Rachel Hendrix, Kate Donahue, Stacy Nelson, Olivia Stanford, and Layton Banks

Solar Panels on top of the Johnson Center

May 1
st
, 2014

GM SOLUTION RATIONALE
We believe that Mason should invest in renewable energies in order to be less dependent on fossil fuels, to
demonstrate our commitment to sustainability, to reduce our carbon emissions, and to be able to contribute to vital
research concerning modern day green technologies. For our Group Design project, we decided to focus on solar
energy specifically. We devised a plan that involved raising awareness for constructing solar paneling on the
Johnson Center facility at George Mason University. Advocating for energy conservation, through solar paneling, is
extremely important. Its widely understood that solar panels are costly to install, however they are tremendously
effective in reducing energy usage and they are also environmentally friendly since the sun is a natural energy
source that does not require the burning of fossil fuels (Alternative Energy Sources, CEF ). In relation to the many
course themes and materials that have been shared with us, our project idea most relates to the issues of oil
dependence and climate change.
In the United States, massive factories burn fossil fuels in order to generate energy and power for our
homes and businesses. This system also relies on oil to further generate this energy. We are dependent on oil
supplies that often come from foreign nations and sometimes the money our country uses to purchase this foreign oil
is also used to harbor or support terrorism. If the US was to adopt policies that implemented more solar energy
programs, not as much oil would be needed for our energy system to continue. The dependence for foreign oil would
be greatly diminished if more households and companies used solar energy panels to generate electricity instead of
fossil fuels (Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization by MIT Press Journals, Page 2).
More importantly, the usage of solar panel energy converters contributes absolutely nothing to the
escalating climate change issue. With the decline of dependence on electricity and natural gas, the university would
serve as a model of environmental awareness by not purposefully emitting harmful pollutants into the environment.
In addition, solar panels have a significantly smaller long lasting ecological footprint than those of fossil fuels. One
of the very few drawbacks of using solar energy panels is that the structures require the burning of fossil fuels in
order to generate the energy needed to create them (Solar Energy and Global Climate Change in New England by
the United States EPA).
Originally our team believed it would be best to place the solar panels on the Johnson Center based on the
buildings central location on campus. However, after talking to one of Masons Climate Change Communication
Rachel Hendrix, Kate Donahue, Stacy Nelson, Olivia Stanford, and Layton Banks
Solar Panels on top of the Johnson Center
May 1
st
, 2014

executives, we were informed that any power produced on the Johnson Center would be very little compared to the
overall amount of energy that Mason currently uses. A more optimal location would be the Exploratory Building
and the design of the solar panels would have to resemble the 250 watt Sunforce Amorphous solar panel model in
order to generate the most electrical energy. There would be no real creativity applied to the structuring of the
system since itd come premade. However there is a certain amount of creativity that must be used when formulating
ideas to collected funding for the renewable energy project. The solar industry is still relatively new in terms of
getting big institutional investors which means that solar developers often have a difficult time persuading
traditional banks to fund these smaller-scale projects. Our team believes that the university could raise money by
temporarily increasing tuition fees and asking for generous donations from alumni students or other organizations.
Word Count: 600














Rachel Hendrix, Kate Donahue, Stacy Nelson, Olivia Stanford, and Layton Banks
Solar Panels on top of the Johnson Center
May 1
st
, 2014

References
"Ecological Drawbacks of Solar Panels." Yahoo Contributor Network. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 May
2014. <http://voices.yahoo.com/ecological-drawbacks-solar-panels-
7530320.html?cat=7>.
Edelson, Edward. "Solar Cell Update." Popular Science 240.6 (1992): 95. ProQuest. Web. 21
Apr. 2014.
Heuberger, Brian. "Social Impacts of Solar Energy." eHow. Demand Media, 7 July 2011. Web. 4
May 2014. <http://www.ehow.com/info_8704232_social-impacts-solar-energy.html>.
Kalogirou, S. "Environmental Benefits Of Domestic Solar Energy Systems." Energy Conversion
and Management 45.18-19 (2004): 3075-3092. Print.
"MIT Press Journals - Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization - Citation." MIT
Press Journals - Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization - Citation. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 4 May 2014.
<http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/itgg.2006.1.2.3#.U2Y_r_ldWSo>.
Probst, MC Munari, and C Roecker. "Solar Energy Systems in Architecture.
"The International Energy Agency (IEA) (2012). Web. 21 April 2014.
Robertson, Keith, and Andreas Athienitis. "Solar Energy for Buildings." Canada Mortgage and
Housing Corportation (2010). Web. 21 April 2014.
"Solar Energy and Global Climate Change in New England | US EPA." EPA. Environmental
Protection Agency, 28 Feb. 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.
Rachel Hendrix, Kate Donahue, Stacy Nelson, Olivia Stanford, and Layton Banks
Solar Panels on top of the Johnson Center
May 1
st
, 2014

Tsoutsos, Theocharis, Niki Frantzeskaki, and Vassilis Gekas. "Environmental Impacts From The
Solar Energy Technologies." Energy Policy 33.3 (2005): 289-296. Print.
Worthy, Wark. "Solar." Chemical and Engineering News 69.24 (1991): 41. ProQuest. Web. 21
Apr. 2014.