Touching on a comment I made in another thread, this may be a way of generating cheap power.

First you need solar on your roof, with a feed in to the grid.

At present, in QLD we are being paid higher prices for the power we sell, than what we pay to buy. Typically, 44cents in and 29cents out (I think)

Now there is talk about the QLD government squashing this arrangement, which would see us being paid more like 8 cents in and 29 cents out.

So, if you have the system in place, and the sell price drops below the buy price, you can look at this alternative.

You install a battery bank, quality batteries, like used in stand alone systems now, you also need an inverter and a large capacity battery charger.

So what you do during the day is use the solar power (FREE) to charge your battery bank, then, you switch to batteries at night, which, provided your bank is large enough, will provide free power.

Now if you have those dreaded rainy days, you then charge your batteries on the 'off peak rate', at night, then switch your batteries on for day use, which won't mean free power, but it will be better than the 29 cents you would normally pay.

Of cause it all has to be costed, but one thing is for certain in my view, and that is that power costs are goimg to continue to rise and paying as much as $1 per KW is very possible in the not too distant future.

I have looked at several Solar setups & some are really impressive. You wouldn't want one though in a hail risk area or be aound trees because those panels ain't made for any impact whatsoever. perhaps if Lexan could be used it would work.
My argument about these things like windpower & solar is that the manufacturing of it its 5 times more polluting than burning coal or so it appears.
I suppose people go for solar & wind because of cost with environmental impact being a second or third consideration when it really should be #1. What people should do is to curb their demand & that would turn the tables properly.

Individual>> What people should do is to curb their demand & that would turn the tables properly.<<

Global de population would work just as well Indy.

So do we nuke em, sterilize them, or take their means of paying for the power away.

sonofgloin,
You'll find my opinion to that dilemma on the other thread. No nuking, none of that radical nonsense, Birth control is all that's needed.
Going back to power, wastage is the greatest use of power. Airconditioning is next, that's on the domestic side. On the commercial side you have waste on 747's flying 10000km with 30 people on board. Too much transport with hardly a thought for service efficiency is a huge waste of resources & cause of pollution. Just look at the trucking industry, huge trucks running backwards & forwards instead of using rail. look at the insane plastics industry, they'r probably the worst wasters of petroleum & for what ? To produce ridiculously idiotic products that are discarded two minutes after purchase. That, my dear young feller is where the wastage is most prominent. How does it happen ? Stupid consumers being exploited by callous manufacturers who have to produce to keep up with Government charges to handsomely reward the masses of bureaucrats for nothing.

Rechtub many out back and near towns homes are isolated from the power grid.
So use this form of power as stand alone.
Modern battery's.
Not old fashioned work quite well, costs are if you take in maintenance about the same, some times cheaper.
I am unsure of what QLD is paying, but know they are proposing 8 cents, [for excess power made by solar owners, windmills for that matter]
I think , firmly your stated system will find more use in the future as both battery's and panels become more effective.
Here, well able to be on the grid a local runs a system like that it cost 25 thousand dollars.
He will need a lot of years to pay for it if his reason was cost..

For those that get a higher price for their solar generated power
I have a money making scheme.
You get a DC power supply and feed its output into the solar cell
circuit and provided the losses do not exceed the difference between
buy and sell prices you are in front.

I wonder if there is anyone in gaol that has tried that, but then
perhaps the law has not caught up with that.

Yes belly, there are more and more opting for stand alone, as just to have power connected, even if it runs through, or past your property is outrageous in costs.

This idea is for those on the grid, with solar, because if you receive less for your solar credits than you pay for power from the grid, why sell it, why not use it to your benefit.

As for the credits, any system installed post July 1 will earn only 8 cents per KW sold, whereas those who got in before are on as high as 56 cents, depending on when you signed and who you signed with.

There will be some very upset people if the contracts are torn up.

rehctub,

Other consumers are subsidising the quick-witted who had the $$ to one side to put solar generation in early. Any payment for power in during daylight hours is a waste of money and must be offset by higher charges to other consumers.

Solar water heating is a better bet. But there again, consumers who had already made the personal investment in gas water heating were denied the solar hot water subsidy.

For those who are at home of a day and use a lot of power during daylight hours it could make sense to buy a German-made solar (most German brands are now made in China so beware) installed by a quality tradesman whose real warranty lasts longer than it takes for the tradie's ute to leave your driveway. Buy just enough power generation to meet your peak daytime consumption.

Without poring over it, a quick mental totting up of the numbers in my own case tells me that is the way to go. Although I would never have gone ahead with an installation when the government was paying everyone who could wield a battery drill to climb onto my roof to do damage. Always happy to be corrected by facts and numbers.

Rehub...may I add ...all new housing must have this by law.........but what would happen to poor souls of big money?

Greens.

Planet3

Rehub...may I add ...all new housing must have this by law.........but what would happen to poor souls of big money do?

Greens.

Planet3

Had a long night planet 3 ?
It shows.
If it was true, that new homes must have it we would not need at least one power station.
If as my thread says, we who install it got a fair go many more would install solar panels feeding back in the the grid.
As NSW currently is those cashing in on solar are taking it from unpaid generators like me.
Even a committee of drunks could do it better than our current system Lords.

Belly, "If as my thread says, we who install it got a fair go many more would install solar panels feeding back in the the grid"

You are trying to be one of those capitalists you likely despise. The power station doesn't need you power. Other consumers don't want to pay higher electricity prices to subsidise your solar system.

BTW, it was the S&FP that protected the interests of home solar owners against the NSW govt who wanted to renege on previous agreements. Not something you might like to admit, but the S&FP has probably delivered more for you than your Labor.

The future is higher energy prices and "time of use" meters. The electricity providers (not you) will guarantee their profits.

You have the wrong view of home solar power. You need to think of your investment being to reduce the effect of escalating electricity prices.

That is why I suggested that you should be happy with a unit that covers you for your daytime use. For the retired, it can help with the budget. They can have the luxury of cheap or 'no-extra-cost' power during the day, but unless they were part of the canny well-off who got in early, they will not make an earner out of selling to 'the man'. They will still need to be careful in the evening - or go to bed early.

For those who are away during the day (and were not some of the canny well-off who got in early), a 2.5 output from the panels and a 5 inverter just in case is more than enough.

Disagreement anyone?

Belly,

I should have added that the ATO is said to be looking at power sold back to the power company as a form of income, which arguably it is.

The ATO has hundreds of accountancy types with soft blue-white hands and nothing to do but look for more ways to increase the tax base to add to the size of ATO's ant hill.

Expect a knock on your door. LOL

Onthebeach, another area the ATO may look at is capital gains tax, as in all fairness, you are generating an income from your residence.

I would suggest however that they take a real hard look before any such move, as the reaction to that would see many claiming their deductions, or at the very least, a fair portion of them.

In fact, if the ATO does tax on the income, one could argue that your residence IS USED to generate income, therefore deductions may be legal.

But, don't discount what i have suggest about using free solar power to charge batteries, because it could be very worth while, especially if power goes to $1.00 per KW.

It won't take too many 70% increases to get to that level.

Congrate,s onthebeach!
There have been some but in all the years I have been here [2005], yours is the silliest I ever saw.
In this thread and my own, time and again, I said I wanted not to profit but to get *a fair go*.
Rechtubs thread is about stand alone, my thought is both that and solar have a future, and benefit this country immensely.
The end result can be one less power station.
Abbott too wants to see another million homes on solar.
I never asked for profit and have beggar all chance of getting it!
Your childlike words are junk comment.
And find me some power generator that rejects the extra power they buy from me for 6 cents.
And sell [as green power] for 40, your maths are poor if you see profit in that for me.
And Bazz dislikes me, but in truth I respect the man he once was, a very special bloke, his bit about feeding in power company power and selling it for 60 cents is madness.
No power company would overlook the generating power of say ten panels and the out put after the crime.
To be honest those getting over the odds are thieving it from those who pay for it.
onthebeach read slowly, observe we both want fairness and equity your charge is madness.

Hey, Belly, who said I disliked you ?
We don't always agree, but so what !

Belly said;
his bit about feeding in power company power and selling it for 60 cents is madness.

Well, many things that are done are madness, but can I be the only one
to have thought of doing that ?
If you are one of those on the 60 cents a KWhr and you are buying at say
25 c a KWhr you could if you were cunning by only feeding in in
daylight hours if there was a time of day meter probably get away
with it.
So long as you did not go silly with it they would never know.
The question arises, is it in fact illegal ?

After all you are not stealing the power your DC power supply uses
and they have contracted to pay you for the power you feed in ?

I am sure if too many did it they would soon make it illegal.
I am just surprised that I have not heard of it being done.
Is it just my murky mind ?

On a related matter Belly, what sort of batteries do you use ?
Lithium Iron have been a great success in electric cars but are
rather expensive. However second hand car batteries should be close
to zero cost and easily obtained from car wreckers.
You would have to turn them over more often, but so what they cost next to nothing.

Belly, my thread is not about stand alone at all, it's about using your free solar power to charge batteries, rather than selling back to the grid at greatly reduced rates.

Alternatively, you can change your way of life (if possible), use your own power, then use cheaper off peak power to charge batteries.

Charge one bank one night, the other the next.

The bottom line is as sure as night follows day, power prices will continue to rise and, I have no doubt governments will try to recind any out of balance contracts for solar buy back, mainly because previous governments have lef the states in very poor shape, in most cases.

Belly, just to clarify this,unlike a stand alone system, my suggestion uses a battery charger to charge the batteries, not the panels, so only a portion of your solar power is used during the day.

I would suggest, worked properly, you would have zero power bill in the right whether conditions.

Bazz and Rechtub I understand you both, and am pleased Bazz is still a mate.
First my batterys are charged from solar power, 3 years old car battery's.
80 Watts two 40 watt panels, run two room lighting,ham radios, and black out proof me TV ext.
Yes I know just what you say Bazz but given the maximum potential of any given solar array, known to power supplier you are with, it would be hard to do.
Rechtub yes and it will be a part in the country,s future, just as it is now,by stand alone I talk of your answer battery,s charged in daylight and used at night.
My two KW will produce on average in the region of 10 units a day.
I use daylight hours about 5 units.
As my panels stop charging, [night] my unused generated power is sold back, at * 6 cents*
I then pay full yet to be proved *34 or 40 cents for all I use at night*
Strange?

rehctub,

Coming from the country and also liking 4X4 travel to remote areas I am familiar with providing one's own power. The greatest limiters for most in the suburbs would be how much power they use and when they use it.

City people do not put up with the minor discomforts and scheduling that allows them to reduce power usage, especially betrween dusk and dawn. Work also causes them to be away. when they should be at home consuming power. The hope is for a new way of storing power, because batteries are expensive, have a short life and don't store much energy.

Belly,

Just because another poster presents both sides of the case is no reason to attack him.

You need to see both sides of the home solar power generation argument. Don't be too confident that the power suppliers want your power, especially at hours of low load. They never suggested home power generation. That was Labor and to win green votes. If you can generate for peak load say at dusk you might have their ears. But the sun has set, hasn't it?

Again, other consumers most often low income earners and people on fixed incomes are subsidising home solar power and that is not fair. But above all of that, government itself wants to reduce unnecessary outgoings and cutting off subsidies that government always saw as seeding money, not a lifetime subsidy, is a way to do that.

As for ATO looking at the income from home power, yes they may and no, it wouldn't be like putting capital gains tax on the home residence where far more are affected. Also, deeming home power to be income earning does not require legislative change. It is just ATO doing its job.

Although the Greens want both death duties and capital gains tax on the family home, and the Gillard/Greens government flew those kites often. Do not discount the likelihood of capital gains tax on the family home if Labor is re-elected and has as usual overspent from the trough of taxpayers' money.

The solar power is not profitable in NSW, as it costs more to buy power during the night when demand is high and there is no sun, than what you get for returning into the grid during the day when domestic demand is low.

GEE onthebeach is not the only one who never reads or understands others posts.
Weak as water OTB!
Howard, then Labor, Abbott says so too, SUBSIDIZE solar power.
Unwanted? how silly is that?
Yes NSW is making solar power installation above a set thing not worth it.
That set thing is your personnel day time use.
Once more I use 15.37 units a day, averaged out over a year.
Will produce 12 units per day.same average.
Use 5 in daylight hours.
Sell 7 unused at 6 cents each.
Buy the other 10.37 units I use nightly.
Including my unused 7 , for them I pay before my 6 cents is returned 34 or 40 cents.
2 kw is a waste, for me 1.5 is the sweet spot, making little more ths an my daily use.
Those wanting and buying under contract green energy could be buying mine! for far more than I get.
*The claim that solar energy is unwanted is answered by governments continue to want more of us to install them*.

I must say I was breathless on reading your post OTB and rushed it to print.
On returning and re reading it is even stranger, even than your post above it.
I could and should have gone in at the start.
John Winston Howard, not Labor started it, not as you claim Labor.
Many could be forgiven for thinking he gave it to his supporters, *the middle class*
Few others could afford it then.
I came in late, and unlike many it is not for profit, not even to stop me getting a bill.
My best reward is in the maths.
I get one third reduction in my bill, even if prices rise.
That returns my $4.000 investment.
Others offer more KW for little more, but I am dealing with a local.
So are you aware Abbott has recently said *he wants to see another million houses with solar power*
I have lived in the true out back, I understand Rechtubs thoughts and agree.
Like another poster in this thread I am a ham radio hobbyist, and use remote mountain tops to place radio gear on, that has battery back up solar power.
Battery,s are better and get better every day.
I saw a whole run your home system last week, ready to go, one big giant battery, ten thousand dollars.
Like any true country dweller I too know , even if not in the bush, how to use limited resources.
You are trying to swim up a water fall in saying solar is unwanted.
I however seem to share one view with you.
Income is taxable from this system and in the end it should get a no tax paid break not be used to profit off others.
The tax should be removed at purchase and every one get the same no profit price country wide.

Generally the government and everybody else are looking at solar
generated power through the wrong lens.
There is so much fixation on global warming that they miss the real
problem.
The real problem is bit longer term and alternative energy will be needed.
If we do not take on nuclear energy, we will have to use geothermal and solar in a big way.
In the long term coal and natural gas will be unaffordable.
Oil has already reached its cost limit.
The cost of coal in other parts of the world is increasing in price
because the easy to get seams have been worked out.
As we shift transport from liquid fuels to natural gas the cost of gas will rise and it will last a lot less time.

Ultimately all energy will have to be electrical and we (the whole world)
will have to convert to electrical energy, so we better get a move on.

Storage will assume great importance. I agree any of the existing
batteries can only be a stop gap.

Bazz I support Nuclear power, we are not Japan and unlikely to ignore safety as they did at every stage from planning on.
I can not however support the view Governments right down to green energy fans are lunatics.
For if we do not want or need solar power billions has been wasted around the world.
Battery,s , long long ago have been in use far back when the only power for broadcast receivers was battery,s.
Even solar panels have gone ahead in leaps and bounds.
And a day will come that battery,s will be so far removed from todays.
I have the greatest confidence in our youth.
On a personal basis cutting my bill, by one third ensures I gain.
Just think, if Abbott got his one million more homes fitted how much we would return to grid, at my system, if all the others matched it?
7 million power units a day.

There is a problem with the amount of unreliable generation that can
be connected to the network.
As I understand it as a non-expert the problem is the time difference
between the rate at which the wind drops or rises and the time it takes
for standby power to ramp up or down.
The solar & wind can ramp up & down in just single digit minutes but
backup generation can take between 30 minutes and a couple of hours.

Even if my times are way out, there is still a big difference that
cannot avoid a network failure like they had in Germany some years back.

Returning to the OP, for the immediate future I cannot see how the risks, which include government (legislative) and new technology risks, could deliver a return to me in five years. Five years is stretching it where technology is changing rapidly and where overseas suppliers control the Aussie market for their benefit not ours.

Those who got in early should do OK, but only through grossly inflated, subsidised input prices.

So enhancements like home en ergy storage is not on. It will take a great leap in technology to make storage worthwhile. At present the risks and costs are not worth it.

Energy suppliers will go down the path of giving price directions to consumers. Unfortunately consumers must pay the price for overenthusiatic migration that continues to over-stretch infrastructure. Power and water will be expensive and restrictions, price and availability, will apply. That is the future. Kevin13 is a raging promoter of his 'Big Australia' too.

Bazz as a worker a very long time ago I worked on the construction of a power station.
Not all that long ago as a union official I watched a new one built next door.
One of a few many others to come, it is remote controlled.
Gas fired unmanned it is turned on a peak demand.
IF solar ever gets to the stage daylight generation is not wanted a fully operational power station could become one used only at night.
Too if made legal, those of us with roof panels could use our own daylight generated power, at the point of switching to the grid, to charge battery we then switch to at night.
Again a man once said every thing that could be invented had been , not so.
This area is in its infancy, and it will move in great leaps and bounds.

Hello Belly,
The gas fired stations that are going to be used as gap fillers can
get up and running very quick, but still not as fast as a bank of
clouds can cover an area with clouds.
They could use weather radar to watch for cloud cover coming and ramp
up in preparation. However wind would be another problem as they could
not know reliably when the wind was going to drop.

There are some pretty drastic situations involved with sudden power
failures in a city. Think of hospitals, office buildings etc etc.
Sure, No-Break generator sets are old hat but they cost a lot of
money and a lot more to have running on standby.
The main network problem is cascading failure around the network as
sudden load changes exceed local current limits and trip out breakers.

I don't agree that there is much room for very large improvement in
anything, we are reaching already the theoretical limits to many things
such as chemical reactions, mechanical devices and even computer speeds.
We are coming up against fundamental limits.

Bazz while much of what you say hes merit lets talk.
Just a few years ago a 20 watt panel cost over 700 dollars.
We, my group, are paying $250 for a 250 watt 24 volt one now.
In tossing this subject around last night on the air , our group includes electrician and more, we invented, well for us, a new thought.
We presumed in time our extra generated power would all be paid for at my level, 6 cents.
And are about to home brew, [make ourselves], large battery chargers.
and use that power not sell it back.
In charging battery,s we then switch to at night, night use only.
By washing cooking and only needing lights fridge freezer at night, TV too, our first trial will tell us.
We get battery,s free, ex remote site.
I however run new car battery,s

Belly,
As well as charging your batteries from solar cells, you are
charging them from off peak power, is that correct ?

What is the difference between your off peak rate and your daytime rate ?
It could be possible that the losses in the batteries and charger might
actually be less than the difference in price, hmmm.

I'll bet Terry is right into that scheme, hi !
Pity I can't hear your repeater here.
Give him my 73s.

Belly, "I however run new car battery,s"

Which are cranking batteries and are totally unsuitable for the purpose.

I will let the rest slide.

While on the farm we set up deep cell 32volt in sequence and parrallel on solar pannels to create 240 volt power to three houses boosted by a deisel generator at peak times. Howevver I left the farm about four years later and never knew how long the batteries and generator lasted. The system was in the vicinity of $14,000 to set up in 1994 without underground wiring to the houses.

For us to link to the electricity grid was over over $70,000 so we opted for self generation. On cloudy days the generator would cut in more. This system required a lot of maintenance and ongoing cost especially for the generator. So the costs, time and convienence I would think it burdonsome.

We now live in a windy area, we do have solar heated hot water so I think solar plus a small wind generator on the roof would be a profitable way.

onthebeach do you know what a ham radio operator is.
Do you understand the degree of technical knowledge needed to get the full call license?
Have you seen us trudge to the top of a hill even 4x4 can not climb loaded down with gear.
And test our solar powered battery driven radio repeater on the way down.
How come my system still works 3 years after it went in.
Are you aware of deep cycle battery,s.
onthebeach here this truth, *you are far too self confident*
And it is wasted on you.
My club has for *decades* installed and run the local community radio station.
Our current leader looked after Sat-alight communications here in this country for Americas moon trips.
No more than ten of us, we
Place radio gear in the scrub and use them for whole events reporting from positions of competitors to medical emergency.
I stand by my claim knowing 50 or more years ago, and today, many homes use deep cycle car battery,s.
We, in our group, could put together a pile exceeding 4 tonn,s of solar battery,s, I rejected mine to use thefar more flexible ones told of here.

Josephus yes you understand how it can work and in fact does.
My stand alone system would take mean hour to put in place bar the needed wiring of the control board.
It is minimal, 2x40watt panels.
Feeding in to a power inverter.
Tow battery,s 12 volt.
I can take 240 from the inverter.
And do, running lights in 3 rooms.
During a black out run TV TOO.
Similar systems are run in caravans all over this country.
Tec, is moving so far I can not keep up with it always.
As time passes have no doubt, todays usful system will be seen as like a kero lantern compared toa torch.

Belly,

You initially said car batteries which are cranking batteries. You have now corrected that to say deep cycle.

If you are technically minded you should have referred to deep cycle in the first place instead of your reference to "car batterys".

onthebeach I do not want endless conflict with you.
But drag you back, even if kicking and screaming to your charge.
You told me my solar generated power is unwanted.
You sharpened the stick, *quite wrongly* saying Labor introduced it.
I had the pleasure of telling you the truth Howard started the scheme,*and it was a wise move*
In further targeting me *not the subject* you said I was profiteering*
Not only not true but imposable given rates paid.
So I did not take the time to tell you, you took no time in thinking about your comment.
This much is true from the first day of broadcast radio, *first being a ham radio operator run and owned*2FC in NSW*
Remote Australians had battery,s usually 6 volt charged by generator they had no deep cycle ones.
Solar, properly thought out, could be the new power station we need not build.
And given the potential to use to the max new Tec in both panels and battery.s it may become so.
Self sustaining now, no one need profit by varying rates paid for power, the cut in bill should be enough.
Governments could do worse than give a one time total no tax break on purchase and installation.
ABC National spoke to the owner of an out back truck stop yesterday.
He has 210 panels and 8 ton of battery,s as his only power source!