California becomes first state to mandate solar panels in new homes

government solve all problems

Doesn’t sound like a fantastic ROI for homeowners but makes the government feel good about their environmental causes.

From Fox News: California has become the first state in the nation to mandate solar panels for all new homes, in a move to cut greenhouse gas emissions that critics say will end up raising home prices in the already expensive market. 

In a unanimous 5-0 vote Wednesday, the California Energy Commission approved the policy.

The regulation will require all homes and apartments built after 2020 to have solar panels, adding an average of roughly $10,000 to construction costs for a single-family home. On the flip side, the commission says, the panels could yield much more in energy savings.

Spokeswoman for the Energy Commission Amber Beck told Fox News that under the new standards, new homes would be expected to reduce energy use by more than 50 percent. She argued that the change will lead to savings in the long run. 

“For residential homeowners, based on a 30-year mortgage, the Energy Commission estimates that the standards will add about $40 to an average monthly payment, but save consumers $80 on monthly heating, cooling, and lighting bills,” Beck said in a statement. “On average the 2019 standards will increase the cost of constructing a new home by about $9,500 but will save $19,000 in energy and maintenance costs over 30 years.”

Few industry groups outwardly oppose the plan after working for years with the commission to shape the regulations. But Republican legislative leaders said Californians can’t afford to pay any more for housing in the state’s already expensive market.

“That’s just going to drive the cost up and make California, once again, not affordable to live,” said Assemblyman Brian Dahle, the chamber’s Republican leader.

The solar panel decision is just the latest example of what critics see as the state’s ever-evolving nanny-state policies. California often is at the leading edge of government mandates and bans, having recently prohibited everything from plastic bags to foie gras – and even flirting with phasing out internal combustion engines.

Bill Watt, a homebuilder and design consultant, told The Orange County Registerthe added solar panel costs, in addition to other building mandates, will make homeownership out of reach for many buyers.

“We’re not building enough housing already,” Watt, former president of the Orange County Building Industry Association, told The OCR. “Why not just pause for a little while, focus on the affordability and housing issues, then circle back?”

Despite the increase in construction costs, the California Building Industry Association generally supports the plan, but expressed a preference to delay the launch.

“[W]e would prefer that this had been put off for a few more years, but the fact is that the California Energy Commission has been working on this, with us, for the past 10 years,” the association’s technical director, Robert Raymer, said in a statement, noting that the group worked with the state’s energy commission to alter the policy. “We know this is coming, we did everything we could to push down compliance costs and increase design flexibility.”

The mandate is the latest win for the solar industry, despite past controversies tied to companies’ use of taxpayer funds.

The most notorious example was California company Solyndra, which filed for bankruptcy in 2011. An Energy Department inspector general report in 2015 said the company misrepresented facts in order to secure a $535 million loan guarantee from the federal government. Taxpayer lost most of that money in the deal.

The new California measure would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 700,000 metric tons over three years, according to the commission. The Energy Commission said this would be equivalent to taking 115,000 cars off the road.


36 responses to “California becomes first state to mandate solar panels in new homes

  1. “The new California measure would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 700,000 metric tons over three years, according to the commission. The Energy Commission said this would be equivalent to taking 115,000 cars off the road.”

    Meanwhile, the number of illegal aliens in Calif. in 2014 was 3.019 million, who drive cars in the millions.

    Liked by 5 people

  2. here is commiefornia dealing with drought so bad that cities are planning on recycling sewer water for drinking water and the legislators are worried about new houses having solar panels….can they just go away and take all of their corruption and idiocy with them?
    if we had fewer illegals (or none at all) in commiefornia, we would have more available resources, like water, land, electricity (even budget surplus).

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Follow the money.

    How much did the solar companies use to bribe Sickramento?

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Grant You, $$olar panel$$$$ are a good investment and indeed represent savings, however, the average homeowner/consumer won’t see their savings until after the mortgage is paid off. Who can afford that type home when the banks ask for lots of cash up front? On sunny Florida, today, no sun at all, and tomorrow the same, guess what? YOU NEED ELECTRICITY……….and here comes Florida Power and Light, the mighty octopus, but wait, last hurricane season took 7 days to restore power in 102+ degrees Fahrenheit.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. Whats new for them they already tell you what kind of toilet you have to use so this doesn’t surprise me at all.So if buying a house there is so expensive now how do the illegals afford to stay in the state other than the rest of the tax payers foot the bill. Wonder when the exodus will begin?
    You have to begin to wonder how many illegals are voting to keep the dems in power.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. This is all part of the conditioning. Measures like these are designed to make the idiots feel great about paying more for less. Obviously, besides the solar industry which will reap huge profits, the state already taxes and imposes fees on homes with solar panels. That’s right, they make the residents pay for generating electricity. So even though the energy is “free”, and you paid for the equipment, you owe the state.

    PG&E loves it because they get free electricity and get to charge them again for it. California is largely hydro-electric so there is no “carbon footprint” involved. It is all bovine excrement.

    Every one of these is but another example of them dictating every aspect of daily life. It is State worship.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Please allow me to add a couple of things to my comments above. For those who are not familiar with this, the system consists of solar panels, batteries, inverters (for converting D.C. to A.C.),and switch gear, meters and a generator.

      I have a setup on my recreational property because there are no mains there. These are pretty good now, with the exception of the batteries that have to be maintained and changed periodically. They are frightfully expensive and, if not maintained properly, don’t last long.

      These “grid connected systems” normally are hooked to the mains and only use the battery power when the grid fails. Some don’e have generators, but if one is to maintain the batteries you must have a generator.

      The reason that I mention this, is that someone is obviously going to get extremely rich off this. Batteries, while improving, are bad technology, even the best of them. There are several inverter/chargers out there that are quite good, although expensive.

      What I see is that the equipment and installation and repair people are going to reap a fortune. So will the utility company because the solar will reduce their expenditure. Of course they will not pass on that reduction in cost. They will probably increase their rates.

      This is how it works. They tell the morons that they are saving the planet. They feel so good about spending what they don’t have on this that they are happy to pay through the nose and go into even greater debt for what they fail to see is absolutely no reason.

      If someone wants to supply their own power to themselves, what business is it of the state? I saw this with car insurance and seat belts. What right has the state to tell you to buy insurance? If the state wants insurance they should supply it.

      The more that time goes by the more sheeplike the people become. I was born a lover of liberty. I can’t abide having a government that wants to be my parent. This particular idea may be one of their worst yet, and that’s saying something. Why would each house have to have an entire system? That’s wasteful and ridiculous.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Lophatt, you truly have a gift for recognizing what is happening behind the scenes.

        Some would call you a prophet.

        Thank you for sharing your insight here.

        Liked by 2 people

      • As I understand it,there are some good agricultural solar power systems that are far cheaper than one marked as residential and would do the job in a home just fine,(Cheaper because THEY don’t have to comply with all the strict regulations the residential systems do. I guess they consider Farmers and Ranchers to be of less human value than City Dwellers.) I still wonder if they are cheap enough to build,and as “good for the environment” as their current power grid. They make their own electricity,but how wonderful is it to be when you figure in any toxicity during their manufacture,and the cost of replacing the batteries and solar panels when they become less productive? I’ve found it very hard to find credible evaluations of the cost “down the road”. The sellers all seem to REALLY WANT you to believe all the components either last forever or are a mere pittance to replace should they deplete. I’m interested,and would likely consider a system if I could afford it,but not as a first line of power,at least not until they can convince me it’ll save me money.

        Liked by 2 people

    • “It is all bovine excrement.”

      That should be a bumper sticker.

      Liked by 3 people

  7. Folks, I must say (all politics aside) that Solar Energy is the way to go, all oil aside.. I’ve been in electronics for 65 years and have seen many Massive improvements in the efficiency of electron flows to get things done.. My old 32in Tube TV took 285 watts, = my New 48in LED flat-screen takes a mere 42 watts.. The first primitive 1960 LED’s projected 50 to 150 miliwatts. Today those LED efficiencies are in the ten’s of watts to hundreds of watts. In time – they will project Kilowatts, & ultimately “Megawatts.” Science will continue to improve their power efficiencies.. Don’t you just Hate those intense LED headlights in the auto coming your way..?? Now about the efficiency of the Solar Cell, – the first solar cells captured about 3-5% of the Sun’s Photons. We now can capture 22-26% of the impacting Sun’s Photons on the solar cell.. The typical roof on the home in the sunny SW States absorbes about 15,000 to 24,000 watts of solar energy per day that converts to unwanted & un-used HEAT for which the over-heated SW States must run Power-Hungry air-conditioners to cool themselves.. Go Figure..!! A High Level Manager of a SW Power & Light Co. told me, “We’re NOT in the business of promoting individual solar power systems.” = Going on to say: “Such Individual Solar Systems would put Us Out of Business..!!” Folks, Its’ – $PowerMoney & Power Politics, & Power Companies. We-the-People’s Self-Sufficiency & Self-Reliance Be Damned..!!


    • How are all those stats going to be effected by Harvard’s implementation of solar dimming?
      Lophatt is correct; if you don’t generate enough electricity, you have to pay the utility company. They’d tried to get me into a contract several times over the past few years, but I read the fine print. You don’t own the equipment. You rent it and they use your house. If you don’t generate enough electricity in a given billing cycle, you owe the utility $$.

      Liked by 4 people

  8. We are told that the payback time is thirty years; will the panels hold up for thirty years? What about insurance costs for various types of storm damage? And how often are such cost and expense recuperation estimates accurate? (All the questions asked can be forgotten if the life of one polar bear can be saved. Sarc.)

    Liked by 2 people

    • The panels might, they seem to get better with time. That will not stop California from charging those who bought them. I see no authority to tax the sun. Between selling the water and taxing the sun it won’t be long before they tax they air you breathe. Oh, maybe that’s what “carbon taxes” are all about.

      None of this is possible if people realize that “the state” does not have the authority to do these things. Somebody should ask them.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. Once electric is installed by whatever city, you are not allowed to disable that utility. You will get a service charge every month for their meter. If the grid goes fown, you go down also. The law mandates you are not allowed to bypass their system. They don’t tell you this up front. I foresee a new excuse for more taxation on the horizon.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Yes, it’s worse than that. They used to have PG&E pay the customers for “surplus” energy they returned to the grid. Now they tax them on surplus power. So, they pay for the electricity they get from the grid and for any power they contribute.

      Liked by 4 people

  10. One More Interesting Phenonoma, “Nicola Tesla” is Correct, = there is More Free Electrons in the Atmosphere & Space – than there are Atomic Nuclei (mass) with the attractive power to hold them in captivity.. (how else can Lightning occure.?) I found “proof” of this phenonoma – when I worked on the Laguna Indian Reservation back in the early 60’s. They all lived in remote mud-hut Hogans, – each family assigned a large land-plot by the Counsel for their survival.. I was there helping 2-3 Indian families gain a better life. We had to run a 2200ft electric fence-line parallel with, but 150 ft. away from the NMP&L 450,000 volt lines xcrossing the Indian Resv. from Farmington,NM – to – Albuquerque,NM. – The more fence wire we un-wound & attached to the post insulators, the “Hotter” the roll of wire became.. Finally I had to use leather gloves to prevent electrocution.. When we finished the 2200ft electric fence, we put a Volt-Ohm-meter on the line and observed 195 standing wave volts of “induced Power.” This was enough power to brilliantly light a 25 watt light bulb. – the only electric light that this Indian family would have at night in their mud-hut hogan home.. They bragged to other Indian Families and soon the NMP&L Electric Co. found out and brought “suit” against me & the Indian family to shut down & discontinue use of the “light.” = We could keep the electric fence up, but were Not Authorized to “intercept” the “stray Voltage” for personal use..!! This Story could go deeper into the Science, but will suffice for now.. Again, Nicola Tesla is Correct.. The Free Electrons are out there now more than Ever Before, – with Cell Towers tranmitting electron power every ten miles.. These Free Electrons are out there in Great Abundance, = now Go Get-em..!!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Yes, of course. Electrons are everywhere. “Electricity” is just getting them to move from one point to another. It is not something that is “expended”. You are paying for the equipment and transmission system. The electrons are free for the taking.

      This is why taxing people for producing solar power is insane. The state doesn’t “own” the sun. I suspect if more people properly understood electricity this would be a much harder sell for them.

      Liked by 5 people

  11. I’m planning to get a Generac Power System generator, natural gas system for the house before hurricane season gets underway -no solar panels to be blown away fridge operating, no spoiled food, ice, cold water, lights, and won’t have to leave my home at all, how cool is that?

    Liked by 4 people

  12. I’m surprised the control freaks of Californicate didn’t make their law retroactive.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Really? You ppl do not know what you are talking about! I live in so cal and have solar panels.
    Some facts: the panels cost us 160.00 a month. Neighbors who are panel free pay about 700.00 a month in the summer.
    We pay sce 6.00 a month to be hooked up. We generate more power than we use. I run the air 24/7 from abt June through sept/oct.
    The solar co. Does ALL maintainence to the panels and the system. If there is a problem like the power goes out, as it did bec of an accident, they contacted us and repaired it…no fee. In the mean time we ran from sce and did not notice anything. Sce never charged us an addional elec fees. When new upgrades to the panels etc are available, they do an charge.
    When the home batteries are out, (expected this year) we will get them so we can have a constant supply of power should the elec grid go down. We can be off grid if needed.
    So, do not tell me there is no savings to the homeowner/renter. There is a BIG savings every month and again a whopper of savings in the summer!
    The power co’s don’t like this for obvious reasons and ppl are being lied to. They want to discourage anyone from getting this because of all the money they will lose.
    I do not like living in Commiefornia, it sucks, but in this case they are 100% correct. I will even go further, I think ALL buildings and all electric using posts, lights etc should have a panel at least to assist with the power.
    Please do some research and speek to people who ACTUALLY HAVE solar panels before you make assumptions or believe the BS that is put out.
    Solar Panels are the only way to go. I will NEVER live anywhere with out these on my home again. The savings are to great to pass up.


    • My friend, mine works fine too. But I bought it and maintain it. It is very expensive (and I know what I’m doing). My point is, if you want to do that, go right ahead. You have my blessing. You can even buy a Prius (if you’re lesbian), but, that’s UP TO YOU.

      I maintain that I don’t any state TELLING the citizenry HOW they are going to electrify their their property. There are many other points I haven’t even bothered with. Taxpayers invested LOTS of money in what is currently run by private (previously regulated) corporations. They get the gold and you get the shaft.

      “Your” government is supposed to work for YOU, not the other way round. They are not supposed to work for PG&E. My father retired from PG&E after a long career so I’m pretty familiar with them as well. Of course, they made trillions (and were heavily regulated and provided MUCH better service than they do now), but they are still there, at least in name.

      My personal experience with solar is that it is fine if you have no other choice. It isn’t particularly worth the time and money unless you can’t pool your resources with others. It makes better sense to build something that services several houses than one. The maintenance is roughly the same.

      I do all my own maintenance and it isn’t too bothersome. I am good with my hands. Not everyone is. You apparently have some system that gets serviced by others. That’s great, but I’m pretty sure it isn’t free.

      Batteries are expensive. Properly maintained you might get ten to twelve years from a set. Not maintained you might get a year or two. Again, that should be each person’s choice, not imposed.

      If this technology were perfect and it was totally cost-effective, I would still have problems with them imposing this. Why not set up a little sub-station for each housing complex? I haven’t lived in California for over twenty-five years and I don’t miss it a bit. The thought of Gerry Brown breathing down my neck gives me cold chills.

      Liked by 3 people

  14. Pingback: California becomes first state to mandate solar panels in new homes — Fellowship of the Minds – NZ Conservative Coalition

  15. when it starts cutting into the profit of big energy companies the law will likely be changed….

    Liked by 2 people

  16. My problem with this CA directive is the same as I have with Federal interference with free enterprise: once it is a directive of a State or Federal government—-all competition stops in the search for an “affordable” and efficient product—whatever it is—in this case, solar panels to promote the use of solar power. So, we will be stuck for a century in inefficient, poorly serviced, poorly guaranteed, poorly promoted/financed etc solar panels/power in this country—-think “Solyndra” (until the Finns or someone else invents a new “cell phone-like “solution to upend our Federally-controlled “system” of solar panels and runs our Federals out of the “business.”) My mother had for 30 years a solar panel that ran her otherwise electric water heater in her retirement home in Florida. That alone saved her a third to half of her electric bill monthly. It was NOT A HUGE, UGLY-looking, EXPENSIVE, complicated thing….which is what it has all become NOW…b/c she had it/installed it way before solar was the “rage.” It probably cost her $100 back in the day……but NOW… would cost her far more than she could recoup in savings…….

    Liked by 3 people

  17. Comrade Obama

    If the government can require these solar panels, where does it end?

    Liked by 3 people

  18. Why should California have solar panels when it already has Moonbeam?

    Liked by 3 people

  19. Solar panels, si! More loss of property rights, no!

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s