Energy Council that has formed in its support is comprised largely of aerospace and construction industries, relative newcomers to the energy field. Not surprisingly, they are being resisted by the already-established energy companies that have vested interests in the long-run uses of coal, oil shale and nuclear energy, and are now beginning to make important investments in on-site solar technologies as well. Peter Glaser (1), the originator and preeminent proponent of the SPS concept, explained the lack of enthusiasm he encountered at the Department of Energy: “I suggest it is very difficult for the SPS program to be managed by people whose primary interest is in the development of fusion or fast-breeder reactors, or even small-scale solar. They have different interests.” In the light of the unexpected fall-off in demand for centralized electricity, the growth of small-scale renewable systems and the reduced federal spending envisioned in the Reagan energy budget (77), what seems most likely is that none of the expensive energy programs will progress very far during the current decade. In the meantime, the building blocks for an eventual migration into space will gradually be constructed, though surely more slowly than the growing numbers of space enthusiasts would like (78). An impetus for space manufacturing operations and for the development of a permanent space settlement may grow out of the need for larger satellite communications platforms and for the latest in military weaponry (79). A modest space program can thus be expected to continue through the 1980s. By the end of the decade, as the long-run dilemma of shifting to renewable energy resources becomes more pressing and the inherent limits of small-scale terrestrial solar sources come to be more widely recognized, the concept of space solar power, building as it does on U.S. strengths in solid-state electronics and in space capabilities, may well win out over fusion or breeder reactors as the renewable energy system of choice for the twenty-first century. CONCLUSION The societal trends that are shaping energy policy in the 1980s indicate that the near-term public response to proposals calling for a major commitment to the SPS system is not likely to be favorable. The concept of space solar power represents a type of technology and a mode of approach to energy supply that is running counter to many of the dominating currents of American society. At a time when renewable energy systems are seen by many to promise more democratic and local involvement in meeting energy needs, the satellite power system would centralize solar energy resources and perpetuate the monopoly control of the utility companies. In a period of pervasive distrust of central governments, large corporations, “big” science and esoteric technologies, and under an administration pledged to reducing the size of government, space solar power would contribute to the further growth of federal and corporate control over energy policy, in the development of some of the most expensive and complicated technologies of all. During the early years of difficult transition to a more diversified energy system, based on both depletable and renewable sources in both large and small-scale systems, the SPS program would concentrate what many will perceive to be a disproportionate share of available capital in the pursuit of a single dramatic “solution.” Most important, the successful investments in energy efficiency and the spreading appeal of dispersed renewables make it appear unlikely that the unmet U.S. demand for centrallygenerated electricity will grow sufficiently in the near term to justify a front-end
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==