1kW Grid Interactive Solar PV up and running

[Ross Herbert]

On Fri, 8 May 2009 15:46:37 +1000, "David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

:Franc Zabkar wrote:
:> On Fri, 08 May 2009 04:16:30 GMT, Ross Herbert
:> <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:
:>
:>> On Thu, 7 May 2009 20:57:12 +1000, "David L. Jones"
:>> <altzone@gmail.com> wrote:
:>>
:>> David, Thanks for the offer and I will take it up in the future.
:>>
:>> One thing which has only just started happening with your posts on
:>> this NG is that as soon as I hit the reply button all of the content
:>> in your post just disappears from the screen and I am left with a
:>> blank pane to type in. That is why none of your post I am responding
:>> to now appears in this response.
:>>
:>> I don't know why it happens but if I go back to respond to your
:>> earlier posts, say on Tonights New Inventors thread, it doesn't
:>> happen. It has only started happening since I responded to your post
:>> in this thread on May 7. Posts you made before that date in this
:>> thread are ok and I see everything in them when I hit reply.
:>>
:>> Can anyone give a reason?
:>
:> The post that you are replying to has a dash-dash-space in the third
:> line. This is the recognised sig delimiter, so anything that comes
:> after it is stripped.
:>
:> Either David's newsreader, OE, is having trouble recognising this
:> convention, or he's adding this line himself.
:>
:> You can use Ctrl-A to select the entire post and then hit R(eply).
:> Then delete the offending line.
:>
:> I suggest that OE users apply "OE Quotefix" to correct other quoting
:> problems, such as missing quote characters when replying to "quoted
:> printable" posts.
:>
:> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
:>
:> - Franc Zabkar
:
:Ah, I always wondered what those two dashes were!
:Outlook was putting my new sig up the top of replies, and I wasn't manually
:cut'n'pasting the dash-dash.
:Installed QuoteFix, now automatically puts the quote at the bottom. Thanks.
:
ave.


Thanks to Franc's explanation and your admission that your new sig was the cause
I now know I wasn't doing something wrong at my end.

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:57:58 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:

:Ross Herbert wrote:
:> On Thu, 07 May 2009 21:30:34 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
:> : So $US4K is approx $AU5K3.

:> that's with approval and landed here.. I don't know how they do it but
:> that's the cost on the invoice I have here.

I can't argue with that fact then.

:> :>You still have to pay for installation at
:> :> current labour costs on top of all this.

:> : the install doesn't take long apart from the board which is a couple
:> f hours max

Not from what I have seen. It took 2 blokes to fit the mounting frame and place
the panels on the roof. The "boy" then took off and left the 2 experienced
blokes there to install the inverter and ac/dc isolator box, run the cabling and
install the required isolator in the meter box, and place the labels as required
by the local authority and then testing the system. It took about 3-1/2 hours
all up. If you are doing a one man installation I think you would be lucky to do
it (properly) inside 6 hours.

BTW, unless you are a registered solar installer you won't qualify for the
rebate.

:> :> It should also be remembered that all the costs have to be submitted to
the
:> :> Australian goverment when applying for the $8K rebate,

:> : why ?
:> : surely it's an invoice which may or may not be relevant to the actual
:> :cost ?

No. the application for the rebate must be made BEFORE you place an order for
the equipment other wise you don't qualify. That's why you should have read the
guidelines and studied the application form because on that form it asks for a
breakdown of equipment plus costs.

:> :which has to be done
:> :> before you even place anorder for the equipment.
:> : nah

Read the guidelines for making an application for the rebate..

:> : Do you think they would approve
:> :> the rebate if you were not going to actually have an out of pocket
expense?
:> :
:> :why not ?

Because it is the prerogative of the federal government to refuse the rebate if
they think you are not making any contribution at all to the cost of the system.

:>
:> Have you actually downloaded and read the application form?
: no reason to

Then you haven't applied for the rebate have you?

:>
http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/renewable/pv/pubs/shcp-application-residential-21may2008.pdf
:>
:> I would say that you appear convinced of the validity of the Nuenergy
: nah
:
and other
:> similar) offer so I can only recommend that you give it a try and see what
:> happens.
: not any time soon as we already have a very large system well below
:retail
: Then report back after it has been operating for a year and let us know
:> how it is performing.

: show the way sunshine

I suppose that remark could be a pun...
I have no problem reporting back after a period of operation of my system.

:>
:> Personally, I would want a reputable company behind the supply of recognised
:> brand name equipment and a reputable qualified installer so that if there is
any
:> comeback later, I can actually talk to a real person who will have to take up
my
:> complaint.

: that's why I imported my own much cheaper


Granted. But, you haven't read the guidelines for making application for the
rebate. If you had you would have seen that you must be approved for the rebate
before placing an order for any equipment and onthe application you must
nominate both the supplier of the equipment and the registered installer along
with his company name and registraton number. Unless you did this or you are a
qualified/registered solar installer yourself (assuming you are going to install
it yourself), you won't get the rebate anyway. Looks like you will end up paying
roughly as much as I did for an inferior system..

 

[atec 7 7]

Ross Herbert wrote:

On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:57:58 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:

:Ross Herbert wrote:
:> On Thu, 07 May 2009 21:30:34 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
:> : So $US4K is approx $AU5K3.

:> that's with approval and landed here.. I don't know how they do it but
:> that's the cost on the invoice I have here.

I can't argue with that fact then.

:> :>You still have to pay for installation at
:> :> current labour costs on top of all this.

:> : the install doesn't take long apart from the board which is a couple
:> f hours max

Not from what I have seen. It took 2 blokes to fit the mounting frame and place
the panels on the roof. The "boy" then took off and left the 2 experienced
blokes there to install the inverter and ac/dc isolator box, run the cabling and
install the required isolator in the meter box, and place the labels as required
by the local authority and then testing the system. It took about 3-1/2 hours
all up. If you are doing a one man installation I think you would be lucky to do
it (properly) inside 6 hours.

BTW, unless you are a registered solar installer you won't qualify for the
rebate.

:> :> It should also be remembered that all the costs have to be submitted to
the
:> :> Australian goverment when applying for the $8K rebate,

:> : why ?
:> : surely it's an invoice which may or may not be relevant to the actual
:> :cost ?

No. the application for the rebate must be made BEFORE you place an order for
the equipment other wise you don't qualify. That's why you should have read the
guidelines and studied the application form because on that form it asks for a
breakdown of equipment plus costs.

:> :which has to be done
:> :> before you even place anorder for the equipment.
:> : nah

Read the guidelines for making an application for the rebate..

:> : Do you think they would approve
:> :> the rebate if you were not going to actually have an out of pocket
expense?
:> :
:> :why not ?

Because it is the prerogative of the federal government to refuse the rebate if
they think you are not making any contribution at all to the cost of the system.

:
:> Have you actually downloaded and read the application form?
: no reason to

Then you haven't applied for the rebate have you?

:
http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/renewable/pv/pubs/shcp-application-residential-21may2008.pdf
:
:> I would say that you appear convinced of the validity of the Nuenergy
: nah
:
and other
:> similar) offer so I can only recommend that you give it a try and see what
:> happens.
: not any time soon as we already have a very large system well below
:retail
: Then report back after it has been operating for a year and let us know
:> how it is performing.

: show the way sunshine

I suppose that remark could be a pun...
I have no problem reporting back after a period of operation of my system.

:
:> Personally, I would want a reputable company behind the supply of recognised
:> brand name equipment and a reputable qualified installer so that if there is
any
:> comeback later, I can actually talk to a real person who will have to take up
my
:> complaint.

: that's why I imported my own much cheaper


Granted. But, you haven't read the guidelines for making application for the
rebate. If you had you would have seen that you must be approved for the rebate
before placing an order for any equipment and onthe application you must
nominate both the supplier of the equipment and the registered installer along
with his company name and registraton number. Unless you did this or you are a
qualified/registered solar installer yourself
thats so wrong it's painful , I used a licensed sparky doing the

majority of work myself having the required trade certs ,
(assuming you are going to install

it yourself), you won't get the rebate anyway.
wrong

Looks like you will end up paying

roughly as much as I did for an inferior system..
utterly wrong ..

"hands hanky to wipe egg "

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:44:47 +1000, Ross Vumbaca
<rossv1@au.com.optushome> put finger to keyboard and composed:

(For some reason, my news server (optusnet) has dropped a few of your
posts, and I only see this reply, but I was able to post your reply in
from google groups):

I had the same problem with broken threads when I was with Optusnet.

If your newsreader supports it, add a second news server to your list.

Here is a free one -- nntp.aioe.org

Configure your newsreader to receive messages from both servers. In
this way any message not available from Optusnet will be delivered by
Aioe.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:58:14 +1000, Ross Vumbaca
<rossv1@au.com.optushome> put finger to keyboard and composed:

Hi Franc,

Franc Zabkar wrote:

A monocrystalline panel, 2kW inverter system proposed by Aussie Solar
would cost me $9515 whereas the NuEnergy 1.1kW inverter system would
cost $8670 - $8720.
No rebate for yourself?

Yes, I qualify for the rebate.

Then the NuEnergy system would cost possibly < $1000, from your post I
got the impression that the NuEnergy system would cost you "$8670 - $8720".

Yes, my cost would be < $1000.

I just took a look at Aussie solar's website, they also offer relatively
low prices, with around $2710 for a 1kW system. Do you have any details
on their inverter or panels?

I believe this recent thread covers some of the hardware:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.electronics/browse_thread/thread/10d14ebedd60d394/bfe163dc7814ab64

This is the inverter:
http://aussiesolar.com.au/inverter_CMS-2000.pdf

The panels are 170W Enertech monocrystalline SE-170M:
http://aussiesolar.com.au/Panel_170w.pdf
http://www.made-in-china.com/showroom/paulineshi/product-detailiqHmrRsyYpWf/China-175W-Mono-Crystalline-Solar-Panels-SE-170M-.html
http://www.solarunlimited.com.au/solarunlimited/d/Resource_Library/Specifications_PDFs/E7VP1O691FD9R1NGUJ46PMY4SIIFZ6/V4XLEGUBY3I75QN.pdf/SolarEnertechSpecSheet.pdf

Assuming that Aussie solar are quite reputable, it doesn't seem far
fetched then, to see http://www.solarsave.com.au/products.html offering
one for $1990 (cheaper), since they may be using a cheaper
inverter/cheaper panels. Or for the really big purchasers, who get
bigger bulk discounts, even less..

What is your opinion of the recent players that are offering 1kW systems
for < $1000? (NuEnergy, and
http://www.statesolarservices.com.au/index.php amongst others).

Regards,

Ross..

I don't have any real understanding of this market. I only recently
started looking into it.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[David L. Jones]

terryc wrote:

On Fri, 08 May 2009 07:57:45 +1000, Franc Zabkar wrote:


11. "Unused data forfeited each month. Additional fees apply if
allowance is exceeded."

Does that mean that BigPond will bill you for excess data downloaded
from your web site? If so, then it seems to me that a malicious
individual could cause you great financial mischief. Why would any
user want to expose themselves to that risk?

Exactly the reason I do not use my "free" webspace. The trade off is
to register a domain name ($40/2yr) with free(dyndns?)/paid($40pa)
DNS ad hose it online (dialup will work,but basic 256/64 adsl is
fine).

That's too expensive.
I use http://www.fxdomains.com/ and domain registration can be had for only
a couple of dollars a year for some extensions, US$8/year for .com
With that you also get 1GB of photo space, and all sorts of other stuff:
http://www.fxdomains.com/free_stuff_with_domain.php
And FXdomains are not the cheapest or most fully featured around.

And for a lousy US$7/month with I get unlimited bandwidth, unlimited
webspace, and host half a dozen websites (some very high bandwidth):
http://www.hostmonster.com/

Web space and domain names are insanely cheap these days, bordering on free.
Tons of advantages too, like having your own email domain that never changes
when you change ISP's, remote FTP backups, automatic photo albums and blogs
etc etc.

Dave.

--
---------------------------------------------
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Fri, 08 May 2009 23:30:45 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:

:Ross Herbert wrote:
:> On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:57:58 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
:> Granted. But, you haven't read the guidelines for making application for the
:> rebate. If you had you would have seen that you must be approved for the
rebate
:> before placing an order for any equipment and onthe application you must
:> nominate both the supplier of the equipment and the registered installer
along
:> with his company name and registraton number. Unless you did this or you are
a
:> qualified/registered solar installer yourself

: thats so wrong it's painful , I used a licensed sparky doing the
:majority of work myself having the required trade certs ,

assuming you are going to install
:> it yourself), you won't get the rebate anyway.

: wrong

:Looks like you will end up paying
:> roughly as much as I did for an inferior system..


: utterly wrong ..
:
*****************
You seem to answer in very short sentences which don't convey much information,
so pardon me if I have to make some assumptions based on your answers.

Let's highlight a few points you may have overlooked. You said you hadn't read
the rebate application form or guideline document. You say you already have the
equipment which you imported from China. Correct? So have you ensured that it
meets the relevant Australian standards as listed here?

"To receive the rebate all the equipment in the system
must be new and meet the relevant Australian
Standards.

All systems, components and equipment must comply
with, and be designed and installed in accordance
with all relevant Australian Standards or, where such
does not exist, with the relevant international
standard. Australian Standards include, but are not
limited to:
• AS/NZS 3000 – Electrical installations
• AS 4509 – Stand-alone power systems
• AS 4086 – Secondary batteries for use with stand-
alone power systems
• AS 4777 – Grid connection of energy systems via
inverters
• AS/NZS 5033 – Installation of photovoltaic (PV)
arrays (currently under review)
• AS/NZS 1170 – Structural design actions; and
• any other standard called upon by the above or
other relevant standards.
Photovoltaic modules must be tested and certified to
IEC61215 or IEC61646 by a laboratory registered
under the International Electrotechnical Commission’s
(IEC) CB scheme to test these standards."

****************
You say above you "used a licensed sparky...". This implies to me that you have
already installed the system. Correct?

Does your sparky/installer appear on the list of accredited installers? (Qld
installers appear on p.31 - 40)
http://www.bcse.org.au/docs/STA/Installers%20List/AccInstallers%20List%20-%20all%20post%20-%20090423.pdf

The guideline states;

"Competent designer and installer

To be eligible for a rebate the applicant must be able
to demonstrate that the person who carries out the
photovoltaic installation is accredited (full or
provisional) for design and installation of photovoltaic
systems by the Australian Business Council for
Sustainable Energy. Details of accredited designers
and installers are available at
www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/
A licensed electrical contractor must carry out the
electrical work associated with the wiring in the
building and in the power system, in compliance with
regulations in the state or territory in which the
installation is undertaken."

Care to tell us if he is on the list?

***********
You say you haven't read the rebate application. So, has it been completed and
submitted?

"When should the application be lodged?

The Residential application for pre-approval must be
submitted to and approved by the Program Manager
before the system installation commences.
A rebate will NOT be paid for equipment installed
without pre-approval being granted."

On page 3 of the guideline it states categorically;
"A rebate will NOT be paid for equipment installed without pre-approval being
granted."

and on page 5;

"Notification of pre-approval
Applicants will be notified in writing if the pre-approval
has been granted or not within six weeks from receipt
of the complete application.

The notification of pre-approval will set out any
additional compliance requirements. The pre-approval
will expire nine months after the date it is granted.

On receipt of pre-approval, successful applicants
should immediately notify their installer so that
materials can be ordered and installation
commenced."

************
Finally, have you actually received an approval of your application for the
rebate?

 

[atec 7 7]

Ross Herbert wrote:

On Fri, 08 May 2009 23:30:45 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:

:Ross Herbert wrote:
:> On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:57:58 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
:> Granted. But, you haven't read the guidelines for making application for the
:> rebate. If you had you would have seen that you must be approved for the
rebate
:> before placing an order for any equipment and onthe application you must
:> nominate both the supplier of the equipment and the registered installer
along
:> with his company name and registraton number. Unless you did this or you are
a
:> qualified/registered solar installer yourself

: thats so wrong it's painful , I used a licensed sparky doing the
:majority of work myself having the required trade certs ,

assuming you are going to install
:> it yourself), you won't get the rebate anyway.

: wrong

:Looks like you will end up paying
:> roughly as much as I did for an inferior system..


: utterly wrong ..
:
*****************
You seem to answer in very short sentences which don't convey much information,
so pardon me if I have to make some assumptions based on your answers.

I will tell you nothing

over to the >troll file

 

[Ross Vumbaca]

Hi Franc,

Franc Zabkar wrote:

I believe this recent thread covers some of the hardware:
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.electronics/browse_thread/thread/10d14ebedd60d394/bfe163dc7814ab64

This is the inverter:
http://aussiesolar.com.au/inverter_CMS-2000.pdf

The panels are 170W Enertech monocrystalline SE-170M:
http://aussiesolar.com.au/Panel_170w.pdf
http://www.made-in-china.com/showroom/paulineshi/product-detailiqHmrRsyYpWf/China-175W-Mono-Crystalline-Solar-Panels-SE-170M-.html
http://www.solarunlimited.com.au/solarunlimited/d/Resource_Library/Specifications_PDFs/E7VP1O691FD9R1NGUJ46PMY4SIIFZ6/V4XLEGUBY3I75QN.pdf/SolarEnertechSpecSheet.pdf

I see, seems to be in a similar vein to NuEnergy and all the rest
cost/quality wise..

I don't have any real understanding of this market. I only recently
started looking into it.

Neither do I, I'm only looking at it as a beginner myself, but the
amount of cheap deals that have recently appeared, followed by the
people who claim it to be a rort, and those who don't, has made it
rather confusing and uncertain..

Regards,

Ross..

 

[Ross Vumbaca]

Hi Franc,

Franc Zabkar wrote:

I had the same problem with broken threads when I was with Optusnet.

If your newsreader supports it, add a second news server to your list.

Here is a free one -- nntp.aioe.org

Thanks for the tip. Doesn't look like my newsreader (Thunderbird)
supports reading from a second server though (unless I set it up as an
additional account) :-\.

Regards,

Ross..

 

[Ross Vumbaca]

Hi Ross,

Ross Herbert wrote:

"Essentially, the householder simply agrees that the rebate will be paid to NU
Energy."

Now if Nuenergy gets the business they hope for it would not be unreasonable for
them to be installing say ten 1kW systems per week. It takes about 6 weeks
before the federal government comes good with the $8K rebate. If a purchaser has
a system installed for no money out of his pocket, as inferred by the Nuenergy
free offer statement, this means that the supplier (Nuenergy) must carry the $8K
debt on each system installed for up to 6 weeks. Now 10 x 6 = 60 systems, 60 x
$8K = $480,000. Therefore, Nuenergy would have to carry nearly half-a-million
dollars worth of overhead debt before starting to receive any $8K rebates back
from the government for the first week of installations. I doubt very much that
Nuenergy would be prepared to be so magnanimous. I would think that Nuenergy, as
do most other suppliers, would insist on the customer paying the actual out of
pocket expenses (say $8K) at completion of the installation so that the customer
is the one to carry the debt until the government pays the rebate back to him.

Of course I may be wrong (again), but a company carrying this sort of debt while
waiting for the government to pay the rebates sounds a bit far fetched to me.

My understanding is that NuEnergy will not install anything at all
unless you have been pre-approved for the rebate. There are a number of
installers out there already, that hold the debt for you, and only ask
for the out-of-pocket costs ($500-$5000), since they expect to get the
rebate (it's pre-approved) and they probably have credit arrangements
with their suppliers that will cover the 6 weeks or so delay in getting
the rebate.

If a supplier of PV systems were to ask the customer to front up with
$8K, (later refunded by the government) it would present quite a barrier
to many customers. I know that some installers do this, which is a major
turn off for me. If you read the T&C of NuEnergy they state clearly that
they operate on the proviso that a minimum number of orders will be
made, and that they won't ship/supply until a threshold is reached
(assumedly to enact their bulk buying arrangement). They probably have
credit arrangements with suppliers, or they will hold the debt
themselves, since they are guaranteed to receive the money. I saw on
their website that they are currently "capital raising".

In holding the debt for the customer, I wouldn't call it magnanimous,
I'd call it business. They know that $8K is a big barrier, they want to
sell a lot of systems, they therefore have no choice but to cover the
initial $8K cost, lest they fail in their endeavour.

From the T&C, I'm 100% sure that the customer will pay nothing beyond
the $2500 deposit (which is later mostly refunded). Also the price of
RECS is changing very soon, perhaps they plan to benefit from this,
since the rollout of systems will take at least a couple months from now
to even begin (assuming that the new higher price of RECS is available
even to those who receive the old rebate, and who haven't 'sold' their
RECS yet).

Regards,

Ross..

 

[Bob Larter]

Ross Herbert wrote:

On Thu, 7 May 2009 20:57:12 +1000, "David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

David, Thanks for the offer and I will take it up in the future.

One thing which has only just started happening with your posts on this NG is
that as soon as I hit the reply button all of the content in your post just
disappears from the screen and I am left with a blank pane to type in. That is
why none of your post I am responding to now appears in this response.

I don't know why it happens but if I go back to respond to your earlier posts,
say on Tonights New Inventors thread, it doesn't happen. It has only started
happening since I responded to your post in this thread on May 7. Posts you made
before that date in this thread are ok and I see everything in them when I hit
reply.

Can anyone give a reason?

Yes. For some reason, he's starting his posts with the string "-- <CR>",
which is used to indicate the start of one's signature. So when someone
replies to his post, their newsreader removes everything after the "--
", thinking it's his sig.


--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Bob Larter]

Ross Vumbaca wrote:

Hi Franc,

Franc Zabkar wrote:

I had the same problem with broken threads when I was with Optusnet.

If your newsreader supports it, add a second news server to your list.

Here is a free one -- nntp.aioe.org

Thanks for the tip. Doesn't look like my newsreader (Thunderbird)
supports reading from a second server though (unless I set it up as an
additional account) :-\.

Yes. In Thunderbird, you have to set up a new account to use another
news server. It doesn't support merging posts from multiple servers.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Sat, 09 May 2009 15:27:24 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:

:Ross Herbert wrote:
:> On Fri, 08 May 2009 23:30:45 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> :Ross Herbert wrote:
:> :> On Fri, 08 May 2009 17:57:58 +1000, atec 7 7 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com>
wrote:
:> SNIP
:> :> Granted. But, you haven't read the guidelines for making application for
the
:> :> rebate. If you had you would have seen that you must be approved for the
:> rebate
:> :> before placing an order for any equipment and onthe application you must
:> :> nominate both the supplier of the equipment and the registered installer
:> along
:> :> with his company name and registraton number. Unless you did this or you
are
:> a
:> :> qualified/registered solar installer yourself
:>
:> : thats so wrong it's painful , I used a licensed sparky doing the
:> :majority of work myself having the required trade certs ,
:>
:> assuming you are going to install
:> :> it yourself), you won't get the rebate anyway.
:>
:> : wrong
:>
:> :Looks like you will end up paying
:> :> roughly as much as I did for an inferior system..
:>
:>
:> : utterly wrong ..
:> :
:> *****************
:> You seem to answer in very short sentences which don't convey much
information,
:> so pardon me if I have to make some assumptions based on your answers.
:>
:I will tell you nothing
: over to the >troll file

So you can't provide valid answers to my questions eh?

Going by what have I seen in the multitude of forums you subscribe to, and
participate in, it is you who is the troll...

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Sun, 10 May 2009 11:16:42 +1000, Ross Vumbaca <rossv1@au.com.optushome>
wrote:

:Hi Ross,
:
:Ross Herbert wrote:
:
:> "Essentially, the householder simply agrees that the rebate will be paid to
NU
:> Energy."
:>
:> Now if Nuenergy gets the business they hope for it would not be unreasonable
for
:> them to be installing say ten 1kW systems per week. It takes about 6 weeks
:> before the federal government comes good with the $8K rebate. If a purchaser
has
:> a system installed for no money out of his pocket, as inferred by the
Nuenergy
:> free offer statement, this means that the supplier (Nuenergy) must carry the
$8K
:> debt on each system installed for up to 6 weeks. Now 10 x 6 = 60 systems, 60
x
:> $8K = $480,000. Therefore, Nuenergy would have to carry nearly half-a-million
:> dollars worth of overhead debt before starting to receive any $8K rebates
back
:> from the government for the first week of installations. I doubt very much
that
:> Nuenergy would be prepared to be so magnanimous. I would think that Nuenergy,
as
:> do most other suppliers, would insist on the customer paying the actual out
of
:> pocket expenses (say $8K) at completion of the installation so that the
customer
:> is the one to carry the debt until the government pays the rebate back to
him.
:>
:> Of course I may be wrong (again), but a company carrying this sort of debt
while
:> waiting for the government to pay the rebates sounds a bit far fetched to me.
:
:My understanding is that NuEnergy will not install anything at all
:unless you have been pre-approved for the rebate. There are a number of
:installers out there already, that hold the debt for you, and only ask
:for the out-of-pocket costs ($500-$5000), since they expect to get the
:rebate (it's pre-approved) and they probably have credit arrangements
:with their suppliers that will cover the 6 weeks or so delay in getting
:the rebate.

The rebate may be pre-approved but it isn't paid until the installation is
complete and the installer's report submitted back to the government. It then
takes about 6 weeks to come through to whoever is nominated to receive it. If a
small installer is only going to ask for the out of pocket expenses and is
prepared to carry the outstanding $8K for 6 weeks in these financially trying
times then I would be surprised. Enviro-Friendly say they can't afford to carry
the debt and they are installing 5 systems per week currently.

:
:If a supplier of PV systems were to ask the customer to front up with
:$8K, (later refunded by the government) it would present quite a barrier
:to many customers. I know that some installers do this, which is a major
:turn off for me. If you read the T&C of NuEnergy they state clearly that
:they operate on the proviso that a minimum number of orders will be
:made, and that they won't ship/supply until a threshold is reached
assumedly to enact their bulk buying arrangement). They probably have
:credit arrangements with suppliers, or they will hold the debt
:themselves, since they are guaranteed to receive the money. I saw on
:their website that they are currently "capital raising".

In order to raise capital they have to provide substantial collateral and they
have to pay whatever interest the lender is asking. What business has ever
allowed the customer to use their money for 6 weeks (or longer) without charging
interest? Even credit cards only give you 4 weeks, and then it's 20 odd percent
till it's paid off.

:
:In holding the debt for the customer, I wouldn't call it magnanimous,
:I'd call it business. They know that $8K is a big barrier, they want to
:sell a lot of systems, they therefore have no choice but to cover the
:initial $8K cost, lest they fail in their endeavour.

This may seem like good business to the customer but in the current financial
crisis a small business would be hard pressed to carry several hundred thousand
$ (or more) in debt for 6 weeks, even at the relatively low interest rates of
today. I would be surprised if any business these days would allow a customer
to, in effect, borrow $8K interest-free, from them for 6 weeks. The banks
certainly aren't going to advance any capital to a business to bulk buy PV
systems from China without very good collateral and they certainly won't do it
interest-free either. Somebody must pay, and if the customer isn't paying for it
then Nuenergy, who must be operating on a very small margin in the hope of
receiving a large volume of orders, has to carry debt as well as the interest.In
fact, the more orders they receive, the larger the outstanding debt will be.

:
: From the T&C, I'm 100% sure that the customer will pay nothing beyond
:the $2500 deposit (which is later mostly refunded). Also the price of
:RECS is changing very soon, perhaps they plan to benefit from this,
:since the rollout of systems will take at least a couple months from now
:to even begin (assuming that the new higher price of RECS is available
:even to those who receive the old rebate, and who haven't 'sold' their
:RECS yet).
:
:Regards,
:
:Ross..

The RECS payout will also only be paid after the 6 weeks following submission of
the installation report.

All I can say is, if you are convinced the offer is good then give it a go and
let us know the result. However, remember what they say, "if it looks too good
to be true, it probably is." To me, It looks too good to be true - but then I am
rather skeptical.

 

[David L. Jones]

Ross Herbert wrote:

Yesterday, my Sharp/Fronius 1kW system was installed and today I saw
the benefit on the meter. At the end of the day the meter reading was
about 2 kWh less than at the start of the day. The peak power
production was around 840W due to the sun being at rather a low angle
at this time of year.

For some reason the installer forgot he hadn't informed the supply
authority that they had to change the meter so until it is changed
the old meter simply runs backwards while the PV is producing power
during the day.

Looks like the suppliers are now actively targeting the vulnerable.
My mum and all the residents in her retirement village have just received an
offer from "Sancturary Energy" to install a 1kW system on individual
dwellings for $9000 which would supposedly be "at no cost to them" ($8000
grant + $1000 REC's). It looks like they specialise in this:
http://www.sanctuaryenergy.com.au/Packages-retirement.html
The installer is SolarSave:
http://www.solarsave.com.au/index.html

http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar1.jpg
http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar2.jpg

You have to sign up to Sanctuary as your energy supplier of course. And the
company supposedly has finance to cover the cost of the installation between
when it's installed and when the grant comes through.
No studies are done on individual dwellings to even see if it's even
feasible for them, they are just telling everyone they can save money if
they sign up.

Dave.

--
---------------------------------------------
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:20:12 +1000, "David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

:Looks like the suppliers are now actively targeting the vulnerable.
:My mum and all the residents in her retirement village have just received an
ffer from "Sancturary Energy" to install a 1kW system on individual
:dwellings for $9000 which would supposedly be "at no cost to them" ($8000
:grant + $1000 REC's). It looks like they specialise in this:
:http://www.sanctuaryenergy.com.au/Packages-retirement.html
:The installer is SolarSave:
:http://www.solarsave.com.au/index.html
:
:http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar1.jpg
:http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar2.jpg
:
:You have to sign up to Sanctuary as your energy supplier of course. And the
:company supposedly has finance to cover the cost of the installation between
:when it's installed and when the grant comes through.
:No studies are done on individual dwellings to even see if it's even
:feasible for them, they are just telling everyone they can save money if
:they sign up.
:
ave.

There could be all sorts of complications arising out of such promotions to
people living in retirement villages. If the residents don't own their own
residence in that village (and they rarely do) they must seek permission from
the owner before installing anything on that premises.

The PV installation is the property of the applicant, who is not necessarily the
owner of the premises. What happens to the PV ownership when they die? I fear
the kids would have great difficulty if they wanted to remove it and install it
somewhere else. Such offers are predatory IMO and the promoters know that most
of the elderly in these situations wouldn't be around long enough to realise the
payback for a PV installation so they would flog them the cheapest components
they could get away with. They are simply looking to capture as much of the
government supplied free money as they can before it dries up.

I can't see this sort of promotion working out at all and any retiree in such
circumstances who may be considering the offer should do some thorough checking
externally, not just take the promoter's word as gospel.

 

[David L. Jones]

Ross Herbert wrote:

On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:20:12 +1000, "David L. Jones"
altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

Looks like the suppliers are now actively targeting the vulnerable.
My mum and all the residents in her retirement village have just
received an offer from "Sancturary Energy" to install a 1kW system
on individual dwellings for $9000 which would supposedly be "at no
cost to them" ($8000 grant + $1000 REC's). It looks like they
specialise in this:
http://www.sanctuaryenergy.com.au/Packages-retirement.html
The installer is SolarSave:
http://www.solarsave.com.au/index.html

http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar1.jpg
http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar2.jpg

You have to sign up to Sanctuary as your energy supplier of course.
And the company supposedly has finance to cover the cost of the
installation between when it's installed and when the grant comes
through.
No studies are done on individual dwellings to even see if it's even
feasible for them, they are just telling everyone they can save
money if they sign up.

Dave.

There could be all sorts of complications arising out of such
promotions to people living in retirement villages. If the residents
don't own their own residence in that village (and they rarely do)
they must seek permission from the owner before installing anything
on that premises.

Yes indeed. Although that's not the case in this particular situation.

The PV installation is the property of the applicant, who is not
necessarily the owner of the premises. What happens to the PV
ownership when they die? I fear the kids would have great difficulty
if they wanted to remove it and install it somewhere else. Such
offers are predatory IMO and the promoters know that most of the
elderly in these situations wouldn't be around long enough to realise
the payback for a PV installation so they would flog them the
cheapest components they could get away with. They are simply looking
to capture as much of the government supplied free money as they can
before it dries up.

My sentiments exactly.

I can't see this sort of promotion working out at all and any retiree
in such circumstances who may be considering the offer should do some
thorough checking externally, not just take the promoter's word as
gospel.

Yes, and there is very little real information supplied with the info pack
they got.
The company is sending a rep around to answer any questions at a community
meeting, but most people wouldn't know what the important questions are. I
advised my mum to avoid it completely, and she liked the sound of that.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/

 

[Mauried]

On Mon, 11 May 2009 12:53:30 +1000, "David L. Jones"
<altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

Ross Herbert wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:20:12 +1000, "David L. Jones"
altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

Looks like the suppliers are now actively targeting the vulnerable.
My mum and all the residents in her retirement village have just
received an offer from "Sancturary Energy" to install a 1kW system
on individual dwellings for $9000 which would supposedly be "at no
cost to them" ($8000 grant + $1000 REC's). It looks like they
specialise in this:
http://www.sanctuaryenergy.com.au/Packages-retirement.html
The installer is SolarSave:
http://www.solarsave.com.au/index.html

http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar1.jpg
http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar2.jpg

You have to sign up to Sanctuary as your energy supplier of course.
And the company supposedly has finance to cover the cost of the
installation between when it's installed and when the grant comes
through.
No studies are done on individual dwellings to even see if it's even
feasible for them, they are just telling everyone they can save
money if they sign up.

Dave.

There could be all sorts of complications arising out of such
promotions to people living in retirement villages. If the residents
don't own their own residence in that village (and they rarely do)
they must seek permission from the owner before installing anything
on that premises.

Yes indeed. Although that's not the case in this particular situation.

The PV installation is the property of the applicant, who is not
necessarily the owner of the premises. What happens to the PV
ownership when they die? I fear the kids would have great difficulty
if they wanted to remove it and install it somewhere else. Such
offers are predatory IMO and the promoters know that most of the
elderly in these situations wouldn't be around long enough to realise
the payback for a PV installation so they would flog them the
cheapest components they could get away with. They are simply looking
to capture as much of the government supplied free money as they can
before it dries up.

My sentiments exactly.

I can't see this sort of promotion working out at all and any retiree
in such circumstances who may be considering the offer should do some
thorough checking externally, not just take the promoter's word as
gospel.

Yes, and there is very little real information supplied with the info pack
they got.
The company is sending a rep around to answer any questions at a community
meeting, but most people wouldn't know what the important questions are. I
advised my mum to avoid it completely, and she liked the sound of that.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/

From reading the eligibility requirements for the rebate, the
applicant can only install the Solar System at the address
of the owner of the premises as shown in the electoral roll.
This would prevent a non owner from installing a system
even if the owner agreed to it.
Its even more vague if a person is the owner, but doesnt own the roof
in the case of a strata titled multi storey apartment.

Or if the person lives in a caravan park and owns the van.
People who rent seem to be totally excluded.

 

[David L. Jones]

Mauried wrote:

On Mon, 11 May 2009 12:53:30 +1000, "David L. Jones"
altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

Ross Herbert wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 08:20:12 +1000, "David L. Jones"
altzone@gmail.com> wrote:

Looks like the suppliers are now actively targeting the vulnerable.
My mum and all the residents in her retirement village have just
received an offer from "Sancturary Energy" to install a 1kW system
on individual dwellings for $9000 which would supposedly be "at no
cost to them" ($8000 grant + $1000 REC's). It looks like they
specialise in this:
http://www.sanctuaryenergy.com.au/Packages-retirement.html
The installer is SolarSave:
http://www.solarsave.com.au/index.html

http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar1.jpg
http://www.alternatezone.com/images/Solar2.jpg

You have to sign up to Sanctuary as your energy supplier of course.
And the company supposedly has finance to cover the cost of the
installation between when it's installed and when the grant comes
through.
No studies are done on individual dwellings to even see if it's
even feasible for them, they are just telling everyone they can
save money if they sign up.

Dave.

There could be all sorts of complications arising out of such
promotions to people living in retirement villages. If the residents
don't own their own residence in that village (and they rarely do)
they must seek permission from the owner before installing anything
on that premises.

Yes indeed. Although that's not the case in this particular
situation.

The PV installation is the property of the applicant, who is not
necessarily the owner of the premises. What happens to the PV
ownership when they die? I fear the kids would have great difficulty
if they wanted to remove it and install it somewhere else. Such
offers are predatory IMO and the promoters know that most of the
elderly in these situations wouldn't be around long enough to
realise the payback for a PV installation so they would flog them
the cheapest components they could get away with. They are simply
looking to capture as much of the government supplied free money as
they can before it dries up.

My sentiments exactly.

I can't see this sort of promotion working out at all and any
retiree in such circumstances who may be considering the offer
should do some thorough checking externally, not just take the
promoter's word as gospel.

Yes, and there is very little real information supplied with the
info pack they got.
The company is sending a rep around to answer any questions at a
community meeting, but most people wouldn't know what the important
questions are. I advised my mum to avoid it completely, and she
liked the sound of that.

Dave.
From reading the eligibility requirements for the rebate, the
applicant can only install the Solar System at the address
of the owner of the premises as shown in the electoral roll.
This would prevent a non owner from installing a system
even if the owner agreed to it.
Its even more vague if a person is the owner, but doesnt own the roof
in the case of a strata titled multi storey apartment.

Or if the person lives in a caravan park and owns the van.
People who rent seem to be totally excluded.

In this case the village is "company title" which means a "corporation"
technically owns the land and dwellings, of which all the resisdents are
equal shareholders of the corporation. Each resident gets one share and
effectively owns one dwelling.
Who knows how that would work in this case, I'm sure lawyers would salivate
at the thought of it.

Dave.

--
================================================
Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast:
http://www.alternatezone.com/eevblog/