3 ms·
I partly agree in principle, your idea is much better generally. But it's also tricky for government to evaluate every energy efficiency invention. When you kno
by IkmoIkmo 8y ago
I partly agree in principle, your idea is much better generally. But it's also tricky for government to evaluate every energy efficiency invention. When you know certain solutions work and work at scale, it makes sense to mandate them. It's like saying let's not require every home to be connected to sewage because that reduces incentives to invent new waste management systems. Some things 'just work' and make sense as a minimum building standard. Whether solar is part of that, I don't know for sure, but the notion it's useful to agree on a few basic ideas strikes true.
It's also important not to forget the economies of scale here. It can be a blessing to know you and all your competitors will need to create solar roofs, the one who builds the best standardised product at scale wins.
I'd prefer to see builders be able to choose from a set of proven standardised technologies (e.g. not just panels but also say solar water heaters) and allow an exception procedure for people like you, which allows you to showcase efficiency-equivalence... rather than for all builders to do their own thing and government having to evaluate each system individually.
- spitfire 8y agoMy home isn't connected to sewage (or water). The municipality doesn't provide that in my low-density area. Instead I have well water and a septic field. Require that a home has a source of electricity, water, sewage and meeds some efficiency standards but do NOT specify how those are to be met. You can issue guidelines separately, but they shouldn't be legislated.