Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

Thread: California to require solar panels on all new homes

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,734
    Quote Originally Posted by infinity View Post
    Putting a gun to someones head and forcing them to install systems that they have to pay for and may not want is un-American. I'm not surprised that they came up with this scam in California.
    Kinda agree, but on the other hand you can say the same thing about pretty much any building and energy code.
    Ethan Brush - East West Electric. NY, WA. MA

    "You can't generalize"

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    26,019
    Quote Originally Posted by electrofelon View Post
    Kinda agree, but on the other hand you can say the same thing about pretty much any building and energy code.
    I'm all for safety as part of the building code but this goes beyond that.
    Rob

    Moderator

    All responses based on the 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,734
    Quote Originally Posted by infinity View Post
    I'm all for safety as part of the building code but this goes beyond that.
    What about energy codes requiring certain glazing or insulation levels?
    Ethan Brush - East West Electric. NY, WA. MA

    "You can't generalize"

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    26,019
    Quote Originally Posted by electrofelon View Post
    What about energy codes requiring certain glazing or insulation levels?
    There is no negative aesthetics that go with things like that. IMO nothing looks worse on an expensive home than ugly solar panels. If one wants to live with the ugliness to get free energy that should be by choice not government mandate.
    Rob

    Moderator

    All responses based on the 2014 NEC unless otherwise noted

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    23,758
    Quote Originally Posted by ggunn View Post
    ...
    Again, not necessarily. If PV systems relieve or ameliorate the utility having to go to the spot market for power during peak periods, that reduces costs for everyone. ....
    But in the same manner the generation and transmission they have to have to be able to supply all of the load when solar is not available increases the cost for everyone as they are selling less energy and that means they have to charge more per unit to cover those costs. If they can't cover the costs of the infrastructure needed to supply all of the loads when the "green" supplies are not available, they will no longer maintain that equipment, and we will not be able to expect that the lights will come on every time we flip the switch.
    Don, Illinois
    (All code citations are 2017 unless otherwise noted)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,734
    Quote Originally Posted by infinity View Post
    There is no negative aesthetics that go with things like that. IMO nothing looks worse on an expensive home than ugly solar panels. If one wants to live with the ugliness to get free energy that should be by choice not government mandate.
    I am probably with you in that I dont think that should be mandated. But I have to bust on you for saying solar panels are ugly. Wouldnt want to cover up those beautiful asphalt shingles.....
    Ethan Brush - East West Electric. NY, WA. MA

    "You can't generalize"

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX, USA
    Posts
    10,033
    Quote Originally Posted by 480sparky View Post
    I'm curious, though. Will the new homes that have all these solar panels actually be able to use the power they produce, or will they be like Florida and not be allowed to? IE, when the grid goes down, you still have no power.
    All grid tied solar that has no batteries shuts down when the grid goes down; it has nothing to do with the homeowner not being "allowed" to use the power it produces. California's solar initiative cannot rewrite the laws of physics.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The Motor City, Michigan USA
    Posts
    821
    I'm pretty sure no law of physics says that you can't disconnect from the grid and locally utilize the electricity your solar panels are generating.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Tampa, FL, USA
    Posts
    1,761
    Quote Originally Posted by 480sparky View Post
    I'm curious, though. Will the new homes that have all these solar panels actually be able to use the power they produce, or will they be like Florida and not be allowed to? IE, when the grid goes down, you still have no power.
    The panels are designed to stop producing when the grid goes down for safety purposes. Otherwise they would backfeed the grid and shock a line crew. I believe that if you have a transfer switch and a small generator, they will still work.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Cherry Valley NY, Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Coppersmith View Post
    The panels are designed to stop producing when the grid goes down for safety purposes. Otherwise they would backfeed the grid and shock a line crew. I believe that if you have a transfer switch and a small generator, they will still work.
    Yes, it can be done. One is free to use the power when the grid goes down, however they would need other system components such as batteries and a "off grid" inverter, or a second inverter that "fakes" the grid for the grid tie inverter and can use/dump all the power thrown at it. It gets expensive and complicated so is not worth it.
    Ethan Brush - East West Electric. NY, WA. MA

    "You can't generalize"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •