Solar Panel Bailout

PUBLISHED: 6:51 PM 10 May 2018

California Adds Costly Energy Regulation To New Homes Beginning 2020

This will increase the price of every new anywhere from $8,000 to $12,000.

California will require all homes built in 2020 and later to be equipped with solar panels.

California is already a ridiculously expensive state to live in. That, along with overreaching legislation such as liberal gun laws and plastic bag bans raise the question as to why anyone would desire residency in such as place.

Recently, the state outdid itself in both the law and cost departments when an eco-industry company voted that anyone purchasing a new home in the state beginning in the year 2020 will be required to put solar panels on their homes at their own expense but at the benefit of failing solar power supply companies. Of course, this will only increase the poverty situation in California even worse, and the idea is so outlandish that even a Berkeley economist is against it.

Despite that the state is the in the midst of “a housing crisis,” on Wednesday, the California Energy Commission decided in a unanimous vote that all “homes built in 2020 and beyond” would be required to have solar panels which will cost between $8,000 and $12,000 per home under the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.

Of course, someone must be benefitting from this scheme, and it is unsurprisingly electric companies such as Tesla.

Tesla, along with Sunrun, openly supported the solar panel regulation.

It is suspiciously convenient that such legislation is occurring now considering that the solar panel industry has “been struggling in recent years, despite state mandates and federal tax subsidies.”

Beginning in 2020, these and similar companies can expect revenue to increase as all new home buyers will either be buying or renting solar panels and other related equipment.

However, the energy commission claims that this will benefit all California residents while ensuring that the state is doing its part to combat global warming.

“It’s good for the customer; it’s good for the homeowner,” claimed Energy Commissioner Andrew McAllister, clearly illustrating the organization’s priorities.

Yet, “it’s so good it had to be mandated,” the Daily Caller reported.

In other annoyances, California residents will soon pay their energy bills in respect to the time of day that service is used in an attempt to convince more to use solar, as houses with solar panels will not be affected as dramatically by the policy.

Thankfully, there are some in California who have retained their common sense. One example in a University of California, Berkeley economist, Severin Borenstein, who made several important points which discredit the value of solar energy.

Borenstein revealed how when the commission makes estimates as to the amount of money that households will save, they purposely overestimate these numbers to falsify savings.

The Energy Commission currently claims that solar panels will cost an extra $40 per month, per household, but will save an average of $80.

Conversely, Borenstein notes that requiring residents to install alternative forms of energy is an “expensive way to expand renewables” and is not realistic to replicate in other states.

Immediately upon hearing of the new California policy, Borenstein wrote a concerned letter to the commission pleading them to at least hold off on implementing it. He hurriedly explained that the reasoning cannot be summed up in a letter but that the decision would be detrimental to the economy of the state.

He continues that he has no financial incentive to gain in opposing the plan but is simply advocating for more practical solutions.

However, those in favor of the plan claim the financial savings which can be made after 20 years of use.

The California Solar and Storage Association commended the new law as being “an important step” towards “the clean energy economy.”

While the energy from solar power may be clean, this is sure to have a detrimental impact on the California housing economy with the state deterring increasing numbers of buyers due to its home prices.

Even more devastating is that by the state turning more to alternative forms of energy, conventional utility providers “are becoming more hesitant to sign long-term contracts with power generators” which risks “a full-blown energy crisis,” according to the California Public Utilities Commission president, Michael Picker.

If such occurred, the state could expect “skyrocketing electricity prices, rolling blackouts, and other problems,” all because it wanted to be more ‘green.’

It is unfortunate that California would force this type of environmental restriction on its residents, helping huge corporations while guaranteeing that the poverty and homeless situation will worsen as affordable housing becomes more difficult to find.

Yet it is unsurprising considering that the state welcomes illegal immigrants while burying its hard-working residents in insane taxes.

Other liberal states are praising the plans with Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C. indicating that they may be the next to make such outlandish building requirements.

The energy companies will surely claim success shortly into implementing this new program, citing the amount of greenhouse gases the state spared the environment. However, this will surely come with consequences that manifest in other areas of society.