Update the building code to require pre-wiring for solar photovoltaics and electric vehicle charging infrastructure in new construction.
Designing solar-ready and EV-ready buildings is a low-cost strategy to encourage adoption of these technologies. Dallas already adopts and implements various building codes, including the IECC, to guide building construction and renovations. The 2018 IECC includes appendices that are not mandatory unless specifically adopted by cities, including Appendix CA Solar Ready Zone (commercial buildings) and RA Solar Ready Provisions (residential buildings). These appendices describe provisions to make buildings solar-ready, including accommodations for solar equipment, piping, and wiring, to encourage future installation of renewable energy systems. The City will adopt these appendices in the next building code update to support solar-ready construction. At the same time, the City will also include EV infrastructure requirements for new construction, including pre-wiring and electrical capacity, to accommodate future EV charging points. The City will evaluate the cost implications of these revisions for new residential construction and consider a waiver program for low income housing developments.
coupled with tax abatements/other incentives, make buildings solar and/or EV ready makes complete sense.
Solar is the future, especially in North Texas. Making new buildings solar and EV compatible is an economically competitive plan.
what about WindMills on top of Roofs? Which has a less carbon footprint in manufacturing; solar/windmills? ..But as we move forward with Flying Cars, some of these roof tops may convert into landing pads.
Urban wind mills are a problem unless you use the vertical sinovious design. They can come apart and get disrupted by ground effect wind. I don't think the economics are there.
This is a critical step in making sure we make it easy for everyone to adopt clean energy technologies in the long term. It's far easier and less expensive to make these changes now, than to have to retrofit all our buildings later when the climate emergency becomes more dire. We only have 10 years to cut our emissions in half. We cannot continue to let progress be optional.
Agreed.
Agreed. This action must be a priority, as it will help us reach that goal of 100% carbon reductions by 2050 (maybe even earlier?). Economically, it also makes sense: solar energy is more stable on the market.
This should be a requirement, lets follow california on this