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.