1 minute ago, plonkster said:

Hey, careful with saying that in public. Ol' Andile and the  19,796 people who voted for him might come after you...

Good point...edited

3 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Now we are talking!!! Now to find someone to import them and get the pricing right. 🙂 

Ps. I emailed them last year asking when they will do 12/24v. They said they have none yet but are talking about it ... so they have dunnit. 

 

They got your request and were afraid, very afraid .....   so did it...

3 hours ago, Niel said:

Quick question, did they make an appointment or was it a surprise visit?  My wife knows where the "stuff" are but that's about it.  I'll have to be home when the inspector visits.

They called to make an appointment first.  Wasn't a surprise visit.

2 hours ago, Carl said:

An interesting point from NRS 097 -2-3 (2014) Section 4.1 Note 3a states: "An individual limit of 25 % of NMD will typicallly support a penetration level (percentage of customers that install a generator) of 30 % to 50 % which is considered a reasonable and acceptable compromise between restricting individual generator sizes vesrus restricting penetration levels." 

I asked the CoCT inspector about the 3.5kw limit yesterday, and he specifically mentioned the 25% of NMD in the NRS requirement (in other words it isn't a CoCT requirement, it's a NRS requirement).

Didn't think to ask why they didn't make the limit 3.6 given that is typically the size of inverter in that range.  I don't expect that to make much difference given the NRS requirement.

So I still think the 3.5 number a bit arbitrary.

 

8 minutes ago, IdlePhaedrus said:

... in other words it isn't a CoCT requirement, it's a NRS requirement ...

Amen to that! 

CoCT is not the problem, they are just the first to enforce it all. 🙂 

2 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Amen to that! 

CoCT is not the problem, they are just the first to enforce it all. 🙂 

The first to enforce a problem ? About right...

 

5 hours ago, Mark said:

They got your request and were afraid, very afraid .....   so did it...

13 minutes ago, The Bulldog said:

The first to enforce a problem ? About right...

Way I look at it: No matter what lines are drawn, somewhere someone is going to get worked up about something. 🙂 

Like say they made the limit 4kva - then there would be bitching about 4.6kva inverters.
5kva ... bet you a case lof beers there will stil be people bitching, why not 10kva?

So why the 3.5kva limit when the inverters are generally 3.6kva?
So I wonder: Why do the manufacturers build 3.6kva inverters in the first place? (5 - 10 - 15 - 20 ... 35 sounds better than 6 - 12 - 18 - 24 ... 36)
When they got their inverters NRS certified, they KNEW the limit was 3.5kva. 

In this "rodeo" no-one is going to get out of it without some bruising - that is if you disagree with the SANS / NRS regulations, or bought stuff knowingly it is not on the NRS list, or you did not think the limits imposed would be enforced.

I chose not to waste my time nor money by simply falling in line with what they published - and I have no regrets whatsoever. Bleh to the regs as I meet them without a drop of worry. 😜

20 minutes ago, plonkster said:

Respect!!! Man I was hosing myself ... and thought ... seeing as I cannot find them yet in SA ... that they better send them 24v batts fast or else ... at the right price off course. 🤣

I'll be shopping very hard for the NEW 24v Pylontech battery bank ... the Wh is really not too shabby.
Est price around Euro 1100 or +- R 17 962.53 - which I would guess will land in SA at about the same price as a 48v 2.4kwh bank. 

6 hours ago, Carl said:

An individual limit of 25 % of NMD will typicallly support a penetration level (percentage of customers that install a generator) of 30 % to 50 % which is considered a reasonable and acceptable compromise between restricting individual generator sizes vesrus restricting penetration levels.

i fully agree that such a restriction makes sense once you reach a 50% generator penetration. But the presently installed capacity in SA is negligible at the moment. There is clearly no risk to the electrical infrastructure at the moment and to force the few existing owners of systems > 3.5kW on a single phase supply to decommission their systems is in my view politically, economically and morally the wrong approach. We need a win win solution. 

Edited May 30, 20197 yr by Fuenkli

1200 registrations received by CoCT of which 450 have been processed and approved so far. Would be nice to know if this is just as part of current registration drive or in total + split between on and off-grid and how much storage is out there?

Interesting, so if each installation has 3kw of panels, then that would be about 3.6MW of generation capacity.

Was sent this video, quite interesting, seeing as SA is going to or trying to avert similar future issues.

Kane Thornton - am I missing it or is he not answering the questions?

No agreed minimum standards ... I really get more and more hope for CoCT. 🙂 

 

 

Man... I can play a drinking game with this video. Every time you spot a fallacy, drink up!

(Then again, I suspect only the philosophers and a few lay debaters will actually get drunk...)

For example: "You have a mini power-station on your roof, you would never do that with a coal station and not do the proper things". Yes, I agree that you need to do it right, but this is a very very poor argument. Solar power is not at ALL like a coal plant... 🙂

Then there's the whole equivocation of bad quality material with safety, or the lack of making a distinction. I've seen (at least one) bad Victron install(s), and I've seen plenty of very safe Axpert installs. The difference in quality isn't directly related to the safety of an install.

The issue with bad PV isolators (in Australia) has been known for years. Again, a house burning down is a bad thing but the failing component known to cause this isn't even exclusively a solar component (and entirely unrelated to the quality of the PV modules or anything else).

So it's again a bit of pop-journalism. Carte Blanche style. The general public eats it up. Those who know the stuff groan a little...

Even old Shrilly-voice Dave from EEVBlog had a switch fail on him. I found it particularly embarrasing that around 0:45 to 1-minute he displays a complete ignorance about why these switches are recalled, calling it "just a switch, on and off".

2 hours ago, plonkster said:

For example: "You have a mini power-station on your roof, you would never do that with a coal station and not do the proper things". Yes, I agree that you need to do it right, but this is a very very poor argument. Solar power is not at ALL like a coal plant... 🙂

You know when you teach little kids things, stuff that is important like i.e. why you must wear safety belts in even the new diesel 4x4 SUV's, do you always give them the University level maths explanations around the forces involved and therefor why safety belts are needed ... or do you use a easier analogy to explain the importance of it all? 

Everyone knows coal stations are complex ... just saying.

Listening to the interviews, the general take-away I got was that we all like cheap, and that it has a consequence sometimes, especially where there are no national standards to guide us cheap scates. So the warnings I picked up is not about the few knowledgeable people who could be affronted by some of the whatshallwecallit - "baby talk"? - it is about the masses who want to save a dime and installers who want to make that dime, to make them sit up and think for a moment.

And I have read of cheap panels being "dumped" in the past on countries.

And remember, we are forced in CoCT to get CoC's AND a engineering report, rest of SA is not, they can install what they want how they want.

 

Edited June 3, 20197 yr by Guest

2 hours ago, plonkster said:

Even old Shrilly-voice Dave from EEVBlog had a switch fail on him. I found it particularly embarrasing that around 0:45 to 1-minute he displays a complete ignorance about why these switches are recalled, calling it "just a switch, on and off".

Yeah, Dave should know better than that. Sigh.

Rooftop isolators are a national disgrace. They need to be struck off as a requirement. Then everyone should really get theirs taken out, in such a way that they can't go high resistance, of course.

22 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Everyone knows coal stations are complex ... just saying.

Yeaaaah... I get what you are saying. I also kinda know the editor likely picked that little bit out of a larger conversation as a bombshell conclusion moment. But didn't you get the feeling they were trying to put that Kane guy into a bad light (likely also with some clever editing)? A bit of a he-said-she-said thing.

Example: First they show him saying "I don't think we have a problem", followed by "only 1% is inspected and 1/6 of those are substandard (and 1/30 unsafe)". See what they did there?

"An unsafe rating is not as bad as it sounds" (clever choice of words, pretty sure that is not what was said), followed by Kane clearly answering a question from a different context.

Next scene... house burned down. Hint "solar inverter went off". Nudge batteries in the garage. No proof, just speculation. Next scene: isolator switch (here the unsuspecting viewer is led to believe it's part of the same trend... is it?). The isolator switch is a known issue, has been known for years, there has been recalls. See what they did there? Conferred the certainty of the latter onto the former.

Kane is back on. What he is saying is "maybe these switches don't actually make the system safer, let's look again at what the intent was". Are they making systems less safe she asks? Now that is an ambiguous question, again, he looks like the ass who disagrees in the face of all the evidence.

There are other subtle hints. Do you notice how they show the installers taking off the old panels... but not installing the new ones? Tiny tiny thing, but those empty roofs at the end of the scene is not for nothing.

Next part of the story. OMG we're going to make the same mistake with batteries. 60k of them installed... with no rules! And Kane get's slotted in again "calm down, no need for concern".

"But... not the only issue.. our taxes are going towards reducing CO2 but actually doesn't..."

This was not a balanced story at all.

I will give you one point though: Yes, some kind of rule set is required. Gotta have SOME standards!

Edited June 3, 20197 yr by plonkster

tl;dr 🙂

5 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Was sent this video, quite interesting, seeing as SA is going to or trying to avert similar future issues.

Thanks, it was interesting.

5 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

No agreed minimum standards ... I really get more and more hope for CoCT. 🙂 

You're way too trusting 😉

2 hours ago, Coulomb said:

Rooftop isolators are a national disgrace.

Looks like it. 

4 hours ago, plonkster said:

Every time you spot a fallacy, drink up!

🤣

If anyone would like to check their solar panels against Oz's current CEC approved list, it can be found here.

Here is some interesting news - from Europe:

Inverters MUST Comply with New Grid Certification

With the new certification now in full force, this will mean some inverters cannot be registered with the DNO. 

After 27th April any generators connected to UK distribution must comply with Engineering Recommendation (EREC) G98 and G99. These two regulations, published by the Energy Networks Association (ENA), replace the G83/2 and G59/3 respectively.

Any older G83/G59 inverters that are not compliant with G98/G99 will not be legally allowed to be connected to UK distribution network and will become not fit for purpose. 

There will be more news on G98/99 certification, what it means, what purpose it serves, and what would happen if an installer registered a non-compliant inverter after April 27th. Look out on the news page. 

Please be aware if inverters from elsewhere are offered at unusually low prices they may be non-compliant old stock and therefore useless. 

Please note: devices that fully comply with EREC G99 can be connected in advance of 27 April 2019 as they also comply with the pre-existing EREC G59 requirements.

As well as compliant inverters there are new application forms for all connection applications where the connection is required on or after 27 April 2019 and the G59/G83 Standard Application Form will be no longer accepted. 

(Even ranges similar to SA ... )

Connection of Generation < 3.68W (G83 & G98)

Connection of Generation > 3.68kW (G59 & G99)

Download PDF's of each certification:
G83/2 will be replaced with G98 (systems up to 16A per phase)

G59/3 will be replaced with G99 (systems over 16A per phase)

Edited June 4, 20197 yr by Guest

1 hour ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Here is some interesting news - from Europe:

This time I did read your entire post 😛 (My apologies really... I was being an ass the other day).

Indeed, the European testing houses are completely overloaded. And I know the Brits also overhauled theirs recently, which is what you posted about.

My rant isn't really about the need for rules and standards. Those are good. What I hate is a kind of equivocation going on, when an entire industry is smeared with a small part of its problems, or when the need for regulation in one area is used to justify regulating another without arguing for such justification. It is entirely possible for CoCT to be right about the need for standards, but wrong about their insistence on how it ought to be done (which is what we argued for weeks) 🙂

 

2 minutes ago, plonkster said:

(My apologies really... I was being an ass the other day).

I got the chance to respond in kind, and I know it generated smiles all over. 🤣

3 minutes ago, plonkster said:

It is entirely possible for CoCT to be right about the need for standards, but wrong about their insistence on how it ought to be done ...

I really don't see where they are wrong? NRS has set limits, so they are enforcing it. What am I missing?

3 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

I really don't see where they are wrong? NRS has set limits, so they are enforcing it. What am I missing?

No no no, I agree with you there. I also don't see them really getting this very wrong (except for not allowing Quattros with a Ziehl maybe). They are definitely getting this more right than wrong.

I'm saying beware of arguing from the source: CoCT is right about matter A, therefore they are right about tangentially related matter B. I'm essentially cutting the people who have disagreements with CoCT a bit of slack... or attempting to!

How many times have you heard: They thought Einstein/Copernicus/Galileo was wrong... but then he really was right (ie, the argument goes: People called Einstein wrong, but he was right. People call me wrong... therefore I am right). Each item has to be argued for separately 🙂

But now I am really just beating a dead horse.

1 minute ago, plonkster said:

... B. I'm essentially cutting the people who have disagreements with CoCT a bit of slack... or attempting to!

But now I am really just beating a dead horse.

Jip, you are.
I posted the CoCT intentions last year on this forum. People knew that it was coming, they bought what they bought. They cannot now throw your toys.
AND CoCT said: Ask first BEFORE you buy. 🙂 

And some of the comments about me and trust. Not for one moment do I "trust" the government / politicians but CoCT is trying really hard, and they learn as we saw with us and Rautenk pushing re. the changeover switch. Someone just needs ot push as hard the Ziehl and Victron combination. From various angles that is. 🙂 

I have a gut feel CoCT is driving this with a purpose i.e. need to be able to be more self reliant in the future, homework on the network is done, systems in place can handle it, so that CoCT can become less beholden to Eskom, as there is no solution for Eskom and this city of ours must grow, and to grow, we need security of power.

Why else would CoCT give a damn if Eskom / ANC does not? 

And I'm pretty sure if the DA lost / or loses to the ANC recently or in the future, these enforcement of the regulations would be left by the wayside.

There is a plan behind because we can already operate semi without Eskom. It scares the dinges our of Eskom / ANC.

Hi, the post heading reads "is your system legal..." so I thought I would share some of the interesting discussion I had with CoCT officials today.  I am trying to find out if I am the only one who has been given this line of reasoning as I would expect quite the outcry if it "got out" so to speak:

Context: Small system using an Axpert inverter (5kVA), 4kW of panels and a smallish battery bank.  It is connected correctly, COC, change over etc...  The application to CoCT was rejected for the following reason:

The maximum size of the "generator" on a 63A single phase connection is 3.5kVA.  

Ok, that is true for a grid tied system, but this is not a grid tied system.  We have proven lab results showing it is not and it cannot feed back.  I send all this documentation in, along with the argument that the size of the PV array is not relevant either as the PV power cannot ever make it back to he grid - it charges the batteries.  This argument gets accepted and I start to feel happy again. 

BUT THEN, I read further.  They are now saying that the size of the inverter from a load perspective is too big for the grid connection to the property, it has to abide by the 25% rule.  I then phone to clarify because surely this cannot be right, right?  I end up speaking to what I am told is the guy who makes the final call on this and he confirms that the size of the inverter (off grid or not) cannot be bigger than 25% of the grid connection.  So for a 63A single phase connection you are limited to a 3.5kVA inverter.  This is why:  If the inverter goes into "bypass" mode due to low battery / solar conditions the sudden demand on the network is what they are concerned about.  I would find it amusing but coming from this guy it is not.

We could not even get to logical questions like

• What is the main breaker for then? 
• What if my two 3kW geysers kick in at the same time?  That is much worse than the little inverter switching to grid power.

The fact that he referred me to the grid tied generation limitations (which I am very familiar with) in this conversation about an off grid inverter is very concerning and demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of the technology they are trying to regulate.

So my question to this group is:

Have you heard of this and do you have any suggestions on how and who to take this up with in the CoCT structure?  If they are really going to apply nonsensical rules like this one cannot blame the crowd who suggests there is something sinister behind all the regulation like trying to stem the spread of PV in the City.  I have never been in that camp for the record.

Greetings

1 hour ago, Hannes7212 said:

BUT THEN, I read further.  They are now saying that the size of the inverter from a load perspective is too big for the grid connection to the property, it has to abide by the 25% rule.  I then phone to clarify because surely this cannot be right, right?  I end up speaking to what I am told is the guy who makes the final call on this and he confirms that the size of the inverter (off grid or not) cannot be bigger than 25% of the grid connection.  So for a 63A single phase connection you are limited to a 3.5kVA inverter.  This is why:  If the inverter goes into "bypass" mode due to low battery / solar conditions the sudden demand on the network is what they are concerned about.  I would find it amusing but coming from this guy it is not.

When I started asking solar installers last year for off-grid assitance, I got quoted grid tied engineering fees to sign a off-grid install off - it does not need signing off!

They got confused badly.

So, I suspect some lines are being crossed here.

Fact one: Axpert is off-grid i.e. it is nowhere near the DB board per se, separate circtuis and all that, so it has NO effect whatsoever ito bypass mode and sudden demand.
Fact two: Therefor by deduction the size has got nothing to do with the house breaker, as it is nowhere near it, so you can make the system as big as you want to, off-grid.

Or am I crossing lines here?

Did you register your system as off-grid or did you fill in the forms for grid tied?

Edited June 4, 20197 yr by Guest