The kinetic energy of a moving mass is attributed to the mass increase because of its velocity. Thus, mass is recognized as a special form of energy. As will be shown in this article, there are similarities between mass and charge which might lead us to conclude that charge should also be considered as a special form of energy. From the above, the following question might be asked: Why charge remains a distinct entity while mass was discovered to be another form of energy. Thus, this article does claim that Charge might also be recognized as another form of Energy, as mass turned to be. This claim, if found viable, and supported by additional findings, will make Energy as the only distinct entity (in addition to time and space), a simpler and cleaner view of nature. This article suggests this claim by using the important similarities that exist between mass and charge, as will be further explained in this article, and by analyzing the existing energy density equations of electric an magnetic fields. Then, by analyzing the existing experimental results related to charges and the fields they create from a new point of view, the article tries to evaluate if this leads also to additional insights. The results are the following conclusions: 1. Magnetic and electric fields which are generated by the same moving charge are always perpendicular to each other, thus, these fields have the structure of the electromagnetic emission from accelerating moving charges. Actually, this article shows that a moving charge generates not just a single additional field referred to as the magnetic field generated by the moving charge. This article shows that a moving charge generates two additional field components, additional to the electric field it generated when it was not moving. One of them is an increase of the electric field intensity generated when the charge was not moving. The other is a field perpendicular to the electric field and might be considered as the actual additional magnetic field. This resolves the mystery why only in electromagnetic emissions the magnetic and electric fields are always perpendicular to each other, while in other cases, the current knowledge of physics imply that they are not necessarily perpendicular to each other. Actually, this finding might not be a new finding. It might be a result of explaining magnetism as being a combination of maxwell equations and special relativity. But the way it is evaluated here might be new. 2. It should be emphasized that it might be impossible to derive an equation which describes the relation between charge and the energy embedded in charge, analogeous to the equation E = m c^2, or arrange an experiment that measures that. This might be because the charge conservation principle inhibits us to convert only charge of one polarity (say positive charge) to energy, without converting a same amount of the other polarity charge (say negative charge), also to energy. And, as the Energy Pairs theory, presented later in this article, implies, by converting same amounts of negative and positive charges to energy results in an untraceable and undetectable Energy Pair, which cannot be measured. 3. Since charge comes in two types, a positive charge and a negative charge, then the energy embedded in charge also comes in two energy types. This might be one of the crucial reasons why it was difficult to recognize charge as another form of energy. However, the article provides a logical explanation to this issue. The article also assigns these energy types to one set of Energy Pairs. This Energy Pairs Theory is also used to explain why in the electron and positron collisions the charges completely disappear.