6 ms·

California requires solar panels on new construction. Adding $20k worth of electrical systems doesn't make the house more affordable.

burnished 5y ago
Most of those systems pay for themselves and make great investments right?
- epistasis 5y ago
  That's right, the solar panels decrease monthly utility costs more than they increase the mortgage payment. The law is written to mandate only energy efficiency that saves money, and it's necessary because contractors are too tied to tradition to actually examine what results in lower cost homes.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    Where do those panels go? In Seattle, the current style is townhomes with almost flat rooftop decks, I don’t see a place for them, but we aren’t exactly the best place for solar.
    - burnished 5y ago
      I imagine the roofs are still probably the best places for them. I doubt you want to set them directly onto the roof anyway, so if you need a little scaffolding to get them arranged in a particular fashion then installation is probably the right time to do that. Yeah, I guess the angle with the sun or something for most of the year makes solar a little more difficult up here? Thankfully we've got a lot of hydro-electric.
      - asdff 5y ago
        Actually the reason why a lot of apartments have rooftop decks now is due to laws requiring x sqft of common space with y units of builds, rooftops can be used for this space requirement if they are designed as such. If you want to make room for solar on the roof, maybe that means you now have to carve out some of your building to add a big internal void for a courtyard or something like that (pretty common to see these sorts of spaces in new builds as it were).
    - epistasis 5y ago
      If there's no way to place the panels, or they would always be in shade due to trees, then it's not required. Otherwise the builder can place the panels where they want. And if for some reason they don't want them anywhere near the site, they can also purchase shares of community solar projects elsewhere. (Which is often a good option for existing homeowners, too.)

burnished 5y ago

Most of those systems pay for themselves and make great investments right?

epistasis 5y ago
That's right, the solar panels decrease monthly utility costs more than they increase the mortgage payment. The law is written to mandate only energy efficiency that saves money, and it's necessary because contractors are too tied to tradition to actually examine what results in lower cost homes.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  Where do those panels go? In Seattle, the current style is townhomes with almost flat rooftop decks, I don’t see a place for them, but we aren’t exactly the best place for solar.
  - burnished 5y ago
    I imagine the roofs are still probably the best places for them. I doubt you want to set them directly onto the roof anyway, so if you need a little scaffolding to get them arranged in a particular fashion then installation is probably the right time to do that. Yeah, I guess the angle with the sun or something for most of the year makes solar a little more difficult up here? Thankfully we've got a lot of hydro-electric.
    - asdff 5y ago
      Actually the reason why a lot of apartments have rooftop decks now is due to laws requiring x sqft of common space with y units of builds, rooftops can be used for this space requirement if they are designed as such. If you want to make room for solar on the roof, maybe that means you now have to carve out some of your building to add a big internal void for a courtyard or something like that (pretty common to see these sorts of spaces in new builds as it were).
  - epistasis 5y ago
    If there's no way to place the panels, or they would always be in shade due to trees, then it's not required. Otherwise the builder can place the panels where they want. And if for some reason they don't want them anywhere near the site, they can also purchase shares of community solar projects elsewhere. (Which is often a good option for existing homeowners, too.)