From low-cost trees and
screens and simple pipes
to million-dollar
high-tech 'chillers'

ACTIVE solar cooling systems are "the least economic of present solar technologies," according to David L. Grumman, president of Enercon, Ltd., a consulting engineering firm in Evanston. Passive cooling systems, on the other hand, are economical right now, and especially attractive in Illinois with its long, hot and humid summers.

The most impressive example of an active solar cooling system in Illinois is in the new Agriculture Building on the state fairgrounds. The system uses an "absorption chiller" which works on the principle of heat exchange — using evaporation and condensation to remove heat under vacuum pressure. Put another way, the absorption chiller alters the state of a circulating fluid from liquid to gas to drive a refrigeration process. It works, but it is still cheaper to use ordinary air conditioners, according to Grumman, whose firm did the calculations to determine the cost-effectiveness of the Agriculture Building's solar cooling system. Grumman believes in the worth of the million dollar project since "demonstration projects are designed not to be cheapest, but to show a new idea works." When will this technology be commercially viable? Grumman says "about a hundred years — it may even be never."

Passive cooling systems are possible and are based on design and planning instead of extremely expensive or delicate equipment. They begin with such simple, low-cost elements as shade trees, sunscreens, good ventilation and alignment of the building to best capture cool breezes. A deciduous shade tree is especially practical in Illinois because it also absorbs a great deal of moisture on our uncomfortable humid summer days. And, in the winter, when the deciduous tree is bare of leaves, direct sunlight can help heat a building.

Passive cooling systems are available to increase comfort within buildings, but extremely hot and humid days could be a problem.

"Solar chimneys," designed to pull hot air upward and out a vent, set up a convection current via one duct above a vertical solar heat collector and another duct below. "Cool tubes" are pipes or drainage tiles buried horizontally in the cool earth, with holes in the underside of the pipes. Vented into a home, they pull cool air into circulation by convection and vents near the ceiling allow hot air outside. The pipes or tiles are generally 6 to 4 inches in diameter; the bigger they are, the better the draft that will be created.

April 1981/Illinois lssues/19

What is suggested here is a basic difference between the kind of future society implied by on-site solar and conservation and that connoted by centralized supply systems. On-site approaches such as photovoltaics, active heating and cooling and passive design all imply less vulnerability and more diversity and autonomy for individuals and communities. They also pose what the February 1981 National Geographic calls "an identity crisis" for utilities.

How utilities respond depends, in part, on where they are. In Oregon which is running out of cheap hydroelectric energy, utilities audit and insulate all-electric homes. In California, which faces the prospect of building nuclear or coal electrical generation plants if electricity runs out, the Public Utilities Commission has ordered all utilities under its jurisdiction to offer its customers incentives to install solar hot water heaters and to offer money to builders of energy-efficient houses and to cities that cut energy use. Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. have announced that renewable energy is now a preferred technology.

In Tennessee, the federally owned Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) offers long-term, low-interest loans to 1,000 Memphis customers for the purchase, installation and maintenance of solar hot water heating systems. The TVA plans to expand the program to include 100,000 customers in seven states along the Mississippi River. The addition of the systems will reduce peak loads and eliminate the need to build another nuclear reactor.

The TVA, however — unlike private utilities — does not have to make a profit, nor is it subject to state regulations. It would require state utility regulations to allow private utilities to build a profit margin into loan programs like the TVA's, and there has been opposition to that concept. In 1978 the San Diego Gas & Electric Co. started a marketing program to sell 43 solar domestic hot water heaters to creditworthy customers. It requested bids from over 60 solar equipment suppliers, but many small solar manufacturers were afraid the utility would monopolize solar. They fought for — and got — legislation to prohibit California utilities from selling solar equipment directly to consumers. The state's Public Utility Commission has at least temporarily determined the role utilities should play in solar marketing. Under a three-year demonstration plan, the utilities are now helping to finance solar hot water heaters.

Government role changing
Midwestern utilities use coal (much of it low-sulfur western) and nuclear power to generate electricity. And Illinois is a special case in the Midwest because it has ample supplies (even a surplus) of high-sulfur coal and nuclear generated electricity. Solar advocates have blamed Illinois utilities for practicing tokenism in their solar promotion and killing pro-solar legislation in the General Assembly.

20/April 1981/Illinois Issues

Richard Carlson, assistant to the governor for energy and natural resources, does not see the utilities as being the hindrance to solar. Instead of blaming the utilities, Carlson says Illinois' sluggishness in solar is caused by a lack of influence over federal energy policy, limited state moneys and a strong pro-coal lobby. He says, "Illinois' priority is coal."

Whatever the reason, Illinois so far has two laws on the books that favor solar development: P.A. 79-943 states that the homes of solar energy users cannot be assessed at a higher value just because of their alternative system; P.A. 80-431 prohibits utilities from charging solar users a higher rate on their backup systems than nonsolar users. Bills that have failed in the General Assembly include proposals to provide a personal income tax credit for persons installing solar; guarantee solar access protection; increase solar use in schools of higher education; install solar hot water heaters in prisons; and implement a sales tax credit to solar system purchasers.

Solar is a challenge for utilities. Oddly enough, it is the electric utilities which must make adjustments, even though only about 8 percent of Illinois space heating is electric. The reason is that without changes in rate structure, massive adoptions of solar heating with electrical backup systems can increase winter peakloads without adding that much to the rate base. Solar hot water systems, however, can reduce the peakloads of summer-peaking utilities like those in Illinois. And, of course, there's photovoltaics and other on-site technologies to generate electricity. These could reduce peakloads but could also threaten the utilities' present franchised monopoly on electricity production.

In the case of natural gas utilities, solar stretches out limited supplies. "Gas being conserved means you can open up to new customers without drawing more from storage fields," says John Ewan, director of energy conservation for Central Illinois Light Company, an electric and gas utility headquartered in Peoria. "Natural gas companies do not see solar as a threat because solar space heating is a supplementary source; gas will still be needed for industry and commerce," says Roy Warmington, public relations spokesperson for People's Gas, Light and Coke Co.

Still, Illinois gas utilities have not gone so far as to hand out solar collectors to their customers the way Florida utilities once gave away gas hot water heaters to replace solar heaters in that state in the 1930's. The main interest for Illinois gas utilities at the moment is deregulation and the endangered synfuels program. Bob Edwards, of Northern Illinois Gas, says his utility is not pushing passive solar, but it is showing customers what they can do to conserve energy. The utility has a passive solar test lab, called the Northern Home, on display in Naperville. It uses both passive solar and insulation.

CILCO worked with Dr. Yahya B. Safdari of Bradley University, who built an active solar demonstration home in the mid-seventies. CILCO also helped finance Illinois Central College's solar passive demonstration house which was completed last year with the help of a grant from the Department of Energy.

Since 1976, Commonwealth Edison, Illinois' large nuclear and coal burning utility, has had an experimental rate program for commercial and residential solar space and hot water heating. The program gives the solar electric user the most advantageous rates, says George Travers, vice president of Commonwealth Edison. Travers says the response so far has been meager, with a total of about 100 solar installations. In order to get experience with solar hot water systems, ComEd recently installed a system on the roof of its plant in Downers Grove and systems at two residences with plans to install four more residential systems this year. Commercial solar hot water systems are particularly interesting because they would save some of the expensive generating capacity needed for peak loads, according to Klaus Wisiol, common load management and conservation manager. But he does not see the utility getting into the business of distributing solar hot water heaters: "We're an energy supply business," he says, "and heating contractors are interested in that [distribution] field."

ComEd has also been contributing to solar research at the Electric Power Research Institute and watching developments in photovoltaics (see box) and in thermal solar (which uses solar heat to produce steam to drive a conventional turbine). "Thus far we have concentrated our attention on thermal solar," Travers says. "If the solar thermal system works in the Southwest, we might try that."

Photovoltaics

'Give me the splendid silent sun.'
---Walt Whitman

In the photo below, a Compound Parabolic Collector (CPC) at Argonne National Laboratory concentrates the sun's rays
three-and-one-half times. Temperatures generated by the CPC can operate
absorption type air conditioners or Rankine cycle engines. Use of
photovoltaic cells with a CPC permits direct and efficient conversion of sunlight to electricity.
Photo courtesy of Argonne National Laboratory

PHOTOVOLTAIC power is the science fiction of the solar industry. Although the process was described as early as 1905, the first photovoltaic cell — converting sunlight energy to electricity — was developed in 1954 by Bell Laboratories. But it was the space program that first used the cells in a convincing way. Photovoltaic cells provided a lightweight, portable and dependable power source for space travel from 1960 onward, and with a massive federal subsidy for research and development, the cost of producing the cells was cut drastically.

In 1959, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) earliest silicon cells cost $2,000 a peak watt ("peak watts" are the cell's output in full sunlight). Today, the average price is $6 a peak watt, according to the October Forbes magazine. And recent breakthroughs in production techniques for solar cells may reduce the cost to 50 cents per peak watt, if the techniques can be fully commercialized.

At that price, the kilowatt hour cost is 5 cents for a utility. Rates to consumers would be from 6 to 8 cents a kilowatt hour. This is competitive with rates now charged in Illinois by Commonwealth Edison to small users of electricity — 7.56 cents per kilowatt hour in the summer months, 6.33 cents per kilowatt hour in other months.

Although four of the largest photovoltaic cell producing companies have recently been bought up and out by major energy companies — Exxon, Shell, Mobil and Arco — the important technological breakthroughs in solar cell production have been made outside the energy industry. The innovators include the Stanford Research Institute (SRI International) and Jack Kilby of Texas Instruments Incorporated and Honeywell Incorporated.

To explain the breakthroughs, it is necessary to describe a solar cell. The cells are graceful in their simplicity, making use of sunlight almost as plants do. They are formed of two wafer-thin layers of crystalized silicon or of other similar substances. Silicon is an inert, photosensitive material which is made into a "semiconductor" when chemically bonded with other materials. One layer is bonded to become negatively charged, using boron, for example. The other layer is bonded to become positively charged, using arsenic, for example. These two wafers, each 15 thousandths of an inch thick or less, are sandwiched together over a barrier layer so that sunlight can penetrate each layer, thereby releasing direct current (electron flow) on both sides of the barrier. This current can be drawn off through an external wire on each side. Each cell produces about half a volt of electricity. But its output of direct current must be put through a converter to produce the alternating current that runs virtually everything electric in the U.S.

In the past, two things have kept the cost of producing solar cells extremely high. First, although silicon is the second most common element on earth, it has been very expensive to make it pure enough and thin enough for use in solar cells. Then, after an expensive, multi-step process, crystalized silicon had to be sawed into micro-thin wafers, wasting 40 percent as sawdust.

The most impressive new photovoltaic system was designed by Jack Kilby, a genius who holds the patent as inventor of the monolithic integrated circuit and also holds the basic patent for the hand-held calculator. He has basically rethought the photovoltaic cell, making it modular, miniature and more efficient.

In the Kilby system, the cells are made like buckshot, only smaller. Doped, high-grade silicon is melted and forced through a tiny nozzle and allowed to fall 10 feet in droplets that solidify into spheres. The silicon spheres are sorted for size and poured out on a surface where metal contacts are applied, and a very thin insulating crust is added. The tiny spheres are then applied to a base layer of material, almost the way sand is spread on sandpaper. Ninety-five percent of the surface of the tiny spheroid cells is potentially useful in producing energy — much more than the 12 to 30 percent in conventional cells.

Next, Kilby thought of placing the completed sheets of solar cells in a long elliptical tube after bathing them with an electrolyte. When the sun hits this tubular array, the cells are activated and a charge comes out of each through its electrolyte coating. As a result, hydrogen gas is created through electrolysis. Part of the hydrogen is drawn off and stored as a hydride, and this in turn can be used at any time in the system's attached fuel cell to create electricity on demand. The whole unit is a closed loop: it can operate continuously since the chemical reaction in the solar tube is nearly the precise opposite of the chemical reaction in the fuel cell. In short, you have a system capable of producing energy around-the-clock; it has storage capacity and cogeneration, plus it takes up less space than traditional solar cell panels. The Department of Energy is granting $14 million to Texas Instruments to demonstrate Kilby's invention.

A second costly problem was the immense amount of energy lost in refining silicon to the 99.999 percent purity needed for solar cells. SRI, in a project headed by Dr. Angel Sanjurjo, developed a one-step method for making semiconductor grade silicon at $5 a kilogram. The work was done under contract with NASA and the Department of Energy. Sanjurjo describes the secret as a chemical reaction, one that produces its own heat, separating silicon from impurities "in a self-sustaining process."

More recently, a senior research scientist, Don Heaps, working at Honeywell, patented a new method of producing entire photovoltaic panels, without wasting silicon, at a cost of 50 cents or less per peak watt. The secret, Heaps found, was to produce many cells at once by coating the panel — a large ceramic sheet — in molten silicon.

In Illinois, Argonne National Laboratory has been working on yet another approach which could greatly increase solar cell efficiency. The idea is to concentrate solar energy on each cell using a "CPC translator," something too complex to explain here. But according to Tony Gorski, who worked on the process at Argonne, "We've proven we can reduce the cost per peak watt by a factor of six."

In sum, the future of photovoltaics looks bright. Dozens of viable, low-cost methods of producing electricity from sunlight have been developed by national laboratories and private companies in just the last three years. No new technological breakthroughs are needed now. What is needed is automated, assembly-line production in quantity, which means a large capital investment. Whatever company gets there first and best stands to make a huge profit marketing rooftop electric generators that run on sunlight. According to Andrew Krantz, a market analyst in the Department of Energy's photovoltaic research group, photovoltaics could be a $30 billion industry — in 1980 dollars — by the end of the century. The present largest marketer, Solarex Corporation, has estimated sales of $10 million a year. Total industry sales are between $40 and $50 million a year, and there is tremendous growth.

April 1981 /Illinois Issues/21

From top to bottom: In Springfield, solar collectors
on the roof of the headquarters of the Illinois
Association of Plumbing, Heating, and Cooling
Contractors, are part of a liquid hot water heating
system. In Macomb, a passive solar hour designed
and built by the owner, uses wood for backup heat.
And in Bloomington a hybrid solar system with hot
air collectors also features partial earthberming
on the north side to store heat in winter and keep
the house cool in summer. Photos courtest of the Illinois Institute of Natural Resources.

Travers says that photovoltaics are too expensive for utilities right now and in terms of economics would not satisfy load demands. "Individual homeowners using it — that is something different," he adds.

As a sample of innovative utility response to change, look at neighboring Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Electric Power in Milwaukee plans to install and monitor solar hot water systems in the homes of 300 customers by the end of 1981. The utility is using a standard unit designed to provide half the hot water needs for a family of four. The customer pays about $2,700 for the system, but with the federal tax credit and the Wisconsin rebate, the customer gets back about $1,300; the remaining investment pays for itself in from five to eight years. Several thousand have applied. The purpose is to demonstrate on a large scale that solar hot water systems work, not to sell solar products. The aim is to reduce peak demand, says Dennis Kois, supervisor of public information.

Kois explains, "Four years ago we were planning to add eight power plant units in the 1980's. Now we are planning only three. We don't want to have to build new power plants," he says. "Many utilities are seeing a long-term slowdown, a change in our energy consumption habits, though others are more bullish," he says. According to Kois, "You can't threaten your reliability. We're trying to be as realistic as possible on what impact conservation can have in freeing up electricity for other uses."

Although Wisconsin Electric is planning to install some photovoltaic cells for research purposes in 1981, Kois does not expect to see massive solar electrical generation until the end of the century.

Wisconsin Power and Light, a gas and electric utility operating out of Madison, Wis., has completed a three-year project with builders to construct five solar passive homes. The utility subsidized the homes up to $3,000, which is the cost of getting about 40 percent of space heating via passive solar, according to Scott Seely, the energy conservation research coordinator for the utility. This year, according to Seely, the utility is moving into a passive solar weatherization and retrofit program. It wants to pay for labor on an existing home, probably owned by a realtor, and the realtor will pay for the materials and keep the home open to the public for 90 days before selling it. But with the housing market so bad, Seely said, "We may have trouble finding a realtor willing to go along with the program." Once again, these are demonstration programs. The utility does not see itself going into the solar and retrofit business.

Wisconsin Power and Light is also working on a wind energy conversion program with six small units. Seely says this is not a near-term probability, but some day the utility might use wind energy farms to cut its peak load, especially in winter.

"We are projecting between a 2 and 3 percent growth rate, and would like to sit back and depreciate plants and never build. Construction is now at $800 per kilowatt of demand," he says.

Wisconsin Power and Light relies 70 percent on coal (a little over a fifth comes from Illinois) and 28 percent on nuclear energy. With the price of natural gas going up, his

utility has seen a lot of conversions to oil and l.p. (propane) gas. With those prices going up too, there may be more demand for electrical space heating. This view is shared by Kois at Wisconsin Electric Power Co., though he emphasizes the utility does not know at what point the change might occur.

22/April 1981/Illinois Issues

And what may be true for Wisconsin is not necessarilytrue for Illinois, which is an urban industrial state with a big storage and distribution system. Many observers believe that natural gas in Illinois — particularly where the delivery system is already in place — will continue to be cheaper than oil and electricity even after deregulation.

In Illinois electric utility profits have been threatened by the last nine years of inflation — affecting the cost of capital — and by the even higher rise in the cost of conventional fossil fuels and uranium to generate electricity. Added to that is the debt incurred by the two biggest Illinois electrical utilities, Commonwealth Edison and Illinois Power from construction begun in the late sixties and early seventies when they anticipated a 6 to 7 percent growth range. But that growth did not materialize. "We have now scaled that [the growth range] back to 3 percent," says Corn-Ed's Travers. And Illinois Power decided recently to build one new nuclear plant at Clinton rather than two.

Meanwhile, ComEd with the approval of the Illinois Commerce Commission is trying to time the construction of power plants to minimize excess capacity. "Our strategy," says Travers, "is to extend construction time as prudently as we can so as not be have a long period with excess capacity. We hope that by 1985-86, we will be able to wholesale excess capacity to other areas to stabilize rates. There are many variables, however, in making forecasts. We would like to keep rates as stable as possible.

"Coal and nuclear will supply the [electrical utility] baseload for the next 20 years. Use nuclear for the baseload, coal for the intermediate load, and shave the peak. Anything we can do to shave the peak, we will — cogeneration, conservation, solar," says Travers.

But the variables are there: the economy could remain unstable, high electrical rates could reduce demand which would send the rates even higher or, on the other hand, there could be a rush to build big plants in the 1990's.

Meanwhile, in every sector of the economy, new technologies are changing the way electricity is produced and consumed. Whatever their strategies, there are both risks and opportunities for the utilities in the coming decade.

Two Carter administration programs involve utilities: the Residential Conservation Service which requires utilities to do an energy audit of the homes of customers, and the Public Utility Regulatory Act, which sets the stage for rate reform and cogeneration agreements. At present, their fate is uncertain.

Codes are critical
Utilities are not the only institution which may have to adapt to solar. Building codes enforced by local governments must be made compatible with solar design and energy efficiency. Whether in new construction or retrofitting existing buildings, the traditional building codes present obstacles and may require the added step of seeking a variance and the risk that the variance will not be granted.

"The developer, realtor or contractor confronting a tough speculative home market is not likely to add the costs of variances to obtain solar orientation," says J. Randle Shick, a Springfield attorney who represents the Illinois Solar Contractors Association. One typical example of solar home design that can create problems is the double-thick wall which allows for super insulation in the Illinois Lo-Cal House. Another example is whether the local code allows roof displacement by collectors.

The developer, realtor, or contractor confronting o tough speculative home market is not likely to add the costs of variances to obtain solar orientation

Two general concepts which must be accepted into local codes are siting — to allow expansive windows facing south — and more importantly, the right of access to sunshine. Without some guarantee or zoning standards that protect the access to sunlight, even passive systems are threatened. Rules must be set to control height and setback of buildings, and even vegetation. "The planner must remember that the administration of the solar access regulations is as important as the form which the adopted regulations can take .... subdivision regulations may offer the most significant action to best assure solar access for new residential development. For relatively stable cities, where the predominant growth is slow and largely in-fill development, the removal of regulatory barriers would be a priority," according to Protecting Solar Access for Residential Development: A Guidebook for Planning Officials, co-authored by Martin Jaffe and Duncan Erley and published in February 1980 by the Department of Energy.

IINR director Frank Beal believes Illinois needs state legislation to change building codes to require energy efficient construction. Minnesota requires information on the thermal efficiency of houses offered for sale, according to Beal. If the state did enact legislation to change local building codes to require energy efficiency, it could also act on the question of solar access.

Federal energy-efficiency standards for new residential and commercial structures were expected to be adopted, but appear now in limbo. The issue of building codes could be resolved at the local level, as has been done in Champaign. But, as Beal points out, few other communities have met with the same success.

Building codes are not a problem in the view of Terry Paul, executive vice president of the Illinois Home Builders Association. The local jurisdictions, according to Paul, have allowed flexibility and understand the need to conserve energy and to lower heating bills. He does not believe solar access is an issue now since there are not yet enough solar installations. At some point, however, he believes, "We as an industry will have to address the problem."

Another hurdle for the development of active solar systems is performance standards. Standards exist for solar collector performance, and standards for overall performance of systems will soon be set by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), a trade association formed by manufacturers, contractors, consulting engineers, architects and others. Collector standards are enforced by a certification and labeling program financed by the Department of Energy in 1977 and 1978 and based on "ASHRAE 93," the performance measurements of the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers. The new overall performance standards should be ready by this summer, according to SEIA president Sheldon Butt of Olin Brass. He says there are also safety standards being developed for solar collectors, and these will be promulgated by Underwriters Lab.

April 1981/Illinois Issues/23

The newly formed Illinois Solar Contractors Association is considering "some certification procedures and tests to determine levels of knowledge," according to the group's president, Susan Rutherford. She adds that the group has not had a lot of unhappy consumers come forward with complaints "so we feel we're anticipating a problem."

State government could always step in and regulate the new industry, but according to Tom Heavysides of IINR, "We're leaning towards self-regulation. . . . the solar industry is struggling in Illinois. In my opinion, the level of consumer protection should grow with the industry."

Meanwhile, at the local level people are dealing with the uncertain energy economy.

In Maywood, a low-and-moderate-income suburb of Chicago where utility bills are sometimes higher than mortgage payments, local government officials are knowledgeable about solar power and conservation. In 1979, Sandra Sharp, Maywood community development director, convinced local officials that they should apply for a Community Development Block Grant to retrofit two Maywood homes for solar. The job was done with the help of the grant, local contractors and the Hawkweed Group, a solar architectural firm. The homes will be placed on the market after a series of tours for interested utilities and citizens, and Maywood is now construcing solar heated fire and police stations.

Pembroke, a rural town near Kankakee where the unemployment rate sometimes climbs as high as 35 percent, is the home of the state's largest solar greenhouse.

Pembroke Township, working with the Pembroke Cooperative, as well as the Kankakee Community Action Program, the Governors State Energy Group (formerly Acorn) and IINR (which supplied the funds), completed the greenhouse in 1978. It has since been doubled in size to become Illinois' first "solar mini-farm." The farm provides starter plants for area farmers, raises laying hens and earthworms, and provides soil for other solar greenhouses in the area.

In Springfield, which has a municipally owned electric utility that burns Illinois coal, the Springfield Energy Project (SEP) under the direction of Professor Al Casella of Sangamon State University, has completed an energy audit of the city. The audit shows that in 1977 over $101 million was spent by the citizens, businesses and institutions of Springfield on elecricity, natural gas, gasoline, diesel and propane. SEP estimates that almost 85 percent of the money left the city. SEP also has initial projections showing that by the year 2000, the money spent on Springfield's energy needs could grow to over $750 million in uninflated dollars.

With funding from a National Science Foundation grant, the Department of Energy and Sangamon State University, the project is now working with community leaders and a citizens' task force. Following the example of several other cities, the task force will make an 18-month study of the potentials for energy conservation and the maximum use of locally available energy sources in Springfield. A major goal is to develop a plan that would reduce the money drain out of Springfield.

Farmers are using solar systems in Illinois and other midwestern states to dry crops and to heat hog confinement buildings.

The typical grain drying system is simply a large machine shed adapted to solar. The south walls and roofs of the sheds are converted into inexpensive solar panels by mounting fiberglass over a black surface. A fan forces the heated air into nearby grain bins. The same technique can be used to dry hay. Low temperature solar grain drying takes several weeks and therefore can only be used by farmers with grain storage bins on their own land.

Then there's Carbondale where conservation and solar have been a concern of the city government since the mid 1970's. Working with the Shawnee Solar Project, the city has carried on an intensive education effort for the last three or four years. As a result, most construction in Carbondale is now passive solar and has good support from contractors and realtors. The city has changed its residential, commercial and industrial building codes to mandate conservation, and it encourages passive solar design. Consumer habits have also changed. When the city government noticed its utility tax revenues were not keeping pace with projections, it had Central Illinois Public Service Company do an audit. Electrical consumption in 1978-79 was down 21.4 percent.

Now the city government, the Shawnee Solar Project and IINR are developing a "conservation and solar utility." The intent is to establish an "energy transition authority" for Carbondale made up of private construction and contracting firms, financial institutions, city government and solar and conservation experts.

Carbondale's attitude is that the energy transition must be made at the local level: that's where the problems, the solutions — and the resources are.

Everywhere there seems to be a sense that we are now in the midst of the energy transition. Moving deeper into the solar and conservation frontier, we are beginning to redesign not only homes but institutions and communities as well.

Gary Adkins is a free-lance writer and is research assistant at the Illinois Legislative Council. He was formerly legislative correspondent for Illinois Issues

April 1981/Illinois Issues/24