COCT extends Registration date for Solar systems

[Mike]

Kaylynn Palm | 34 minutes ago

CAPE TOWN - The City of Cape Town has extended its registration date for solar photovoltaic systems to May.

The initial closing date was 28 February.

The city says the main reason that registration is required is to ensure the safety of its staff, adding that information on where these systems exist can be used for electricity demand control and quality of supply management.

The municipality says it does not charge for the registration of solar PV systems.

However, if people fail to register by 31 May, they will pay a R6,400 service fee for the removal of unauthorised small-scale embedded generation.

The city's Phindile Maxiti said: “If it is not registered, it will be very dangerous for our contractors because they won’t know if the system is connected to the grid or not if we don’t do this registration. We want to make sure that our people are safe because now and then the contractors of the City of Cape Town have to go out and fix electricity.

[SOLARWIND]

This is a feeble excuse as it is impossible for a small inverter to power a whole neighborhood! They will always be safe, because the solar systems will trip out the moment the city power goes off!

The main reason is interference with private owners and to know where and how much they are losing out on revenue.Safety is just a nice excuse.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SOLARWIND said:

This is a feeble excuse as it is impossible for a small inverter to power a whole neighborhood!

I have a question. We keep on focusing on the transformers, neighborhoods.

Our house is connected to a box in the street, right, where our old electricity meter used to be. Now we have PAYG, both meters send power both ways.
That box is locked, for safety reasons, electricians wants to open it, he needs to log a call or face some serious penalties.
Once I saw inside 3 or 4 neigbours street no's on some of the other meters in that same box.

So, if someone works inside that box, whilst my inverter happily is pushing out the max it can, as there is a draw from other homes, daytime, all gone to work, as I installed it myself, from my DB via the wires to that box in the street, what would happen to the person working inside there?

Can anyone put their head on a block, or as an electrician/engineer, sign of that that inverter, feeding happily back to that box at max the panels can give, that box being connected to a house or more in the street drawing power, as absolutely 100% safe, no one can ever get hurt or worse?

 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Guest

[SOLARWIND]

5 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

I have a question. We keep on focusing on the transformers, neighborhoods.

Our house is connected to a box in the street, right, where our old electricity meter used to be. Now we have PAYG, both meters send power both ways.
That box is locked, for safety reasons, electricians wants to open it, he needs to log a call or face some serious penalties.
Once I saw inside 3 or 4 neigbours street no's on some of the other meters in that same box.

So, if someone works inside that box, whilst my inverter happily is pushing out the max it can, as there is a draw from other homes, daytime, all gone to work, as I installed it myself, from my DB via the wires to that box in the street, what would happen to the person working inside there?

Can anyone put their head on a block, or as an electrician/engineer, sign of that that inverter, feeding happily back to that box at max the panels can give, that box being connected to a house or more in the street drawing power, as absolutely 100% safe, no one can ever get hurt or worse?

 

That box is always connected to the area distribution transformer of  50 kVA or much more in some instances.     The transformer in turn, is part of the grid, even on its primary side, so theoretically power can be fed back through the transformer (at 11 000 V in most cases). This transformer is thus connected (via a sub station or wires) to various other transformers in the area. At the time of a power failure from the utility side, your 1 kVA/5 kVA or what else, could theoretically be trying to feed the whole area's consumers, which is a dead short as "seen" by a small inverter, so it WILL trip. If there is more than one consumer with inverters running, the sum of their ratings are still way less than the kVA rating of the supply authority. with a grid tie inverter, your grid tie may "see" another grid tie as the "grid" and stay on briefly (20 ms?), then "sees" the overload and die and so will each and everyone of the other inverters in the area.This scenario will take place virtually immediately following a power failure from the utility.

By the time the repair team arrives, everything will be off.

 

[Guest]

I agree 100% with this ... being one of the reasons of the non-engineers, the political one ...  

3 hours ago, SOLARWIND said:

The main reason is interference with private owners and to know where and how much they are losing out on revenue.

but ... 

1 hour ago, SOLARWIND said:

... your grid tie may "see" another grid tie as the "grid" and stay on briefly (20 ms?), then "sees" the overload and die and so will each and everyone of the other inverters in the area.

We have about 650 houses in our neighborhood, maybe 1500-2000 houses in the valley.

Before the area was dark if Eskom goes off now,. Now most houses have lights on.

So say 1/3 - 1/2 of them now have grid tied inverters or grid connected UPS'es in the 5/10kva ranges.

Call it a easy 100 x 5kVA inverters. That is 50 000kVA.

So, taking that idea, can anyone say with absolute surety that 100's of 1/5/10kVA grid tied and other DB connected inverters in say our area, will all stop within 20ms after the grid goes off, in the area?

Anyone tested it?
Who takes the responsibility if someone is badly hurt, mutilated or even killed, because of 100's of people doing their own thing and connecting to DB's?

My friend lost a bunch of electrical appliance because of a wind farm feeding back to the not so small town he lived in. Was 110v or some such in his home when Eskom was on a load shedding schedule. He found the problem when he got shocked pulling a plug out touching the prongs with Eskom being "off". A pal of his tested the volts the next time the power went off.

And that is the problem, 100's or 1000's of inverters grid tied or grid connect powering DB's in an area, many being DIY installs.
And how many have actually gotten an electrician in to test their DB boards that their bondings are 100% correct. Mine was not. If it was not for the regulatory tests, we would never have known about it.

And THAT is the problem that needs regulations, the 100's or 1000s of grid connected inverters in an area. 
That is the engineering problem that must be solved - with regulations.

Edited February 5, 2019 by Guest

[___]

8 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

So, if someone works inside that box, whilst my inverter happily is pushing out the max it can, as there is a draw from other homes, daytime, all gone to work, as I installed it myself, from my DB via the wires to that box in the street, what would happen to the person working inside there?

That is what I also said repeatedly in the past. We're not only concerned with the "normal" situation where you have a nice big transformer down the street that will sink any and all power. We're also concerned with the fault scenario where something is open circuit and accidentally energising that line is exceedingly easy. We're also not only concerned with whether that accidental energy is a neat clean 230VAC RMS... no... if a fault develops inside your inverter and the high voltage DC bus leaks out... that is equally bad.

7 hours ago, SOLARWIND said:

That box is always connected to the area distribution transformer of  50 kVA or much more in some instances

Is it though? So an electrician might never want to isolate a part of the neighbourhood circuitry from the big transformer to perform some work? I'd say that is a dangerous assumption.

With all that said though, I also think the "safety" thing is either BS or we're getting it wrong. If safety (on the ground) is really the big concern, then you should be adding haste to this, not delay it. I think it's more a matter of getting their house in order, so to speak.

Edit: Well let me put it this way, of course safety is the number one concern, and of course rushing into a thing has safety repercussions... so maybe safety is the reason. There might have been many others, but this might have been the overruling one. Let's not always assume people are idiots...

Edited February 6, 2019 by plonkster

[Fuenkli]

I also think that the safety aspect is overemphasized. Whenever we have a power failure here in Plattekloof (because of the shifting ground we have a lot of them) I go and speak to the repair crew to find out what the problem is and how they fix it. What struck me is that they ALWAYS short the live wire they work on to ground with a big heavy duty cable and earth spike. They also told me, that they never had a problem with an inverter back feeding power into a dead grid. I am however in favor of registering/checking grid connected PV systems but the process should be MUCH quicker and simpler. I think the city is seriously paranoid about this and that it has more pertinent challenges it should channel its scares resources and money to.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, plonkster said:

Let's not always assume people are idiots.

Plus one on that.

It is not about assuming ones own little inverter/s being the center piece of it all.
It is not for the repair people to assume that if it has not happened before, it will never happen. Titanic comes to mind.
It is not about assuming the inverters we are installing are safe ... with no "papers" to back that up.
It is not about assuming a transformer/s are the safety net ... who even knows how many transformers are in ones vicinity, or the / their size?
Assuming most of the regulatory changes are in fact applied.
Assuming all DB's are properly bonded.

Lots of assumptions if you ask me.

It is about how many inverters are connected to DB's in ones own area, maybe even connected to the same transformer.
It is about having "papers" for the grid connected inverters in lieu of SABS certification.
It is about experienced people at the forefront of this at CoCT whom has been at it since before 2010, before most of us even knew we want solar. 
It is about suitably qualified electrical engineers being in that mix too ...

 

50 minutes ago, plonkster said:

... the "safety" thing is either BS or we're getting it wrong.

Until there is substantiated unquestionable proof from engineers I take the point of view that we, here, are getting it wrong.

The deeper I go down this rabbit hole of getting my system registered and signed off by an electrician and engineer, the backwards and forwards, the regulatory updates, the more it makes sense too me.

 

7 minutes ago, Fuenkli said:

ALWAYS short the live wire they work on to ground with a big heavy duty cable and earth spike.

Earthing it all assumes all the regulatory steps where taken.

I told this before. Electrician told me they where on a case where all was switched off, yet the one cable was still powered, cable being on no plan. They had to get a Master Electrician to come and cut it with a special suite and hacksaw. Electricity was all over that suite as he cut into that cable. It apparently was a epic thing to view.

 

[phil.g00]

Some light reading that demonstrates the real concerns about solar in the context of urban administration in South Africa.

resource_431.pdf

[ebrsa]

Notwithstanding all the dire predictions of imminent electrocution of repair personnel, I remember news reporting with photos of electricians working on live high tension grid feed lines at hundreds of thousands of volt. One night during a thunderstorm,  the municipal electrician fixed the pole fuse of one of the 3 phases feeding my house of that time in Randburg. The fuse failed with a spectacular bang and flash,  perhaps because of high load of the underfloor heating. He merrily fixed it while the grid was live and rain pouring down,  declining my offer of help to hold his ladder. In no time all was fixed and he loaded up his van and departed. That was when we still paid the municipality 34 cents per KWh. 

[phil.g00]

30 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

Some light reading that demonstrates the real concerns about solar in the context of urban administration in South Africa.

It is quite amazing how much thought goes into just fleecing people for the right amount of money to avoid illegal connections.

(And how illegal connections are not considered from a safety perspective, purely a financial one).

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

Some light reading that demonstrates the real concerns about solar in the context of urban administration in South Africa.

I found this part quite encouraging ... 

Key findings: Residential revenue impact
Based on the revenue impact modelling exercise, as well as an analysis of the impact on a range of specific example customers using different tariffs, the following can be concluded:

• There is potential for significant revenue gain for CoT from residential SSEG systems. The main reason for this is that CoT makes a profit from re-selling the SSEG power exported by customers, and residential sector SSEG typically exports significant power as their load profile is not daytime peaking.
• Having a balanced 3-part SSEG tariff is the most appropriate form of revenue protection for CoT. This document indicates appropriate tariffs which will serve this purpose, balancing revenue protection through suitable fixed and feed-in charges with customer payback considerations.
• Reverse feed blocking results in revenue reduction for CoT, because this forgoes the potential profit to be made from re-selling SSEG exported power.
• The biggest revenue loss takes place with illegal connections - i.e. the meter reverses, effectively paying the customer the full electricity purchase tariff for each SSEG kWh exported, while the distributor on-sells this power at a loss.

Proposed residential SSEG tariffs:

• Fixed charge: A charge of around R150 per month is shown to adequately protect revenue
• Energy charge: SSEG customers should remain on normal IBT energy charges (which average around R1.50/kWh for mid-income users)
• Feed-in tariff: A value of 83c/kWh together with the above fixed charge will adequately protect revenue (this value is based on the Cost of Supply Study average avoided Eskom costs per kWh)

Very much along the lines of what CoCT would want to do, NERSA being the issue.
The fixed charge of R150 already in place in CoCT.
The 83c/kWh ex VAT along the lines of what Munic's pay Eskom, so same as in CoCT.

Would just add that they must install the bi-directional meter free of charge.  

 

8 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

And how illegal connections are not considered from a safety perspective ...

It is a problem, a huge one, and they warn people about illegally connecting in the media. Problem is to police it all.

Finding them in residential areas, reversing that meter, is a problem ito man hour costs read more of our taxes wasted.
I'm thinking people reversing their meters on purpose to duck paying their electricity bill are in the same category as someone who steals my taxes for personal gain. 

And who is brave enough to go into a townships / informal settlements and disconnect those people en-mass? I won't dare. Would write that off as acceptable losses and move on, justifying that by seeing that single mother with her children doing homework late at nigh with lights, whilst cooking food for her children, who cannot afford electricity ever ... makes that ok by me.  

 

59 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

I remember news reporting with photos of electricians working on live high tension grid feed lines at hundreds of thousands of volt.

Like these? The best of the best

Like this man? https://gearjunkie.com/high-tension-wire-inspector-job-epic-occupation

Check that video, live wires. And those chopper pilots ... that precision and trust. Respect.

It is a very high risk highly paid job. Whole different ballgame than the DB box in your street.

45 minutes ago, ebrsa said:

He merrily fixed it while the grid was live ...

I have also done stupid things along similar lines, not switching off, as it takes time and patience. I got shocked, blew stuff up. So he was either very lucky or just damn good.

Won't assume that for the 1000's of workers, loved ones, that one incident like this makes it ok for everyone to do.  

[SOLARWIND]

1 hour ago, Fuenkli said:

I also think that the safety aspect is overemphasized. Whenever we have a power failure here in Plattekloof (because of the shifting ground we have a lot of them) I go and speak to the repair crew to find out what the problem is and how they fix it. What struck me is that they ALWAYS short the live wire they work on to ground with a big heavy duty cable and earth spike. They also told me, that they never had a problem with an inverter back feeding power into a dead grid. I am however in favor of registering/checking grid connected PV systems but the process should be MUCH quicker and simpler. I think the city is seriously paranoid about this and that it has more pertinent challenges it should channel its scares resources and money to.

True, IF there are 100's or 1000's of grid-tied inverters in a specific area, and IF the ESKOM supply to the WHOLE area is ISOLATED WITHOUT EARTHING AS A PRECAUTION, THEN and only THEN will there be a local "grid" which could be live. I agree, there should be safety regulations in place to be 100% safe and I agree that they should rather be strict on the Certificate of Compliance by a duly Authorised person and that the CoC makes provision in the Test Report section thereof that the signatory thereof certifies the safety of the system as a whole. It is ESKOM or the Municipality that should brush up on safety and KNOW that there is nowadays always the possibility of reverse power on the system.THEY are the ones that should make their equipment safe before touching it. (This is the reason for EXISTING safety rules which state that they should TEST, ISOLATE AND EARTH. - NOTHING NEW).

[phil.g00]

56 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

I'm thinking people reversing their meters on purpose to duck paying their electricity bill are in the same category as someone who steals my taxes for personal gain. 

I interpreted the meter reversal mentioned in the paper to mean the reversal that happened when someone with an illegal solar installation generated power and because the meter reversed he was essentially selling power back at the same price he was paying for it. And that was the concern, not actual meter tampering.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

I interpreted the meter reversal mentioned in the paper to mean the reversal that happened when someone with an illegal solar installation generated power and because the meter reversed he was essentially selling power back at the same price he was paying for it.

Without a newly installed bi-directional meter, it cannot be measured therefor one cannot claim a refund.

The older meters turn back, so it shows a "credit" where there is none. If the person is sharp they use the power again the next day, week, to not flag a credit on the bill, or they have a small monthly average charge. Read meter tampering.

There where mentions of electricians actually "helping" people to do that ... for a fee.

These newer bi-directional meters, to accurately do the in/out calcs, would require a system upgrade at most if not all Munics. And I read somewhere Eskom stated they cannot upgrade their systems to do that, even if they wanted to, at this point in time.

This whole grid tied thing is not cutting edge in SA. It is bleeding edge with USA and Europian experiences around this a guideline for what can happen over time, the good and the not so good. 

[phil.g00]

28 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

The older meters turn back, so it shows a "credit" where there is none. If the person is sharp they use the power again the next day, week, to not flag a credit on the bill, or they have a small monthly average charge. Read meter tampering.

Meter tampering I am sure is rife, but that is the type of meter tampering that can happen with or without solar.

However, when a meter runs backwards because of correct power flow all that happens is your power gets sold to someone else by the authorities at full price.

It just that the authorities want to insert themselves into that transaction for an extra piece of the action.

It quite clear from that paper that they are carefully considering how much they can skin you for, while still keeping you working for them.

That's exploitation on their behalf.

Edited February 6, 2019 by phil.g00

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

That's exploitation on their behalf.

I see it differently.

If more and more people are going solar, grid tied and feeds back, Munic's buy from us at same rate as they pay Eskom, that would be very good for SA.

Less taxes wasted on Eskom fiasco's.

I would fill my roof with panels, sit back and enjoy the income.

[phil.g00]

3 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Munic's buy from us at same rate as they pay Eskom, that would be very good for SA.

Most people would also consider that to be fair.

And by extension of that logic, if I am fed-direct from ESKOM could my meter run backwards?

[___]

12 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

If more and more people are going solar, grid tied and feeds back, Munic's buy from us at same rate as they pay Eskom, that would be very good for SA.

When they buy from Eskom, the line that brings it to them is maintained by Eskom, so the price per unit includes the upkeep of the power line and related equipment. To make the situation analogous, you'd also have to pay for the maintenance of your grid connection separately... which many of us now already does, at least in part (the R150/month connection fee). I half suspect that R150 doesn't quite pay all of it though.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

Most people would also consider that to be fair.

Jip, for see, that is what CoCT has had on the table since day one. Now Tswane also.

Problem is over 12 month period you cannot be in credit, them owing you. Constitution blocks them all currently, as only Eskom can sell power. Therein the net metering concept today.

Hold thumbs for what Cyril wants to propose to fix Eskom. It MAY be the start of new things, splitting Eskom into three, then allowing generation to be sources from anywhere.

13 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

... , if I am fed-direct from ESKOM could my meter run backwards?

Jip, with Eskom, same applies, if the meter is old and/or broke.
And they don't have the manpower to trace you - still theft of my taxes. 

Edited February 6, 2019 by Guest

[phil.g00]

2 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

It MAY be the start of new things, splitting Eskom into three

That's akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

3 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

then allowing generation to be sources from anywhere.

Yes, I have heard the talk of deregulation, that might be interesting for solar.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, phil.g00 said:

That's akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Ja, like so: https://www.bustle.com/p/titanic-ii-a-replica-of-the-titanic-will-set-sail-in-2022-after-delays-12807341

 

[phil.g00]

Some more light reading this time Cape town specific:

resource_282.pdf

Seems to me the plan is the COCT is just going to adjust a fixed price charge for connection to the grid.

And adjust it regular to make sure that even if you make your own power you're still gonna pay.

Edited February 7, 2019 by phil.g00

[Guest]

1 hour ago, phil.g00 said:

Seems to me the plan is the COCT is just going to adjust a fixed price charge for connection to the grid.

That doc was Feb 2014. 10 years they said then, we are 5 years down that road.

Since 2014 Eskom failures made that document all but moot. 

Then last year enter the connection fee of R150 ex VAT per month, to cover Munic grid maintenance, as everyone has dropped Eskom purchases.

And don't forget, late last year Cpt said that the Munic can keep the power on, if the draw is low, when Eskom could not.

Where this is going, no idea, but my gut tells me if they can legally buy "local" and not from Eskom, they would do that.

[___]

14 hours ago, phil.g00 said:

Seems to me the plan is the COCT is just going to adjust a fixed price charge for connection to the grid.

Yup. And again, like typical South Africans, lots of people assume malice.

Many many places in South Africa have a connection feel. You pay for the privilege of having the connection, and then you pay for whatever you use on top. You know... like a Telkom phone line, or like your car that costs you a bunch of money before you've driven the first mile. In Cape Town, the "connection fee" got bundled into the unit price, and now they are unbundling it, and you are absolutely right: This is to ensure that you still pay for the maintenance of the grid when you start cutting on your consumption.