Posted on 05/07/2018 8:53:14 AM PDT by BeauBo
The state's Energy Commission is expected to approve new energy standards that would require solar panels on the roofs of nearly all new homes, condos and apartment buildings from 2020 onward. There will be exemptions for homes that either can't fit solar panels or would be blocked by taller buildings or trees, but you'll otherwise have to go green if your property is brand new.
(Excerpt) Read more at engadget.com ...
Good work. Thanks.
Here it is required they be connected to the grid. If the power goes off everyone’s goes off. Even the peeps with solar panels. Daughter has had them on their last 2 houses.
So, who’s the Energy Commissioner’s relative who got the contract?
>>
I wonder if there is any way to mitigate that vulnerability?
Isolating components modularly? Grounding, bonding or shielding components?
<<
The core problem is the massive area of current collection that serves as a perfect antenna for the very high frequency EMP. A PV solar cell has a really low Vr and any defect in the junction will ruin it. Another factor is the very short pulse rise time vs the sheer physical size of the cell. I cannot see any way that a blocking diode could have any time to operate. The current-collection “antenna” is right on top of the junction while any external shunt or protective device must be at a distance, which equals time. Not enough time when the rise time is picoseconds.
The only way to protect PV solar panels would be to build a Faraday cage around the entire panel.
This is why I have been posting this warning. I don’t see any way to effectively protect PV solar. I have been involved in RF engineering for almost 50 years starting with my FCC Commercial License in 1969.
Your machine example is pretty good. The machine can be turned off without any consequences. Solar is like that, it can be open circuit and won't burn up or anything like that. But it may be (and I don't know the facts) that the power companies are required to buy the solar power and then dump any extra that they have if they cannot throttle their wholesale suppliers. So then you have the case where you have a captive market for your lumber machine but they can't use the lumber so they put in a pile and burn it. That's not sustainable even if it works out for you in the short run.
What is the antenna? I assume there have to be power connectors to take the power from each inidivdual cell, and those would be a few inches long at least. Are you saying those will generate enough voltage to kill the individual cells?
I looked into solar panels since my house catches the afternoon and evening sun really well on the backside and the cost and installation etc... was ridicules. It would have taken at least twenty years and no repairs to recoup the expenditure.
Either that or offer massive subsidies to people to install them.
Reminds me of the pictures from Rio during the Olympics. The wealthy built a large wall so they wouldn’t have to see the slums or let any of the pesky slum dwellers interfere with their lives.
A nearby town installed solar panels on several town buildings such as schools, PD/FD etc, but not city hall thanks to a federal grant. They have caused nothing but maintenance headaches in most of the buildings, so much so that they are ripping them off one after 4-5 years and replanting the formally new roof because they keep having to patch leaks and repair water damage to the ceilings and walls.
From a cost perspective it makes a lot of sense. Much cheaper to design them in and install them when a new house is built than retrofitting them in.
Does the law apply to the homeless camps? Not every new home, just taxpayers' new homes.
“Good article. In the article it says that the new regulations will add an estimated $25,000 to $30,000 to the cost of constructing a new house but that after 25 years it will “save the owners” $50,000 to $60,000. The author points out that this is a horrible return on the “investment”
Not to mention that extra 30K is rolled into a 30 year mortgage. At 4.25% that 30K is now 53K
““Good article. In the article it says that the new regulations will add an estimated $25,000 to $30,000 to the cost of constructing a new house but that after 25 years it will “save the owners” $50,000 to $60,000. The author points out that this is a horrible return on the “investment”
Not to mention that extra 30K is rolled into a 30 year mortgage. At 4.25% that 30K is now 53K”
Forgot to mention that after 30 years, that original Solar System is dead / obsolete and still has 5 years to be paid off.
Yes. About 560,000 low to moderate income people have left since 2006. All teachers, shop keepers, clerks, firemen, policemen, garbagemen, road maintenance people, etc. Replaced with highly paid programmers and techies. Not a recipe for long-term success, is it?
California introducing more fascism!
Yes, apparently California housing doesn’t cost enough already. After they mandated fire sprinklers in each newly built home, the cost went up by thousands.
“You liberals! stay the f*ck the hell out of things you don’t understand, like the free market economy.”
If we wanted to follow this through to its logical conclusion – something Liberals are incapable of doing – Eventually this new mandate will cause a decline in power requirements. Therefore the cost per kilowatt will go down. Making the solar power panels less necessary.
Why would teachers, fireman, policeman, and any other government workers leave California? They have a cushy pension there after working a very short time. That is a big part of what is bankrupting the state.
A pension doesn’t put a roof over your head while you are working toward that pension.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.