1.

Exploiting the sun is the best option

“Nanotechnology; Nanotech Could Make Solar Energy as Easy and Cheap as Growing Grass”
Obesity, Fitness & Wellness Week. Dr. Lewis (Researcher at the California institute of
Technology).Oct 6, 2007. pg. 545. "More energy from the sun hits the earth in an hour than
all the energy consumed by human beings on our planet in an entire year. So, if we are
going to find an efficient, environmentally-friendly substitute for fossil fuels, it makes sense
to exploit the sun," says Dr. Lewis.

2. Overconsumption avoidable with use of solar energy

“A load of rubbish - otherwise known as the eco-friendly homes of the future Earthships
are made of tires, bottles, cans and a devotion to saving the planet.” Robert Nurden The
Daily Telegraph April 7, 2007 Pg. 6. "As someone with environmental concerns, I was won
over by the solar principles of the earthship. This is not some wacky housing scheme for
hippies - it can be designed to fine specifications or keep very simple. But it certainly
provides the best possible housing solution to the problem of over-consumption of energy
and disposal of waste. To respond to climate change, we need to dramatically reduce
carbon emissions, particularly from the built environment.''

3. Rooftop solar panels are most efficient

Jay Inslee (US Rep Washington) and Bracken Hendricks (senior fellow Center for American
Progress) “Apollo’s Fire: Igniting America’s Clean-Energy Economy 2008,” pg. 82. “Our
rooftops may become our Saudi Arabia of solar energy. Even using today’s panels, America
could produce its entire electrical load via our available rooftops. We do not need a
hundred-square-mile plot of desert with wall-to-wall solar panels. Our rooftops will do
nicely. It is more efficient, in any event, for our energy to be generated in a distributed
fashion, in a multitude of places, to avoid the costs and inefficiencies of lengthy
transmission systems; an average of 7 percent of the energy is lost in transmission.”

4. Solar energy cleaner; more cost effect to coal

“No need for coal-fired power stations” Peter Wylie The Courier Mail December 1, 2007
Saturday pg. 57. Such damage and loss of life will get worse as temperatures increase. A
change to renewable energy could save much money if we can prevent the weather
damage becoming worse. Even now, solar power stations are likely to produce cheaper
electricity over their lifetimes than coal.
 5. Not enough attention is directed to solar energy

“Money shortage hinders a solar revolution; Backers don't see big advances soon;
Business of green” Andrew C. Revkin and Matthew L. Wald The International Herald
Tribune July 17, 2007 Pg. 13. Scientists long ago calculated that an hour's worth of the
sunlight bathing the planet held far more energy than humans worldwide could use in a
year, and the first practical devices for converting light to electricity were designed more
than half a century ago. Yet research on solar power and methods for storing intermittent
energy flows has long received less spending, in the United States and other industrialized
countries, than energy options with more political support.