Posted on 12/13/2004 10:44:47 PM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO (AP) - California could have 1 million buildings producing solar energy by 2018, with half of all new homes powered by the sun, administration officials said Monday as they outlined ways to meet one of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's more ambitious campaign promises.
The goal is to create a self-sustaining solar industry in 10 years, making the zero-pollution power source so commonplace and cheap that costly incentives are no longer necessary, said Joe Desmond, Schwarzenegger's deputy secretary for energy.
Until then, environmental officials are considering funding methods that could include a charge on electricity bills to pay the estimated $700 million to $1 billion cost. That would return a projected $3 billion to $5 billion in benefits, Desmond said in an interview.
The goal is to generate 3,000 megawatts of power from the sun within 13 years, the equivalent of a dozen medium-sized power plants. One megawatt is enough to power about 750 homes.
To get there, solar manufacturers who move to California might be offered an investment credit, while homeowners' income and property tax credits, set to expire in 2006, might be extended, Desmond said.
The administration officials propose to require builders to offer solar power as an option in subdivisions of 50 homes or more by 2010. And they want the California Energy Commission to consider requiring solar energy in the same way the commission has in the past mandated low-flush toilets, insulation standards, energy efficient appliances or low-energy lighting fixtures in bathrooms.
They also want to let owners of solar-powered buildings sell more of their electricity back to power utilities.
The proposals all come in the wake of the blackouts and spiraling power costs that plagued the state in 2000 and 2001 and reverberate today.
California already is the world's third-largest market for solar technology, but advocates say such a statewide incentive plan would put the state on a par with leaders like Japan and Germany.
Schwarzenegger backed a solar homes proposal that failed in the Legislature four months ago. Resource and Environmental Protection agency officials on Monday outlined their goals and solicited suggestions on how to meet his campaign promise, though Schwarzenegger has yet to endorse a new attempt at legislation.
Unlike the previous version, the latest variation would include commercial as well as residential buildings, which may make it easier and cheaper to reach Schwarzenegger's million-roof goal, Desmond said. That's also a goal of state Sen. John Campbell, R-Irvine, who is carrying a preliminary version of the bill with last year's legislative sponsor, Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City.
"The devil will be in the details," said Bernadette Del Chiaro of the Environment California Research and Policy Center.
Her organization estimated that the state needs to pay homeowners at least $2,800 for each kilowatt of solar power generation they install to make the investment worthwhile.
The California Building Industry Association has been generally supportive, but opposes mandates that would cost its members and wants to begin with a smaller program. Utilities and unions in August supported a less ambitious competing bill that Schwarzenegger aides said would have been unworkable.
---
On the Net:
Read the bill, SB1, at www.sen.ca.gov
Solar panels work. I've got them on my boat, they are very nice.
By the time power is "free" the bureaucrats will have made it's delivery/use so expensive society will be living on grits and riding bicycles to work.
How long have you had them onboard and do they take up much space?
This was a pretty good read until I hit 'funding methods...'. Geez Louise, do these guys ever stop thinking up new ways to get the taxpayer to bend over?
I support new dwellings and old homes at the time of resale, being mandated to be at least 75% energy self-sufficient. Add the cost of retrofitting to the refi and within twenty years a significant portion of homes would be energy self-sufficient, or close to it.
Local municipalities should be mandated to consult with homeowners who wish to make their homes net providers of energy back into the grid.
Turn net users into net providers with an income, and this energy situation will turn around quickly.
What I like about this is that it's also a way of breaking up the big energy jackasses that try to screw the public at every turn.
Make each home an energy producer and all of a sudden the big boys aren't quite so powerful. It would also impact oil prices and our dependency on foreign oil.
I still say cars with batteries will work just fine around town. I'd love to see every second car in a household, at least those that could, turned to the electricity produced on top of their own garage.
Take that Opeckers.
Solar manufacturing utilizes horrible chemical processes. (Not that details matter to environmentalists.)
LOL! And how TAX will these homes and businesses pay.....to use the sun? Think that's far fetched? It's Califronia.....
"much"
>>Until then, environmental officials are considering funding methods that could include a charge on electricity bills to pay the estimated $700 million to $1 billion cost. That would return a projected $3 billion to $5 billion in benefits, Desmond said in an interview.
If that were true, then some private enterprising group should be able to do this without taxpayer dollars. It's just another green boondoggle being sponsored by a (R)epublican.
They are not very attractive as an architectural amenity and after a few years actually detract from the sale price of a house. Its one thing if want them. Its quite another when the government forces you to put them on your house.
As with many of these types of plans, this one is probably got some language in it to guarantee a buddy of the enforcers will get the contracts to supply the government mandated panels. These deals are alway corrupt when you open the kimono on them.
Agreed.
They have been on board for 7 years, and they sit up out of the way on a welded aluminum arch across my transom. There is also a wind generator up there. They are a nice complement to one another, for when the wind is howling, there is often less sun, and vice versa.
In my case, mid ocean is the very definition of "off grid." Where I see solar panels and wind generators is in allowing folks to build 21st century homes with all the modcons, very far from big brother, the home boys, nosy neighbors etc. They allow you to escape the burbs for the mountains or high desert, while enjoying all of the modern stuff.
I don't believe that in all cases, or even most cases, these grids have to go on top of the house or garage. They can also be placed in the back yard. If the installers were crative, they could place the things on end.
I don't pretend to have all the answers, but it seems to me, if most houses had these, they wouldn't be a net negative.
If I were going to purchase a home and found it was 75 to 100% energy self-supporting, it would be a huge plus to me. If it actually produced more energy than it used, so much the better.
It seems to me that a type of homestead act is in order to reduce our oil dependency/foreign deficit. It could be used with solar panels, gray boxes to time water heaters, Overhead pipes that are solar heated, hybrid cars. (It is a shame that home associations stick their noses so far into your backyard that clotheslines are forbidden.) They has tree claims on the prairie and a similar thing could be done about xeriscape to reduce the need of watering.
Well said.......BTW not sure of yer weather there but the Geminid Meteor Shower is looking really good this AM.......just spent the last two hours freezing my hiney off watching a really good light show !
Get outside and look up !!
New homes, great, but how much will it cost to retrofit old homes for this lofty aspiration? And shall we add that cost on to our already ridiculous housing prices? My husband is on two search committees at the university where he teaches, and it was his responsibility to tell the prospective new professors just exactly what housing prices are out here. A bunch of the prospects dropped out right then. We ourselves bought an old house last year, took it down to the studs and insulated everything in sight ... and the whole project of redoing that part of the house (insulating all outside walls) was about $20,000. And that was for a small house. I can't imagine what it would cost for a big house.
I am all for using solar power as much as possible, but mandating things without thinking them through carefully is a bad idea. Californians love to mandate their good ideas now and worry about the cost later, I've noticed.
Overcast....
I've got lots of questions about this...
Solar panels produce DC - how are we running all the modern AC appliances that require 110V? (Or is Commufornia trying to force all the manufacturers to redesign everything to run on DC by legislative fiat, with no regard for the technical feasibility of that, much less the economic viability?)
What kind of battery technology are we using and what is this wonderful program going to cause in terms of waste battery "Issues"...?
Are they figuring the cost of the batteries and power inverters, and the switching and isolation and control systems necessary to interconnect all the trendy eco-friendly local house-resident solar power generation systems with the power grid, into their happy equation?
I'm REAL dubious about this... the technology for hooking up wind turbines is well-established, because they generate 110VAC or 220VAC right at the head of the turbine; nearly anyone can hook one up. But the solarcell/battery technology... I haven't heard that it's viable unless the Marin County yuppie-in-question bought a whole slew of *very* *expensive* DC-compatible appliances (and you *don't* get "All The Modern Conveniences" that way; you just get whatever is commercially available that's been re-engineered for DC power...).
Of course, the fact that it's not workable, if in fact it isn't, wouldn't deter the utopian fruitcakes in the Commufornia Assembly for one instant from passing legislation requiring everyone to start doing it.
The devil is in the technology and the market. The details are pretty simple.
Once these things are cost effective, people will run to the solar panel market. Until that happens, the victims--er taxpayers of California will be shafted over this. Do they not think that companies aren't looking for a way to develop and market solar power? It's a potential gold mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.