Big Brother intruding too deeply with new mandate
When a state regulatory body decrees that all new homes must have rooftop solar starting in 2020, I’m thinking Big Brother is intruding too deeply into my personal life. Shouldn’t it be my call alone whether to invest in solar panels, perhaps incentivized by state tax credits or rebates?
Should solar buying be simply mandated by a government bureaucracy without even a vote by our elected representatives in the Legislature?
One additional very real concern: California is mired in a housing crisis. Buying a home already is unaffordable for far too many families. And now the state is going to add the cost of a rooftop solar system to every new home purchase, like it or not.
The latest median price for a home in this state is $538,640, according to the California Association of Realtors. The minimum annual income required for a mortgage is $111,500, the Realtors say. Only 31 percent of households can afford that.
For many years, housing construction in California has fallen far short of keeping up with population growth. There are many reasons for all this. Start with high land costs. There are labor shortages. Zealots fight nearby developments. Environmental regulating drags on interminably. Since Proposition 13 lowered property taxes, cities discouraged new housing and favored commercial projects.
Now there’s a new, intrusive cost driver: the solar edict.
After more thought, however, I’ve concluded that perhaps forcing all buyers of new homes to go green is desirable.
Its impact on housing affordability will be minimal, if the California Energy Commission’s figures are correct. The average cost per home for solar was estimated at $9,500. But over a 30-year mortgage, the panels will add about $40 a month to the mortgage but save $80 a month in heating, cooling and lighting costs.
We need to cut back further on greenhouse gas emissions. They’re produced by burning fossil fuel, such as natural gas in home furnaces and water heaters — and in huge power plants that generate electricity for air conditioners and televisions. Those emissions escalate the global warming that is reducing the snowpack we’ve historically relied upon for water storage and clean hydroelectric power.
Buildings account for 25 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions. Homes built under the commission’s new solar and other efficiency standards are expected to use half as much energy as homes built in 2016 without panels — the equivalent of taking 115,000 gas-burning cars off the road.
But how about a twofer that would generate renewable energy and save water?
There are tens of thousands of acres in the parched San Joaquin Valley that would make excellent solar farms. Right now, they’re growing almonds and pistachios for export to Asia.
Agriculture soaks up 80 percent of California’s developed water. Only 20 percent goes to domestic and industrial uses. Plus, for decades, farmers have been sucking up aquifers, and the land is sinking, cracking canals and roads.
The state should regulate agricultural land, as it does most all other land, and carve out patches for solar farms. Buy up the orchards that are feeding China. Convert them to renewable energy production.
That’s not possible now — it’s political poison. But as the snowpack falls and the population rises, it may be as inevitable as rooftop solar.
Big Brother also should help homebuyers with state tax write-offs. Don’t hold your breath.