All Forum Posts by: Steve K.

I agree government should get out of the energy business but we might differ on which forms of energy they should stop supporting first. I'd like to see the subsidies for coal, nuclear, and gas go away first. Solar and wind are the two forms of energy that have potential to exist without government subsidies.  

 Seth good point about remodels, I had forgotten about that thanks for bringing that back to my attention. I definitely see your point. Any addition over 500ft2 in my area triggers the dreaded "site plan review" process aka a ton more hoops to jump through. I want to add a bedroom on my primary and the list of things they want me to do would add about $10k to the project (and I already have solar, now they want me to add sprinklers but I have vaulted ceilings so that's not practical, they don't care) so I feel your pain on regulations in general.

Of course it causes a knee jerk reaction whenever home prices are increased in a region that has a major housing crisis but I think the thought process being applied here is more long term (and I frame it this way because as I have said I have mixed feelings about the mandate, so I can only present what I think the policy makers intentions are). The way proponents of the mandate frame it is as it relates to home pricing is that initial costs will increase but total cost of home ownership actually decreases due to reduced monthly operating expenses. So it's basically forcing people to become investors in a power plant on their roof as opposed to being locked into buying electricity from the utility with no return on their end, ever. Homes with solar save their occupants money whereas homes without solar keep a debt to the utility on the books each month indefinitely. Reduced operating expenses also theoretically reduces the rate of mortgage default and makes home ownership MORE affordable in the grand scheme because the electric bill is eliminated, which in CA as you know can be a significant monthly expense. At least that's what I assume the policy makers would say based on what I've read. I'm still learning about how this experiment is expected to work.

Let's face it, a large part of homelessness is due to people making poor personal decisions (in addition to a very long list of other factors beyond people's control of course to be fair, but still, many homeless people made bad life decisions). A solar mandate forces people to save money and removes the option for them to divert money they should use for their bills to buy luxury items. Many of us have tenants with a fancy flat screen TV and a blinged-out BMW who are behind several months on their electric bills. They wouldn't be behind on their bills if they didn't have those bills, because the electricity they use was provided by the solar panels on the roof. That's the idea anyway, and it wasn't my idea but I'm trying to present what I believe is the intention behind the mandate, take it or leave it.

I think this mandate is looked at as a drastic measure even among the most ardent supporters of solar such as yours truly. Perhaps drastic measures are needed as we enter the new energy economy. It's not going to be easy to adjust as we move forward, big changes are coming to the way we produce and consume energy.  I plan to profit from the changes, crucify me for it if you like.  

@Brian Ploszay

@Rhonda Wilson

@Karen Margrave

@Andrew Smith

@Jay Hinrichs

 Net metering: meter reverses during the day when surplus energy is being produced, credits those kilowatt hours to the account for later use when sun isn't shining. 

 There has been a 30% tax credit on solar equipment since 2005. Batteries are no longer used 99% of the time. 

I’m enjoying my Silfabs, paid off in less than a year (tagged 21 onto an order for 8 MW so less than wholesale pricing on the mods, spliced together some remnant racking, installed them with some solar bros on a Saturday and had our master wire them up for me to return a favor so total out of pocket was under $4k before ITC for a 6kW system). My last house had Evergreen panels: truly American owned/ American made. Loved that string ribbon technology, super tight power tolerance for the time and zero waste manufacturing the cells. I guess that was 70’s technology essentially, only 12% efficient but the fuel source was free so efficiency didn’t bother me one bit. It’s funny when folks get hung up on efficiancy withe something that doesn’t require fuel. My truck is only 20% efficient and I have to keep putting gas in it! But I still drive it. Simpler times back then, when American made meant 100% American and Fords weren’t made in Mexico. 

Care to clarify, you’re not a fan of SunPower? They’re pricey but sweet, some people just gotta have the top of the line gear and don’t mind paying for it. I’ve got Silfabs on my roof, North American made baby!

The utility does buy the excess

Very few systems use batteries anymore (net metering is used instead)

Average system cost is under $10k, or $40/month if rolled in with the mortgage, while energy savings are $80/mo. avg.= $40/mo. avg. net benefit 

CA Building Industry Association supported the mandate

The mandate will effect about 88,000 new homes annually, or less than 1% of the total housing stock, so will have minimal effect on the housing crisis. 

Solar adds initial expense but reduces operating costs, forcing people to become investors and save money instead of wasting it each month paying an electric bill unnecessarily

I'm taking my 168 hours of classes to get my license right now and I just sat through an hour presentation online (required) listening to this exact strategy. I was instructed to try to preview and if the FSBO declines, just swing by the house once a week unannounced and drop off printed infographics such as "How to stage your property", "The benefits of a home warranty", and "What to look for in a real estate agent" in order to build the relationship over time until the FSBO begs me to list the property for them. I probably won't be trying any of that, but I can confirm it's the way it's currently being taught. The teacher explained that the best way for new agents to get listings was from FSBO's or expireds. Guess that's why so many new agents wash out.

Good luck selling your property! Can I preview it? (Just kidding lol)

Curtis,  People do install solar without the mandate. Solar has a wide adoption across the US, and doubling every few years. 19% of California's electricity came from solar in 2018, and there are about 1 Million residential rooftop solar installations there. Utility scale solar provides enough electricity for an additional 9M homes. So I'd say people are installing them without the mandate. The CA Building Industry Association (CBIA) even supported the mandate because according to them, builders are putting solar on almost every new home in CA anyway. 

So the question becomes, "If it's already so popular, why need a mandate?" and now that's a good question. I can't speak for the policy makers, but it's related to California's goal of being carbon free by 2045. I didn't follow the whole process as the mandate became law over the last 10 years, so I can't explain to you exactly how it came about, but I'm sure it was a shining example of government working in it's most wise and efficient form to refine the law into a perfect piece of legislation (sarcasm). As pro-solar as I am I also see how the "optics" of this aren't great. But I'm not against the mandate per-se as it will boost the industry I work in even further, and I believe it benefits everyone by pushing us to adopt more cost effective (long term) sources of energy. 

The "large portion from the government" that you mentioned is the 30% federal tax credit. It's true solar wouldn't be where it is today without this tax credit (so thank you G.W. Bush who signed it onto law in 2005, and thank you current president for extending it through 2024). However, solar isn't alone as a subsidized energy source. Every single form of energy receives direct and indirect support from the government. Many trillions go to nuclear, coal, gas, hydro, and R&D for technologies we haven't yet heard of. Without government subsidies for energy our economy would literally collapse overnight. 

As of now wind and solar are the only forms of energy we know of that have the potential to be cost effective without government support. In 2020 the solar tax credit begins going away, dropping a few percentage points each year and phasing out entirely by 2024. By then we won't need it, as we expect solar to have completely undercut legacy fuels in price. Contrary to your esteemed crayon theory, solar panel prices have not gone up, but down 75% since 2009. The mandate (although minor in the grand scheme of things because it only applies to 80,000 homes a year or far less than 1% of CA housing stock) will contribute to pushing prices down further (efficiencies of scale, competition, mass production). 

On one level energy is extremely complicated, but on the most basic level it comes down to fossil fuels being a finite resource that becomes more rare and more expensive to extract over time, while sunshine and wind are free and abundant. Brace yourself for a lot more solar and wind coming soon to a place near you, as most all new energy capacity in the near future will be from renewables. 

This Forbes article explains how quickly renewables are taking over:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2018/01...

 Not bad numbers especially since you bought the Rolls Royce of solar panels, going with SunPower. Simply the best in my opinion wise choice.