California to require solar panels on all new homes. What about the costs? (homebuyer, maintenance)

[BeauCharles]

I'm not sure about a law requiring it for new construction. I think implementation will move along quite well with tax breaks (they're still available?) and the requirement for utilities to credit you for your excess power generated. Even in my very modest 1970s subdivision probably every fourth house has solar (like my next door neighbors).

Also, when you're speaking of a new $750,000 to a $1,000,000 home on the coast another 25K to 30K isn't going to be that much. When its adds an extra 10% to the cost of a home in Yuba City or Madera that's a pretty big hit.

[ryanst530]

and the requirement for utilities to credit you for your excess power generated

Just wait, California will figure out a way to tax the credits, and/or utility companies will simply raise electric rates.

[Csonka]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Solar panels until recently needed to be replaced every 20-25 years. Now, however, they're coming out with ones that last 40-50 years. Still, it's something to bear in mind, though proponents point out that the money saved from utility bills more than pays for them. But solar energy systems require more care and attention that conventional electrical systems. Batteries need replacing from time to time, the inverter needs care, possibly needing replacement in the longer-lasting systems.

Hopefully these new CA housing developments.will provide information on the care-and-feeding of the system. It's an education, a learning curve involved with living with one. You have to be judicious in turning off the lights when you leave a room. You have to develop new habits.

They don't last that long. They are good for maybe 10 to 15 years in the "real" world. Sure they may last 40 years but at 10% effectiveness. They naturally degrade every year. Plus newer ones come out, and people are going to want the newest ones that look modern and clean. Or you are the house with the old panels on that everyone laughs at.

You know how it goes.

And the inverters have to be replaced.

Lots of maintenance.

I'm just saying that people should have their eyes open as to what to really expect with solar. I have solar on my garage to power my pool and home office and garage where we have a deep freeze and secondary refrigerator. Then I have utility service on the house itself. I like having both tbh. But the solar systems are not something you can just forget about like you do with electricity from the utility provider. There is quite a bit of maintenance both physical and diagnostic. It can be a real pain.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Csonka

They don't last that long. They are good for maybe 10 to 15 years in the "real" world. Sure they may last 40 years but at 10% effectiveness. They naturally degrade every year. Plus newer ones come out, and people are going to want the newest ones that look modern and clean. Or you are the house with the old panels on that everyone laughs at.

You know how it goes.

And the inverters have to be replaced.

Lots of maintenance.

I'm just saying that people should have their eyes open as to what to really expect with solar. I have solar on my garage to power my pool and home office and garage where we have a deep freeze and secondary refrigerator. Then I have utility service on the house itself. I like having both tbh. But the solar systems are not something you can just forget about like you do with electricity from the utility provider. There is quite a bit of maintenance both physical and diagnostic. It can be a real pain.

I agree, overall. Those new ones I mentioned don't lose effectiveness over 30-40 years. It's a new generation of solar panel. Maybe they're not available in the US yet? In parts of Europe, they're insured to work for 20 years at max efficiency.

Also, there could be problems, if people want to not only run their homes off them, but charge their EV's with them. The batteries may not be able to manage all that. There really would need to be training provided by neighborhood associations, or something, to avoid people accidentally trashing their systems.

[V8 Vega]

A house with no trees to shade it is very hot.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by Csonka

They don't last that long. They are good for maybe 10 to 15 years in the "real" world. Sure they may last 40 years but at 10% effectiveness. They naturally degrade every year. Plus newer ones come out, and people are going to want the newest ones that look modern and clean. Or you are the house with the old panels on that everyone laughs at.

You know how it goes.

And the inverters have to be replaced.

Lots of maintenance.

I'm just saying that people should have their eyes open as to what to really expect with solar. I have solar on my garage to power my pool and home office and garage where we have a deep freeze and secondary refrigerator. Then I have utility service on the house itself. I like having both tbh. But the solar systems are not something you can just forget about like you do with electricity from the utility provider. There is quite a bit of maintenance both physical and diagnostic. It can be a real pain.

Feel good laws usually cost more than they actually benefit anyone paying for them.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

While I have solar panels and I think they have many advantages, demanding that new homes have solar panels will simply add to the cost of new homes. Doesn't that run contrary to the push for more [cheaper] entry level housing?

https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/06/...ost-new-homes/

I've looked at several other sources online regarding this and can't find a single one other than what you posted that claim this will increase the cost of a home by $30,000. This is pretty much the consensus of the 7 or 8 other articles I've found:

The new policy applies to single-family houses and multifamily units that are three stories or less, and there are some exceptions for homes that are too shady. Homebuilders will probably try to pass on the costs to customers, Carl Reichardt, a San Francisco-based analyst for BTIG LLC, said in a phone interview before the vote.

Installing a solar system and complying with other energy-efficiency measures required will add about $9,500 to the cost of a new home, according the the California Energy Commission. That would be offset by about $19,000 in expected energy and maintenance savings over 30 years, the commission estimates.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...r-on-new-homes

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Feel good laws usually cost more than they actually benefit anyone paying for them.

True... in this case, the beneficiaries are the union electricians who install them and the politicians to whom they donate re-election campaign contributions.

[SportyandMisty]

Installing a solar system and complying with other energy-efficiency measures required will add about $9,500 to the cost of a new home, according the the California Energy Commission.

THERE'S a reputable source.

I'd love to see the assumptions baked into that estimate. How much of the $9500 is for solar and how much is for the "...other energy-efficiency measures." Let's say half is solar.

How many solar panels & inverters can you buy & install for less than $5,000? Not many. It is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but far from consumer expectation that it power most of the house.

[SportyandMisty]

I've been looking at the actual regs... they also require solar water heating systems on the roof... I'd guess the plumbing costs of that will consume a lot of that $9500...