The recent discussion and editorials on the use of solar power for the city should be at the top of this council’s agenda.
Instead of giving 10-year tax exemptions on new construction, council should have been giving grants to install solar panels on the roofs of any new structure with more than 30 residential units. Why? The demand for more energy from these high-density residential units and hotels and motels is going to cost every property owner more for electrical power in the next few years. Why? The more the city demands power from the supplier, the higher the rates will go, because the supplier will have to build more infrastructure to provide the city’s power grid.
Why should high-density residential buildings install solar panels? high-density residential buildings have a higher demand for power, not because of the number of units but because they have demand for power through the whole 24-hour day. i.e.: 24-hour lighting in the hallways, in the parking lots and operating elevators. This demand on the electrical service is not needed in single-family homes, but it will be the single family home owner and businesses who will be hit with the extra cost to upgrade the electrical services demanded mainly by these density buildings.
Most high-density units have great expanses of roofs which are not always totally utilized by their mechanical systems, therefore they can easily accommodate solar panels to provide their own energy requirement to service their hallway lighting their parking elevators, etc. That’s thinking into the future, especially when solar panels have improved so much and dropped so much in price. Granted, it would be difficult to convert existing density buildings, but new buildings should be installing solar energy and encouraged by the city with grants. Not 10-year tax exemptions.
Had council taken this approach instead of the 10-year tax exemptions, our infrastructure budget would still be fairly healthy and would help keep our city roads in better repair. The city’s infrastructure budget was cut dramatically in 2009 and has never recovered. Incidentally, it’s been estimated that the city will need $175 million to bring our infrastructure up where it needs to be.
Nobody will be encouraged to live here when our poorly maintained infrastructure is ruining the city’s image as a place to “live forever.”
Jake Kimberley
Penticton