112 Krisztina de Bruyn-Szendrei et al.
the payback time of southward- oriented panels would increase from five to
seven years, while the payback time of east- or westward- oriented panels
increases from nine to 15 years.
Social aspects
From the perspective of social acceptance of rooftop solar panels, the survey
conducted among Dutch stakeholders has shown that public perception of
rooftop solar PV is generally positive. An important enabling factor to that has
been the policy instrument of net metering,
5
which provides a good business
case for owner- occupiers who have both a sufficiently large rooftop area and the
financial ability to invest in solar PV. A considerable proportion of Dutch
households, however, do not reap the benefits from this policy as they consider
the payback time to be too long or simply do not have the funds necessary for
the initial investment. Partly this relates to the argument that the rationality of
people is hampered by not having full information as well as cognitive limitations, while time for decision making is limited (the concept of bounded rationality as explained in Chapter 2).
For example, while a comparison between interest revenues from savings
accounts and revenues from solar PV investments may currently lead to a
favourable picture for the latter, households may still find it more comfortable
(a lower perceived risk) to keep their money in a savings account. This is partly
due to the underlying uncertainties, such as ‘unknown’ developments of known
risks of household investments in solar PV. In the case of investment in solar
PV panels, this could lead to postponed or cancelled investments.
Policy- related uncertainty
Finally, uncertainty for scaling up rooftop solar panels, which could result in an
implementation risk, lies in the current absence of a policy to make newly built
residential dwellings more suitable for solar PV panels. According to the consulted stakeholders, it would be essential to provide incentives or regulation so
that architects and building companies, as well as future home owners, can
better integrate solar panels on rooftops and/or situate houses in such a way that
it is most effective for solar PV. Currently, the energy performance code (EPC)
for buildings offers insufficient incentives for this, so newly built houses may still
lack suitable conditions for solar PV, and instead stimulates doing the minimum
of installing only two panels. (These are also referred to as ‘shame or excuse
panels’, according to the interviewed solar PV experts.) For existing houses this
is even more complicated because a building certificate (an energy label from A
= ‘highest’ to G = ‘lowest’) is only required if a dwelling is sold.
With stricter EPCs, installing solar PVs would be a relatively cheap way to
meet the new standards. Adopting solar PVs on rooftops could therefore become
mandatory in building standards and guide architects when designing new
houses.
the payback time of southward- oriented panels would increase from five to
seven years, while the payback time of east- or westward- oriented panels
increases from nine to 15 years.
Social aspects
From the perspective of social acceptance of rooftop solar panels, the survey
conducted among Dutch stakeholders has shown that public perception of
rooftop solar PV is generally positive. An important enabling factor to that has
been the policy instrument of net metering,
5
which provides a good business
case for owner- occupiers who have both a sufficiently large rooftop area and the
financial ability to invest in solar PV. A considerable proportion of Dutch
households, however, do not reap the benefits from this policy as they consider
the payback time to be too long or simply do not have the funds necessary for
the initial investment. Partly this relates to the argument that the rationality of
people is hampered by not having full information as well as cognitive limitations, while time for decision making is limited (the concept of bounded rationality as explained in Chapter 2).
For example, while a comparison between interest revenues from savings
accounts and revenues from solar PV investments may currently lead to a
favourable picture for the latter, households may still find it more comfortable
(a lower perceived risk) to keep their money in a savings account. This is partly
due to the underlying uncertainties, such as ‘unknown’ developments of known
risks of household investments in solar PV. In the case of investment in solar
PV panels, this could lead to postponed or cancelled investments.
Policy- related uncertainty
Finally, uncertainty for scaling up rooftop solar panels, which could result in an
implementation risk, lies in the current absence of a policy to make newly built
residential dwellings more suitable for solar PV panels. According to the consulted stakeholders, it would be essential to provide incentives or regulation so
that architects and building companies, as well as future home owners, can
better integrate solar panels on rooftops and/or situate houses in such a way that
it is most effective for solar PV. Currently, the energy performance code (EPC)
for buildings offers insufficient incentives for this, so newly built houses may still
lack suitable conditions for solar PV, and instead stimulates doing the minimum
of installing only two panels. (These are also referred to as ‘shame or excuse
panels’, according to the interviewed solar PV experts.) For existing houses this
is even more complicated because a building certificate (an energy label from A
= ‘highest’ to G = ‘lowest’) is only required if a dwelling is sold.
With stricter EPCs, installing solar PVs would be a relatively cheap way to
meet the new standards. Adopting solar PVs on rooftops could therefore become
mandatory in building standards and guide architects when designing new
houses.