What do you think of California's new law requiring solar panels on new homes?
Take off all the global warming and carbon emmission marketing and a solar-powered house is great for the consumer. Below is an image of PV on a residential structure that has a HERS rating above 60.So the mandate is forcing architects, builders, mortgage companies and buyers to pay attention to natural forces that keep the HERS rating low as a starting point and then putting a smaller, affordable and balanced PV system either roof mounted or as the carport.A well made home with R24 walls, R30 roof and leaks less than 1 air change per hour around all the home's shell, door and windows will consume 75% less energy to heat and cool. Then fill the home with Energy Star appliances and the electric bill will go from $300 a month to $75 a month allowing the homeowner to have more budget to pay down the mortgage years sooner.Along with the reduced energy cost as a result of a better made structure there will be a health benefit of being able to actively monitor and control the indoor air quality. A tighter envelope means fewer dust and allergens inside the home. Controlling the humidity below 60% and molds and mildews can’t grow.There is also another added benefit of longer lasting homes since the tighter/stronger shell will repel insect infestations and in California the stronger home will also have a higher survival rate during fires and earthquakes. Other areas of the country will be more resilient to high wind events such as tornadoes, hurricanes, gas line explosions, etc.2x4 stick construction with R13 insulation literally cannot support renewable energy. There just isn’t enough roof area or room in the bank account for all the solar panels.It's all win-win except for those cheap ass contractors who have undocumented workers and issue tail light warranties. As always, design/build new communities for the 55+ empty nesters so they can move out of the neighborhoods designed to support school kids. Let us seniors retire in affordable homes that are net zero.Oh, and best of all…nobody is going to hire lawyers and declare eminent domain to build more mega gigawatt centralized nuclear. Thorium fuel manufacture is just a couple of digits (234 vs 230) away from being centrifuged bomb stuff.
How can we accelerate sustainable energy?
Add money.That’s it. Just add money.The main issue is that while electricity is easy to generate, its difficult and expensive to store or transport.That’s why we use fossil fuels - they are more complicate to find, but super easy and cheap to move around. A fuel is just an energy storage/transport medium; coal is bulky but cheap (so ideal for stationary uses); oil and its derivatives can flow through pipes or be carried in plastic containers. Even by hand. Cheap!So its a combination of the generation costs, but also the infrastructure to transport the energy, and use it.For example- there’s about 2 billion vehicles on the roads, but we only make 70 million a year. You’d need to replace all of those vehicles (which needs some R+D) and build a complete charging infrastructure and enough generation capacity to charge them all at “peak” times.That costs a lot of money. If you want to do it quicker you need to scrap cars (and indeed oil tankers) that are still in use - which often means have existing loans or debt on them. That means more money to stop the global economy crashing (which is what happens when you write off too much debt…)My back-of-the-envelope calculation for replacing all oil use (100,000,000 barrels a day at 1700kWh/barrel) was about US$100 trillion, which was mostly on vehicles and infrastructure, not the electricity generation. That’s roughly the global annual GDP.TLDR; Money. It’s very expensive to change out a global infrastructure.
The construction of single family homes now banned in californa?
No, the construction of single family homes is not banned in California.
When will solar panels become more financially viable for home use?
Home solar panels are a lot more viable already. A lot of this has to do with state policies to become sustainable. For instance in CA, home solar is seen as an asset to the state so much that they are mandating home solar panel systems for new homes. Plus nationwide their is a 30% tax break after purchase. Clearly there are a lot of reasons why solar is more financial viable in terms of politics. And, technology is getting better, with higher efficiency ratings for certain types of panels, making their return higher. However, what makes this equation viable? That’s competitive prices because if you are paying more or less for the same efficiency level delivered by the same type and make of panel, this could make the panel more or less viable. And, then the same can be said for installation, and the rest of the system including accessories and BOS.Here’s a groundbreaking solution. HahaSmart’s solutions guarantee you are buying prices that are statistically 25% below the average market value of home solar systems, and the installation. They do this buy connecting you with a nationwide network of local installers ready on call, that have already been chosen as the best, certified and most cost effective people. And, HahaSmart connects you to their direct prices on panels. If you follow up with these guys, you can guarantee that you are choosing a decision that gives you a contemporary better bang for your buck. All of which, makes getting solar these days more financially viable for home use.
Ideas to improve the standard of living for those earning under $18,000 in the U.S.?
saw an extremely thought provoking episode of oprah in which she was discussing the 30M people in the U.S. earning under $18,000, yet working tirelessly to make ends meet. was very surprised to hear of people in positions such as paramedics and lab technicians earning less than $10 per hour and unable to provide properly for their families (one woman profiled was living temporarily in a homeless shelter). raising the min wage will help, but even at roughly 2x where the min wage is today, health care costs are oftentimes enough to break the bank of most hourly earners. curious to hear potential solutions, partcularly from professionals in gov't or economics.
Why are so many conservatives against the development of renewable resources? Even if global warming is not real and they are not necessary, aren't they still good for the economy?
Most of the ones against renewable generation of electricity have a pre-existing bias which they have been feeding for decades.They ignore the terawatt of wind and solar generation capacity that has been built globally. They ignore Germany receiving 36% of its electricity from renewable sources in 2018 while having continued solid GDP growth and the most stable grid in Europe. They ignore China having put in more solar energy in the first half of 2018 than exists in all of the USA. They ignore the Lazard unsubsidized cost of generation reports that now show that wind and solar are both the cheapest forms of new generation that can be built and are cheaper to build new than the operating costs of existing nuclear and coal plants in many cases. They ignore the reality of the failure of nuclear generation to achieve lower costs and faster deployments, especially ignoring the reality of China where it has been out built by wind and solar and is now seeing a much slower growth.Much of this goes hand-in-hand with ignoring the challenges of global warming. While 65% of Republicans in the USA now accept that global warming is occurring, much smaller minorities accept that it’s serious or that humans are causing it. With that rejection of empirical reality comes a rejection of the change that is necessary to deal with it, the change away from the use of fossil fuels for transportation, heat and electrical generation. And with that rejection comes the rejection of the alternatives, renewable energy.It’s become a partisan race for Republicans and many other conservatives to see how long they can breathe with their heads buried in the sand. Some of them appear to have mastered the art of breathing through their asses. Certainly they talk out of them often enough.