Jump to content

Is your system legal? Capetonians have till 28 Feb 2019 to register their systems


Guest

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, PeterP said:

The wording on CoCT website clearly states that they must give authorisation for off-grid systems + they issue an approval letter to confirm this. Original website wording merely stated that one must declare (register) system - the goal posts have changed, and yes they have been sending inspectors around to confirm systems are off-grid.

You are right: http://www.capetown.gov.za/City-Connect/Apply/Municipal-services/Electricity/apply-for-authorisation-for-off-grid-or-standalone-sseg/

But I think someone got the words wrong. They cannot stop ANYONE from going off-grid, as long as you have registered as such.

News: I see that you can use e-Services to register: https://eservices1.capetown.gov.za/coct/wapl/zsreq_app/index.html ... n the link above.

And from 1 Jun 2019, a fee is applicable to register. So use the e-Services. 🙂 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, PeterP said:

Disagree - the key is whether it can feed-back. Ebrsa's meeting confirms this.

Can anyone prove that a inverter does not feed back, that it meets NRS / SANS regulations, without any papers?

My point is: Think about a sales person saying a battery will last 20 years and 1 000 000 cycles. That does not make it so, for their are lots of small T&C's that comes into play.

Still would like to know what Swartland had to say about the Axpert inverters, with NRS and SANS regulations taken into account? 
IF Swartland said, it is fine, you do it get a CoC for the entire house and it is on your head if something goes wrong, then that is their decision.
Was that their official decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PeterP said:

The wording on CoCT website clearly states that they must give authorisation for off-grid systems

I have emailed them. Lets see what they say back, changing from DECLARING to Authorisation.

See the eService is still DECLARING:

image.thumb.png.8a0ac08d3207caea81dc404428e8e4ad.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

1) Jip, we have deduced that here on PF. Issue is not ones own home but being one of i.e. a 1000 others all on the same transformer. 
2) So does CoCT - NRS and SANS regulations both are national, not CoCT or Swartland specific. 😉 
3) Interesting. So I deduce that they are saying you can connect any inverter if you live in the Swartland, as long as it meets point 2, no?
4) The last fiasco has been sorted, if the inverter is on the list, the Bob's your uncle - and the regs are still in flux in talking to my Sparkie this morning. Him having been on a seminar where a lot of questions where raised and answered, earthing one of the burning issues.

But, having said all that, what is Swarltand allowing ito what inverters can be connected? Are they saying anything goes as long as YOU take all the responsibility?

@The Terrible Triplett herewith my replies to your questions posted above.

1. I don't know who the WE group is on the forum that have deduced why municipalities limit feed in capacity. I was certainly not familiar with the reasons and some others too given questions posted on the issue.

2. I mentionded the Swartland (SM) requirement for NRS and RSA Renewable Plant Grid Code for sake of clarity.

3. It is unclear to me what prompted this question. Apart from the regulations mentioned under 2 above I repeat paragraph 6 or my posting

"Grid-tied installations are required to be signed off by an ECSA registered engineer or technologist and test certification, as specified in NRS097-2-1, by a 3rd party test house, must be submitted as well as a CoC as per SANS 10142-1."

The test certification and sign off information required by SM as stated on their application form is copied and pasted from the form below.

Final copy of circuit diagram
Inverter Type Test: The inverter type test certification requirements are specified in NRS 097-2.1. Type testing is to be undertaken by a 3 party test house such as
Bureau Veritas, KEMA or TÜV Rheinland. Inverter suppliers should be asked to provide the necessary certification before the equipment is purchased. Factory settings sheet or other documentation showing that the inverter has been set according to NRS 097-2-1. An electrical installation Certificate of Compliance as per SANS 10142-1.

Grid-tied SSEG plant must also automatically disconnect from the grid in the event of a power outage if designed to operate in "islanded mode".  This must be demonstrated to municipal personnel during commisioning.

It is also recommended that an ECSA registered professional, who is to sign of the application and is familiar with the technical details of the intended generation technology be engaged to complete the application form.

As far as your final question goes, SM said nothing of the sort. What the Director explained was that it is the responsibility of the owner of the premises to obtain a CoC as a legal requirement. No municipality is obliged to ensure that you have one but should they demand it, it is the owners legal obligation to ensure that he has a CoC. I suppose a good example is a drivers license which is not demanded when you renew your car license but you will surely be in legal trouble is you don't have one should it be demanded by an authorised official.

Bear in mind that the above is for grid-tied SSEG plant.

Here is the verbatim definition for stand-alone generators.

Stand-alone generator
A generator that is not in any way connected to the utility grid. Export of energy onto the utility grid by the
generator is therefore not possible.

I hope this answers your questions but maintain my view that SM regulations and requirements are applicable to SM residents only and I for one see no need for trying to prove who is right or better or wrong or worse. Perhaps you should ask the CoCT how many consecutive clean audits they have received from the Auditor-General and what number they are on lthe list of well managed municpalities as another comparison. Already the one post of mine have elicited a host of opinions, some in agreement and others not. To what purpose? Perhaps forum members, so inclined, should start disecting every one of the 173 or so municipalitiy's regulations on the issue, if some of them even have such regulations. That should keep everyone very busy but would serve no constructive purpose.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, cpbotha said:

Not exactly.

Yup. All I want to know is if you are allowed to connect the AC-input of the Axpert to the grid. If yes... no problem. If no... still stuck with the same problem.

36 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

Stand-alone generator
A generator that is not in any way connected to the utility grid. Export of energy onto the utility grid by the
generator is therefore not possible.


That sounds like a No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Still would like to know what Swartland had to say about the Axpert inverters, with NRS and SANS regulations taken into account? 
IF Swartland said, it is fine, you do it get a CoC for the entire house and it is on your head if something goes wrong, then that is their decision.
Was that their official decision?

As I said before, I deliberately did not bother to discuss spesific inverters as I could not see any purpose in singling out the Axpert for discussion when there surely must be other inverters with similar technical specifications. Swartland does not have a list of approved equipment but their regulations and requirements, that grid-tied equipment must conform with NRS and SANS, makes that unneccesary. The requirements for stand-alone generators I have also recently posted on this thread.

Why the Axpert enjoys so much discussion remains a mystery to me. If you do not have one, it is not your problem. If you have one then consider the regulations and requirements of your municipality or Eskom if that is your supplier. Of course the forum purpose is, amongst others, to exchange information and I have asked many questions on the Axpert subject and received answers of value. 

Has anyone ever laid eyes on the complete circuit diagram and analysed the firmware of both the inverter, battery charger and MPPT controllers. Perhaps @Coulomb and @weber have to a large degree but I doubt if they found time or the need for all the aforementioned. It is a very limited approach to base opinions only on the CoCT regulations and their, dare I say, Infamous list. Of course it applies to the good residents of The Metro but has no effect on others.

I was once in my younger days told by the highly respected CEO of a large JSE listed company who was also chairman of the board of a subsidiary of which I was a member that " If the law does not specifically forbid something then do it. I it is specifically forbidden, then find the loophole". This I have found to be very sound and useful advice. All one has to do is read applicable documentation without any emotion and/or any preconceived views and the absolute truth will become evident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@plonkster not to disagree with you but just for the sake of discussion, if an Axpert is not connected to the but grid but a large battery charger is and feeds to the Axpert batteries, could one logically reason that the Axpert is connected to the grid.  I would even reason that if a transformer of suitable capacity is connected to the grid and the output to an Axpert grid input or any other off-grid inverter, there is no physical connection to the grid. Likewise if an inverter, designed as an off-grid inverter with solar panels and a battery charger, either incorporated or seperate, is connected to the grid which part of the generator or its output is then connected to the grid. Let us, for purposes of this discussion, forget about the comments on this forum that the Axpert, if a fault develops, may in some theoretical instances feed AC into the grid. After all faults occur like motor cars which are not designed to roll over but sometimes do and kill people. But precautions to prevent that is nowhere to be seen. Such is the illogical reasoning of mankind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

a large battery charger is and feeds to the Axpert batteries, could one logically reason that the Axpert is connected to the grid

I'd say that in this case it is clearly not connected to the grid. I think the whole issue for the regulators is that they want to be able to see clearly what you have done, or they want paperwork from a trustworthy source that says it is done correctly. That is why they are always insisting on separate external changeover stuff, things you can inspect.

You'd have to be a special kind of belligerent to claim that a battery charger makes it grid-connected in a dangerous way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

Let us, for purposes of this discussion, forget about the comments on this forum that the Axpert, if a fault develops, may in some theoretical instances feed AC into the grid. After all faults occur like motor cars which are not designed to roll over but sometimes do and kill people.

For the sake of discussion. If a car starts burning whilst the owner blissfully uses it, then the manufacturer can be held liable. Kouga comes to mind.

You said that the official made the point to make sure of the CoC being in place, that the responsibility is on the owners head, based on feedback here on what Swartland is doing. On the one side I like it, the other side not so much. Is it of concern to me, not at all. Merely a passing interest in a general discussion.

48 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

Why the Axpert enjoys so much discussion remains a mystery to me. If you do not have one, it is not your problem.

Why? Simply because Newbies keep on buying products that are not on "The List", a list that is comprised of inverters that have been certification for SA standards in the absence of SABS certification, a list as a service to people wanting to buy inverters, a list that is NOT inclusive of only CoCT inverters, but of all manufacturers supplying SA. 

So to say ...

49 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

" If the law does not specifically forbid something then do it. I it is specifically forbidden, then find the loophole".

Is just not the right way because when viewed from the "other" side, the grid being a national resource, I would prefer people to not stuff up OUR grid because they found a loophole. 😉 

No, not one, or anyone specific, no!
It is case of 1000's or 10's of thousands of connections that does have / can have an affect overall on the grid.
We just don't know the full impact because solar is new in SA.

Why the infatuation of wanting to force certain brands to be complaint in the absence of papers, papers a simple process for the manufacturer to obtain, boggles my mind. 

The bottom line, in Swartland it appears you can do what you want, as long as you meet the NRS / SANS regulations and have the CoC to back it. So the onus then rest squarely on the Sparkie who installed and gave the CoC ... sounds to me like buyer beware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ebrsa said:

Why the Axpert enjoys so much discussion remains a mystery to me. If you do not have one, it is not your problem.

I don't own a Chinese vehicle but I still advise my friends not to buy them 🙂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, PeterP said:

The wording on CoCT website clearly states that they must give authorisation for off-grid systems + they issue an approval letter to confirm this. Original website wording merely stated that one must declare (register) system - the goal posts have changed, and yes they have been sending inspectors around to confirm systems are off-grid.

So I emailed them asking what is this about "authorisation" for off-grid.

Reply I got, I quote:

The City needs to be assured that the off grid installation complies with the necessary legislation. To this end we request the owner to complete the attached. (doc attached)

Rather have the owner be made aware that the equipment either is or isn’t approved earlier than later when they want to expand the system. The declaration for off grid is a slightly different process to the application for authorisation to connect a grid tied installation, as it doesn’t directly affect the municipal supply.

On top of that:
We (me, @Fuenkli and @Rautenk ) got a thank you from a CoCT official for the effort we put in to clarify the disconnect switch. I quote his reply:

I think the DC issue solved many other people’s problems as well. Thank you for following through.

I seriously do not see why we keep on thinking "they" (CoCT) are out to "get us", why we call them CofCT.  Every email I sent, every query I have had, they always deal with it  - via email to boot. Yes, sometimes it takes a wee little while.

And I'm not even friends with the mayor or any of the officials nor any need to have meetings. 😉 

CoCT has probably the simplest and easiest most cost effective way (read free) to get grid tied approval / off-grid registration, in SA. More so now that you can start that process via eServices.

Declaration for off-grid SSEG.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

The bottom line, in Swartland it appears you can do what you want, as long as you meet the NRS / SANS regulations and have the CoC to back it. So the onus then rest squarely on the Sparkie who installed and gave the CoC ... sounds to me like buyer beware.

TTT  based on what do you conclude the above when what I posted is quoted again below. I don't know to what extent Swartland requirements differs from those of CoCT but judging from yours and posts by others, there is no material difference. So I have to conclude that your above statement is inaccurate. Otherwise perhaps you would elaborate on differences.

2 hours ago, ebrsa said:

"Grid-tied installations are required to be signed off by an ECSA registered engineer or technologist and test certification, as specified in NRS097-2-1, by a 3rd party test house, must be submitted as well as a CoC as per SANS 10142-1."

The test certification and sign off information required by SM as stated on their application form is copied and pasted from the form below.

Final copy of circuit diagram
Inverter Type Test: The inverter type test certification requirements are specified in NRS 097-2.1. Type testing is to be undertaken by a 3 party test house such as
Bureau Veritas, KEMA or TÜV Rheinland. Inverter suppliers should be asked to provide the necessary certification before the equipment is purchased. Factory settings sheet or other documentation showing that the inverter has been set according to NRS 097-2-1. An electrical installation Certificate of Compliance as per SANS 10142-1.

Grid-tied SSEG plant must also automatically disconnect from the grid in the event of a power outage if designed to operate in "islanded mode".  This must be demonstrated to municipal personnel during commisioning.

It is also recommended that an ECSA registered professional, who is to sign of the application and is familiar with the technical details of the intended generation technology be engaged to complete the application form.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

TTT  based on what do you conclude the above when what I posted is quoted again below. I don't know to what extent Swartland requirements differs from those of CoCT but judging from yours and posts by others, there is no material difference. So I have to conclude that your above statement is inaccurate. Otherwise perhaps you would elaborate on differences.

I read between the lines of what you wrote ... but now I'm changing my "interpretation" of what I read on what you wrote. 🙂 

CoCT kept on posting regulations when asked very specific questions around hybrid grid tied inverters, not answering the question raised by many.

You are now quoting the same regs, regs that kept on repeating, regs that many of us have posted on this forum, over and over ... where does that leave YOU with your unit?

I ask for I found it interesting that you did not ask Swartland specifically about your unit as that was the part I was really interested in to know, how will they see it?
Off-grid - installed like a generator - or can you just connect it to the DB - being a UPS - with the panels allowed to be connected?

You are probably the ice breaker for your unit here on the forum. Therein me pushing.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, plonkster said:

Stand-alone generator
A generator that is not in any way connected to the utility grid. Export of energy onto the utility grid by the
generator is therefore not possible.
 

Yup. All I want to know is if you are allowed to connect the AC-input of the Axpert to the grid. If yes... no problem. If no... still stuck with the same problem.

That sounds like a No.

It is a yes - the two sentences need to be read together. The fact that it is not possible to export energy onto the grid means it is not in any way connected to the grid.

Provided you have the documentation to prove it can't export, it will be accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

I ask for I found it interesting that you did not ask Swartland specifically about your unit as that was the part I was really interested in to know, how will they see it?
Off-grid - installed like a generator - or can you just connect it to the DB - being a UPS - with the panels allowed to be connected?

You are probably the ice breaker for your unit here on the forum. Therein me pushing.

I specifically avoided the issue and reporting on it for the simple reason that I do not want to start a war of words involving Swartland Municipality (SM). Since I represented a community organisation, a ratepayers association in fact and one that is now in its 64th year of existence, meetings and discussions with SM are on behalf of our members in the village. So of course I at times have meetings with the Mayor, the Administration and our councillor. Some of these recently concerned the budget for the next year and we do not agree on some issues. So I hardly need to find more issues where all kind of questions and statements reflecting on the integrity of SM take place as has already happened following my original post on my meeting with our Director Electrical Engineering Services. He was extremely helpful as he always is and gave us more than two hours of his valuable time. So the last thing I wish to do is to see how much I can muddy the waters. Hopefully I have learned at least some diplomacy and wisdom in my 81 years of life.

I will make my own decisions based on the regulations and requirements and if proven wrong will take steps to rectify them. Others must make their own decisions as rules and regulations in other instances may be different with the exception of national legislation.

Not to endlessly belabour the point, let me just, ask how many Axpert owners have managed to feed energy into the grid and what was the result. I wonder if anyone so far has succeeded in doing so and whether their Axpert survived the occurence. Certainly it seems not to be an issue in Australia or @Coulomb and @weber would most likely have reported it.

Y ou did reply to my example of cars rolling over and killing people, to state that the aggrieved party would have a claim against the manufacturer. My example and other questions were actually to see if someone would come up with answers to explain the issue of off-grid inverters, the input of which is connected to the grid. Off-grid inverters are not designed to feed energy into the grid as we all know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

I specifically avoided the issue and reporting on it for the simple reason that I do not want to start a war of words involving Swartland Municipality (SM). Since I represented a community organisation, a ratepayers association in fact and one that is now in its 64th year of existence, meetings and discussions with SM are on behalf of our members in the village. So of course I at times have meetings with the Mayor, the Administration and our councillor. Some of these recently concerned the budget for the next year and we do not agree on some issues. So I hardly need to find more issues where all kind of questions and statements reflecting on the integrity of SM take place as has already happened following my original post on my meeting with our Director Electrical Engineering Services. He was extremely helpful as he always is and gave us more than two hours of his valuable time. So the last thing I wish to do is to see how much I can muddy the waters. Hopefully I have learned at least some diplomacy and wisdom in my 81 years of life.

I will make my own decisions based on the regulations and requirements and if proven wrong will take steps to rectify them. Others must make their own decisions as rules and regulations in other instances may be different with the exception of national legislation.

Not to endlessly belabour the point, let me just, ask how many Axpert owners have managed to feed energy into the grid and what was the result. I wonder if anyone so far has succeeded in doing so and whether their Axpert survived the occurence. Certainly it seems not to be an issue in Australia or @Coulomb and @weber would most likely have reported it.

Y ou did reply to my example of cars rolling over and killing people, to state that the aggrieved party would have a claim against the manufacturer. My example and other questions were actually to see if someone would come up with answers to explain the issue of off-grid inverters, the input of which is connected to the grid. Off-grid inverters are not designed to feed energy into the grid as we all know.

I think it's safe to say that the COCT rules don't (yet?) apply to SM so there's no need to worry about it. At least not at this stage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, PeterP said:

It is a yes - the two sentences need to be read together. The fact that it is not possible to export energy onto the grid means it is not in any way connected to the grid.

Provided you have the documentation to prove it can't export, it will be accepted.

I appreciate your reply PeterP. But since we are talking about an off-grid inverter, is it not a logical conclusion that it is not designed to feed energy  into the grid. Otherwise it would be marketed as a grid-tied inverter one would expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

I think it's safe to say that the COCT rules don't (yet?) apply to SM so there's no need to worry about it. At least not at this stage?

Be careful of that statement. Again Axpert is allowed to be installed in City of Cape Town, however it should be done as per SANS requirements (basically off-grid installed), This DOES not give you comfort on the having the Grid AC in at all times. 

 

2 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

appreciate your reply PeterP. But since we are talking about an off-grid inverter, is it not a logical conclusion that it is not designed to feed energy  into the grid. Otherwise it would be marketed as a grid-tied inverter one would expect.

There are quite a few people that succeeded in installing this as off-grid installation, only getting the Electrician CoC based on the new SANS, and having it registered with City of Cape Town. There are a change over switches installed.

Once I am back from my international roaming, this will be one of the topics I will discuss with City of Cape Town it a face to face meeting. What EXACTLY they would require to satisfy them that this off-grid inverter is, well, off-grid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rautenk said:

There are quite a few people that succeeded in installing this as off-grid installation, only getting the Electrician CoC based on the new SANS, and having it registered with City of Cape Town. There are a change over switches installed.

Once I am back from my international roaming, this will be one of the topics I will discuss with City of Cape Town it a face to face meeting. What EXACTLY they would require to satisfy them that this off-grid inverter is, well, off-grid.

@Rautenk I trust you international roaming is both interesting and enjoyable. Would I be right in assuming the transfer switch switches the load between the inverter output and the grid and the batteries are charged solely by the PV panels. The outcome of your intended discussions with CoCT will no doubt be of interest to many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Rautenk said:

Be careful of that statement. Again Axpert is allowed to be installed in City of Cape Town, however it should be done as per SANS requirements (basically off-grid installed), This DOES not give you comfort on the having the Grid AC in at all times. 

 

I didn't say it's not allowed to be installed in City Of Cape Town. I am saying that we can't rule what happened in another municipality as the golden rule for all. i.e. the rules of CoCT don't apply to City of Johannesburg, as example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

... i.e. the rules of CoCT don't apply to City of Johannesburg, as example. 

Since when is NRS and SANS regulations Cape Town only regulations? 🙂 

When will it sink in that CoCT is but only, upon NERSA's insistence, enforcing the SANS and NRS rules to ensure that the solar industry follows the rules.

EDIT: Fact that it is not yet enforced elsewhere does not make the regulations magically go away for all the other regions.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I just say... I have no interest in starting a fight or participating in one. I still think that if it is an acceptible UPS, one that switches off the grid before engaging the inverter (as I am told this one does), then it cannot possibly feed back. Then it falls under that particular part of NRS097-2-1 that regulates UPSes that are used for SSEG... and that part says simply that it must then comply with SANS 10142-2-1. From the very beginning I thought it should be as simple as that, even though I have expressed concern about the quality of the changeover arrangement. I am curious as to whether there are other municipalities who interpret it that way. That is all 🙂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, plonkster said:

I am curious as to whether there are other municipalities who interpret it that way. That is all

Times 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@plonkster thank you for your explanation above. It would seem to me that both NRS and SANS compliance are required in Swartland with the notable exception that registration of stand-alone installations is not required. But such a registration does not appear to  be part of NHS or SANS but is required by CoCT for their own convenience sake for valid or at least justifiable reasons. It would be interesting to hear what @Rautenk finds out from his intended discussions whenever they may happen, not that it affects me but it may clarify some issues that have enjoyed much debate on the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

registration of stand-alone installations is not required

I must admit, that is a breath of fresh air.

3 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

CoCT for their own convenience sake for valid or at least justifiable reasons

To prevent abuse I think. Otherwise all systems will suddenly be off-grid. The registration requirement means you have to perjure yourself if you're attempting to exploit a loophole 🙂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...