3 ms·
> Preventing any house from utiliising solar has a direct and specific negative impact. Domestic solar has an extremely tenuous value proposition. If you don't
by wyager 4y ago
> Preventing any house from utiliising solar has a direct and specific negative impact.
Domestic solar has an extremely tenuous value proposition. If you don't have batteries in your house, you're using the grid as an extremely inefficient subsidy for solar production/load mismatch (externalizing many costs). If you do have batteries in your house, it's more expensive (and less efficient) than using grid power.
Domestic solar is usually not a good thing compared to grid power, and any small marginal benefit may easily be outweighed by aesthetic costs.
- dredmorbius 4y agoSolar will require a large land-area deployment. In absolute magnitude, it's roughly equivalent to total built area, and dual-purposing land that's already dedicated to human use rather than appropriating crop or wild landscapes has its benefits. Not all structures can be readily retrofit, but again, blanket prohibitions on aesthetic grounds seems exceedingly short-sighted and petty.