Simitian 'trees vs. solar' bill passes Senate
Original post made on Apr 23, 2008
Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 3:26 PM
on Apr 23, 2008 at 9:51 am
This is a well-intended but not well thought out proposal. Certain trees such as redwoods can affect not just the next door neighbor but properties several lots away. It takes a lot of energy to warm up and light up homes put into darkness by evergreen trees thoughtlessly planted. I subscribe to the National Arbor Day Foundation's theme of Right Tree, Right Place. This new law flies in the face of this as it allows Wrong Trees in Wrong Places and neighbors would be helpless as a result. Please contact your representative to defeat enactment.
on Apr 23, 2008 at 11:17 am
This is a tough one. I'm all for solar energy, but for someone to have to cut down an old tree because a neighbor decides to install panels somehow doesn't seem right. That tree might be allowing the homeowner to use far less energy to keep his/her house cool during the summer.
I know this wouldn't help with existing homes, but I wonder if cities have started to revise their ordinances to prohibit certain types of trees -- ones that would be a problem for solar energy -- for new homes. If not, it might be a good thing to do.
on Apr 23, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Yes, this is tough, but there is a big difference between deciduous trees that could provide desired shade in the summer (when it's easier to get sunlight on panels because of the sun angle) and those that cause shade year-around. There is a real benefit to light, not just on panels, but also on windows and roofs during the winter. From what I can tell, this bill does not distinguish at all between types of trees.