California Just Became the First State to Require Solar Panels on New Residential Construction

The state continues to lead the way in emission reduction strategies.

acilo/Getty

California just became the first state to mandate solar panels on nearly all new residential homes. 

The mandate is part of California’s “Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan,” which includes the goal that both residential and commercial construction be zero net energy by 2030—meaning the buildings’ annual energy usage is either less than or equal to the renewable energy generated onsite. California was also the first state to require net zero energy through building code.

The solar panel requirement, which applies to new single and multi-family home construction up to three stories high, was included in an update to the state’s building energy efficiency standards. The California Energy Commission approved the standards today and they will become effective January 1, 2020.

California has been a leader in statewide initiatives to combat climate change, including setting aggressive goals like lowering carbon pollution to at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as well as requiring that utility companies get at least 50 percent of all electricity from renewables by the same year. About 20 percent of California’s new homes are built with solar arrays and the state has held about a third of the nation’s total jobs in solar since 2013, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. A state energy department analysis estimates the new building code will add about 5,400 jobs to that market. 

Environmentalists are celebrating the new building standards, and not just because of the solar panel mandate. “We’re excited because [the new building standards] continue to help California move towards more renewable energy,” Pierre Delforge, director of energy efficiency, energy, and transportation for the Natural Resources Defense Council says, noting that the new code also includes regulations for doors, windows, and insulation that will help reduce carbon emissions. “California is providing a framework and doing the research,” Delforge continues. “They’re putting out a model that other states can emulate.”

The state’s energy commission projects that the standards will reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions by 1.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide over three years. What’s more, residents will save about $80 per month on energy bills, and $19,000 over a 30-year period.

But the mandate is projected to increase home building costs by an average of $9,500—which could exacerbate the state’s housing affordability problems. Last year, the California Association of Realtors released a report saying that about 70 percent of the state couldn’t afford the median home price of more than $550,000.

California Housing Partnership, a nonprofit that focuses on policy and research around affordable housing, has not yet taken a stance on the mandate, according to its policy director Stephanie Wang. “California’s policies should support both affordable energy and affordable housing for those most vulnerable in the housing crisis,” Wang says. 

Delforge says that the increase in construction costs due to the solar panel mandate is “only half the equation,” and the monthly savings in utility bills for residents will outweigh the burden down the line.

Although unprecedented in many ways, the solar panel requirement will be incremental. New home builds account for about one percent of the state’s total residences per year, according to Delforge, so don’t expect to see swaths of solar panels popping up on roofs across the state just yet. “The number of homes impacted by the building code is relatively small,” he admits, “but those homes will last for decades—and it’s much cheaper to build it right the first time than retrofit it later on.”

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate