4 ms·

Does the survey mention who’s going to pay for it? Seems to be a running issue for this kind of pre-legislation sentiment research

nostrademons 5y ago
Ultimately the resident, as the cost is going to get passed along in new home prices, which will then get passed along for existing home prices and rent.
- ZeroGravitas 5y ago
  Where that "cost" over time is highly likely to be negative, aka free money, and it's only the coordination problems that prevents people from doing it. (See also lease of EVs, if you were paying monthly anyway then the lower running costs of EV can be factored in for a fairer comparison that reflects better on EVs than the up front cost.)
  - CanceledAccount 5y ago
    If there was really “free money” in installing solar panels everyone would be doing it already.
    - Teever 5y ago
      there's 'free money' in exercising and eating healthy but most people don't do it enough. People don't always make the most economically rational decisions.
      - caeril 5y ago
        It's economically rational in a world filled with the moral hazard provided by universal healthcare and insurance. Why eat right or exercise when 99.8% of my $500k quadruple bypass surgery will be paid by other people?
    - nostrademons 5y ago
      It's a time-value-of-money problem. Over the long run, solar saves money. The payback period of our panels was about 9 years, but our utility raised their rates, so I think it's more like 7 now. Problem is, most people don't have 7 years worth of utility bills available to spend now, and if they did, they'd rather spend it on other things.
    - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem
      - missedthecue 5y ago
        How does that apply here? In fact, the opposite would seem to be the case; the fewer people that install solar panels, the more expensive electricity is to buy off the grid, meaning the faster the payoff time for a home solar system.
        ZeroGravitas 5y ago
        If you build a new house with solar integrated, the person who buys the house (and society generally) benefits over time, but they need to pay up front for the costs. If you add it, then people will buy the other "cheaper" house that will cost them more in the long term and you'll go out of business. This is called a "Race to the bottom". Pretty much every nation has a whole bunch of regulations about what you can build and sell, and what kind of houses is a popular specific example everyone is familiar with, not because they're all secret authoritarians, but because in the past, people did a whole bunch of stupid, short-sighted things to hit a lower price point and the businesses that didn't do stupid, short sighted things couldn't compete with them and were forced into doing stuff they knew was stupid or dangerous and people ended up living in dangerous, hard to heat homes. This is the core problem of climate change. We'd all be better off dealing with it, but if someone else goes for the short term profit they ruin it for everyone.
    - jeherr 5y ago
      You could say the same about investing, and yet a ton of people still don't do that.
- Proven 5y ago
  > which will then get passed along for existing home prices and rent. In other words, it'd be a new tax. Despite that most commenters see it as a great investment. Bravo HN! It's such a great investment it has to be mandated to ensure nobody misses such a great opportunity! Invest in solar and get rich, serf.... or else!
mytailorisrich 5y ago
It's the usual issue of the wording of questions in surveys. "Would you agree to be made to pay $20k for solar panels on your new home?" may not have got the same replies although, arguably, it's more realistic.
- Nasrudith 5y ago
  I don't think anybody was expecting them to be free so much as bundled into the mortgage as a standard item, sparing them from any separate financing, uppricing, or possible zoning issues.
  - mytailorisrich 5y ago
    Sure, that would probably be part of the price of the house and thus, for most people, financed through a mortgage. But that's indeed a matter of financing the cost. The point remains that this cost would be paid by the person buying the house and therefore it seems to me that the most realistic and honest wording of such survey should include making that clear in order to get meaningful answers.

nostrademons 5y ago

Ultimately the resident, as the cost is going to get passed along in new home prices, which will then get passed along for existing home prices and rent.

ZeroGravitas 5y ago
Where that "cost" over time is highly likely to be negative, aka free money, and it's only the coordination problems that prevents people from doing it. (See also lease of EVs, if you were paying monthly anyway then the lower running costs of EV can be factored in for a fairer comparison that reflects better on EVs than the up front cost.)
- CanceledAccount 5y ago
  If there was really “free money” in installing solar panels everyone would be doing it already.
  - Teever 5y ago
    there's 'free money' in exercising and eating healthy but most people don't do it enough. People don't always make the most economically rational decisions.
    - caeril 5y ago
      It's economically rational in a world filled with the moral hazard provided by universal healthcare and insurance. Why eat right or exercise when 99.8% of my $500k quadruple bypass surgery will be paid by other people?
  - nostrademons 5y ago
    It's a time-value-of-money problem. Over the long run, solar saves money. The payback period of our panels was about 9 years, but our utility raised their rates, so I think it's more like 7 now. Problem is, most people don't have 7 years worth of utility bills available to spend now, and if they did, they'd rather spend it on other things.
  - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem
    - missedthecue 5y ago
      How does that apply here? In fact, the opposite would seem to be the case; the fewer people that install solar panels, the more expensive electricity is to buy off the grid, meaning the faster the payoff time for a home solar system.
      - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
        If you build a new house with solar integrated, the person who buys the house (and society generally) benefits over time, but they need to pay up front for the costs. If you add it, then people will buy the other "cheaper" house that will cost them more in the long term and you'll go out of business. This is called a "Race to the bottom". Pretty much every nation has a whole bunch of regulations about what you can build and sell, and what kind of houses is a popular specific example everyone is familiar with, not because they're all secret authoritarians, but because in the past, people did a whole bunch of stupid, short-sighted things to hit a lower price point and the businesses that didn't do stupid, short sighted things couldn't compete with them and were forced into doing stuff they knew was stupid or dangerous and people ended up living in dangerous, hard to heat homes. This is the core problem of climate change. We'd all be better off dealing with it, but if someone else goes for the short term profit they ruin it for everyone.
  - jeherr 5y ago
    You could say the same about investing, and yet a ton of people still don't do that.
Proven 5y ago
> which will then get passed along for existing home prices and rent. In other words, it'd be a new tax. Despite that most commenters see it as a great investment. Bravo HN! It's such a great investment it has to be mandated to ensure nobody misses such a great opportunity! Invest in solar and get rich, serf.... or else!

mytailorisrich 5y ago

It's the usual issue of the wording of questions in surveys. "Would you agree to be made to pay $20k for solar panels on your new home?" may not have got the same replies although, arguably, it's more realistic.

Nasrudith 5y ago
I don't think anybody was expecting them to be free so much as bundled into the mortgage as a standard item, sparing them from any separate financing, uppricing, or possible zoning issues.
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  Sure, that would probably be part of the price of the house and thus, for most people, financed through a mortgage. But that's indeed a matter of financing the cost. The point remains that this cost would be paid by the person buying the house and therefore it seems to me that the most realistic and honest wording of such survey should include making that clear in order to get meaningful answers.