|Image from: http://www.envirogadget.com|
Why don't local governments mandate alternate/renewable energy sources be built in to every bit of new construction?
My curiosity is piqued by this post from Sci-Fi Author Tobias Bucknell: Solar Power has a Moore's Law? Political backscratching aside, is there a reason why new homes/offices aren't built to be self-sustaining/nearly self-sustaining with solar/wind/water/geo-thermal/whatever-resource-is-location-applicable?
- Is it the input cost? Wouldn't economies of scale resolve that?
- Is it the output cost? Would builders be unable to sell new construction at a profit? Couldn't
dreadedtemporary subsidies offset that?
- Is it consumer desire/demand? Good marketing convinced an entire nation to pay for water. If the only new-construction home you can buy is one that will cost you less to heat/cool/power, doesn't that kind of make its own sales pitch?
- Is it institutionalism? There's no doubt that the utility providers would take financial hits as consumer demand declined. The support industries would also suffer. Greed does wonders for innovation, as does demand for alt-energy supplies and maintenance.
Yes, I completely understand why mandating retrofits will never fly, but natural churn could make a 50-year = 50% adoption plan feasible. Maybe?
Local governments, for the most part, deal with all the permits, inspections, and nitnoids of construction in their jurisdictions. By logic, local governments are in the position to make this change happen.
Educate me, why don't local governments mandate alternative-energy new construction?