It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

California Becomes First State to Mandate Solar on New Homes

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   


California became the first U.S. state on Wednesday to require solar panels on almost all new homes, sending the clearest signal yet that rooftop power is moving beyond a niche market and becoming the norm.

Right!!!

I'm not against Solar power but the reality of what they are doing is more like forcing a niche market to become the norm,lol.





Most new homes built after Jan. 1, 2020, will be required to include solar systems as part of energy-efficiency standards adopted Wednesday by the California Energy Commission. While that’s a boost for the solar industry, critics warned that it will also drive up the cost of buying a house by almost $10,000.



linky

Interesting none the less and wondering how the power Corps will lobby and bastardize this towards their favor? I'm assuming once the power customers start providing power to the grid versus consuming, they won't be compensated for it and the Power company will resell it . Not necessarily a bad thing if that concept was allowed to be used as a SAFE mesh type electrical network directly between the consumers with a reduced role and cost of the power company in the middle.
edit on 22531America/ChicagoWed, 09 May 2018 14:22:03 -0500000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42


California became the first U.S. state on Wednesday to require solar panels on almost all new homes, sending the clearest signal yet that rooftop power is moving beyond a niche market and becoming the norm.

Right, I'm not against Solar power but the reality is what they are doing is more like forcing a niche market to become the norm,lol.





Most new homes built after Jan. 1, 2020, will be required to include solar systems as part of energy-efficiency standards adopted Wednesday by the California Energy Commission. While that’s a boost for the solar industry, critics warned that it will also drive up the cost of buying a house by almost $10,000.



linky


And people wonder why CA real estate is so expensive...



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

That's OK. It's practically impossible to build new homes in Cali anyhow -- you know, environmental concerns.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Exactly. Builders will be able to afford it.
I'm waiting to see how they monetize it for the long run.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Well, I mean, most of it is a desert (which seems pretty ideal for solar power). That's an environment, right?



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

Got out of that S#it-hole just in time.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

Pretty good post.

You would hope the would create SAFE MESH but hey Henry ford paved over tracks.

People love to make fun of California. Yet they provide about 14 percent of the United states GDP.
edit on 9-5-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

I encourage cali to keep doing stupid # like this up to november... More people will vote for the 3 state split....

Jaden



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   
so you have no choice on weather or not you can put a solar panel on your home or not?

yea let's give these people more power and they will dictate your entire life to you



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: interupt42

Got out of that S#it-hole just in time.


You and me both. Never looked back.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Presently, you do not really save any money with solar panels. The cost of the panels and installation and maintenance actually burns up any savings in the long run, especially if you do not get a government subsidy to help pay for it.

I know someone who did an array and it will take about the same time to pay back the cost of the system in relation to the savings they will be getting. In that fifteen years, the panels will need to be replaced too, the effective life is twelve years here and they figure that fifteen years would be possibly feasible because of lower power of the sun. The guy does his own cleaning of the panels and inspections to check them.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
Presently, you do not really save any money with solar panels. The cost of the panels and installation and maintenance actually burns up any savings in the long run, especially if you do not get a government subsidy to help pay for it.

I know someone who did an array and it will take about the same time to pay back the cost of the system in relation to the savings they will be getting. In that fifteen years, the panels will need to be replaced too, the effective life is twelve years here and they figure that fifteen years would be possibly feasible because of lower power of the sun. The guy does his own cleaning of the panels and inspections to check them.


That really isn't true. It depends on the state, if you are off the grid, what company you use, what type of panel etc...

The some guy anectdote isn't universal.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   
The only benefit I can see of solar is getting every home off the grid. It could save a ton of money infrastructure wise if each home can power itself instead of needing to be connected to power lines, telephone poles, and other issue resulting in entire blocks or towns without power.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: interupt42

I encourage cali to keep doing stupid # like this up to november... More people will vote for the 3 state split....

Jaden


The three state plan would screw the north and south California states. Though I am sure the freedom would feel great until the bills come in.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Solar is a good option in some states like California that don't have much diversity in weather or seasons. Most states don't have that luxury. Still, making things mandatory sounds like some authoritarian bull crap.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Atsbhct

You mean how will the cost be amortized? Apparently it saves about $650 a year, so about 14 years to pay for itself. If you're using it to charge an electric vehicle as well as power the house, probably better than that.


Installing a solar system and complying with other energy-efficiency measures required will add about $9,500 to the cost of a new home, according the the California Energy Commission. That would be offset by about $19,000 in expected energy and maintenance savings over 30 years, the commission estimates.

www.bloomberg.com...

What percentage of the cost of new house in California is $9,500?
edit on 5/9/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

If you look into the manufacture of solar panels, they really aren't any more environmentally friendly either. You're just outsourcing the pollution to some 3rd world country full of brown people where they have to mine those toxic rare earth metals for the panels.


Just like electric cars aren't actually any more environmentally friendly. Neither is ethanol.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
Solar is a good option in some states like California that don't have much diversity in weather or seasons. Most states don't have that luxury. Still, making things mandatory sounds like some authoritarian bull crap.


Solar tech is changing pretty rapidly now. It's being projected 40 percent efficiency is obtainable relatively soon.

Black silicone are also not going to be as fickle to light.



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42


Californian here. Not sure why this is terrible. Except yes, wait for it.... you here at AtS are on pint when you assert like all major breakthroughs, it will be taken over from the people by PG&E. So yeah. No more chimneys, must have solar, so it goes.

I feel like this is gonna go the way of Hetch Hetchy and the how San Francisco was suppose to receive the water for its populace as they owned the rights. Again corporate fat cats at PG&E we’re like F that! Those people gonna pay. And so they do. Yosemite’s beautiful twin destroyed by good intentions and then to steal it from Californians? Salt in the wound.

Mark your own words, this has pork barrel written all over it.

Why can’t some things just be for the good in America??



posted on May, 9 2018 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: rickymouse

If you look into the manufacture of solar panels, they really aren't any more environmentally friendly either. You're just outsourcing the pollution to some 3rd world country full of brown people where they have to mine those toxic rare earth metals for the panels.


Just like electric cars aren't actually any more environmentally friendly. Neither is ethanol.


The only conclusive studies I have read contradict your statement. The Norwegian one even had scientists that were skeptical like you are.




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join