From EurekAlert!
Fewer rooftop solar photovoltaics installations exist in African-American and Hispanic-dominant neighborhoods than in white-dominant neighborhoods, even when controlling for household income and home ownership
Tufts University
MEDFORD/SOMERVILLE, Mass. and BERKELEY, Ca. (Jan. 10, 2019)–Although the popularity of rooftop solar panels has skyrocketed because of their benefits to consumers and the environment, the deployment has predominantly occurred in white neighborhoods, even after controlling for household income and home ownership, according to a study by researchers from Tufts University and the University of California, Berkeley, published today in the journal Nature Sustainability.
While solar energy is a popular, cost-effective, sustainable source of energy that can be deployed at large, utility-scale projects as well as on individual rooftops, deployment of rooftop solar has been uneven.
“Solar power is crucial to meeting the climate goals presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but we can and need to deploy solar more broadly so that it benefits all people, regardless of race and ethnicity,” said Deborah Sunter, Ph.D., a professor of mechanical engineering at the School of Engineering at Tufts, and the study’s lead author. “Solar energy can be a resource for climate protection and social empowerment.”
Researchers combined data from Google’s Project Sunroof on existing rooftop solar installations across the United States with demographic data, including household income, home ownership, and ethnicity and race, from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. The Project Sunroof data includes information on more than 60 million rooftops, and almost 2 million solar installations.
“Advances in remote sensing and in ‘big data’ science enable us not only to take a unique look at where solar is deployed but also to combine that with census and demographic data to chart who gets to benefit from the solar energy revolution,” said Sergio Castellanos, Ph.D., a research faculty at UC Berkeley’s Energy and Resources Group and the California Institute for Energy and Environment (CIEE). “This information allows us to think more deeply about the effectiveness of current policies and approaches to accelerating solar PV (photovoltaics) deployment.”
The study found that for the same median household income:
- black-majority census tracts – or neighborhoods – have installed 69 percent less rooftop PV than census tracts (neighborhoods) where no single race or ethnicity makes up the majority (no-majority); and
- Hispanic-majority census tracts have installed 30 percent less rooftop PV than no-majority census tracts. Meanwhile, white-majority census tracts have installed 21 percent more rooftop PV than no-majority census tracts.
When correcting for home ownership, black- and Hispanic-majority census tracts have installed less rooftop PV compared to no-majority tracts by 61 percent and 45 percent, respectively, while white-majority census tracts installed 37 percent more.
The study’s authors said more research is needed to help determine the root causes of the differences. They noted that the findings could be useful in developing better and more inclusive energy infrastructure policy and outcomes, including as part of the evolving ‘Green New Deal’ and programs at the state and federal level.
“Our work illustrates that while solar can be a powerful tool for climate protection and social equity, a lack of access or a lack of outreach to all segments of society can dramatically weaken the social benefit,” said Daniel Kammen, Ph.D., former science envoy for the U. S. State Department, and current professor and chair of the Energy and Resources Group, professor in the Goldman School of Policy, and professor of Nuclear Engineering at UC Berkeley. Both Sunter and Kammen have been fellows of the Berkeley Institute for Data Science (BIDS), and Castellanos is a fellow at UC Berkeley´s Data for Social Sciences Lab (D-Lab).
###
Sunter, D., Castellanos, S., Kammen, D. (2019) “Disparities in rooftop photovoltaics deployment in the United States by race and ethnicity,” Nature Sustainability. DOI 10.1038/s41893-018-0204-z.
About Tufts University
Tufts University, located on campuses in Boston, Medford/Somerville and Grafton, Massachusetts, and in Talloires, France, is recognized among the premier research universities in the United States. Tufts enjoys a global reputation for academic excellence and for the preparation of students as leaders in a wide range of professions. A growing number of innovative teaching and research initiatives span all Tufts campuses, and collaboration among the faculty and students in the undergraduate, graduate and professional programs across the university’s schools is widely encouraged.
This is simple: the non-black and non-latino folks have more money. Which they freely squander, especially when motivated by 30% tax credits.
The only things this all proves is that, once again, government income transfer goes to the upper middle class rent seekers who voted for that type of politician.
Maybe Obama could come out of retirement, go back to his first profession and replicate his triumph as a key contributor to the genesis of the sub-prime crisis – but this time with those racist solar panels?
There’s serious talk of trying to draft Michelle Obama to run for president in 2020.
More research is needed to keep me in dollars until the end of time.
The main motivato for solar roofing is economics and those discriminatory economics (by swapping power on the grid for an equal amount for free off the grid -with exceptions due to peak hours) these solar owners are getting paid retail for power that actually has little value (uncontroillable) and, what’s worse, causes reliable power generator plants to operate at lesser capacities, and less capacity operation means higher priced output, which non-solar roof neighbors mostly pay for. Solar roof output should NOT be allowed onto the grid and installation subsidies should NOT be allowed. This will reduce the number of solar roofs, lower the costs of power from the grid, save lots of money much better spent on advanced nuclear power, which is the obvious future power source (at least obvious to the British, the Canadian and the Asians, who’s govts seem to be smarter than everyone else’s) . Is there a law against studies of the problems with solar roofs? They are not hrd to find.
Notice that the same racial differences show up in electric car sales – EV blogs are chock full of pimply faced White guys, with hardly a Black guy to be found. Ditto for all green endeavors.
Shouldn’t they be comparing race according to economic groups? Are they saying that there aren’t any poor white people? I don’t consider our family to be poor. We have discussed solar and the cost does not justify the expense nor the return on investment. The only way the return could be equal is to artificially raise the cost of electricity. And then only equal. Then you have to think about the present value of the money and the trade off between a high grade investment yield and sinking the money into a fixed asset with the attendant deprecation. Good accounting would have to account for the declining yield in the solar panels as they age, insurance ( damage from wind, hail, water ) and maintenance ( the wiring, and I’ve never seen a battery that doesn’t decline with age).
Governments, people and other groups are addicted to what has been described as hopiumn. We’ll put up the solar panes and windmills and hope it’s a good investment. If it were a good investment, government wouldn’t have to support it thru subsidies nor would they have to force people to buy their electric thru green projects first. Somehow, in the vain belief that the local coal fired plant is causing the ‘ the canary in the coal mine’, the Arctic to melt, or the Maldives to already be underwater. You can say that ‘ no more snow’ is a cheap shot, but all 3 of these things, along with a long list of failed predictions/projections, has not occurred nor likely to.
Based on that reasoning, perhaps the blacks in the same economic group are smarter than the whites. Why waste money on something that is going to make you poorer?
Here’s an example, many members of my family went the traditional route of getting degrees. Some advanced. My nephew in particular graduated 1st or 2nd at Stanford, unemployed. Fluent in Chinese, Russian and French. You would think that with the trade the US does with China somebody would snap him up. Sends out resumes and never hears back. Other members are struggling to pay the student loans and are not making half of what was quoted as the market would pay them.
When I apply for a job, I leave off my education entirely.
Who’s making better decisions?
This is identity-politics poison.
There are massive cultural differences between white, black, and hispanic people. Contrary to the assertion above, not we DON’T need more research into exactly which of these causes this particular difference in outcome. There is no cause for any Government action – people are just making the choices they think right for themselves. It really doesn’t matter if whites buy more solar panels than blacks.
The world would be a much better place if people could just ignore s*t that doesn’t matter and relax. And despite provoking my response, I think it would also be a better place if posts like this never received the oxygen of publicity.
[Of course it’s obviously White Guilt at the root of this phenomenon…]
This type of research is one of the reason’s the government debt approaches one trillion dollars per year.
This study only widens the racial divide which I believe was the intent.
Virtue signalling is a Caucasian affliction.
Holy dimwit batshit! Who gets the freaking ‘benefit’? I’m sorry, mixed power is cheaper than renewable when bought from the grid. Why should intermittent power be a benefit?
Man, the amount of unbelievably stupid crap in this “study” boggles the mind.
“popularity of rooftop solar panels has skyrocketed because of their benefits to consumers and the environment” –
LMFAO try “because of government mandates and subsidies that reward consumers for adding useless, destabilizing power to the grid and raising the cost of electricity for everyone” – the only thing that will be “skyrocketing” if more of this useless crap is fed into the grid is the price of electricity.
“popular, cost-effective, sustainable source of energy” –
LMFAO try re-reading my reaction to the first point above regarding it being “popular” – “popularity” would be ZERO without government mandates and subsidies; as for being “cost effective,” only if you IGNORE the ACTUAL costs; as for “sustainable,” show me the solar panel made with absolutely NO fossil fuel contribution at all (you can’t, and therefore, it isn’t “sustainable”); as for it being a “source of energy,” show me one that returns enough energy to replace that which is involved, “cradle to grave,” in its production, installation, maintenance and disposal, accounting for ALL added costs including costs of destabilizing the grid and making less efficient use of BASE LOAD (i.e. REAL) electric power generation; you can’t.
“Solar power is crucial to meeting the climate goals presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” –
LMFAO Not only is it NOT “critical” to “meet the “climate goals” of the IPCC, which are based on complete fiction, but the use of solar panels doesn’t do anything about it; the more solar and wind “power” is added to the grid, the higher electric prices go, but CO2 emissions are NOT being reduced, since you need to have virtually the same fossil fuel based generation as you need without the solar and wind due to the intermittency problem.
“we can and need to deploy solar more broadly so that it benefits all people, regardless of race and ethnicity,”
LMFAO the ONLY people who “benefit” from solar are the people selling solar panels to suckers and the “investors” who are “mandate and subsidy mining”; and since solar causes electric prices to go UP, it HURTS the very people this colossally STUPID “study” claims to seek to “help” through the imposition of more useless “renewable” power generation.
“Solar energy can be a resource for climate protection and social empowerment.” –
LMAO Solar will not “protect” the climate, which requires no “protection.” Solar wouldn’t even “protect” the climate if the Eco-Nazi climate BS was reality, since it does NOTHING about CO2 emissions, given intermittency and the requirement for essentially the same amount of fossil fuel powered backup generation anyway.
“Advances in remote sensing and in ‘big data’ science enable us not only to take a unique look at where solar is deployed but also to combine that with census and demographic data to chart who gets to benefit from the solar energy revolution,” –
LMFAO there IS no “solar energy revolution;” just a “solar energy boondoggle” where more rich, politically connected, and (ironically, given the tone of this “study”) mostly white scum to pocket boatloads of ill-gotten profits by forcing their useless product down people’s throats through government coercion.
“They noted that the findings could be useful in developing better and more inclusive energy infrastructure policy and outcomes, including as part of the evolving ‘Green New Deal’ and programs at the state and federal level.” –
LMFAO There’s nothing “better” about energy infrastructure that costs more than existing infrastructure and is less reliable, which is exactly what “renewables” ARE. The “Green Screw Deal” will screw over poor people more than others, making its negative impact WORSE for so-called “minorities,” and will NOT benefit them. It would benefit nobody except the already rich, politically connected scum that can position themselves to profit from the scam.
“Our work illustrates that while solar can be a powerful tool for climate protection and social equity, a lack of access or a lack of outreach to all segments of society can dramatically weaken the social benefit,”
LMFAO – WHAT “social benefit” – skyrocketing energy prices?!
The fact that this twaddle comes from an institution of supposed “education” is both astounding and saddening – yet at the same time, given the leftist “thought bubble” of academia these days, not unexpected.
Can’t think of a point you’ve made that I would disagree with. My reply to Kenji is (or should soon be) above regarding why I put them on my roof top. Selfish and cheap are the only reasons. I think I’ve made at least half of the points you made to others.
What will happen to them when they reach their life expectancy – I don’t know. I don’t believe I’ll have the home that long and I expect the next buyer to be more of the MSM educated person who will think it is fantastic to buy a home with solar panels over a similar one w/o PV. I do find occasional reasons to love the ignorance of those who don’t understand science and listen to the MSM.
I deal with data all the time and have been tracking their output over the 4 years I’ve had them and their output has dropped 3% over the four years and also a decrease from one year to the next year.
“…Although the popularity of rooftop solar panels has skyrocketed because of their benefits to consumers and the environment,…”
“Solar power is crucial to meeting the climate goals presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,….”
The 2018 E.I.A. numbers for U.S. electricity generation by source are not posted on their website yet, but solar energy’s contribution to U.S. electricity generation in 2017 was only 1.3% according to the E.I.A. How exactly then does rooftop solar (or any other solar type) qualify as an energy source that has “skyrocketed” in popularity with consumers? I don’t see a hell of a lot of rooftop solar panels here in Wisconsin…during the cold weather months here in the northern tier of states they make zero sense.
How does Dr. Sunter plan on dealing with all the toxic waste that solar panels leave behind at the end of their useful lives if we try an scale them up more forcefully against fossil fuels and nuclear?
If solar panels haven’t demonstrated an ability to scale up meaningfully against fossil fuels and nuclear power in the nearly 65 years they’ve been around, how exactly are they going to be “crucial” to meeting the Paris Climate Accord goals? Shouldn’t Dr Sunter be look at the possibilities of 4th gen nuclear instead?
How does someone with a PhD demonstrate such illiteracy on the subject of solar energy? Questions, questions, questions…..and I would love to hear her answers. How someone like her earns a PhD I’ll can’t help be wonder.
The R-word reaches Green tech. What if the panels are installed by a transgender workforce?
No doubt this is caused by how solar companies market and sell their products. They are obviously discriminating against non-whites. How do I know? Because every ethnic/racial/economic class does not have equal and proportional solar panel installation.
I smell class-action lawsuit!
“The study’s authors said more research is needed to help determine the root causes of the differences.
The ONLY relevant statement in the study….
The flip side of this coin is the charge of racism leveled against climate activists in California. Policies there aimed at cutting emissions, including mandatory solar panels, are making housing unaffordable and less available for poorer minorities, a recent lawsuit says.
https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2019/01/09/climate-activists-versus-affordable-housing/
Wonder what federal department paid for this waste of time and $$$$$.
Things that affect Solar Panel ownership. 1. Unsuitable roof. 2. Renter, 3. Condo owner, 4. Tree shading, 5. Priorities [e.g., cellphones, supersize flat screen TV, new car every 3/4 years, cruises, vacations, $200 sneakers, etc., etc.] 6. Credit rating [also affected by #5]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4
Whitey on the Moon
By Gil Scott-Heron
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey’s on the moon)
I can’t pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey’s on the moon)
Ten years from now I’ll be paying still.
(while Whitey’s on the moon)
The man just’ upped my rent last’ night.
(’cause Whitey’s on the moon)
No hot water, no toilets, no lights.
(but Whitey’s on the moon)
I wonder why he’s upping me?
(’cause Whitey’s on the moon?)
I was already paying him fifty a week.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Taxes taking my whole damn check,
Junkies making me a nervous wreck,
The price of food is going up,
And as if all that shit wasn’t enough
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the moon)
Her face an’ arm began to swell.
(but Whitey’s on the moon)
Was all that money I made last year
(for Whitey on the moon?)
How come there ain’t no money here?
(Hm! Whitey’s on the moon)
You know I just about had my fill
(of Whitey on the moon)
I think I’ll send these doctor bills,
Airmail special
(to Whitey on the moon)