Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mandatory Renewables

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mandatory Renewables

    I just couldn't resist. The evil google monster suggested this article for me.

    townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2017/07/16/california-requires-solar-panels-on-all-homes-and-windmills-on-all-farms-n2354430?

  • #2
    I know that there are laws requiring a home larger than 5000 sq feet to be Net Zero energy usage in Colorado and I believe some places in California. That is directed toward using less of the grid to meet some of the Obama EPA goals. Without finding ways to reduce the electrical usage the US will have a very hard time going to a high % of all power coming from RE.

    Comment


    • #3
      What I thought was funny is it they're going to look to the rest of the country to help subsidize that. And the races / minorities there are going to be subsidized. LGBT=a subsidy now? How disparaging for all of them, could have just said it was based on low income.

      Comment


      • #4
        I would hope that before mandatory RE for all housing is put to law there would be a major push to replace low efficient appliances and lighting to products that use 75% less wattage. That may help balance out the power usage to power generate ratio.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by SunEagle View Post
          I would hope that before mandatory RE for all housing is put to law there would be a major push to replace low efficient appliances and lighting to products that use 75% less wattage. That may help balance out the power usage to power generate ratio.
          Similar and more comprehensive has already happened in CA. See the CA Energy Code, part 6 of the Ca Building Standards Code (which is Title 24 of the CA Code of Regulations, or simply called Title 24).

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SWFLA View Post
            What I thought was funny is it they're going to look to the rest of the country to help subsidize that. And the races / minorities there are going to be subsidized. LGBT=a subsidy now? How disparaging for all of them, could have just said it was based on low income.
            Ah, hopefully you can see that the article is satire.
            CS6P-260P/SE3000 - http://tiny.cc/ed5ozx

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by sensij View Post

              Ah, hopefully you can see that the article is satire.
              Aren't most news updates on battery technology and solar pv system requirements just satire?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by SunEagle View Post

                Aren't most news updates on battery technology and solar pv system requirements just satire?
                I appreciate the comment, but no. Most of the stuff in the popular media is brain fluff written by technical zeros to collect a paycheck for filling up space. To produce real satire takes intelligence and brain work.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SWFLA View Post
                  I just couldn't resist. The evil google monster suggested this article for me.

                  townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2017/07/16/california-requires-solar-panels-on-all-homes-and-windmills-on-all-farms-n2354430?
                  This shows complete stupidity on CA goberment. You really have to be brain dead to vote Jerry Brown as the goberner.

                  MSEE, PE

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sunking View Post

                    This shows complete stupidity on CA goberment. You really have to be brain dead to vote Jerry Brown as the goberner.
                    Luckily in this case author was just trying to be funny but unfortunately result looks too similar to reality. Reminded me of the April 1st 'news report' one journalist wrote on local public transportation initiative in Ontario, Canada. Government there came up with bright idea to purchase double buses and run them between cities in hope public will drop their cars and move over to those buses. Public didn't so those big buses were running completely empty for many months. So report started like: "There' not much news today so I decided to make some on my own. Constable such and such pulled over one of those buses driving on the highway in HOV lane and issued driver a ticket saying I don't care how big the vehicle is but if it has less then 2 occupants driver is getting a ticket".

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by max2k View Post

                      Luckily in this case author was just trying to be funny but unfortunately result looks too similar to reality. Reminded me of the April 1st 'news report' one journalist wrote on local public transportation initiative in Ontario, Canada. Government there came up with bright idea to purchase double buses and run them between cities in hope public will drop their cars and move over to those buses. Public didn't so those big buses were running completely empty for many months. So report started like: "There' not much news today so I decided to make some on my own. Constable such and such pulled over one of those buses driving on the highway in HOV lane and issued driver a ticket saying I don't care how big the vehicle is but if it has less then 2 occupants driver is getting a ticket".
                      Some of you are saying this is fake. The ridiculous quotes from lawmakers are likely all fake but the news is mostly real. Senator Scott Wiener from SF passed similar legislation for buildings in city limits when he was there in local govt. As a state senator, in Jan he proposed the 15% rooftop dedicated space to solar PV or Thermal statewide, I hadnt heard of an acreage requirement.
                      sd11.senate.ca.gov/news/20170601-kqed-california-lawmakers-move-towards-new-renewable-energy-goals
                      Lots of articles on this in the "green mafia", but i just linked to the government press release.

                      As JPM pointed out, CA already had Title 24 in place. One of its requirements is Zero Net Energy buildings ( www.californiaznehomes.com/faq ) ALL new homes ZNE by 2020 and commercial by 2030. SolarPV will be on lots more new homes in CA in 3.5 years.

                      Last edited by cebury; 07-18-2017, 04:44 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by cebury View Post

                        Some of you are saying this is fake. The ridiculous quotes from lawmakers are likely all fake but the news is mostly real. Senator Scott Wiener from SF passed similar legislation for buildings in city limits when he was there in local govt. As a state senator, in Jan he proposed the 15% rooftop dedicated space to solar PV or Thermal statewide, I hadnt heard of an acreage requirement.
                        sd11.senate.ca.gov/news/20170601-kqed-california-lawmakers-move-towards-new-renewable-energy-goals
                        Lots of articles on this in the "green mafia", but i just linked to the government press release.

                        As JPM pointed out, CA already had Title 24 in place. One of its requirements is Zero Net Energy buildings ( www.californiaznehomes.com/faq ) ALL new homes ZNE by 2020 and commercial by 2030. SolarPV will be on lots more new homes in CA in 3.5 years.
                        That is sad. I'm all for new tech and all but forcing it on the population instead of market natural selection will end up badly with lots of wasted money. Unfortunately, at my expense as well (again!).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by max2k View Post

                          That is sad. I'm all for new tech and all but forcing it on the population instead of market natural selection will end up badly with lots of wasted money. Unfortunately, at my expense as well (again!).
                          One way or another, we all pay for each other's ignorance and folly. No way around it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by J.P.M. View Post

                            One way or another, we all pay for each other's ignorance and folly. No way around it.
                            following this trend I might won't have a choice when buying my next house but to go with some ridiculous lease as there won't be any other available. I wouldn't be surprised as this is what happens when government interferes with market too much.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by max2k View Post

                              following this trend I might won't have a choice when buying my next house but to go with some ridiculous lease as there won't be any other available. I wouldn't be surprised as this is what happens when government interferes with market too much.
                              Unfortunately when you live in a state who's government is narrowly focused on one path you end up spending more money to satisfy their wishes.

                              I can think of two options. Vote the current government out of office (hopefully a better group is elected) or move to another state.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X