As if home prices weren’t high in California as it is. Trulia rates the state 3rd in median home price behind Hawaii and D.C. (obviously, there are tons of factors that make home prices higher, so it can’t all be blamed on state and local rules and such). And CNBC ranked California 3rd highest for cost of living, behind NY and Hawaii
California to become first U.S. state mandating solar on new homes
For seven years, a handful of homebuilders offered solar as an optional item to buyers willing to pay extra to go green.
Now, California is on the verge of making solar standard on virtually every new home built in the Golden State.
The California Energy Commission is scheduled to vote Wednesday, May 9, on new energy standards mandating most new homes have solar panels starting in 2020.
If approved as expected, solar installations on new homes will skyrocket.
An interesting question I haven’t found an answer for yet is whether the solar would all go directly to the home, or being linked into the grid, meaning your home would be part of the energy companies property. Anyhow, solar installation would skyrocket not because people want it, but because government demands it. And they’re trying to wipe out the use of natural gas at the same time
In addition to widespread adoption of solar power, the new provisions include a push to increase battery storage and increase reliance on electricity over natural gas. Among the highlights:
- The new solar mandate would apply to all houses, condos and apartment buildings up to three stories tall that obtain building permits after Jan. 1, 2020.
- Exceptions or alternatives will be allowed when homes are shaded by trees or buildings or when the home’s roofs are too small to accommodate solar panels.
- Solar arrays can be smaller because homes won’t have to achieve true net-zero status.
- Builders installing batteries like the Tesla Powerwall would get “compliance credits,†allowing them to further reduce the size of the solar system.
- Provisions will encourage more electric use or even all-electric homes to reduce natural gas consumption. State officials say improved technology is making electric water heaters increasingly cost-effective.
The mandate dates back to 2007 when the state energy commission adopted the goal of making homebuilding so efficient “newly constructed buildings can be net zero energy by 2020 for residences and by 2030 for commercial buildings.â€
You can see builders finding ways to make sure the buildings are shaded. On the bright side, perhaps this will lead to builders not clear cutting land for developments.
The new energy standards add about $25,000 to $30,000 to the construction costs compared with homes built to the 2006 code, said C.R. Herro, Meritage’s vice president of environmental affairs. Solar accounts for about $14,000 to $16,000 of that cost, with increased insulation and more efficient windows, appliances, lighting and heating accounting for another $10,000 to $15,000.
But that $25,000 to $30,000 will result in $50,000 to $60,000 in the owner’s reduced operating costs over the 25-year life of the home’s solar system, Herro said.
The problem is, most people do not stay in their homes for 25 years. And that up-front cost is not exactly chump-change. And, then you have repair costs, upkeep costs, and it makes it more expensive for the repair and upkeep costs for the roof itself. And, really, how does this help?
At night when there’s no solar power, people come home, turn on the lights, the TV and possibly the air conditioning and start pulling power from the grid, he said. Some gas-powered generating plants then are fired up to help meet that additional load, boosting carbon emissions.
“That additional (home-generated) solar kilowatt-hour isn’t worth very much because it’s displacing what is already clean energy,†McAllister said. “That net-zero home is not a net-carbon-zero home.â€
Yeah, most people are gone during most days. At night, solar can only help so much, if the home has lots of expensive batteries.
