As a Scientist, I am only too aware of the biases that ensue when ‘so called‘ facts are presented. It is almost impossible for facts to be presented without a hidden agenda. However, I will attempt to introduce a few facts as a comparison between Oil and Solar in as natural a manner as possible. I will leave you to draw the conclusions and further hope to leave my bias at the door.

One might say that we are in a world greedy for energy, a world that gorges itself on more and more fuel day after day. It is a reality that, even in the most destitute places in the world, the major sources of energy is the supply of fossil fuel. This fuel is used to power our houses, our cars, and our business. Every aspect of our lives is touched by fossil fuel every day (more precisely, every “second”) of our lives. We are totally addicted to fossil fuel. If you disagree, I dare you to go a day, or even a single hour without using any fossil fuel or any product fueled by this energy source.  I asked a friend of mine this morning to tell what he thought would happen if we should cut off the supply of oil in our country and he suggested that we would experience total anarchy and I totally agree with him.

Fossil fuel is the primary energy source but are there other sources of energy that are equally viable? Are there other sources of energy that are equally affordable? Are there other sources of energy that are equally sustainable? Are there other sources of energy that are equally reliable?

Whether or not there is global warming, we all agree the fossil fuel causes pollution and pollution causes health problems for us and our children. Therefore, the proliferation of the use fossil fuel is a source of health problems and is generally not a good thing. So are there other sources of energy that are cleaners and better for our health? Let’s discuss this, void of political overtones.

All these questions are ones that we should all face in one way or another. I suggest that if we are truly honest with ourselves, we really have not realized that we have allowed ourselves to be consumed by the oil industry. Every election or every momentary increase in the price of oil, we become agitated and note that oil is important to us and when things settle down again, we again become comforted by the cradle of the oil monster.

We really need to face this issue head on and deal with it before it is too late. We cannot be afraid to discuss these issues at the expense of our lives and that of our children.

Did you know that enough energy reaches the earth every hour from the sun that can provide energy for every household and business in the world for an entire year? Further, the sun is expected to last another 30 billion years.

The sun is the source of all energy on the earth, be it fossil fuel, coal, wind, wave, or nuclear. The sun is also the source of all life on the planet. Therefore, without the sun, mankind would not exist and the earth would not even be imagined.

Despite these facts, the sun’s energy is only responsible for 0.06% of all the energy used within the United States. Instead, we invest in mining coal or the transferring of trillions of dollars, yearly, to the oil rich states of the middle east or other unfriendly territories.

Solar energy is free and abundant. It is also clean and  releases only a trace of the  so-called greenhouse gasses, such as CO₂, that pollute our atmosphere.

But has the technology reached the stage where it is economically viable to embark on a whole scale installation of solar energy systems in our homes and businesses? The answer is a resounding YES.

Solar energy can now provide electricity to light our homes and business by the use of photovoltaic (PV) cells and Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) systems and  also provide heating and cooling for our homes and business by the use of solar thermal systems; evacuated tubes and/or flat plate collectors.

It should also be noted that the government is committed to help us develop and install solar systems in our homes and business and have provided many  grants and tax incentives to help to defray the cost of the installation of the systems or to aid in the research and development of the technology.

The installation of a solar system in your home could result in the reduction of your energy bill by more than 60% and more than 30% in a typical business. More savings may be realized and your consultant should advise you, accordingly.

If just 10% of our neighborhoods install a solar system, we could reduce our national debt by more than 3 trillion dollars and save over 5 million tons of carbon gasses.

You are encouraged to catch this wave and reduce your energy bills, cut your carbon foot print, and help save our planet.

Cap and Trade is the proposed legislative act by which the United States government plans to establish a protocol for dealing with the economics surrounding the climate change market. The unit of commerce in the climate change market is known as a Carbon Financial Instrument Contracts (CFI), this is sometimes referred to as Carbon Credits. The CFI is a cash product that is used to measure the amount of Greenhouse Gases (GHG) “sequestered” or “offset”.

The term “sequestered” is used to infer the process of the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and retention in a terrestrial system (e.g., forests and soils) or in a geologic formation and the term “offset” is used to represent the development of equivalent generated by qualifying mitigation GHG projects, such as, solar, wind, and other renewable energy protocols.

There are typically 8 types of greenhouse gasses, namely, Carbon Dioxide (CO₂), Methane (CH₄), Nitrous Oxide (N₂O), Perfluorocarbons (PFCs), Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC’s), Sulphur Hexafluoride (SF₆), Water Vapor (H₂O), and Ozone(O₃). The first six are deemed to be controllable, i.e., can be generated and controlled by human activities, and the latter two are classified as uncontrollable gasses, i.e., they occur naturally and not significantly affected by human activities. However, for simplicity all gasses are converted to their equivalent carbon component and measured by the CFI. Accordingly, a unit of CFI measures one metric tonne of Carbon Dioxide.

The CFI is traded in two major markets world wide, namely, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) located in Chicago, Illinois and the European Climate Exchange (ECX) located in London, England.

The climate market was established as a consequence to the Kyoto Protocol that was used by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), aimed at combating global warming. The Protocol was initially adopted on December 11, 1997 in Kyoto, Japan and entered into force on February 16, 2005. As of November 2009, 187 states had signed and ratified the protocol. United States was the only major country in the world, not to ratify this protocol.

The ratification of the Kyoto Protocol allowed countries to set limits on the amount of carbon dioxide that signers to the protocol would agree to. This resulted in a cap of the amount of carbon dioxide that manufactures in the ratifying country was allowed to emit in the atmosphere. If in that country a particular manufacturer or company produced more carbon dioxide than they were allotted, the company would be required to pay a fine. Accordingly, companies had to adopt measures to reduce their emissions or if they could not do so, find alternatives such as bartering with other companies who produced less than they were required to produced. Consequently, the carbon trading market was born.

Since the early dawn of the market establishment, the European Climate Exchange (ECX) has grown exponentially while the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has teetered on failing. Currently, a CFI is being traded on the CCX at $0.10 while the same CFI is traded on the ECX at over $23.00. Consequently, over 200 US based companies have moved their trading desk to London and are actively trading on the ECX. The CCX has just over 100 voluntary member traders on the market.

The Cap and Trade legislation, if passed, will result in the setting of limits on the amount of carbon dioxide that a company or manufacturer will be allowed to emit in the atmosphere within the United States of America. As was the case in the rest of the world with the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, manufacturers and companies would adopt measures to reduce their fines and this would result in the vitalization of the local carbon trading market. This would also mean the significant provision jobs and the moving of the economic commerce back to the US from England.

Whether or not there is climate change, the economic commerce surrounding climate change is real and significant. For example, a 4-MW solar photovoltaic plant used to supply the power demands of 600 mid-sized homes in the Chicagoland area, would offset over 6,000 CFI per year or 180,000 CFI in 30 years. If this was traded on the ECX futures market, over $4,000,000 would be realized from the trade using today’s trading rate of $23.00. In other words, approximately $6,000 per household would be earned on the ECX as compared to the $3.00 per household that would be realized if traded on the CCX.

Therefore, whether or not global warming exist, there is money to be made in the climate change market and by not passing the Cap and Trade legislation we lock ourselves out of the market and allow the rest of the world to make profit unchecked. Consequently, we lose.

It is interesting to note that whereas those people who trumpet personal responsibility seem to have no regard for the planet in which we all live. It is very easy to declare that we are not affecting the earth in any way and cast a blind eye to the facts that are staring us in our faces. The fact is, if we do nothing, then the consequences could be significant. Are we willing to simply ignore the issues, how ever small they may be, and wish that the cry for helping to protect the environment is all a fake? Can we really afford that risk, especially when there are better alternatives? Where is the personal responsibility in that?

I am utterly amazed that these people are so keen on supporting the fossil fuel consumption campaign when there are so many healthier, cheaper, and more sustainable systems of energy production available. What is it that is so great about fossil fuel, anyway? Is it the sending of trillions of our hard earned dollars to the Middle East that is appealing or is it the fact that we are comfortable in our skins and until it affect us personally, it does not matter. The only time we seem to lift our heads and pay attention, is when gas prices increases a bit. This sense of apathy is what has lulled the world to enter into several wars and countless empires to fall.

We cannot just sit by and do nothing, we have to get involved and help to find a solution and not just accept that the outcome is inevitable. People, what are your proposals, what should we do? I am tired of hearing just criticisms with no directions. You cannot just wait for the Liberals to come up with an idea and then try to prove them wrong.

I am by no means saying that all the facts are in and that the issues are all foregone conclusions but so far, the evidences are not encouraging us to be apathetic.