It should be illegal to not architect a home to maximize solar.
California has a terrible law that promotes “builder grade” solar of the minimum regulatory size, and then makes adding proper solar more expensive than if they didn’t fuck up the house intentionally.
make the worst house possible to thumb their nose at CA government and its regulations.
Improve value of home that with ultra high CA electricity rates pays for itself very quickly, and adds value more than the cost, and so makes more money for builder.
Eh I got the land for it why couldn’t I use it? Solar on the roof means you have to go on the roof to fix or troubleshoot. You are adding holes to your roof, unless if you get the tesla solar roof in the first place which you can’t trust anything made by them so you are better off keeping them separate.
The only pro I have seen with it being on the roof, which is probably a good one if true, since it is attached to your house, your home insurance would have to cover damages from bad storms / freaks of nature.
Edit: Also beyond the obvious not needing additional land for it.
It should be illegal to have a roof without solar.
It should be illegal to not architect a home to maximize solar.
California has a terrible law that promotes “builder grade” solar of the minimum regulatory size, and then makes adding proper solar more expensive than if they didn’t fuck up the house intentionally.
The builders’ lobby is powerful in CA.
Very likely, but their choices are:
Eh I got the land for it why couldn’t I use it? Solar on the roof means you have to go on the roof to fix or troubleshoot. You are adding holes to your roof, unless if you get the tesla solar roof in the first place which you can’t trust anything made by them so you are better off keeping them separate.
The only pro I have seen with it being on the roof, which is probably a good one if true, since it is attached to your house, your home insurance would have to cover damages from bad storms / freaks of nature.
Edit: Also beyond the obvious not needing additional land for it.
Because you should be planting trees on that land.
one solar panel removes more Co2 than 10 trees. (by displacing FF energy)
We need both
Depending on the location, no, not really.