Jump to content

My application has gone in...


bushman10
 Share

Recommended Posts

My deal with the supplier is that they need to manage the entire application process. If the application fails then I am not buying the kit as the kit and installation need to comply to all the Muni standards. If the application succeed then the deal goes ahead. Once the installation is starting I will post pictures

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My deal with the supplier is that they need to manage the entire application process. If the application fails then I am not buying the kit as the kit and installation need to comply to all the Muni standards. If the application succeed then the deal goes ahead. Once the installation is starting I will post pictures

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Clever there is more than enough motivation to get your application through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have received the good news today that Paarl municipality have approved - "Your application to install and commission a photo-voltaic embedded generation system has been approved". The conditions are pretty generic but the interesting one is - "c. That exported energy into the municipal network may not exceed the total of energy normally imported from the municipal network. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Mike said:

thats the problem, they only pay you up to and equal to what you purchase from them. meaning you always have to pay in.......

They really have no choice. Legislation forbids them from buying electricity from you. Only Eskom may actually buy electricity. What municipalities do is rebate you for what you push back so that it is "technically" not buying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CoC has identified this problem few years back, over and above the legislation, that if everyone feeds in, it will become rather problematic.

Some states in the US of A and countries in Europe, after years of buying back, are now wanting, or have, put in a grid connection fee, and reducing what they pay you.

Over and above the concerns of big business with large fat profits, it is not as simple as we like to believe it to be. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the bottom line is that if you are installing a GTI system just to lower your bill, all good and well, but there are folks that think its about selling all your excess back monthly and being in credit. It is just not worth it going overboard. I am guilty in part,as i do legal net metering but not with COCT and i return approx 1mw per month of my surplus energy for free, that i would love to give my non existent neighbors.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see the problem. At night I can not generate and will consume from the grid. During the day time the plan is to produce more than my daily use. The extra production is then offset against my night time consumption. In this manner my electricity account is zero. I see it as baby steps for the minicipality so that one day they may pay me back when their systems allow it. If I actually got paid our money then it would be deemed as income by SARS and then I will have to pay tax on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wetkit said:

Hi Mike, you sure about the 1 MW per month?

1000kwh is a lot!!!

I told you the Imeon works, Since i installed the test unit, here are the monthly:

November reading 00000- 988,20kw  = 988kw

December 988,20 - 2065,66 = 1177,46kw

January 2065,66 - 3151,71  = 1086,05kw

Feb 3151,71 -- today ( 3972,0)  = 820,29kw.....we still have a few days to go for the month , should get to approx 1005kw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, bushman10 said:

I don't see the problem. At night I can not generate and will consume from the grid. During the day time the plan is to produce more than my daily use. The extra production is then offset against my night time consumption. In this manner my electricity account is zero. I see it as baby steps for the minicipality so that one day they may pay me back when their systems allow it. If I actually got paid our money then it would be deemed as income by SARS and then I will have to pay tax on it.

you will never be at zero, as the municipality charges more for what you would use at night, as opposed to what you would export during the day, You can expect to pay around 60% less than you do now. I do not think we in S.A will ever see the Muni or Eskom paying the residential user back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup the setup has not been cheap. My current average consumption as measured for the last 18 months has averaged out at 857 kWh per month with a max of 1107.3 kWh for 1 month when my wife used her glass blowing kiln a lot. I am still ignorant in all matters related to kWh so hope I interpreted the stats correctly.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bushman10 said:

I don't see the problem. At night I can not generate and will consume from the grid. During the day time the plan is to produce more than my daily use. The extra production is then offset against my night time consumption. In this manner my electricity account is zero. I see it as baby steps for the minicipality so that one day they may pay me back when their systems allow it. If I actually got paid our money then it would be deemed as income by SARS and then I will have to pay tax on it.

On that link the TTT posted about thw Camel- vs the Duck-shaped power curve (another thread here), that's where you'll see the problem.

 

The problem is that power stations are slow beasts. Some are really slow, like Nuclear. Nuclear takes days to weeks to spin up. Coal takes hours. Pumped storage is in the range of minutes, as is Gas/Diesel peaking plants.

 

With lots of solar being pumped into the grid, your 3PM-9PM ramp (on the chart) becomes very steep, and you can't spin stations up fast enough to deal with it. In other words, large scale pumping of energy into the grid destabilises the whole system (when not properly managed). And then you take it all back between 7 and 9... you're actually not doing them a favour :-)

 

Of course, the operative phrase there is: when not properly managed. There are ways to manage it, but I suspect there are other problems in SA as well: Aging equipment, a grid that really wasn't built with this in mind...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a note on current Nuclear Power Stations regarding Load following:

The current EU regulations require that Nuclear Power Plants (generation III and III+) be capable of a minimum daily load cycling operation between 50 - 100 % Pwith a rate of change of electric output of 3 - 5 % PR / minute.

Some NPP designs are even capable of power changes in the range of 3 - 5 % PR / Second.

France and Germany operate their Nuclear Plants in Load following mode. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that Koeberg has the capability to do load following as it was designed and built in an era (I think) that considered Nuclear as a base load station. (Built in the late 70's early 80's and commissioned in 1984/5) As the fuel costs are relatively cheap it makes sense to run it flat out. 

Koeberg operates at 100% PR  and only reacts to major grid events such as at a certain high grid frequency it will automatically reduce power. Also at a low grid frequency it will open the 400 KV breaker and try and island itself.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...