Comment Log Display

Comment Log Display

Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 2 for 2022 Scoping Plan Update - Building Decarbonization Workshop (sp22-buildings-ws) - 1st Workshop.


First Name: Michael
Last Name: Brady
Email Address: mjbrady@acm.org
Affiliation: none - general public comment

Subject: A personal observation
Comment:
In principle, what you're talking about makes sense. HOWEVER,
retrofit is problematic. It's not free - far from it - and
available incentives are limited. Forcing it without help is
tantamount to ordering buildings demolished or sold, forcing people
to move out of state (if not become homeless) because replacement
affordable housing is simply not available. Arguably, if applied
indiscriminately, some people might want to address it as a taking.
Anyway:

As an example, I have a (lower, for my area) middle income, but
high enough that practically none of the existing retrofit
incentive programs apply. I have a newer (but still 25 years old)
tract home. I'm unusual in my neighborhood in that I'm an
owner/occupant (original owner); most are rentals. I have a newer
a/c-gas heat system that has a 95%+ efficient heater, and a small
solar panel installation. But those absorbed a large chunk of my
savings; and at my age (70+) and semi-fixed income (pensions and
social security) large loans are difficult to arrange. So some
real-world considerations:

* cooking - the gas range still works, and the useless over-range
microwave/exhaust fan has been replaced with a real hood (that
works); replacing with an induction range would require rewiring
the house at large expense, since it would require a new electrical
panel and interior wiring opening up walls; the high cost of the
new range itself is far exceeded by the required electrical
upgrades. Small incentives are available for the range itself; none
are available for the other work. The only way replacing the range
makes sense is if (when?) a complete kitchen remodel is done -
which isn't going to happen any time soon.

* water heat - the gas heater is probably 1/3 into its useful life,
but like the range replacing it with electric would require another
new panel (had to be done for the solar work several years ago
already) and interior wiring. Similar issue with small incentives
for the heater (which is more than double the cost of the gas
heater, with the gas heater being the highest-efficiency model
available that doesn't require an electric hookup), but none for
the building modifications which cost far more.

* HVAC - this is the one place where electrification may be
supportable, when the existing system requires major work or
replacement, _IF_ a heat pump can operate on the same capacity
circuit as the existing central a/c. The heat pump, of course,
needs to be capable of cost-effectively handling winter temps in
the low 20s.

* EV - I have one, purchased used because a new one, incentives or
otherwise, were simply far too expensive. Like many people, I can't
afford or justify (for my normal usage) spending $40-50K on a car.
I got no incentive for the car, since ALL incentive programs are
only for new. Adding a Level 2 charger cost more than $3K because
of local code requirements related to a new 240V circuit. Again,
there were few incentives: a small one from SMUD that covered about
1/2 the cost of the EVSE itself at Amazon, and a now-discontinued
federal tax credit. But they made only a small difference in the
net cost. Frankly, we as a society need to do better to get EVs
into the hands of people who can't afford new cars, and to get
charging retrofits into older, smaller houses that are typically
rentals or owned by middle-class or lower income occupants.

* Other building upgrades - I'm lucky: the house was built recently
enough to have *some* insulation and decent windows. But doing the
standard approach (force full energy code upgrade when other work
is done) is tantamount to requiring demolition - total gut and
rebuild. $500K work on a house worth $500K doesn't make sense.

* Solar+storage - this is a great idea, but has been used by SMUD
to stop installation of rooftop solar. Rooftop solar in the first
place is expensive, but adding a battery more than doubles the
cost. Incentives or otherwise, this makes a grid-connected system
unjustifiable from a financial standpoint - essentially infinite
payback period. Where are the incentive programs for adding storage
to existing rooftop solar at an affordable price?

OK, off my soapbox. Just, please, consider the implications on
existing building owners when talking about forced retrofits.

Attachment:

Original File Name:

Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2021-12-13 10:38:11



If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.


Board Comments Home

preload