Reality Check Series
- REALITY CHECK 1 - Ground Source Heat Pumps
- REALITY CHECK 2 - BATTERY CAPACITY
- REALITY CHECK 3 - Home Wind System
- REALITY CHECK 4 - Standard Offer Contract (SOC)
- REALITY CHECK 5 - Roof Mounts Mean LOW efficiency?
- REALITY CHECK 6 - Net Metering
- REALITY CHECK 7 - Heating with Electricity
- REALITY CHECK 8 - Simple Solar Controllers
- REALITY CHECK 9 - Horizontal Axis vs Vertical Axis Turbines
- REALITY CHECK 10 - Wind Turbine and Solar PV Ratings
- REALITY CHECK 11 - RUSH to SMART Meters
- REALITY CHECK 12 - MAXIMUM BENEFITS with Renewables
- REALITY CHECK 13 - SMART Meters Rosy Future
- REALITY CHECK 14 - Still Starry Eyed on 80.2 cents
- REALITY CHECK 15 - Getting the MOST out of Ground Mounts
- REALITY CHECK 16 - Enphase vs Conventional Inverters
- REALITY CHECK 17 - Let's get REAL!
REALITY CHECK 1 - GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMPS
Most people know that installing a ground source heat pump will reduce their energy requirements and save them money on their heating and air conditioning. That's true overall but here's the REALITY. Ground source heat pumps ( their compressor s and back up heating elements) use a LOT of electricity, so while your overall energy demand will be less than burning fossil fuels like oil or gas, your electricity bill may double from 1200-1500kWhrs to 2500-3000kwhrs a month or more. When a ground source heat pump is running it's equivalent to turning on a burner on your electric stove and a "back up" heating element used by a heat pump furnace is 10-12kW equivalent to running 8-9 electric baseboard heaters. A back up heat capability is needed in case the ground source heat has been exhausted for the capacity it was designed for. This happens sometimes on VERY cold periods when the heat pumps run continuously for several days so the back up heat source is ALL Electric.
THE UPSIDE
1. Your overall home energy costs can be up to 30-40% less than you pay for oil, gas or electricity today.
2. it's clean renewable energy (depending on where you get your electricity)
3. You get heating and air conditioning in one unit.
THE DOWNSIDE
1. Your electricity bill will increase and continue to increase as energy costs rise due to inflation or any other causes.
2. If your electricity supply fails you will have no light and no heat without a backup generator, wood or propane.
3. If the heat pumps fails or is undersized for very cold use in Canadian winters, your backup heat is usually a 10-12kW electrical heating element like turning on several baseboard heaters all at once . . . so any backup power system can be very demanding.
4. It is very expensive to buy a small wind or solar system that can power a ground source heat pump. Homes with ground source heat pumps cannot be run by typical renewable energy systems of 2-3 kw rated power costing $25-30,000. Other heating sources such as thermal solar, wood, wood pellet or even propane cost less to install and use far less electricity.
BOTTOM LINE
Get a ground source heat pump to reduce your overall energy demand but recognize that the future electricity energy costs cannot be limited and renewable energy systems big enough to power it will cost a lot more than the heat pump
Most people know that installing a ground source heat pump will reduce their energy requirements and save them money on their heating and air conditioning. That's true overall but here's the REALITY. Ground source heat pumps ( their compressor s and back up heating elements) use a LOT of electricity, so while your overall energy demand will be less than burning fossil fuels like oil or gas, your electricity bill may double from 1200-1500kWhrs to 2500-3000kwhrs a month or more. When a ground source heat pump is running it's equivalent to turning on a burner on your electric stove and a "back up" heating element used by a heat pump furnace is 10-12kW equivalent to running 8-9 electric baseboard heaters. A back up heat capability is needed in case the ground source heat has been exhausted for the capacity it was designed for. This happens sometimes on VERY cold periods when the heat pumps run continuously for several days so the back up heat source is ALL Electric.
THE UPSIDE
1. Your overall home energy costs can be up to 30-40% less than you pay for oil, gas or electricity today.
2. it's clean renewable energy (depending on where you get your electricity)
3. You get heating and air conditioning in one unit.
THE DOWNSIDE
1. Your electricity bill will increase and continue to increase as energy costs rise due to inflation or any other causes.
2. If your electricity supply fails you will have no light and no heat without a backup generator, wood or propane.
3. If the heat pumps fails or is undersized for very cold use in Canadian winters, your backup heat is usually a 10-12kW electrical heating element like turning on several baseboard heaters all at once . . . so any backup power system can be very demanding.
4. It is very expensive to buy a small wind or solar system that can power a ground source heat pump. Homes with ground source heat pumps cannot be run by typical renewable energy systems of 2-3 kw rated power costing $25-30,000. Other heating sources such as thermal solar, wood, wood pellet or even propane cost less to install and use far less electricity.
BOTTOM LINE
Get a ground source heat pump to reduce your overall energy demand but recognize that the future electricity energy costs cannot be limited and renewable energy systems big enough to power it will cost a lot more than the heat pump
FWNews - BATTERY CAPACITY
There is no magic to battery capacity. Light weight batteries can store very little power. If you want a lot of power (say to run a home for 2-3 days) you need HEAVY batteries and a lot of them. The amount of power batteries can store is directly proportional to their weight. A battery big enough to run a home for a day or two will weigh at least 1-2 "tons". There is no magic new technology either lithium ion, metal hydride or nickel cadmium that can compete on price so plan on spending $2,000-$5,000on an average size battery rated at 800-1000AH, that might store around 10-15kWhrs of usable energy.
REALITY CHECK 2
1. A car battery . . or even a couple of dozen car batteries cannot store enough energy to run your home for more than a few hours. Car or even truck batteries are designed with thin lead plates to allow them to "give up" their stored electrons rapidly when the starter is turned on for a few seconds. That's a lot of power but not a lot of energy.
2. Renewable energy batteries for the home have larger and thicker plates (and weigh a lot more) so they can "absorb" and "release" more electrons over a long period of time (hours or days). They have a lot more lead in them and as a result they can store a lot more ENERGY. If you want to know how much energy is in a battery (how many kWhrs) you won't find it on the label because how much energy you can get from it depends on how fast you tray and take it.
If you demand a lot of power really fast (like a starter motor) you'll get less than if you take it out at a slower rate like lights and small appliances in a home use. So batteries are rated in AMP HOURS (AH), but in order to compare one battery's AH capacity you must compare the same rate of discharge. Normally car batteries are rated in "Cranking hours" . . that's not the same as AmpHours, and an AH rating always refers to the rate of 6hr, 20hr or perhaps 100hr rate. Compare AH ratings at the same rate. Typical RE home battery packs are 1000-2000AH at a 20hr rate.
BOTTOM LINE
Battery capacity is like a gas tank and big gas tanks can cost a lot of money if you want to store a lot of energy.
There is no magic to battery capacity. Light weight batteries can store very little power. If you want a lot of power (say to run a home for 2-3 days) you need HEAVY batteries and a lot of them. The amount of power batteries can store is directly proportional to their weight. A battery big enough to run a home for a day or two will weigh at least 1-2 "tons". There is no magic new technology either lithium ion, metal hydride or nickel cadmium that can compete on price so plan on spending $2,000-$5,000on an average size battery rated at 800-1000AH, that might store around 10-15kWhrs of usable energy.
REALITY CHECK 2
1. A car battery . . or even a couple of dozen car batteries cannot store enough energy to run your home for more than a few hours. Car or even truck batteries are designed with thin lead plates to allow them to "give up" their stored electrons rapidly when the starter is turned on for a few seconds. That's a lot of power but not a lot of energy.
2. Renewable energy batteries for the home have larger and thicker plates (and weigh a lot more) so they can "absorb" and "release" more electrons over a long period of time (hours or days). They have a lot more lead in them and as a result they can store a lot more ENERGY. If you want to know how much energy is in a battery (how many kWhrs) you won't find it on the label because how much energy you can get from it depends on how fast you tray and take it.
If you demand a lot of power really fast (like a starter motor) you'll get less than if you take it out at a slower rate like lights and small appliances in a home use. So batteries are rated in AMP HOURS (AH), but in order to compare one battery's AH capacity you must compare the same rate of discharge. Normally car batteries are rated in "Cranking hours" . . that's not the same as AmpHours, and an AH rating always refers to the rate of 6hr, 20hr or perhaps 100hr rate. Compare AH ratings at the same rate. Typical RE home battery packs are 1000-2000AH at a 20hr rate.
BOTTOM LINE
Battery capacity is like a gas tank and big gas tanks can cost a lot of money if you want to store a lot of energy.
REALITY CHECK 3 - Home Wind System
Can a small wind system run my Home?
Yes it can but it depends on what home and how you live . . most importantly how it's heated or cooled. Not all homes have the same energy demands. Two families living in identical houses with teh same appliances may use substantially different amounts of energy.
Small wind systems for home use are typically 1-2 meters across (500w-1kW) . . some as large as 4 meters across (5kW). Making electricity from the wind is simply changing the direction of the molecules of air as they pass by. The amount of energy you get from doing that depends on how many molecules change direction each hour and that's directly related to how fast they are going. . . so it mostly depends on how BIG your turbine blades are . . and to some degree how efficient they are. A turbine with 1 meter long blades (2m across, 3.4 sqM cross-section) can produce about 1kW/hr when the wind is nearly 30mph (when the energy density is about 500w per square meter). . . but the reality is at 10mph (16km/hr) the most it can produce, from that same cross-section is about 50w, when the capturable energy is less than 15w/sqM. If you want a kilowatt at 10 mph you need blades nearly 5 meters long (over 30 feet across) . . and that's generally a bit too large for most backyards or budgets. Such a machine would be rated at around 15-20kW because that's what it should produce at around 25mph. (most turbines are rated at wind speeds around 25-30mph near their maximum power). Also the cost of a 10kW turbine is typically $30-40,000 Cdn installed.
REALITY CHECK
Turbines capable of powering an entire home (1500-3000kWhrs/month) are eventually just too big to be installed on most home properties, especially in North America where homes are quite large and not very efficient at using energy in the first place and single home lot sizes are measured in SqMeters not acres. Typical European homes use about 1/3 of the power of North American homes with the same appliances. However; when combined with energy conservation, insulation, modern appliances and combined with solar panels, a 1-3kW small wind system (less than 4m diameter) and ~1kW of solar PV, can operate a 2-3,000 sq ft off-grid home for around $30,000 Cdn. (remember the additional cost of and RE system replaces the 10-12,000 heating and ducting system and has no future fuel costs so 30,000 may well be less cost over the years as the cost of energy rises to world levels) One key energy demand is to use an efficient source of heat and hot water like solar thermal, wood pellet or an outdoor wood furnace . . . especially if the property has it's own wood source. Find an heat sources that demands the least electricity and you'll be energy secure or even off-grid if you want in no time, at a pretty reasonable cost.
BOTTOM LINE
A small hybrid wind and solar system CAN run a home. The question really is can it run your home, and the only way to tell that is to know how many kWhrs/day you need. Find some other source for HEAT/AIR CONDITIONING and HOT WATER and do some energy efficiency improvements and the 2-4kW hybrid power source from sun and wind will do most if not all of the rest.
REALITY CHECK 4 - Standard Offer Contract (SOC) Standard Offer Program (SOP)
Both terms seem to be used interchangeably for the same thing in Ontario.
Is Standard Offer Contract a good way to get paid for Renewable Energy I produce? The new Feed in Tariffs (FIT) under SOP are offering up to 80cents/kWhr for roof mounted solar. See REALITY CHECK 5 before you decide that's worth it.
Answer: It may make sense as a business case, on a commercial scale, but not for personal use systems and for business it is only allowed if you choose just one source of energy, such as wind or solar or biomass for example. Hybrid systems do not qualify for SOC/SOP.
You cannot combine wind and solar hybrid systems because they pay different rates and the utility would not be able to distinguish what rate to pay, since the electrons from the wind or solar collectors would be combined. If you want both types of collectors you'll need to create two separate systems with two separate contracts and two separate meters. Some other considerations for a privately owned system.
1. You cannot use any of the electricity yourself. You must send it all into the grid. . . at a fixed price. This means you still must pay full retail price for the power you use in your home at a price that is not fixed . . but will only go UP! . . and you still need to pay the connect charges from sending power to the grid as well as connect and billing charges to buy it back.
2. You are not allowed to have batteries as part of an SOC system because it would be possible for you to store energy from the system during low price points and sell it back to the system at higher price. . . and that wouldn't be fair would it?
3 You may be required to purchase a million dollar personal liability insurance contract at your expense on your system in case of damage or loss to the network you are connected to.
4. Grid tied inverters are not very efficient at feeding small amounts of power to the grid so if your generator is operating at 400w and your inverter is most efficient at 1000-4000watts then much of your generated power is lost before it can go to the grid and be paid for.
5. Unless you are producing SUBSTANTIALLY more than you are using then it just does not make economic sense. The cost of a Solar PV system that can produce 1500kWhrs/month is over $60,000 and would earn about $420/month . . . less the connect and billing charges. In round numbers, you might expect to break even in 12.5 years and earn about $36,000 in the last 7.5 years of the contract assuming no maintenance issues and nothing changes. In 20 years your $36,000 earnings will be worth about $12,000 in todays money. Meanwhile, if you just want to earn money with your extra cash, investing $60,000 at 5% SIMPLE interest will earn give you $120,000 in 20 years . . worth about $45-50,000 in 2027. If you had borrowed money to buy the system (say from your mortgage) then the reality is there is likely no payback in 20 years.
REALITY CHECK
Produce and use your own power without contracts and net-metering. Every kilowatt you create yourself is one less you need from the utility . . no contracts, no billing, no taxes, no delivery charges and best of all no cost for the energy itself. Here's the REAL Reality Check . . .Did you amortize the cost of your current heating system and when will it pay for itself?
BOTTOM LINE
Feed in Tariffs (FIT) and Standard Offer Programs (SOP) are geared to commercial production companies and not to individuals unless you want to own your own power company. That CAN work . . . but you need to play by all the commercial rules. You don't get to store or use any of your own energy, you need to commit to 20yr contract and you need to be prepared to operate and maintain the system for the 20yrs.
Both terms seem to be used interchangeably for the same thing in Ontario.
Is Standard Offer Contract a good way to get paid for Renewable Energy I produce? The new Feed in Tariffs (FIT) under SOP are offering up to 80cents/kWhr for roof mounted solar. See REALITY CHECK 5 before you decide that's worth it.
Answer: It may make sense as a business case, on a commercial scale, but not for personal use systems and for business it is only allowed if you choose just one source of energy, such as wind or solar or biomass for example. Hybrid systems do not qualify for SOC/SOP.
You cannot combine wind and solar hybrid systems because they pay different rates and the utility would not be able to distinguish what rate to pay, since the electrons from the wind or solar collectors would be combined. If you want both types of collectors you'll need to create two separate systems with two separate contracts and two separate meters. Some other considerations for a privately owned system.
1. You cannot use any of the electricity yourself. You must send it all into the grid. . . at a fixed price. This means you still must pay full retail price for the power you use in your home at a price that is not fixed . . but will only go UP! . . and you still need to pay the connect charges from sending power to the grid as well as connect and billing charges to buy it back.
2. You are not allowed to have batteries as part of an SOC system because it would be possible for you to store energy from the system during low price points and sell it back to the system at higher price. . . and that wouldn't be fair would it?
3 You may be required to purchase a million dollar personal liability insurance contract at your expense on your system in case of damage or loss to the network you are connected to.
4. Grid tied inverters are not very efficient at feeding small amounts of power to the grid so if your generator is operating at 400w and your inverter is most efficient at 1000-4000watts then much of your generated power is lost before it can go to the grid and be paid for.
5. Unless you are producing SUBSTANTIALLY more than you are using then it just does not make economic sense. The cost of a Solar PV system that can produce 1500kWhrs/month is over $60,000 and would earn about $420/month . . . less the connect and billing charges. In round numbers, you might expect to break even in 12.5 years and earn about $36,000 in the last 7.5 years of the contract assuming no maintenance issues and nothing changes. In 20 years your $36,000 earnings will be worth about $12,000 in todays money. Meanwhile, if you just want to earn money with your extra cash, investing $60,000 at 5% SIMPLE interest will earn give you $120,000 in 20 years . . worth about $45-50,000 in 2027. If you had borrowed money to buy the system (say from your mortgage) then the reality is there is likely no payback in 20 years.
REALITY CHECK
Produce and use your own power without contracts and net-metering. Every kilowatt you create yourself is one less you need from the utility . . no contracts, no billing, no taxes, no delivery charges and best of all no cost for the energy itself. Here's the REAL Reality Check . . .Did you amortize the cost of your current heating system and when will it pay for itself?
BOTTOM LINE
Feed in Tariffs (FIT) and Standard Offer Programs (SOP) are geared to commercial production companies and not to individuals unless you want to own your own power company. That CAN work . . . but you need to play by all the commercial rules. You don't get to store or use any of your own energy, you need to commit to 20yr contract and you need to be prepared to operate and maintain the system for the 20yrs.
REALITY CHECK 5 - Solar Efficiency can be better in Northern climates"Common knowledge" suggests that solar panels need to be mounted on the roof. That's because almost all the photos you see are like that. In fact, that's often a VERY inefficient way to capture power from some very expensive technology . . especially here in Canada or other seasonal climate. First of all, even if they face directly south, the fixed position means they only operate at their peak power in the middle of the day around noon. But just as important, the efficiency of those panels goes down as they get hot in the sun. A 1kW array can produce 15-20% less than it's rating when they get above 100 degrees F, and on a roof when the summer air temperature is 90 degF (40C), a shingled or steel temperature can easily exceed 100-120F. Alternately though, in freezing temperatures, like here in the "great white north", that same 1kW array can be putting out almost 1.2kW.
If you can track the sun or at least mount the panels a foot or two away from the roof for ventilation . . like on a pedestal tower or tracker with lots of air circulating, you will get more energy from those panels throughout the year. A tracker that follows the sun throughout the day, can provide up to 50% more energy than fixed panels in the summer and as much as 30% more in winter. If you put them closer to the ground where you can reach them, it will be a lot easier and safer to adjust them for summer and winter angles (something they don't need to do in lower latitudes) and easily brush the snow or a leaf off when needed. Did you know that just ONE leaf covering ONE cell on a panel can drop power production by as much as 20-30% or more on the whole system. That's because all the cells are in series and blocking one cell blocks them all just like kinking a garden hose. Even multi-string parallel arrangements suffer some power loss whenever one string is at a lower voltage than then others. All panels on all strings need to be clean and clear of shading for peak performance and maximum power production.
1. Roof mounts require holes in the roof that are places for water or ice to get in or roof to deteriorate
2. Accessibility to summer/winter adjustment and cleaning is often needed but harder and risky to do on a roof
3. Winter snow reflections and cold temperatures can give more power than even cloudless hot desert installations
4. Active azimuth trackers are cost effective if you have more than 800w generally but a less expensive manual swivel mount can add significant amounts of energy over the year compared to fixed roof mounts.
BOTTOM LINE
Solar panels on the roof work, just not very efficiently so if there is no other place to put them then just do it with the knowledge you are not getting near the energy they are capable of producing(Likely 30-50% less). Any other location except the sloped south facing roof of a residence would produce more energy . . like a pedestal, a tilted rack or best is a tracker if you have more than about 1.2kW
Check out the full analysis here http://www.solar2006.org/presentations/tech_sessions/t61-99024.pdf
Here's a chart that shows how much power is lost as the temperature goes up. the RED is clear skies full sun and the colour change data below is progressively more overcast and weaker sun power.
If you can track the sun or at least mount the panels a foot or two away from the roof for ventilation . . like on a pedestal tower or tracker with lots of air circulating, you will get more energy from those panels throughout the year. A tracker that follows the sun throughout the day, can provide up to 50% more energy than fixed panels in the summer and as much as 30% more in winter. If you put them closer to the ground where you can reach them, it will be a lot easier and safer to adjust them for summer and winter angles (something they don't need to do in lower latitudes) and easily brush the snow or a leaf off when needed. Did you know that just ONE leaf covering ONE cell on a panel can drop power production by as much as 20-30% or more on the whole system. That's because all the cells are in series and blocking one cell blocks them all just like kinking a garden hose. Even multi-string parallel arrangements suffer some power loss whenever one string is at a lower voltage than then others. All panels on all strings need to be clean and clear of shading for peak performance and maximum power production.
1. Roof mounts require holes in the roof that are places for water or ice to get in or roof to deteriorate
2. Accessibility to summer/winter adjustment and cleaning is often needed but harder and risky to do on a roof
3. Winter snow reflections and cold temperatures can give more power than even cloudless hot desert installations
4. Active azimuth trackers are cost effective if you have more than 800w generally but a less expensive manual swivel mount can add significant amounts of energy over the year compared to fixed roof mounts.
BOTTOM LINE
Solar panels on the roof work, just not very efficiently so if there is no other place to put them then just do it with the knowledge you are not getting near the energy they are capable of producing(Likely 30-50% less). Any other location except the sloped south facing roof of a residence would produce more energy . . like a pedestal, a tilted rack or best is a tracker if you have more than about 1.2kW
Check out the full analysis here http://www.solar2006.org/presentations/tech_sessions/t61-99024.pdf
Here's a chart that shows how much power is lost as the temperature goes up. the RED is clear skies full sun and the colour change data below is progressively more overcast and weaker sun power.
This Chart is 1000's of kWhrs per year for a 1kW ARRAY near Toronto Canada
Note that the fixed roof mount (lower green data points) do not account for the lost energy from snow cover or even small amounts of debris such as bird droppings or a single leaf that may drop the production of the whole array by 10-15% for as long as it remains on a single panel. That may be weeks if you are not ready to climb up to the roof on any given day. Snow cover will drop production by greater than 95%.So that 1kw fixed roof mount might really be producing only 50% or less of it's potential annual energy.
Note that the fixed roof mount (lower green data points) do not account for the lost energy from snow cover or even small amounts of debris such as bird droppings or a single leaf that may drop the production of the whole array by 10-15% for as long as it remains on a single panel. That may be weeks if you are not ready to climb up to the roof on any given day. Snow cover will drop production by greater than 95%.So that 1kw fixed roof mount might really be producing only 50% or less of it's potential annual energy.
The demonstration on YouTube here shows how easy it is
REALITY CHECK 6 - Net Metering
This is a capability everyone wants until they really understand the implications. Net-metering is an arrangement with your utility whereby they allow you to send energy you generate from wind or solar back into the power grid for credit. That's for "power credit" not payment. Net Metering does not pay you anything. . . and the credit is only temporary . . until your next billing cycle. Then it's reset to ZERO again with no compensation. You pay for any deficit. They will not pay for any balance left in your favour and you start again.
The REALITY is net metering COSTS your utility and they have no incentive to either make it easy of profitable for you. You still pay the connection charge even if you use nothing from them. That's fine but why not save the cost of batteries and just go DIRECT to GRID with no batteries. That's cheaper and faster payback.
REALITY 1 is you CAN do it and it DOES WORK . . but . . your solar or wind system cannot operate by itself with a load so when the utility power fails your system is down too. So if you do experience frequent or unplanned outages then net metering will not help for that.
REALITY 2 is that unless your system produces substantially more energy than you use, it is likely you will rarely make use of that ability to send power to the grid because you'll use it all before it can be sent. In addition, you will waste a lot of the occasional excess power you do produce, in the inefficiency of low power generation. If you are only generating 200-400 watts (even if you are not using any of it) and you have a 4,000watt inverter, that inverter is NOT operating at it's published 95% efficiency but more like 60-70% . . and so you are probably wasting a lot of what you are producing. You need to have a 2-3kW array to feed a 3-4kW grid tie inverter or you are wasting a lot of production. ( By the way, a 2 kW array costs about $12,000 dollars plus the inverter and installation)
REALITY 3 is whenever you produce more than you use during any billing period that production is lost and effectively reduces the efficiency and payback of your system, so it makes no sense to produce more than you use. Make sure your system is not over designed or over-sized more than a reasonable amount for growth.
Make sure your average power, AND peak system power matches the grid-tie inverter power you've chosen in order to actually be able to send most of that power to the grid efficiently. Then be prepared to sign lots of assurances for the utility that if any thing goes wrong or fails or fees change you agree ahead of time to pay any and all of the costs that might occur. Here's what it says in one of the Ontario utility's agreements for net-Metering.
You agree to have regular scheduled maintenance performed on your generation facility in order to assure that connection
devices, protection systems, and control systems are maintained in good working order and in compliance with all
applicable laws, statutes, codes, licensing requirements, directives, rules, regulations, protocols, policies, orders, injunctions,
rulings, awards, judgments or decrees or any requirement or decision or agreement with or by any government or
government department, commission, board, court authority or agency.
This is a capability everyone wants until they really understand the implications. Net-metering is an arrangement with your utility whereby they allow you to send energy you generate from wind or solar back into the power grid for credit. That's for "power credit" not payment. Net Metering does not pay you anything. . . and the credit is only temporary . . until your next billing cycle. Then it's reset to ZERO again with no compensation. You pay for any deficit. They will not pay for any balance left in your favour and you start again.
The REALITY is net metering COSTS your utility and they have no incentive to either make it easy of profitable for you. You still pay the connection charge even if you use nothing from them. That's fine but why not save the cost of batteries and just go DIRECT to GRID with no batteries. That's cheaper and faster payback.
REALITY 1 is you CAN do it and it DOES WORK . . but . . your solar or wind system cannot operate by itself with a load so when the utility power fails your system is down too. So if you do experience frequent or unplanned outages then net metering will not help for that.
REALITY 2 is that unless your system produces substantially more energy than you use, it is likely you will rarely make use of that ability to send power to the grid because you'll use it all before it can be sent. In addition, you will waste a lot of the occasional excess power you do produce, in the inefficiency of low power generation. If you are only generating 200-400 watts (even if you are not using any of it) and you have a 4,000watt inverter, that inverter is NOT operating at it's published 95% efficiency but more like 60-70% . . and so you are probably wasting a lot of what you are producing. You need to have a 2-3kW array to feed a 3-4kW grid tie inverter or you are wasting a lot of production. ( By the way, a 2 kW array costs about $12,000 dollars plus the inverter and installation)
REALITY 3 is whenever you produce more than you use during any billing period that production is lost and effectively reduces the efficiency and payback of your system, so it makes no sense to produce more than you use. Make sure your system is not over designed or over-sized more than a reasonable amount for growth.
Make sure your average power, AND peak system power matches the grid-tie inverter power you've chosen in order to actually be able to send most of that power to the grid efficiently. Then be prepared to sign lots of assurances for the utility that if any thing goes wrong or fails or fees change you agree ahead of time to pay any and all of the costs that might occur. Here's what it says in one of the Ontario utility's agreements for net-Metering.
You agree to have regular scheduled maintenance performed on your generation facility in order to assure that connection
devices, protection systems, and control systems are maintained in good working order and in compliance with all
applicable laws, statutes, codes, licensing requirements, directives, rules, regulations, protocols, policies, orders, injunctions,
rulings, awards, judgments or decrees or any requirement or decision or agreement with or by any government or
government department, commission, board, court authority or agency.
REALITY CHECK 7 - Heating with Electricity
Electricity Retailers are quick to point out that "electricity is 100% efficient" . . that's true and it may be clean in your house but it's not necessarily CLEAN for the planet, unless it came from solar or wind generators. One of the most inefficient things you can do with electricity is turn it into HEAT! . . heck nuclear reactors waste over 70% of the heat they get from the reaction and turn only 30% of that heat into electricity . . then they lose another 9-10% just sending it to you over the power grid. . . . and they call that 100% efficient. In fact, a REALLY good way to dissipate a lot of electricity is to turn on a resistor like a base board heater or an hot water tank, so if your goal is to become energy efficient or energy self-sufficient then find other ways to make heat besides electricity.
A good way to make heat is to burn fossil fuels, but unfortunately that's not "good for the environment" right now. You can burn wood or natural gas but those are also somewhat "dirty" with all the gases they produce. An article I read some time ago talked about the cost of a BTU (British Thermal Unit) which is a very small unit of heat. 1kWhr of electricity equals about 3412 BTU. A gallon of fuel oil contains about 135,000 BTUs of heat and if burned at an efficiency of 70% . . . A thousand gallons of fuel oil can produce about 95 Million BTU . . enough to heat about 600sqft of living space in Alaska all year. Propane on the other hand has only 21,500 BTU per pound and costs about twice as much for the same amount of heat.
Well to simply things here's a rough comparison using last year's energy costs:
$1 of electricity will produce about 27,000 BTU
$1 of Propane will produce about 60-65,000 BTU
$1 of Natural Gas will produce about 65-70,000 BTU
$1 of Dry hardwood will produce about 78-80,000 BTU
$1 of Wood Pellet will produce about 85-90,000 BTU
I really like wood pellet as a heat source because you are burning a waste product in a very efficient way and at a reasonable price. Some of the new European stoves are quite sophisticated and beautiful appliances . . . and in the end it's the cost/BTU that matters. The costs have only begun to rise to world levels here in North America. Here's a comparison calculator you can enter your own local fuel prices into and see how they compare in your neck of the woods. it's put out by the Wood Pellet Association but it's just a calculator that you put the cost numbers in so if you believe they haven't "FUDGED" the calculation it's probably a valid comparison. Just click on the link below and then on "Compare Fuel costs"
http://www.pelletheat.org/2/index/index.html
Here's another one you can play with
http://www.outdoorfurnaces.com/article/cost-comparison-chart-117.asp
And here's one more interesting one that includes burning corn
http://www.magnumheat.com/fuel_comparison.cfm
Electricity Retailers are quick to point out that "electricity is 100% efficient" . . that's true and it may be clean in your house but it's not necessarily CLEAN for the planet, unless it came from solar or wind generators. One of the most inefficient things you can do with electricity is turn it into HEAT! . . heck nuclear reactors waste over 70% of the heat they get from the reaction and turn only 30% of that heat into electricity . . then they lose another 9-10% just sending it to you over the power grid. . . . and they call that 100% efficient. In fact, a REALLY good way to dissipate a lot of electricity is to turn on a resistor like a base board heater or an hot water tank, so if your goal is to become energy efficient or energy self-sufficient then find other ways to make heat besides electricity.
A good way to make heat is to burn fossil fuels, but unfortunately that's not "good for the environment" right now. You can burn wood or natural gas but those are also somewhat "dirty" with all the gases they produce. An article I read some time ago talked about the cost of a BTU (British Thermal Unit) which is a very small unit of heat. 1kWhr of electricity equals about 3412 BTU. A gallon of fuel oil contains about 135,000 BTUs of heat and if burned at an efficiency of 70% . . . A thousand gallons of fuel oil can produce about 95 Million BTU . . enough to heat about 600sqft of living space in Alaska all year. Propane on the other hand has only 21,500 BTU per pound and costs about twice as much for the same amount of heat.
Well to simply things here's a rough comparison using last year's energy costs:
$1 of electricity will produce about 27,000 BTU
$1 of Propane will produce about 60-65,000 BTU
$1 of Natural Gas will produce about 65-70,000 BTU
$1 of Dry hardwood will produce about 78-80,000 BTU
$1 of Wood Pellet will produce about 85-90,000 BTU
I really like wood pellet as a heat source because you are burning a waste product in a very efficient way and at a reasonable price. Some of the new European stoves are quite sophisticated and beautiful appliances . . . and in the end it's the cost/BTU that matters. The costs have only begun to rise to world levels here in North America. Here's a comparison calculator you can enter your own local fuel prices into and see how they compare in your neck of the woods. it's put out by the Wood Pellet Association but it's just a calculator that you put the cost numbers in so if you believe they haven't "FUDGED" the calculation it's probably a valid comparison. Just click on the link below and then on "Compare Fuel costs"
http://www.pelletheat.org/2/index/index.html
Here's another one you can play with
http://www.outdoorfurnaces.com/article/cost-comparison-chart-117.asp
And here's one more interesting one that includes burning corn
http://www.magnumheat.com/fuel_comparison.cfm
REALITY CHECK 8 - Simple/Cheap Solar Controllers
Like most things you get what you pay for. Solar panel controllers come in all shapes and sizes, some with convenient plug ins and handy lights or meters. What should normally matter most is how efficient is it in converting sunlight into energy in my battery or my home. A simple 12v controller takes the voltage from the solar panels only when the panel voltage exceeds the battery voltage. So if your battery is above 13v say and the sun is only bright enough to make th epanel 12.9v then NOTHING is going is being captured or sent to your system.
More expensive MPPT controllers like the Outback MX-60 or the soon to be releases CLASSIC from Midnite Solar have special circuitry to "play with the voltage" and allow a lower voltage panel at lease trickle some power even in low light or overcast conditions. This is a big advantage and will capture a significant amount more energy each month than cheaper contollers. In cloudless places like the desert this may not be as important and most everywhere else.
Even better is to use 3 or 4 12v or 24v panels in series and ensure that they will produce way more than 12 v even in low light. . . . but . . . this only works with MX60 type controllers that can "automagically", adjust the output voltage to match your battery or System Voltage no matter what your panels produce. . . MPPT controllers are WORTH THE PRICE if you don't live in the desert.
Like most things you get what you pay for. Solar panel controllers come in all shapes and sizes, some with convenient plug ins and handy lights or meters. What should normally matter most is how efficient is it in converting sunlight into energy in my battery or my home. A simple 12v controller takes the voltage from the solar panels only when the panel voltage exceeds the battery voltage. So if your battery is above 13v say and the sun is only bright enough to make th epanel 12.9v then NOTHING is going is being captured or sent to your system.
More expensive MPPT controllers like the Outback MX-60 or the soon to be releases CLASSIC from Midnite Solar have special circuitry to "play with the voltage" and allow a lower voltage panel at lease trickle some power even in low light or overcast conditions. This is a big advantage and will capture a significant amount more energy each month than cheaper contollers. In cloudless places like the desert this may not be as important and most everywhere else.
Even better is to use 3 or 4 12v or 24v panels in series and ensure that they will produce way more than 12 v even in low light. . . . but . . . this only works with MX60 type controllers that can "automagically", adjust the output voltage to match your battery or System Voltage no matter what your panels produce. . . MPPT controllers are WORTH THE PRICE if you don't live in the desert.
REALITY CHECK 9 - Horizontal Axis vs Vertical Axis Turbines
Everyone has a "New Idea" or a "Revolutionary Design" in small wind turbines. The fact is horizontal axis turbines with 3 blades are about the most efficient configuration turbine you can convert wind energy with. You'll often hear about some new turbine that sits on your roof or "more conveniently" on the ground where you "don't need a tower" and it will "power your whole house". A "shroud" around the blade will actually funnel more air across the turbine at increased speed and so more power is possible. . . but it's still limited to cross section. Small cross section, small power. Just because it's "new" does not mean it hasn't been tried before and dismissed as less efficient or more expensive . . or a dozen other reasons.
The REALITY is vertical axis turbines work but they are just inherently LESS efficient and must be much larger than conventional turbines to capture the same amount of energy. You'll hear that "They capture energy from all directions" or "They start up in very light wind" . . . First of all "low start up" for any turbine is relatively unimportant. The wind below 10mph (16km/hr) has less than 15w per sqM so is not going to contribute any useful energy to you system. Secondly, As the wind passes the blades it changes direction and gives up some energy then slows down and becomes turbulent.
This turbulent air departs behind a horizontal blade but with a vertical blade this turbulence also affects the retreating blade as it passes the other side of the machine and REDUCES the efficiency of the whole rotor. As well, since turbulent air can cause lift on two blades simultaneously . . from different directions . . the lifting forces are partially working against each other. This CAN NOT be MORE efficient than a single lifting blade that does not have to deal with its own turbulence as well as the wind's turbulence.
Watch for claims that "the turbine uses the roof as an accelerator". . . this may have some effect when the wind comes from one specific direction but in general roofs produce turbulence which does not have energy to transfer. A good rule of thumb is wind turbines should be located in "clean air" (laminar flow) at least 30 feet (10m) above all obstacles withing 300ft (100m) of the turbine. Otherwise, they will be inefficient and produce less power that they could otherwise. There is never any laminar flow near the ground or near obstacles like trees and buildings.
Everyone has a "New Idea" or a "Revolutionary Design" in small wind turbines. The fact is horizontal axis turbines with 3 blades are about the most efficient configuration turbine you can convert wind energy with. You'll often hear about some new turbine that sits on your roof or "more conveniently" on the ground where you "don't need a tower" and it will "power your whole house". A "shroud" around the blade will actually funnel more air across the turbine at increased speed and so more power is possible. . . but it's still limited to cross section. Small cross section, small power. Just because it's "new" does not mean it hasn't been tried before and dismissed as less efficient or more expensive . . or a dozen other reasons.
The REALITY is vertical axis turbines work but they are just inherently LESS efficient and must be much larger than conventional turbines to capture the same amount of energy. You'll hear that "They capture energy from all directions" or "They start up in very light wind" . . . First of all "low start up" for any turbine is relatively unimportant. The wind below 10mph (16km/hr) has less than 15w per sqM so is not going to contribute any useful energy to you system. Secondly, As the wind passes the blades it changes direction and gives up some energy then slows down and becomes turbulent.
This turbulent air departs behind a horizontal blade but with a vertical blade this turbulence also affects the retreating blade as it passes the other side of the machine and REDUCES the efficiency of the whole rotor. As well, since turbulent air can cause lift on two blades simultaneously . . from different directions . . the lifting forces are partially working against each other. This CAN NOT be MORE efficient than a single lifting blade that does not have to deal with its own turbulence as well as the wind's turbulence.
Watch for claims that "the turbine uses the roof as an accelerator". . . this may have some effect when the wind comes from one specific direction but in general roofs produce turbulence which does not have energy to transfer. A good rule of thumb is wind turbines should be located in "clean air" (laminar flow) at least 30 feet (10m) above all obstacles withing 300ft (100m) of the turbine. Otherwise, they will be inefficient and produce less power that they could otherwise. There is never any laminar flow near the ground or near obstacles like trees and buildings.
REALITY CHECK 10 - Wind Turbine and Solar PV Ratings
When does 1kW = 1 kW?. Most people have the impression a 1kW turbine produces 1kW when it's running . . or 100W of solar PV produce 100W when the sun is out. The reality is "ratings" are actually "peak power output" and most of the time . . . the large majority of time they produce much less. So if you want to use 1 kW of power anytime by just flipping on a switch you'd best think ahead about how much battery capacity you have or how much power your turbine will produce MOST of the time.
It's all about CROSS SECTION. Wind and Solar are "low density energy" sources so you need large collectors to capture significant amounts of energy. A 3.5 SqM cross section turbine (1m long blades . . 2 m across) for example will produce about 55w in 10mph (16km/hr) wind. That's about 15w per sqM. There's practically NO energy below 10mph but even though it turns nicely in a light breeze and produces nothing the neighbours will thnk it's running your whole house including the hot tub. At 20mph its about 480w. . . so most of the time your production is less than half the "Rated Power". . . just 10mph faster at 30 it may produce more than 1kW.
Solar is a little better on ratings, in that in average sun near mid-day a 100w panel will put out about 90-100w . . but that level of production only lasts for 3-4 hours in the middle of a sunny day. So each 24hr day (with no clouds) you might expect 300-400Whrs (watt hours NOT kilowatt hours) production from a 100w panel and over a month of mostly sunny days a 100w panel may accumulate 7.8kWhrs of energy. Ten panels (1kW) would produce 78kWhrs . . . and for a typical North American home that's barely 10% of the demand. 1kW of solar panels costs about $6500 cdn.
Wind on the other hand, (rated 1 kw) might expect to produce anywhere from 75-300kW hrs per month depending type of turbine, on the location and height of the tower, as well as the season. Less in summer, closer to the 75kWhrs and more in winter, perhaps more than 300. Just a 30ft higher tower can make a 40% increase in energy produced if it's sited properly. A 1 kW turbine costs about $2600 . . and with an average tower maybe $4000 all together.
When does 1kW = 1 kW?. Most people have the impression a 1kW turbine produces 1kW when it's running . . or 100W of solar PV produce 100W when the sun is out. The reality is "ratings" are actually "peak power output" and most of the time . . . the large majority of time they produce much less. So if you want to use 1 kW of power anytime by just flipping on a switch you'd best think ahead about how much battery capacity you have or how much power your turbine will produce MOST of the time.
It's all about CROSS SECTION. Wind and Solar are "low density energy" sources so you need large collectors to capture significant amounts of energy. A 3.5 SqM cross section turbine (1m long blades . . 2 m across) for example will produce about 55w in 10mph (16km/hr) wind. That's about 15w per sqM. There's practically NO energy below 10mph but even though it turns nicely in a light breeze and produces nothing the neighbours will thnk it's running your whole house including the hot tub. At 20mph its about 480w. . . so most of the time your production is less than half the "Rated Power". . . just 10mph faster at 30 it may produce more than 1kW.
Solar is a little better on ratings, in that in average sun near mid-day a 100w panel will put out about 90-100w . . but that level of production only lasts for 3-4 hours in the middle of a sunny day. So each 24hr day (with no clouds) you might expect 300-400Whrs (watt hours NOT kilowatt hours) production from a 100w panel and over a month of mostly sunny days a 100w panel may accumulate 7.8kWhrs of energy. Ten panels (1kW) would produce 78kWhrs . . . and for a typical North American home that's barely 10% of the demand. 1kW of solar panels costs about $6500 cdn.
Wind on the other hand, (rated 1 kw) might expect to produce anywhere from 75-300kW hrs per month depending type of turbine, on the location and height of the tower, as well as the season. Less in summer, closer to the 75kWhrs and more in winter, perhaps more than 300. Just a 30ft higher tower can make a 40% increase in energy produced if it's sited properly. A 1 kW turbine costs about $2600 . . and with an average tower maybe $4000 all together.
REALITY CHECK 11 - The RUSH to SMART METERS
In the past few years most Ontario Utilities have embarked on a very expensive BILLION DOLLAR plan (paid for by OEB and ultimately you and me) to replace all of the old mechanical electricity meters with new digital SMART meters. This all seems to be a necessary and important upgrade to keep our system up to date and provide new and better means to service their customers. SMART meters allow time of day billing at various rates and electronic meter reading on a daily basis . . . but . . .Whether is was by design or by default may never be clear but unless you need CONTROL of your customer's power consumption there is no need to replace existing meters.
You may be told that for Net metering "the old meters are not certified in both directions" and "that's a Federal jurisdiction" so your utility will say "we are just complying with federal regulations". When you ask the FEDs why an existing meter is not certified to work in both directions they will say. "nobody ever asked". I fact the old meters ARE just as accurate in BOTH directions . . but . . when you are settling accounts by the DIFFERENCE in flow there is no way to tell how much energy went this way and how much went that way. . . and the only problem with that is YOU CAN'T TAX THE ACTUAL IN AND OUT FLOW.
So in REALITY a KEY reason I can see for spending all that money and time changing meters when a private wind generator or solar system is NET METERED is . . . so that they can be sure to collect all the TAX on all the power you consumed . . but not credit it back when you send it into the grid. . . and that goes for all the charges too PST, GST, Line losses and Debt Load. The bottom line value and efficiency of feeding power into the grid is therefore reduced.
On the other hand if you produce and use your own power FIRST by storing and using excess amounts locally in your battery system before you take power from the grid . . there is less PST GST LINE LOSS AND DEBT LOAD to pay to the utility. . . and no further contractual agreement necessary.
The other uses of SMART meters is for remote monitoring and meter reading, or limiting your peak demand during high use periods when there is insufficient generation capacity. It turns out these reasons are just a convenient bonus for ensuring taxes are collected and in Ontario we pay about $3-4 on every monthly bill to ensure that happens.
REALITY CHECK FOR PERSONAL POWER SYSTEMS
The old meters would work fine for private net metering clients, they are equally accurate BOTH directions, they account for power flow AND TAX credits FAIRLY for both users and they cost NOTHING to leave in place. That first 800,000 meters changed at a cost of say $150 per meter is 120Million.
In the past few years most Ontario Utilities have embarked on a very expensive BILLION DOLLAR plan (paid for by OEB and ultimately you and me) to replace all of the old mechanical electricity meters with new digital SMART meters. This all seems to be a necessary and important upgrade to keep our system up to date and provide new and better means to service their customers. SMART meters allow time of day billing at various rates and electronic meter reading on a daily basis . . . but . . .Whether is was by design or by default may never be clear but unless you need CONTROL of your customer's power consumption there is no need to replace existing meters.
You may be told that for Net metering "the old meters are not certified in both directions" and "that's a Federal jurisdiction" so your utility will say "we are just complying with federal regulations". When you ask the FEDs why an existing meter is not certified to work in both directions they will say. "nobody ever asked". I fact the old meters ARE just as accurate in BOTH directions . . but . . when you are settling accounts by the DIFFERENCE in flow there is no way to tell how much energy went this way and how much went that way. . . and the only problem with that is YOU CAN'T TAX THE ACTUAL IN AND OUT FLOW.
So in REALITY a KEY reason I can see for spending all that money and time changing meters when a private wind generator or solar system is NET METERED is . . . so that they can be sure to collect all the TAX on all the power you consumed . . but not credit it back when you send it into the grid. . . and that goes for all the charges too PST, GST, Line losses and Debt Load. The bottom line value and efficiency of feeding power into the grid is therefore reduced.
On the other hand if you produce and use your own power FIRST by storing and using excess amounts locally in your battery system before you take power from the grid . . there is less PST GST LINE LOSS AND DEBT LOAD to pay to the utility. . . and no further contractual agreement necessary.
The other uses of SMART meters is for remote monitoring and meter reading, or limiting your peak demand during high use periods when there is insufficient generation capacity. It turns out these reasons are just a convenient bonus for ensuring taxes are collected and in Ontario we pay about $3-4 on every monthly bill to ensure that happens.
REALITY CHECK FOR PERSONAL POWER SYSTEMS
The old meters would work fine for private net metering clients, they are equally accurate BOTH directions, they account for power flow AND TAX credits FAIRLY for both users and they cost NOTHING to leave in place. That first 800,000 meters changed at a cost of say $150 per meter is 120Million.
REALITY CHECK 12 - How to get the MOST out of Renewable Energy Investments
You've read all the REALITY CHECKs below and by now are wondering "Is it even worth it to even try to GO GREEN"
The answer is YES absolutely . . you just need to avoid the common misconceptions and mis-information fed to you by the media and possibly even your neighbours. Not that your neighbours don't know anything about renewables but unless they own a system now and have tried net metering or off grid operations then they likely can offer you any REAL advice.
Going GREEN or even partially GREEN is easy and cost effective but you do need to make some changes in the way you use heat and use energy generally . . . and to do it cost effectively you need to find some other source for heat and hot water other than electricity. Heating systems that use a lot of electricity will be hard to support with wind and solar generators that are inexpensive and almost impossible to support off grid..
Also you want to use the MOST energy efficient appliances you can. That means Compact florescent lights, newer fridge/freezer compressor technology, and energy efficient pumps and fans for well water or furnace fans etc. Think about getting LED lighting in the most common use areas like kitchen and entry or hallways. Costs more but a lot less energy over the years . . a lot less.
Install SYSTEM power bars so you can turn of ALL your video/audio equipment at once and prevent "Phantom loads" from sucking power continuously even though you are not using them'
Then . . stay connected (if you can) and begin with a couple of solar panels and maybe a small turbine if your local municipality will permit (See the CANWEA website for small wind municipal planning guidelines). Start small but plan for expansion . . maybe get a solar pedestal mount that will hold 8 200W panels but only buy 2 or 4 to start. Wire it so it will handle 8 or more.
You've read all the REALITY CHECKs below and by now are wondering "Is it even worth it to even try to GO GREEN"
The answer is YES absolutely . . you just need to avoid the common misconceptions and mis-information fed to you by the media and possibly even your neighbours. Not that your neighbours don't know anything about renewables but unless they own a system now and have tried net metering or off grid operations then they likely can offer you any REAL advice.
Going GREEN or even partially GREEN is easy and cost effective but you do need to make some changes in the way you use heat and use energy generally . . . and to do it cost effectively you need to find some other source for heat and hot water other than electricity. Heating systems that use a lot of electricity will be hard to support with wind and solar generators that are inexpensive and almost impossible to support off grid..
Also you want to use the MOST energy efficient appliances you can. That means Compact florescent lights, newer fridge/freezer compressor technology, and energy efficient pumps and fans for well water or furnace fans etc. Think about getting LED lighting in the most common use areas like kitchen and entry or hallways. Costs more but a lot less energy over the years . . a lot less.
Install SYSTEM power bars so you can turn of ALL your video/audio equipment at once and prevent "Phantom loads" from sucking power continuously even though you are not using them'
Then . . stay connected (if you can) and begin with a couple of solar panels and maybe a small turbine if your local municipality will permit (See the CANWEA website for small wind municipal planning guidelines). Start small but plan for expansion . . maybe get a solar pedestal mount that will hold 8 200W panels but only buy 2 or 4 to start. Wire it so it will handle 8 or more.
REALITY CHECK 13
If you live in Ontario Canada (March 08) you probably received a 13 page brochure in the mail from the Government of Ontario and sponsored by Hydro One and Powerwize . . which is an electricity association of other power companies like Toronto Hydro and Hydro Ottawa as well as others. The brochure is full if information about what SMART meters will do and how things are going to change once EVERY home in Ontario is equipped with one. The old analog meter is going to be obsolete very soon. Lots more info here on the Hydro One Networks website site as well as a copy of the brochure and lots of interactive calculators on the Powerwize.ca site.
This whole brochure is obviously intended to paint a ROSEY picture of this program and make everyone feel comfortable about the costs and impact it will have on their lives . . but . . In reading the "few Q & A's" in the last couple of pages I thought I'd "read between the lines" of this glossy brochure for you and offer come deeper level of understanding on this program, so you know more about what's happening to your power bill and services. I'm not against SMART meters as long as you know what you are in for, but the brochure really skims over the reality of SMART Meters without really telling you the real impact . . kind of like that NUCLEAR ad on TV that's been playing. In REALITY things are about to change substantially for Ontarians once these devices are all installed. There are good an necessary reasons for what they are doing with SMART Meters but . . pick up your brochure is you have it handy or download it from the hydro One link above and read along. See if we can discover the true impact.
It's fine to say there will be "new options for managing your electricity costs" but in reality it's further eliminating some good options as well . . permanently . . and it will force you to adopt a more conservative style of use or pay significantly more for electricity if you don't comply. In reality the price of MOST of the energy you use now with almost double from about 5 cents to 9.2 cents/kWhr.
The first question is "Why is Ontario introducing smart meters?" . . The reality is we all need to be more conscious of our energy waste and become more efficient. Few people will conserve without an incentive so COST/kWhr is the incentive . . The sooner it really "hurts" to pay our power bill the sooner we'll change our habits. Bottom line though is we have been getting such a low price for so long we think we are entitled to have it never go up and this can't go on any longer. The brochure says they "need to replace nearly 80% of our generating capacity and expand the system". (Pg 4). That's true but the purely Nuclear direction they've chose is unprecedented world wide, and that costs a lot of tax money paid for over decades by rising energy costs. Beyond new generating capacity they need to rebuild substantial portions of the GRID infrastructure (power lines and transformers and switches) which both old and out of date . . not optimized for next distributed, renewable energy sources. . a likely reason no one in government is paying much attention to any other energy proposals.
The cost of just putting SMART meters in every home in Ontario is only part of the "program cost" and that is projected at 1.07 BILLION. For each one of the 1.3 million homes then the cost is therefore about $823 . . but they say they'll only add about $3-$4 to your monthly bill to cover the installation. If that's the case then we'll all be paying that $3-$4 charge for the next 17 years. Either that our our debt charge or taxes will be tapped for the balance.
There are lots of hints and tips on how to save energy and lower your costs but as everyone realizes few people are planning to do their washing in the middle o f the night and young families with kids will NOT be able to wait till the weekend to do it. Whether you like it or not Time of Use (TOU) billing is going to cost you more and it's revisable upward EVERY SIX MONTHS.
One of the interesting side effects of SMART meters for wind and solar or net-metered customers is they can track your grid usage as separate from your personal power generation. This could mean that any taxes owed on energy you receive is charged but NOT credited when you return energy to the grid temporarily. That means you are paying GST, PST . . AND THE DEBT CHARGES effectively on energy you jsut produced for FREE . . because the bill on all the energy you receive from the grid even if you just sent the same amount of power to the grid an hour before. You won't get credit for the taxes . . .just the energy. Since taxes and delivery charges are larger than the energy costs this substantially reduces the EFFICIENCY of doing net-metering unless you are producing a lot more power than you're using. No net metering explanations I've seen on the web actually address this issue.
If you live in Ontario Canada (March 08) you probably received a 13 page brochure in the mail from the Government of Ontario and sponsored by Hydro One and Powerwize . . which is an electricity association of other power companies like Toronto Hydro and Hydro Ottawa as well as others. The brochure is full if information about what SMART meters will do and how things are going to change once EVERY home in Ontario is equipped with one. The old analog meter is going to be obsolete very soon. Lots more info here on the Hydro One Networks website site as well as a copy of the brochure and lots of interactive calculators on the Powerwize.ca site.
This whole brochure is obviously intended to paint a ROSEY picture of this program and make everyone feel comfortable about the costs and impact it will have on their lives . . but . . In reading the "few Q & A's" in the last couple of pages I thought I'd "read between the lines" of this glossy brochure for you and offer come deeper level of understanding on this program, so you know more about what's happening to your power bill and services. I'm not against SMART meters as long as you know what you are in for, but the brochure really skims over the reality of SMART Meters without really telling you the real impact . . kind of like that NUCLEAR ad on TV that's been playing. In REALITY things are about to change substantially for Ontarians once these devices are all installed. There are good an necessary reasons for what they are doing with SMART Meters but . . pick up your brochure is you have it handy or download it from the hydro One link above and read along. See if we can discover the true impact.
It's fine to say there will be "new options for managing your electricity costs" but in reality it's further eliminating some good options as well . . permanently . . and it will force you to adopt a more conservative style of use or pay significantly more for electricity if you don't comply. In reality the price of MOST of the energy you use now with almost double from about 5 cents to 9.2 cents/kWhr.
The first question is "Why is Ontario introducing smart meters?" . . The reality is we all need to be more conscious of our energy waste and become more efficient. Few people will conserve without an incentive so COST/kWhr is the incentive . . The sooner it really "hurts" to pay our power bill the sooner we'll change our habits. Bottom line though is we have been getting such a low price for so long we think we are entitled to have it never go up and this can't go on any longer. The brochure says they "need to replace nearly 80% of our generating capacity and expand the system". (Pg 4). That's true but the purely Nuclear direction they've chose is unprecedented world wide, and that costs a lot of tax money paid for over decades by rising energy costs. Beyond new generating capacity they need to rebuild substantial portions of the GRID infrastructure (power lines and transformers and switches) which both old and out of date . . not optimized for next distributed, renewable energy sources. . a likely reason no one in government is paying much attention to any other energy proposals.
The cost of just putting SMART meters in every home in Ontario is only part of the "program cost" and that is projected at 1.07 BILLION. For each one of the 1.3 million homes then the cost is therefore about $823 . . but they say they'll only add about $3-$4 to your monthly bill to cover the installation. If that's the case then we'll all be paying that $3-$4 charge for the next 17 years. Either that our our debt charge or taxes will be tapped for the balance.
There are lots of hints and tips on how to save energy and lower your costs but as everyone realizes few people are planning to do their washing in the middle o f the night and young families with kids will NOT be able to wait till the weekend to do it. Whether you like it or not Time of Use (TOU) billing is going to cost you more and it's revisable upward EVERY SIX MONTHS.
One of the interesting side effects of SMART meters for wind and solar or net-metered customers is they can track your grid usage as separate from your personal power generation. This could mean that any taxes owed on energy you receive is charged but NOT credited when you return energy to the grid temporarily. That means you are paying GST, PST . . AND THE DEBT CHARGES effectively on energy you jsut produced for FREE . . because the bill on all the energy you receive from the grid even if you just sent the same amount of power to the grid an hour before. You won't get credit for the taxes . . .just the energy. Since taxes and delivery charges are larger than the energy costs this substantially reduces the EFFICIENCY of doing net-metering unless you are producing a lot more power than you're using. No net metering explanations I've seen on the web actually address this issue.
REALITY CHECK 14 - Starry Eyed on 80.2 Cents
FIRST OF ALL - Do not take this the wrong way. Solar on the roof WORKS! It's just most people are too fixed on the 80cents and ignore the real impact on the roof and the actual revenue that can be achieved.
When the OPA first offered it's record breaking 80.2 cents/kWhr for solar on the roof over a year ago everyone did a quick calculation in their head on 10kW systems and immediately sent in their application. Now, and well into our second season of installations . . and much "kerfuffle" over roof vs ground . . . people still seemed focused on getting the 80 cents no matter the REAL cost in 10 or 20 years. I'm not trying to stifle the market. I want to sell lots of roof rail as well as ground mounts but I honestly think no one has thought this thing through when it comes to REALITY.
Does the highest price per watt mean you make more money on the roof? All things considered I'm willing to bet it's not. I think the only winners in this game will be the ones who got grandfathered with 80.2 cents and a ground mount. If you live in Ontario at least, here are some things you might want to consider.
1. The house does not move and so roofs can't track the sun and get the 30-40% more energy and revenue available like tracking ground systems can. Roof's also come at different slopes and 4/12 or 6/12 slope is not ideal for maximum production or revenue especially if it does not face True South.
2. Snow cover in winter and dirt and dust in the summer are going to reduce your ACTUAL energy collected and revenue by as much as 20% depending on snowfall and roof slope. Depending on the panels you choose you might loose less energy and gain more revenue if they were tolerant to ice and snow ridges along the lower edge of the panels as barely melted snow refreezes as it drips off. That will happen to all panels. Day4 M45 or M60 is one such panel manufacturer that claims to be ice/shadow tolerant on it's lower edges. Some new installations this season may prove that doing product research BEFORE you buy, might cost a bit more cost/watt but they may generate much more revenue in 20 years than the ones that offered you the "Best Deal" or the ones being pushed at the time by your installer.
3. Hot panels baking on the roof in summer (130-140degrees when the air temp is only 75-80 degrees), produce 15-20% less energy and revenue than panels on a pedestal with good air circulation.
4. The cost of replacing the shingles within next the 20 years, means removing and replacing the solar array at additional cost.
5. The snow load your roof is calculated for now must accommodate another 1000kg (2200lbs) of solar array, and now instead of of that same roof supporting a snow and wind load across a surface area of 1000sq ft . . that PLUS 2200lbs of solar array and wind loading is concentrated on 60-80 bolts of support pressing on an area of only 12 square inches of your rafters. (~80sqcm). That's a lot of stress on trusses that may not have been designed for very concentrated solar array loads AND wind and snow.
So think about all the REALITY of "Solar On the ROOF" before you decide that 80cents is better than nothing. If you work out the numbers and the losses from all these less than ideal issues you may conclude that Tracking Ground mounts will produce more energy and revenue in the long run. Before you do that however consider REALITY CHECK 15 - Optimizing Solar Production at 64.2cents. Pedestal mounts can be very productive . . . but they also have issue to consider before you invest.
FIRST OF ALL - Do not take this the wrong way. Solar on the roof WORKS! It's just most people are too fixed on the 80cents and ignore the real impact on the roof and the actual revenue that can be achieved.
When the OPA first offered it's record breaking 80.2 cents/kWhr for solar on the roof over a year ago everyone did a quick calculation in their head on 10kW systems and immediately sent in their application. Now, and well into our second season of installations . . and much "kerfuffle" over roof vs ground . . . people still seemed focused on getting the 80 cents no matter the REAL cost in 10 or 20 years. I'm not trying to stifle the market. I want to sell lots of roof rail as well as ground mounts but I honestly think no one has thought this thing through when it comes to REALITY.
Does the highest price per watt mean you make more money on the roof? All things considered I'm willing to bet it's not. I think the only winners in this game will be the ones who got grandfathered with 80.2 cents and a ground mount. If you live in Ontario at least, here are some things you might want to consider.
1. The house does not move and so roofs can't track the sun and get the 30-40% more energy and revenue available like tracking ground systems can. Roof's also come at different slopes and 4/12 or 6/12 slope is not ideal for maximum production or revenue especially if it does not face True South.
2. Snow cover in winter and dirt and dust in the summer are going to reduce your ACTUAL energy collected and revenue by as much as 20% depending on snowfall and roof slope. Depending on the panels you choose you might loose less energy and gain more revenue if they were tolerant to ice and snow ridges along the lower edge of the panels as barely melted snow refreezes as it drips off. That will happen to all panels. Day4 M45 or M60 is one such panel manufacturer that claims to be ice/shadow tolerant on it's lower edges. Some new installations this season may prove that doing product research BEFORE you buy, might cost a bit more cost/watt but they may generate much more revenue in 20 years than the ones that offered you the "Best Deal" or the ones being pushed at the time by your installer.
3. Hot panels baking on the roof in summer (130-140degrees when the air temp is only 75-80 degrees), produce 15-20% less energy and revenue than panels on a pedestal with good air circulation.
4. The cost of replacing the shingles within next the 20 years, means removing and replacing the solar array at additional cost.
5. The snow load your roof is calculated for now must accommodate another 1000kg (2200lbs) of solar array, and now instead of of that same roof supporting a snow and wind load across a surface area of 1000sq ft . . that PLUS 2200lbs of solar array and wind loading is concentrated on 60-80 bolts of support pressing on an area of only 12 square inches of your rafters. (~80sqcm). That's a lot of stress on trusses that may not have been designed for very concentrated solar array loads AND wind and snow.
So think about all the REALITY of "Solar On the ROOF" before you decide that 80cents is better than nothing. If you work out the numbers and the losses from all these less than ideal issues you may conclude that Tracking Ground mounts will produce more energy and revenue in the long run. Before you do that however consider REALITY CHECK 15 - Optimizing Solar Production at 64.2cents. Pedestal mounts can be very productive . . . but they also have issue to consider before you invest.
REALITY CHECK 15 - Getting the MOST out of Solar PV
A lot has been said by OPA and others about the cost of Ground Mounts and why solar on the roof is worth 80 cents while mounting on the ground is only worth 64 cents/kWhr. In fact if you do the numbers and look at the real energy production of the panels you've chosen you'll see that you can actually make more energy and earn more revenue from tracking systems versus fixed mounts. . . . but at what cost . . . is it really worth it or am I better to just fill my roof and just sit back and collect the higher contract price?
Here are some things to consider. Whether someone is paying you per kHr or you simply want the most power you can collect per dollar spent then consider these ideas.
1. PV panels produce more per hour if they remain cool (like <20DegC) . Good air circulation means Pedestal of Ground Mounts generally run cooler and produce more energy than roof mounts. You can't get that on a roof unless that are raised or tilted away from the roof.
2. On the ground they are generally easier to clean or keep clear of snow. . . so more kWhrs and more overall revenue especially in snow covered areas. Don't forget that in the country, especially along or near dirt roads the local dust even a concession away can rob 5% or more from your production every hour they stay dirty. Again, more kwhrs . . more revenue.
3. When snow does slide off, even in cold weather it can refreeze as it gets to the bottom edge and leave an ice ridge across the lowest row of panels. For most arrays that means a loss of up to 15-20% production. The entire array, whether in series or parallel ( unless they are on separate controllers), produces LESS energy and less revenue until that partial shading is cleared. Easily done on the ground. . . but did you know that one pane, Day4 made in Vancouver has special wiring around the lower row of cells that all but eliminates that shading issue. I know of no other panel that does that but then virtually no other panel manufacturer in the world has paid attention to Canadian solar issues like Day4 has. Day4 panels may well be worth purchasing for a roof system, even with a bit extra cost, just for that extra production value alone.
4. Adding a tracker can add as much as 30-35% more kWhrs (Compare) and 30-35% more revenue than a fixed ground or roof mount. You'll hear claims of 45% but that actually only applies in high "specular light" areas like central Spain or southern Arizona where there are few clouds. Southern Ontario and most regions in Canada are dominantly "diffuse light" regions where you don't see a strong shadow most of the time due to puffy clouds, haze or high overcast.
5. If you have a tracker and it uses regular ac power to run the drive motors and controller, you'll need to include the cost of the wire and conduit to bring 120v AC power from the road. . . and remember when you use that power it's costing you 80cents/kWhr. Is the tracker chasing the brightest spot in the sky all the time? That's a lot of wear and tear and maintenance over 20 years for 2 motor and controllers etc . . not to mention the additional power you are using to get very little actual advantage in production. ( typically about 3-4% annually over a single axis azimuth tracker). How many kWhrs a day does the tracker use?It probably converts 120v AC to 24v DC and runs at about 8amps when driving ( that's 192watts). Ask them how many kWhrs a day it consumes.
6. If you put a post in the ground will the local municipality consider it "real property" like an in ground swimming pool and add that 60-100k PV system to your taxable property value? What does that cost each year off your PV production earnings? Check your local municipal by-laws. They differ widely between communities. If you can surface mount on a movable slab of concrete it's like an above ground pool and attracts no "real property" assessment.
7. What happens when you string 6-12 panels together in Series? . . . well you get 300-600vDC at the array. How you handle that is pretty important from a safety perspective so check with your local ESA guy to find out what safety precautions are needed in ground based arrays . . special wire . . conduit . . . safety interlocks. It may not be as simple as you'd wish when ground mount systems are so accessible. Maybe putting 600v strings of panels on the roof might be less of a hassle and safety risk after all. . . and to heck with getting every watt you can. Just trying to put some REALITY into your decision making.
8. What does the overall system cost installed? Considering panels performance, type of tracker, power demands and reliability of the tracker, winter cold performance etc. Then are you planning to clean or keep the snow off or just let them clear naturally? What about warranty on the mechanisms and the cost of insurance or connection charges. They are all part of a decision on whether the annual production in DOLLARS not cents/kWhr is worth it.
All things considered I think Ground mount single axis Azimuth trackers offer the best value considering cost, convenience and production/revenue generating capability. . . don't discount roof out-of-hand however. At 80cents it will still pay for itself with an "install and forget" approach to revenue generation. . . as long as you've considered the points made in REALITY CHECK 14.
A lot has been said by OPA and others about the cost of Ground Mounts and why solar on the roof is worth 80 cents while mounting on the ground is only worth 64 cents/kWhr. In fact if you do the numbers and look at the real energy production of the panels you've chosen you'll see that you can actually make more energy and earn more revenue from tracking systems versus fixed mounts. . . . but at what cost . . . is it really worth it or am I better to just fill my roof and just sit back and collect the higher contract price?
Here are some things to consider. Whether someone is paying you per kHr or you simply want the most power you can collect per dollar spent then consider these ideas.
1. PV panels produce more per hour if they remain cool (like <20DegC) . Good air circulation means Pedestal of Ground Mounts generally run cooler and produce more energy than roof mounts. You can't get that on a roof unless that are raised or tilted away from the roof.
2. On the ground they are generally easier to clean or keep clear of snow. . . so more kWhrs and more overall revenue especially in snow covered areas. Don't forget that in the country, especially along or near dirt roads the local dust even a concession away can rob 5% or more from your production every hour they stay dirty. Again, more kwhrs . . more revenue.
3. When snow does slide off, even in cold weather it can refreeze as it gets to the bottom edge and leave an ice ridge across the lowest row of panels. For most arrays that means a loss of up to 15-20% production. The entire array, whether in series or parallel ( unless they are on separate controllers), produces LESS energy and less revenue until that partial shading is cleared. Easily done on the ground. . . but did you know that one pane, Day4 made in Vancouver has special wiring around the lower row of cells that all but eliminates that shading issue. I know of no other panel that does that but then virtually no other panel manufacturer in the world has paid attention to Canadian solar issues like Day4 has. Day4 panels may well be worth purchasing for a roof system, even with a bit extra cost, just for that extra production value alone.
4. Adding a tracker can add as much as 30-35% more kWhrs (Compare) and 30-35% more revenue than a fixed ground or roof mount. You'll hear claims of 45% but that actually only applies in high "specular light" areas like central Spain or southern Arizona where there are few clouds. Southern Ontario and most regions in Canada are dominantly "diffuse light" regions where you don't see a strong shadow most of the time due to puffy clouds, haze or high overcast.
5. If you have a tracker and it uses regular ac power to run the drive motors and controller, you'll need to include the cost of the wire and conduit to bring 120v AC power from the road. . . and remember when you use that power it's costing you 80cents/kWhr. Is the tracker chasing the brightest spot in the sky all the time? That's a lot of wear and tear and maintenance over 20 years for 2 motor and controllers etc . . not to mention the additional power you are using to get very little actual advantage in production. ( typically about 3-4% annually over a single axis azimuth tracker). How many kWhrs a day does the tracker use?It probably converts 120v AC to 24v DC and runs at about 8amps when driving ( that's 192watts). Ask them how many kWhrs a day it consumes.
6. If you put a post in the ground will the local municipality consider it "real property" like an in ground swimming pool and add that 60-100k PV system to your taxable property value? What does that cost each year off your PV production earnings? Check your local municipal by-laws. They differ widely between communities. If you can surface mount on a movable slab of concrete it's like an above ground pool and attracts no "real property" assessment.
7. What happens when you string 6-12 panels together in Series? . . . well you get 300-600vDC at the array. How you handle that is pretty important from a safety perspective so check with your local ESA guy to find out what safety precautions are needed in ground based arrays . . special wire . . conduit . . . safety interlocks. It may not be as simple as you'd wish when ground mount systems are so accessible. Maybe putting 600v strings of panels on the roof might be less of a hassle and safety risk after all. . . and to heck with getting every watt you can. Just trying to put some REALITY into your decision making.
8. What does the overall system cost installed? Considering panels performance, type of tracker, power demands and reliability of the tracker, winter cold performance etc. Then are you planning to clean or keep the snow off or just let them clear naturally? What about warranty on the mechanisms and the cost of insurance or connection charges. They are all part of a decision on whether the annual production in DOLLARS not cents/kWhr is worth it.
All things considered I think Ground mount single axis Azimuth trackers offer the best value considering cost, convenience and production/revenue generating capability. . . don't discount roof out-of-hand however. At 80cents it will still pay for itself with an "install and forget" approach to revenue generation. . . as long as you've considered the points made in REALITY CHECK 14.
If you really care about the technical discussion read this . . then read the REALITY CHECK below
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Talk:Directory:Micro-Inverter_System_by_Enphase_Energy
REALITY CHECK - 16
The discussion above is a very detailed and technical discussion around the many nuances of an "advanced" technology . . . bottom line is . . . it's promising but has only 2-3yrs of history and no direct competitors. Early adopters will be either rewarded or disappointed by the ultimate Mean Time Between Failure ( proven MTBF) of the system and the many variables around cost performance, efficiencies and ROI under highly variable REAL WORLD conditions of roofs and trackers, cold and wet vs hot and dry or even hot and wet. . . . To me it's not a technical or performance argument no matter how wonderful and redundant the technology is. It's a practical argument. Realistically, because Enphase is such a unique inverter solution . . . . it comes down to . . . a BET . . . that one company, Enphase, will not fail to deliver for the next 20 years+ . . Enphase customers are BETTING on ONE new system configuration for their long term future . . . for early adopters such bets are never a consideration in purchasing . . .because they never think long term . . . . but when the mass market bets on a new technology . . . for a couple of decades . . . I think it's rarely a long term honeymoon . . . technology advanced rapidly. Think IBM and Apple . . . VHS and BetaMax . . standard DVD or Blueray.
With Enphase, with EVERY failure you experience . . . GUARANTEED you will have to deal with Enphase . . . no other option, nobody with alternative customer service, or a competitive price . . . just Enphase . . even if other companies have newer, better micro-inverters on the market, you will need a compatible vintage Enphase inverter to complete the repair . . . unless you are prepared to replace them all. . . Will there be lots of Model A Enphase available in 2020 or 2030 when the panels are still guaranteed to produce? With virtually any other inverter choice you will guaranteed be able to trash the failure and upgrade to any of a dozen companies with the latest technology.
Enphase may well be around and if they do they will likely have advanced new microinverters. Will they perform optimally in the same string with your old models? . . you'll only know that answer some day in the future. To me, if I'm investing into a 20+ year program . . . it's early to be placing a 20 year bet on any unique product no matter what it offers . . .I'm not ready to put ALL my investment at the mercy of any ONE new product no matter how good their initial technology looks . . .It's not because it's bad technology. It's because it's the ONLY solution using that technology and I will have locked my bet into that one.
In a rapidly advancing and diversifying technology future I want to be able to choose from many suppliers as improvement and failures happen. If it were a short term bet of a couple of years fine but, for the long term of a n OPA contract, I'd rather make a safer long term BET that guarantees there will be dozens of inverter options with improved performance, some coming from companies that don't exist yet. Over 20+ years, I won't risk not being able to take advantage of them when they appear by placing a long term bet on any one of them.
An just so it's clear, I am not a technical expert on inverters. I only wrote this REALITY CHECK as a way to rationalize a long term decision whether or not to adopt a new and unique technology for 20 years before there are any competitors.
Energy Systems for the Next Generation
David G Cooke
President and CTO
True North Power NG Inc
519-632-8830 x250
www.truenorthpower.com
REALITY CHECK 17 - Let's get REAL
Let's get REAL about the cost of electricity. Here in Ontario people seem to mistrust both the government and the utility companies. Journalists and politicians talk about the high cost of electricity and anticipate that cost rising by 40% or more in the next 5 years. We constantly hear the screams of disgruntled electricity users talk about how we are being lied to about the price of power and what the OPA is "behind the scenes" "manipulating the price of energy", "Scheming to get more money out of us". In REALITY however, I really think those people don't want to face the truth . . .as Jack Nicholson famously said, "You can't handle the TRUTH!"
There have been lots of poorly thought out government decisions made, overpaid executives and poorly implemented programs administered, but the TRUTH IS electricity is too cheap here in Ontario. Market complexities and government oversight from politicians who don't really understand how the system actually works, leads to manipulation of both supply and price as well as the media. Not surprisingly then, it sometimes leads to back room dealings such as was exposed in the California markets . . . for example: this discussion from Wikipedia
"Megawatt laundering is the term, analogous to money laundering, coined to describe the process of obscuring the true origins of specific quantities of electricity being sold on the energy market. The California energy market allowed for energy companies to charge higher prices for electricity produced out-of-state. It was therefore advantageous to make it appear that electricity was being generated somewhere other than California."
READ MORE HERE, Fascinating! - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
While there is no way of knowing or even suspecting these types of manipulations are actually going on in other jurisdictions it's fare to say "It should not be happening in a publicly funded system". What we can say for sure is, regardless of any shenanigans the REAL COST of electricity is arbitrarily low here in Ontario, and if you think prices are low now because energy demand is low you would only be partly right . . . due to a downturn in manufacturing from recession . . . but that's only part of the game. StatsCanada says "Canada has some of the lowest prices for electricity in the world, mainly due to Canada's natural resources, such as inexpensive hydro (i.e., water resources) and a vast coal supply (see Figure 1 from 2007)." BUT . . .the Ontario government has committed to closing coal fired plants while at the same time struggling to keep constituents happy by keeping electricity prices from rising. The REALITY IS Ontario electricity cost less than it did over a decade ago.Here are three bills from my home in the past decade.
Aug 1998 1230kWHrs cost $124.24 = 10cents/kWhr in 1998
May 2003 2140kWHrs cost $203.04 = 9.5 cents/kWhr in 2003
Nov 2010 757kWHrs cost $124.40 = 16.4 cents/kWhr in 2010
By the most conservative method of calculating inflation 10 cents in 1998 equals 16.8 cents in 2010. . . so in fact the REAL cost of electricity has not yet increased . . . . in over a decade. . . it did not even keep up with inflation. . .
Here's what Wikipedia says th rest of the world is paying. You may not appreciate what a sheltered life we live in Canada and especially here in Ontario.
Country or Territory / US cents / 1kWh / As of / Sources
Australia / 18.55 / 2009–2010 / PEI[2]
Belgium / 11.43 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
Canada / 6.18 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
Croatia / 17.55 / 2008-07-01 / HEP
Denmark / 42.89 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
Finland / 6.95 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
France / 19.25 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Germany / 30.66 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Hong Kong
(Kowloon/ NT) / 11.80 / 2010 / CLP announces new tariff[4]
Hong Kong
(HK Is.)12.30 / 2008-05-07 / HEC[5]
Iceland / 8.45 / 2010-08-15 / OR[6]
Ireland / 23.89 / 2006–2007 / ESB[7]
Italy / 37.23 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Malaysia / 7.42 / Dec 2007 / ST[8]
Netherlands / 34.70 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Perú / 10.44 / 2006–2007 / PTL[9]
Philippines / 28.80 / April 2010 / EEP[3]
Portugal / 12.85 / 2010 / EDP[10]
Singapore / 17.34 / Jul 2010 / SingaporePower[2]
Spain / 5.55 / 2010 / Iberdrola[11]
South Africa / 10.15 / 2008–2009 / Eskom[12]
Sweden / 27.34 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Kingdom of Tonga / 45.70 / 2010 / [13]
Turkey /18.3 /2010 / [14]
UK /18.59 / 2009 / EEP[3]
USA / 9.28 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
It's really hard to quantify and compare REAL electricity prices even within Ontario let alone around the world. There are too many variables in how costs are calculated. . . . But . . in REALITY while much of the rest of the world already pays 2 to 3 times what we pay here in Ontario the public, the utilities and the politicians are all squaring off to do battle over increased energy costs. For decades previous governments have arbitrarily held prices artificially low hoping the public will ignore the REAL cost if energy AND inflation. Energy costs more to produce today than 10 years ago. Dwindling fossil fuel supplies and the new renewable energy just plain cost more to produce. Nuclear power is even more inefficient and expensive by any measure. . . .especially when you consider the impact of burning these fuels has on our planet.
So time to get REAL! . . time to pay the piper . . . before the whole system collapses around us. Ontario needs new cleaner energy sources. It all costs money and only "renewable sources" can significantly eliminate the health and pollution costs we also like to ignore. Yes there are many ways to interpret the data, the costs, the inflation . . . the REAL cost of electricity. . . it's a quagmire of rates and dispatch methods, over-scheduling, transmission constraints and more, you only need to know that the "conspiracy" is largely being driven by public outrage that we should never have to pay more for electricity than we did 20 years ago. . . . eventually we ALL have to face REALITY.
The best hedge I know to that scenario is to start investing in yourself . . . . begin to acquire the equipment necessary to collect and store your own electricity. . . . because . . . when you own the equipment the energy is FREE . . and not subject to taxes, rising costs, usage fees, delivery fees, HST OR inflation. Either go big with a 10kW MicroFIT system and sell power for the next 20 years or get a smaller 1-2kW system to produce at least some of what you need during peak hours. Then add to the system as you can afford to, as technology improves and as equipment prices come down. Every kilowatt you produce and use yourself is one you don't pay tax on or ever pay more for.
Let's GET REAL. Energy is everywhere. All you need is the equipment and the energy is FREE!
Let's get REAL about the cost of electricity. Here in Ontario people seem to mistrust both the government and the utility companies. Journalists and politicians talk about the high cost of electricity and anticipate that cost rising by 40% or more in the next 5 years. We constantly hear the screams of disgruntled electricity users talk about how we are being lied to about the price of power and what the OPA is "behind the scenes" "manipulating the price of energy", "Scheming to get more money out of us". In REALITY however, I really think those people don't want to face the truth . . .as Jack Nicholson famously said, "You can't handle the TRUTH!"
There have been lots of poorly thought out government decisions made, overpaid executives and poorly implemented programs administered, but the TRUTH IS electricity is too cheap here in Ontario. Market complexities and government oversight from politicians who don't really understand how the system actually works, leads to manipulation of both supply and price as well as the media. Not surprisingly then, it sometimes leads to back room dealings such as was exposed in the California markets . . . for example: this discussion from Wikipedia
"Megawatt laundering is the term, analogous to money laundering, coined to describe the process of obscuring the true origins of specific quantities of electricity being sold on the energy market. The California energy market allowed for energy companies to charge higher prices for electricity produced out-of-state. It was therefore advantageous to make it appear that electricity was being generated somewhere other than California."
READ MORE HERE, Fascinating! - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis
While there is no way of knowing or even suspecting these types of manipulations are actually going on in other jurisdictions it's fare to say "It should not be happening in a publicly funded system". What we can say for sure is, regardless of any shenanigans the REAL COST of electricity is arbitrarily low here in Ontario, and if you think prices are low now because energy demand is low you would only be partly right . . . due to a downturn in manufacturing from recession . . . but that's only part of the game. StatsCanada says "Canada has some of the lowest prices for electricity in the world, mainly due to Canada's natural resources, such as inexpensive hydro (i.e., water resources) and a vast coal supply (see Figure 1 from 2007)." BUT . . .the Ontario government has committed to closing coal fired plants while at the same time struggling to keep constituents happy by keeping electricity prices from rising. The REALITY IS Ontario electricity cost less than it did over a decade ago.Here are three bills from my home in the past decade.
Aug 1998 1230kWHrs cost $124.24 = 10cents/kWhr in 1998
May 2003 2140kWHrs cost $203.04 = 9.5 cents/kWhr in 2003
Nov 2010 757kWHrs cost $124.40 = 16.4 cents/kWhr in 2010
By the most conservative method of calculating inflation 10 cents in 1998 equals 16.8 cents in 2010. . . so in fact the REAL cost of electricity has not yet increased . . . . in over a decade. . . it did not even keep up with inflation. . .
Here's what Wikipedia says th rest of the world is paying. You may not appreciate what a sheltered life we live in Canada and especially here in Ontario.
Country or Territory / US cents / 1kWh / As of / Sources
Australia / 18.55 / 2009–2010 / PEI[2]
Belgium / 11.43 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
Canada / 6.18 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
Croatia / 17.55 / 2008-07-01 / HEP
Denmark / 42.89 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
Finland / 6.95 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
France / 19.25 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Germany / 30.66 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Hong Kong
(Kowloon/ NT) / 11.80 / 2010 / CLP announces new tariff[4]
Hong Kong
(HK Is.)12.30 / 2008-05-07 / HEC[5]
Iceland / 8.45 / 2010-08-15 / OR[6]
Ireland / 23.89 / 2006–2007 / ESB[7]
Italy / 37.23 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Malaysia / 7.42 / Dec 2007 / ST[8]
Netherlands / 34.70 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Perú / 10.44 / 2006–2007 / PTL[9]
Philippines / 28.80 / April 2010 / EEP[3]
Portugal / 12.85 / 2010 / EDP[10]
Singapore / 17.34 / Jul 2010 / SingaporePower[2]
Spain / 5.55 / 2010 / Iberdrola[11]
South Africa / 10.15 / 2008–2009 / Eskom[12]
Sweden / 27.34 / 2009 / EEP[3]
Kingdom of Tonga / 45.70 / 2010 / [13]
Turkey /18.3 /2010 / [14]
UK /18.59 / 2009 / EEP[3]
USA / 9.28 / 2006–2007 / PEI[2]
It's really hard to quantify and compare REAL electricity prices even within Ontario let alone around the world. There are too many variables in how costs are calculated. . . . But . . in REALITY while much of the rest of the world already pays 2 to 3 times what we pay here in Ontario the public, the utilities and the politicians are all squaring off to do battle over increased energy costs. For decades previous governments have arbitrarily held prices artificially low hoping the public will ignore the REAL cost if energy AND inflation. Energy costs more to produce today than 10 years ago. Dwindling fossil fuel supplies and the new renewable energy just plain cost more to produce. Nuclear power is even more inefficient and expensive by any measure. . . .especially when you consider the impact of burning these fuels has on our planet.
So time to get REAL! . . time to pay the piper . . . before the whole system collapses around us. Ontario needs new cleaner energy sources. It all costs money and only "renewable sources" can significantly eliminate the health and pollution costs we also like to ignore. Yes there are many ways to interpret the data, the costs, the inflation . . . the REAL cost of electricity. . . it's a quagmire of rates and dispatch methods, over-scheduling, transmission constraints and more, you only need to know that the "conspiracy" is largely being driven by public outrage that we should never have to pay more for electricity than we did 20 years ago. . . . eventually we ALL have to face REALITY.
The best hedge I know to that scenario is to start investing in yourself . . . . begin to acquire the equipment necessary to collect and store your own electricity. . . . because . . . when you own the equipment the energy is FREE . . and not subject to taxes, rising costs, usage fees, delivery fees, HST OR inflation. Either go big with a 10kW MicroFIT system and sell power for the next 20 years or get a smaller 1-2kW system to produce at least some of what you need during peak hours. Then add to the system as you can afford to, as technology improves and as equipment prices come down. Every kilowatt you produce and use yourself is one you don't pay tax on or ever pay more for.
Let's GET REAL. Energy is everywhere. All you need is the equipment and the energy is FREE!