The Solar Fraud: Why Solar Energy Won't Run the World

The dreamy-eyed predictions all failed because they were based on emotional urges and political agendas rather than honest assessments. The gurus were numerous, but solar energy is a topic of science, where votes don t count, even when they come from high-profile lawyers, political appointees, and leaders of environmental organizations.

The Solar Fraud explains the realities of solar energy, especially how much one can expect from solar sources

- First, however, I have to agree that many types of "green" energy are probably not that green. Not everyone wants a windmill in their backyard, and pouring thousands of miles of concrete up and down the coasts would cause unacceptable habitat destruction.

- I think some of his numbers are suspect. For example, he bases his figures for the total amount of energy which could be harvested from wave power off a facilty built 100 years ago. In that case, it helped put it in perspective, but...

- In general, however, you can't look at the current state of the art as a blanket indictment of the field. Throughout the book, Hayden dismisses technology after technology on the basis of the current implementation.

- Also missing is general acceptance that alternative energy sources all have their place. Part of the problem is that they are not often used very effectively right now. For example, wind would be a miserable main source of grid electrical power. But what if it were used more creatively to fill some other need such as electrical power for a hydrolysis facility (off grid, off peak, etc.)? Similarly, solar is useless for running things at night without some form of starage. However, peak electrical demand is usually on a hot sunny day when everyone's air conditioner is running.

- Just because something isn't ever going to supply 30% of society's demand doesn't make it worthless. For example, biogas is a vastly underutilized resource, even if it will never satisfy more than a few percentage points of total demand.

- His discussion of US efficiency (SUVs in particular) is limited to conversion efficiencies of the motor (Hayden claims we're extremely efficient). Even if your motor is 100% efficient at converting chemical energy to physical work, you're still guilty of some sort of "lifestyle inefficiency" if you only get 15 mpg driving your monster truck to the mall when a hybrid car would get you there at 50+ mpg.

- Hayden makes the mistake of assuming that since green energy makes up a tiny portion of annual production, it therefore isn't viable. Excel energy produces 0% of its energy in Colorado from nuclear. Does that mean it can't possibly work on a large scale?

- He seems to assume that if an energy source is more expensive than fossil fuels, it is therefore bad. Missing from this is a little perspective -- if future generations were able to compete in today's markets, you can guarantee that prices would be a lot higher. Fair market or not, current wrangling over energy prices in this way is tantamount to a group of robbers dividing up the spoils. The only really valid cost figure is the energy cost of production. Hayden is right in that "green" gasoline additives make no sense. However, I've heard that current solar cells break even from an energy perspective in less than 10 years, and are consequently a viable technology.


Good science, bad attitude   July 25, 2003
Haresh Kamath (Palo Alto, CA)
28 out of 29 found this review helpful

First, a disclaimer: I'm a researcher in the alternative energy field, including renewable energy technologies. Iym here to review this book, not solar energy.

The purpose of the book is to educate the general public about what the author sees as fraud in the way renewable energy is portrayed by its proponents. The author, a physicist, argues that most of the media commentary about these technologies is not based on sound knowledge of scientific principles. He then methodically attacks the most common arguments for major renewable energy technologies, backing up his arguments with theoretical calculations as well as data from the field.

Other than some offhand remarks about nuclear power, the author offers no alternatives to renewable energy sources. This seems odd until you realize that the author is not attacking renewables per se, but the admittedly overbearing hype over them.

Unfortunately, this approach leads to a more serious problem: a hostile, sneering style that often reads more like a series of angry exchanges in an online message board than a dispassionate rebuttal. The author endlessly quotes renewable energy advocates and follows with his own sarcastic rejoinders, reminiscent of the snide comments with which renewables proponents attack nuclear power or clean coal technologies. The vitriol gets old and doesnyt help the credibility of the arguments.

The saving grace is the excellent set of calculations that the author presents for the technical limitations for renewable technologies. The science and math are fundamentally sound. While there are grounds for some quibbles over some of the numbers, for the most part it appears that the author has done his homework. The book presents a reasonably accurate depiction of the state of renewable technologies at the time it was written. Itys an good resource in that it describes some of the practical limits on these technologies at present, as well as theoretical limits and practical avenues for future research.

Bottom line: The book is a good reference for researchers and those interested in renewables, but a tiresome read unless you like a lot of sneering.


Negative, irritable and often outright hostile.   June 28, 2003
bro (Shreveport, LA United States)
17 out of 27 found this review helpful

Overall, I did not like this book. The author, Howard Hayden, appears to have a chip on his shoulder brought on by his apparent perception that liberalism is too closely associated with the perceived promise of solar energy. He takes a one-sided Rush Limbaugh-like approach in his analysis of this important topic.....except, Hayden's facts are now outdated. For example, he apparently did not forsee the very recent development of the high efficiency 225W 3x5 solar panels by Sharp Inc. Within just years, for example, his fixation on the land area of Connecticut could now be reduced significantly. He also apparently does not understand the principles of "economies of scale". Somebody in 1880 could have just as easily written a book about the fraud of electical power. Such a person would have never made any meaningful contribution to this world and would have died writing beside his lantern, while the rest of the world had electric light. [...]