A (sensible) government regulation is keeping me from installing solar

My house is old. It was built before McKinley was shot...that's how old. Back then they used a phenomenal quality of wood to build things, they kept ceilings high, and they installed almost no insulation. (So that last one may be too general, but they certainly installed none in my house.) On the whole, home building is different than it was 120 years ago, but it's not better or worse on the whole...just different.

That said, building codes have changed drastically in the past 100 years. When my house was built, the structure holding the roof was perfectly logical, and given that it has survived 100 years, seems to have been particularly effective. Today, we would use a different system for the roof structure, and our codes reflect the knowledge we have gained from the past to establish a roof that will provide us safe shelter.

And that's where what killed my home solar project.

Without getting into too much detail, the roof structure used on my home would not meet today's building code, the law that establishes the minimum building practices that architects and builders have to follow to provide a safe and healthy home. Under normal circumstances, I am not required to redo my roof to meet the new code, however, if I decided to add weight to the roof...say through the installation of solar panels...then I would have to make sure my roof met the same level of integrity as the code-compliant roof does. Although this regulation affects my ability to put solar on my house, it makes complete sense to me.

As I previously noted, at the subsidized prices offered by the Solar Chicago program, my cost to generate would be less than utility, and it would be locked in for the life of the panels. Bringing my roof to compliance would negate that benefit. Economically speaking, it would not make sense to do solar on my house now. Some might argue that reinforcing the roof makes sense anyway and I should not consider it part of the cost of solar, but this ignores reality. When I set out to improve my home and my relationship with energy, waste, water, and other aspects of sustainable living, I promised that I would do things only if it was reasonable for anyone to do them. I could pay more for solar just to say I have solar, but then widespread adoption would rely on everyone to pay more for solar, which will not happen.

In addition, with solar now more expensive than utility-based electricity - at least until panel prices continue to drop and utility prices increase - it makes more sense for me to use the resources I would have put toward the project to better use improving the efficiency of the home. Installing a ground source heat pump system to replace my aging boiler might make more sense than solar, or replacing the upper-story windows, or looking at innovative ways to insulate the walls of the house. Any of these might be better uses for my investment...both economically and environmentally.

I am still committed to installing solar on the house one day. If a lighter-weight panel type comes along, or the price of the panel plus structural work drops below the price of utility, I will be the first in line. Until then, I will find the most economical - and legal - way to minimize how much grid energy my house needs.