Post by: UIZ733 on November 17, 2015, 07:45:01 AM
The only way (it would appear to me) to retain the tariff if one rents out their home, would be to keep the electricity account in their name and negotiate the bill payment with the renter.
Is this a correct assumption? Are there any difficulties associated with an arrangement of this kind in rental agreements?
Comments, experiences and advice appreciated.
Post by: listo on November 17, 2015, 07:51:53 AM
All you should have to do is have an agreement with your tenant.
I'm off today, but I'll check up on it tomorrow & let you know for sure if no one else on here can confirm it by then
Post by: Fizzie on November 18, 2015, 09:26:39 AM
Yep, sadly you're right :'(
https://www.dews.qld.gov.au/energy-water-home/electricity/solar-bonus-scheme/frequently-asked-questions (https://www.dews.qld.gov.au/energy-water-home/electricity/solar-bonus-scheme/frequently-asked-questions) has got all the details, but simply, if you change the name on the a/c (sole exception being if you change to your spouse's name) then you lose the .44c FiT. As far as I can tell, even if you change it to your kid's name, they will lose the .44c. Even if you change it to someone else for a while, then change it back to your name, both the person in the middle & then you both lose the .44c & work on the current standard (.08c?).
However, if you don't change names at all, then the .44c is still supposed to last till 1/7/2028 ;D :cup:
So, if you're renting the place out, leave the 'leccy in your name, you pay the bill & get the money back off the tenant - don't know if I'd go so far as to give the tenant any credit that may actually come in though! >:D
Post by: McGirr on November 18, 2015, 10:06:31 AM
Naturally if you sell the house the new owners do not get the benefit of the 44c. While in realestate people selling their homes that had spent a fair amount of money on panels would complain that buyers did not see the value that was spent.
I was always asked was it worth adding panels to a house when selling and the answer was no.
Mark
Post by: plusnq on November 18, 2015, 10:36:23 AM
Naturally if you sell the house the new owners do not get the benefit of the 44c. While in realestate people selling their homes that had spent a fair amount of money on panels would complain that buyers did not see the value that was spent.
I was always asked was it worth adding panels to a house when selling and the answer was no.
Mark
New battery systems will probably change that equation though.
Post by: Bird on November 18, 2015, 10:41:59 AM
Post by: muzza01 on November 18, 2015, 10:49:41 AM
The agreement is on the size of inverter not the number of panels. I so much wish I had of had the foresight or knowledge at the time and I would of put in a 5KW inverter so I could continue to put more panels on the roof as I could afford to do it.
Post by: UIZ733 on November 18, 2015, 11:16:13 AM
I put a 2.75 KW system on our house under the .44c scheme. Unfortunately I only put in a 3KW inverter. So I can put another 250W panel on the roof to increase my output to 3KW but if I change the inverter to a larger unit to add more panels I revert to the new scheme.How would they know you had made a change?
The agreement is on the size of inverter not the number of panels. I so much wish I had of had the foresight or knowledge at the time and I would of put in a 5KW inverter so I could continue to put more panels on the roof as I could afford to do it.
Post by: MattNQ on November 18, 2015, 11:50:27 AM
The 44 cent feed in tariff in Qld is based on the residence it was negotiated on, NOT the account holder. If the account name on the premises changes (for example renting) the tariff is lost, and the account reverts to the current rules.
The only way (it would appear to me) to retain the tariff if one rents out their home, would be to keep the electricity account in their name and negotiate the bill payment with the renter.
Is this a correct assumption? Are there any difficulties associated with an arrangement of this kind in rental agreements?
Comments, experiences and advice appreciated.
If you have a rough idea of what your house costs per week to run, you could include it in the rent amount rather than having to chase them up each month/3 months to pay the bill.
Got some friends who rent out a house to uni students on a per room basis.
They put solar on & kept electricity in their name. The rent agreement includes electricity.
Only issue they had was tenants going out & leaving the aircon on all day. You'd have to consider some motel key type arrangement or coin operated setup if that was an ongoing problem.
Post by: rotare on November 18, 2015, 03:12:30 PM
I put a 2.75 KW system on our house under the .44c scheme. Unfortunately I only put in a 3KW inverter. So I can put another 250W panel on the roof to increase my output to 3KW but if I change the inverter to a larger unit to add more panels I revert to the new scheme.
The agreement is on the size of inverter not the number of panels. I so much wish I had of had the foresight or knowledge at the time and I would of put in a 5KW inverter so I could continue to put more panels on the roof as I could afford to do it.
I reckon in SA it is based on your actual installed system size, not inverter size. Looking at the paperwork lodged by the installers to the authority for my system, they asked specific details on the number of solar panels installed and the rated panel output, which then led to the obvious question about total maximum system sized installed. From what I understand most systems have a slightly bigger rated inverter, than the system is capable of producing - I guess that makes sense.
Also the wording in other documents I have about the government solar rebate scheme is that it only applies to the original installed system. In other words, if you replace it with an equivalent (output wise) system down the track, then technically you can't receive the same level of rebate you did with the original system, if that makes sense.
Quote
How would they know you had made a change?
I'm guessing if all of a sudden you're producing considerably more power than your system is supposedly capable, this would trigger a physical inspection of your system to determine whether there has been some tampering or changes.
Reminds me of the story about the clever electrician who realised that he received more in rebates per watt generated, than he would if he paid for the electricity off the grid through his provider. So he fed mains power into his inverter and the sat back and waited for the big rebate cheque to arrive in the mail at the end of the month. Sounds like a great idea but he didn't take into account he was feeding power back into the grid 24 hours a day..... I guess he had to explain how his solar panels managed to make power all through the night ;D
Post by: MrCruza on November 18, 2015, 03:31:40 PM
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on November 18, 2015, 04:10:33 PM
How would they know? Welcome to the world of smart meters. AFAIK when the system is installed it is registered on the network so they can see how much you're feeding back to them. If the system details changed they would know.
Correct, we've got a 2kw system with a 3 kw inverter, but even adding panels now, is deemed a change and there goes the 44cent deal.
Any upgrade or change, its all over red rover.
Post by: Trrrumping Beast on November 18, 2015, 05:31:33 PM
Correct, we've got a 2kw system with a 3 kw inverter, but even adding panels now, is deemed a change and there goes the 44cent deal.This is interesting because my father has done exactly this - added extra panels to an existing system. Kept the same inverter though. No issue as yet. Still making $, only more of it....i must mention this to him. If he has anything to add i will post back here. I think he is with origin energy.
Any upgrade or change, its all over red rover.
Nigel
Post by: Fizzie on November 19, 2015, 08:48:06 AM
Correct, we've got a 2kw system with a 3 kw inverter, but even adding panels now, is deemed a change and there goes the 44cent deal.
Any upgrade or change, its all over red rover.
Jeepers, are you sure about that?
From the link I posted earlier:
I am on the 44 cent tariff and have a 5 kilowatt inverter with panels of a lesser capacity. Can I add additional panels to my system?
Yes. You can add more panels to your system without affecting your eligibility to continue to receive the 44 cent rate. Systems are required to be compliant with the relevant Australian Standards. Please notify your electricity distributor of your intention to add panels to your system.
Who are you with? Does the Bay come under Ergon or are you still SEQ?
Post by: Sheepy on November 19, 2015, 09:31:54 PM
Post by: grafy82 on November 19, 2015, 09:48:18 PM
Post by: Bill on November 20, 2015, 06:52:16 AM
Correct, we've got a 2kw system with a 3 kw inverter, but even adding panels now, is deemed a change and there goes the 44cent deal.This the reason we had a 5kw inverter installed with our 3.6kw system.
Any upgrade or change, its all over red rover.
We could now add panels with no one being the wiser.(hopefully)
Bill
Post by: Isuzumu on November 20, 2015, 08:33:27 AM
Post by: MrCruza on November 20, 2015, 08:49:09 AM
I was told if you buy another house you can take your system with you and not loose your 44c rebate, have not tested it though.
Not correct, Bruce. The contract stays with the property and expires if you sell.
Post by: MattNQ on November 20, 2015, 12:30:01 PM
You can put more panels on your roof as long as you don't change the inverter size you signed up for. If the power company questions why you are making more, you just tell them you changed all your lights to L.E.D, bought a more efficient fridge, stopped using so much air-conditioning, etc. Lots of ways around it. Ergon never looked on my roof when they hooked me up.
I wonder if they'd get sus if you put in over & above the inverter capacity to keep it pumping it out at maximum power for longer ? When I signed up, I wasn't allowed to get 6kw of panels for my 5kw inverter & still get the 44c. Which would have been handy as more panels had to face east than the more optimum north
I did wonder if they'd notice if I augmented it later.
Post by: Green rv on November 20, 2015, 01:27:14 PM
me thinks it time for a current affair to look into this
another mate has a 5kw system and still pays $320 per 1/4 (not on the 44c)(also has a pool)
i have a 1 kw on 54c deal and pay $120 1/4. wish i had some more $$ at the time and put a bigger system on
:cheers:
Adam
Post by: street camper on November 20, 2015, 02:23:10 PM
Post by: Trrrumping Beast on November 20, 2015, 07:27:54 PM
I wonder if they'd get sus if you put in over & above the inverter capacity to keep it pumping it out at maximum power for longer ? When I signed up, I wasn't allowed to get 6kw of panels for my 5kw inverter & still get the 44c. Which would have been handy as more panels had to face east than the more optimum northThat's precisely what my father has done - added more panels than the theoretical capacity of the inverter. So far no issue from the power company, but time will tell I guess.
I did wonder if they'd notice if I augmented it later.
Post by: markg66 on November 20, 2015, 08:09:22 PM
You can add more panels than your inverter is rated for but at peak production times the inverter may shut itself down and restart continuously until the panel input is back within the invertver limits, so you will be wasting your best production time. Just don't over do it and it should be fine.
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on November 21, 2015, 06:09:30 AM
Jeepers, are you sure about that?
From the link I posted earlier:
I am on the 44 cent tariff and have a 5 kilowatt inverter with panels of a lesser capacity. Can I add additional panels to my system?
Yes. You can add more panels to your system without affecting your eligibility to continue to receive the 44 cent rate. Systems are required to be compliant with the relevant Australian Standards. Please notify your electricity distributor of your intention to add panels to your system.
Who are you with? Does the Bay come under Ergon or are you still SEQ?
Probably not.... ;D
Its something I was told by someone who I think knew something about it that if the powers to be, pickup that there is a significant change, they would chase it up, as they don't wanna be paying 44cents any more than they have to.
Post by: richee on November 21, 2015, 06:28:06 AM
You can add more panels than your inverter is rated for but at peak production times the inverter may shut itself down and restart continuously until the panel input is back within the invertver limits, so you will be wasting your best production time. Just don't over do it and it should be fine.
We have just installed a 5kw inverter with 6.5 kWs worth of panels. The invert "clips" the input at 5.05 kW and doesn't shut down.
Richard
Post by: grafy82 on November 21, 2015, 09:01:05 PM
We have just installed a 5kw inverter with 6.5 kWs worth of panels. The invert "clips" the input at 5.05 kW and doesn't shut down.
Richard
Correct. I've seen setups with 8.0kw of panels on a 5.0kw inverter and it does not shut of at all. It does however make the full 5kw from about 8:30am through until just after 4:30pm most days. Wouldnt it be nice!
Post by: prodigyrf on November 21, 2015, 09:12:50 PM
I was talking to an electrician mate and he tells me that 1000 people drop of the 44c deal per year (ie selling house)Why? The selling owner was happy to install the system and reap the benefit of being cross-subsidized by their neighbours' power bills as long as they wished to, while the new owners are not sponging off their neighbours anymore, yet still saving the planet apparently. What's not to like?
me thinks it time for a current affair to look into this
Post by: Rumpig on November 21, 2015, 09:35:58 PM
That's precisely what my father has done - added more panels than the theoretical capacity of the inverter. So far no issue from the power company, but time will tell I guess.my mate who installed our solar system in our house, has done the same thing as your dad has done on his own house. I believe the theory of it is... the system reaches max capacity quicker, and then stays there over a longer period, therefor producing more power for you. I think I vaguely recall him saying something about certain inverters copping better then others with this type of set up, but my memory of that conversation is a pretty average.
Post by: prodigyrf on November 21, 2015, 10:44:46 PM
But the best solution is appropriately matched 4th generation microinverters on each panel with a major spinoff being you don't lose the whole generating capacity should an inverter fail which is often happening in 3-5 years with poorly specced global system inverters. Lots of owners take a power bill or two to wake up that the inverter has failed.
Disclaimer: I'm sponging off my neighbours and not moving but someone has to save the planet :angel:
Post by: grafy82 on November 21, 2015, 11:37:09 PM
Why? The selling owner was happy to install the system and reap the benefit of being cross-subsidized by their neighbours' power bills as long as they wished to, while the new owners are not sponging off their neighbours anymore, yet still saving the planet apparently. What's not to like?
Sponging off the neighbors?? No, more like paying off the loan from the bank with a government subsidised scheme (although, that will be done and dusted within 2 years anyway ;D) I thought I couldn't afford it, but sat down and did the maths and worked out it was cheaper to pay off the loan for the system than keep paying the electricity bill. The neighbors I'm apparently 'sponging off' could have done the same thing.
Post by: grafy82 on November 21, 2015, 11:42:58 PM
Explained here- https://www.infiniteenergy.com.au/oversizing-your-solar-panel-array/ (https://www.infiniteenergy.com.au/oversizing-your-solar-panel-array/)
But the best solution is appropriately matched 4th generation microinverters on each panel with a major spinoff being you don't lose the whole generating capacity should an inverter fail which is often happening in 3-5 years with poorly specced global system inverters. Lots of owners take a power bill or two to wake up that the inverter has failed.
Disclaimer: I'm sponging off my neighbours and not moving but someone has to save the planet :angel:
There have been lots of dramas with micro inverters and you'd be far more likely to notice something wrong with a normal inverter as you would have a whole string drop out instead of just 1 panel, showing a big reduction in production. When we were looking at micro inverter systems, we got quoted $20000 for 5kw as opposed to $10500 for a 5kw single inverter system. Way too much to justify taking the punt.
Post by: prodigyrf on November 22, 2015, 02:32:37 AM
Sponging off the neighbors?? No, more like paying off the loan from the bank with a government subsidised scheme (although, that will be done and dusted within 2 years anyway ;D) I thought I couldn't afford it, but sat down and did the maths and worked out it was cheaper to pay off the loan for the system than keep paying the electricity bill. The neighbors I'm apparently 'sponging off' could have done the same thing.So you're not on an artificial mandated FIT scheme then that pushes the price onto other consumers? It's a fallacy of composition (like all taking a box to stand on at the footy), that we could all be better off power bill wise on a universal FIT scheme but hey a taxpaying bloke's gotta put his hand up for any Gummint clawback going down. I'm not kidding myself the numbers would stack up if the generators were paying me the 5-8c/kwhr wholesale it's really worth in the marketplace.
Post by: grafy82 on November 22, 2015, 05:35:08 AM
So you're not on an artificial mandated FIT scheme then that pushes the price onto other consumers? It's a fallacy of composition (like all taking a box to stand on at the footy), that we could all be better off power bill wise on a universal FIT scheme but hey a taxpaying bloke's gotta put his hand up for any Gummint clawback going down. I'm not kidding myself the numbers would stack up if the generators were paying me the 5-8c/kwhr wholesale it's really worth in the marketplace.
I just don't think it's exactly sponging off anyone. I would leave that title to long term department of housing tenants and dole bludgers. Makes my 44c feed in tariff look like a drop in the ocean ;D
Post by: Symon on November 22, 2015, 06:12:14 AM
New battery systems will probably change that equation though.
Wouldn't think so. I think it will fall into the same category as swimming pools, it may make some buyers want to pay more, but it general most people will see it as a liability.
Post by: plusnq on November 22, 2015, 07:12:14 AM
Wouldn't think so. I think it will fall into the same category as swimming pools, it may make some buyers want to pay more, but it general most people will see it as a liability.
I might not have been as clear as I could have been. I meant they would change the economics of having the panels. Not as a value add for sale.
Post by: MattNQ on November 22, 2015, 10:51:18 AM
So you're not on an artificial mandated FIT scheme then that pushes the price onto other consumers? It's a fallacy of composition (like all taking a box to stand on at the footy), that we could all be better off power bill wise on a universal FIT scheme but hey a taxpaying bloke's gotta put his hand up for any Gummint clawback going down. I'm not kidding myself the numbers would stack up if the generators were paying me the 5-8c/kwhr wholesale it's really worth in the marketplace.Given I've been subsidising first home buyers, baby bonuses, insulation schemes etc, I'm happy to get something back for a change.
That said the 44c was shortsighted and should have been a tiered return. Starting at 30c and reducing to a flat 10 over a period....say 15 years perhaps
sent from Earth via tapatalk
Post by: jetcrew on November 22, 2015, 11:08:57 AM
i will say this though for any myswagger
If you are currently looking at solar even on 6c FIT it can be very very worthwhile if it is set up according to that FIT.
High internal usage and low external exports. is where the game is at these days.
Just helped a friend of friend as they were about to get set up with 6Kw all facing northish sighted to deliver the maximum system production....awesome right ..the sales guy had his charts graphs google maps and all that jazz and he had done a good job of making sure the system produced the maximum amount of power each day ..BUT all that generation was predominatly during the hours that no one was home and nothing was being used in the home ..end result is that power was being exported to the grid at 6c ..good for power company bad for home owner.
When we mapped out the home owners usage pattern we could clearly see that like my home the peak power demand periods were early morning and after school time till sun dropped, so by re orientating the panel arrays to cover see these times even though by doing this we did reduce the total system performance we saved an additional $ per day even though the system was now tech not sighted 100% correctly.
In a nut shell current solar installs should be designed with HIGH USAGE LOW EXPORT in mind. I happily sacrafice 4-5KwH per day in production in return for production when i need it rather than when the power comapny can get it for 6c .
You have to export 5 Kwh in order to pay for 1Kwh you buy ..so why not sacrafice that 5 units for 2 units you can use yourself so 2 units used is worth more to you in $$$ saved than 5 exported. system 3 units down on production but more $$$ in your pocket.
This is esp important if you buying a home that was on the 44cFIT and you will drop to 6cFIT after purchase it may not give you what you expect in terms of savings as it would have been set up with maximum export in mind so do not even factor it into purchase price .
And a few $$$ on having some one re orinetate the panels to match your useage patterns may pay dividends for you over 5-10 yrs of home ownership.
Jet ;D ;D
Post by: cruiser 91 on November 22, 2015, 02:10:28 PM
I wont hop into the sponging etc argument ;D ;D
i will say this though for any myswagger
If you are currently looking at solar even on 6c FIT it can be very very worthwhile if it is set up according to that FIT.
High internal usage and low external exports. is where the game is at these days.
Just helped a friend of friend as they were about to get set up with 6Kw all facing northish sighted to deliver the maximum system production....awesome right ..the sales guy had his charts graphs google maps and all that jazz and he had done a good job of making sure the system produced the maximum amount of power each day ..BUT all that generation was predominatly during the hours that no one was home and nothing was being used in the home ..end result is that power was being exported to the grid at 6c ..good for power company bad for home owner.
When we mapped out the home owners usage pattern we could clearly see that like my home the peak power demand periods were early morning and after school time till sun dropped, so by re orientating the panel arrays to cover see these times even though by doing this we did reduce the total system performance we saved an additional $ per day even though the system was now tech not sighted 100% correctly.
In a nut shell current solar installs should be designed with HIGH USAGE LOW EXPORT in mind. I happily sacrafice 4-5KwH per day in production in return for production when i need it rather than when the power comapny can get it for 6c .
You have to export 5 Kwh in order to pay for 1Kwh you buy ..so why not sacrafice that 5 units for 2 units you can use yourself so 2 units used is worth more to you in $$$ saved than 5 exported. system 3 units down on production but more $$$ in your pocket.
This is esp important if you buying a home that was on the 44cFIT and you will drop to 6cFIT after purchase it may not give you what you expect in terms of savings as it would have been set up with maximum export in mind so do not even factor it into purchase price .
And a few $$$ on having some one re orinetate the panels to match your useage patterns may pay dividends for you over 5-10 yrs of home ownership.
Jet ;D ;D
Tilting panels for peak times is all well and good but you have to keep in mind a few things b4 jumping in.
You can only tilt fixed panels in one direction, so you will only have decent solar generation either in the morning or evening. The other thing is this might be ok in summer when the sun is high but in winter the sun is a lot lower, tilting east or west will produce next to nothing in the colder months.
or
You could subsidise solar with wind generation or just go wind power all together which is relatively close to the cost per kw of solar but works day and night provided you have enough wind, however you may need a very high mast to escape low turbulence and is also subject to the dam council for approval.
or
Collective mass purchase of battery back up which will reduce individual purchase costs.
Post by: cruiser 91 on November 22, 2015, 02:38:34 PM
Given I've been subsidising first home buyers, baby bonuses, insulation schemes etc, I'm happy to get something back for a change.
That said the 44c was shortsighted and should have been a tiered return. Starting at 30c and reducing to a flat 10 over a period....say 15 years perhaps
sent from Earth via tapatalk
Now we are all subsidising your gen's free university education :) and a few others things too like free medical :) But who's keeping tally >:D
:cheers:
It all boils down to a thing called privatisation.
Yep, I got the .44c in 2010......................but systems were twice the price if not three times compared to today's, I paid $7.5k for a quality 2.6kw system, its all that would fit on the roof. If I had room for a 10kw system I would of borrowed and paid the $40K. Having said that, anyone that could do math begged, borrowed, stole money to get a system on, it was a no brainer.
That labour government must be the dumbest government on record.
Post by: grafy82 on November 22, 2015, 04:27:46 PM
Having said that, anyone that could do math begged, borrowed, stole money to get a system on, it was a no brainer.
Exactly. It's not just rich people who installed, many of us took out loans just to make sure we didn't miss out. It was the governments decision to run the scheme like they did and it was never up to us how electricity prices would change. We just saw what was coming and jumped on board. I just get sick of people who don't have Solar blaming those o us who do for the electricity price rises.
Post by: Spada on November 23, 2015, 06:52:11 AM
Post by: richee on January 23, 2016, 07:44:43 AM
We only exported 700 kw so we managed to use 75% of what we produced (2900kWh), with a bit of effort and management this can be improved upon.
We consumed from the grid 2588 kWh less than the same time last year saving us $650.
Very power hungry Ducted Air and the pool runs 8 hours a day.
We should be able to save approx $2000 per year with a payback in 4 years.
Gotta love Solar.
Richard
Post by: BaseCamp on January 23, 2016, 08:05:22 AM
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: Symon on January 23, 2016, 08:17:57 AM
I thought that the Solar schemes where promoted by the Government of the day because it was a cheaper option than building a new power stations to meet demand. It's only since the government has sold the power assets that the companies are now blaming solar panel owners for driving up everyone else's bills ?
Not sure where you got that from but it is wrong. When you have a power network that was not designed for distributed generation suddenly used for such a purpose you are going to have (costly) problems. Just look at the network stability issues that Germany suffered when they implemented very aggressive renewable targets before the grid was ready for it.
The government of the day promoted the scheme to stay in the good books with the Greens who at the time held a lot of sway in the senate. It was a very poorly thought out scheme (like pink batts) that was all about satisfying an ideology rather than a long term strategy. Thankfully the dust is settling somewhat and we are seeing some more realistic schemes.
Post by: gronk on January 23, 2016, 09:23:01 AM
In a nut shell current solar installs should be designed with HIGH USAGE LOW EXPORT in mind.
Jet ;D ;D
That's why I'm not getting solar panels until they work out how to get them operating during the night time !! ;D ;D Seriously..that's when my power usage is !
My power bill is approx $1300 per year, and I just couldn't see a return on 10 to 20 K even with the old 44c .....unless I was 100% offsetting my power bills. And then it was still a 8yr plus return .
Post by: JD-120 on January 23, 2016, 12:16:41 PM
That's why I'm not getting solar panels until they work out how to get them operating during the night time !! ;D ;D Seriously..that's when my power usage is !
My power bill is approx $1300 per year, and I just couldn't see a return on 10 to 20 K even with the old 44c .....unless I was 100% offsetting my power bills. And then it was still a 8yr plus return .
my olds have a similar leccy bill. they have 4kw solar and get get about a 1500-2000 credit every year, so effectively 2500-3000 better off each yr
My bill used to average between the seasons 700-1100 / quarter. I now pay about $300 / yr in bills. That should be even better this yr as I have just replaced electric hot water with solar, replaced pool pump with energy efficient version and all down lights are now LED's. There is a few thousand investment there for those replacements, but will effectively pay for them selves in my mind.
Post by: Murph on January 23, 2016, 12:50:52 PM
Post by: gronk on January 23, 2016, 01:24:42 PM
my olds have a similar leccy bill. they have 4kw solar and get get about a 1500-2000 credit every year, so effectively 2500-3000 better off each yr
So, they don't pay anything for power ? They are 200 to 700 dollars better off !! How much did the 4kw setup cost though ?
Post by: JD-120 on January 23, 2016, 01:30:45 PM
So, they don't pay anything for power ? They are 200 to 700 dollars better off !! How much did the 4kw setup cost though ?about 5 k. Paid itself off within 3yrs. 44c tarrif however
Post by: grafy82 on January 30, 2016, 09:31:00 AM
That's why I'm not getting solar panels until they work out how to get them operating during the night time !! ;D ;D Seriously..that's when my power usage is !
My power bill is approx $1300 per year, and I just couldn't see a return on 10 to 20 K even with the old 44c .....unless I was 100% offsetting my power bills. And then it was still a 8yr plus return .
Gronk, I'm no good at maths, but we installed a 5kw system for $10500 and we have the 44c feed in tarrif. Our bills were approximately $2500 a year. We now have no bill ($2500 saved) and we receive and annual cheque for approximately $1300 on top. So that's $3800 a year paying off a $10500 loan. It was actually cheaper for us to pay the loan off than keep paying our electricity bill. With your quoted power usage, you would have been even better off.
Post by: GBC on January 30, 2016, 11:44:18 AM
Sponging off the neighbours - yeah right. I understand the premise of the argument, but the blame lays squarely at the labor government's feet, not at those of use who got off our arses and borrowed money as an each way bet against ineptitude and an unregulated power market. The maths was stupidly easy but it appears some still haven't worked out how it works.
Post by: muzza01 on January 30, 2016, 12:14:09 PM
Sponging off the neighbours - yeah right. I understand the premise of the argument, but the blame lays squarely at the labor government's feet, not at those of use who got off our arses and borrowed money as an each way bet against ineptitude and an unregulated power market. The maths was stupidly easy but it appears some still haven't worked out how it works.I am with you GBC. The maths was stupidly easy but I constantly get questioned by sceptical friends (and some on the forum) who try and prove to me that it was a waste of money or that I am praying off the people who didn't get it.
Most arguments are sorted when I produce an electricity bill but I don't normally carry them around with me.
Post by: muzza01 on January 30, 2016, 12:57:40 PM
I originally paid for a 2.5KW system with 3kw inverter. The installers were supposed to install 10 X 250 watt panels but for whatever reason they installed 11 panels (I only paid for 10) so I guess we have a 2.75 kW system.
Our .44 cent feed finishes in July 2028.
When the system was first installed it was great watching my analog meter going backwards during the day. It took the Electricy company about a month to come out and install the smart meter which meant we couldn't watch the meter going backwards anymore.
My last electricity bill was $94.
Post by: dlncooke on January 30, 2016, 01:21:01 PM
We use Click Energy 10cents p/kWh (Qld) is not to bad.
It's the daily connection fee that keeps going up weather or not your on 10 or 44 cents.
I would have like the 44 cents. but typical Gov always ripping people off.
Cheers
Dave
Post by: oldmate on January 30, 2016, 01:29:33 PM
Post by: Fizzie on January 30, 2016, 03:25:55 PM
https://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/powerwall (https://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/powerwall)
From what I've been reading - not yet!
As it's still brand new (first residential unit in Oz only got installed this week), it's still a very expensive exercise.
Best guess is that savings you will make on buying power will take about 13 years to pay for the unit, which is only guaranteed for 10... :o
If you want to do batteries, most people are saying hold off for another couple of years, as big changes to battery pricing & technology are expected "soon" 8)
Post by: Symon on January 30, 2016, 04:34:17 PM
https://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/powerwall (https://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/powerwall)
Pro tip - never buy 1st generation technology.
Post by: Hairs on January 30, 2016, 04:39:25 PM
From what I've been reading - not yet!Yeah, I was reading about these the other day & you're right, they have only just hit our shores.
As it's still brand new (first residential unit in Oz only got installed this week), it's still a very expensive exercise.
Best guess is that savings you will make on buying power will take about 13 years to pay for the unit, which is only guaranteed for 10... :o
If you want to do batteries, most people are saying hold off for another couple of years, as big changes to battery pricing & technology are expected "soon" 8)
Might pay to hang off for a couple of years and see.
We are about to loose our 66c in July, and I've been wondering how to make the most out of the 19kw's per day(This is a top end figure on a clear day). There is nobody at home through the day. I don't feel comfortable setting timers on the washing machine/dry, the A/C has it's own timer so setting to cool down trough the day is fine I guess. Just about to pull the pool out(the liner is shagged) so there is a draw on power. We have solar hot water, but we have two mid teenage girls that take long showers(Time to install a coin operated timer I think ;) )
Hmmm.
Got a lot to think about ;D
Also agree with Simon.
:cheers:
Post by: gronk on January 30, 2016, 06:46:45 PM
Gronk, I'm no good at maths, but we installed a 5kw system for $10500 and we have the 44c feed in tarrif. Our bills were approximately $2500 a year. We now have no bill ($2500 saved) and we receive and annual cheque for approximately $1300 on top. So that's $3800 a year paying off a $10500 loan. It was actually cheaper for us to pay the loan off than keep paying our electricity bill. With your quoted power usage, you would have been even better off.
4 yrs ago, we were unsure of the lifespan of our present house , like if we intended to stay for another 10 yrs.?
At 44c, it sure makes sense, but you can't get that anymore. We baulked and missed the boat, and work options means we can't do anything about it anymore. My power usage has gone up to $390/quarter, so will have to get back to being smart with the smart meter !!
Post by: Snapman007 on January 30, 2016, 07:01:40 PM
We have a 6.0kW system using the lower end of the top tier panels with an Sma inverter installed on $1000 worth of tilt frames for a total of $8400 with a $0.50 fit in July 13. We signed up at the end of the buy in. The same system one year earlier through Origin was around $18k.
2014 we generated $3597. 2015 was $3452. We are about at the break even point afte 2.5 years. I now have to ring Origin to get an invoice sent out.🙊
GBC said the math was easy, no it wasn't. I crunched the numbers for over 12 months and could not work out how a government I didn't vote for wants to give me $80k over 25 years for an initial outlay of $8.4k. 🤗
It not bludging off the neighbours, it was probably the best investment opportunity offered by a government of all time. Everyone had equal opportunity to get on board and I bet none of us that did have sour grapes. I didn't take up the Ruddy cash handout as I thought that was just wrong but I'm not dirty at ones that did, just myself.
Anyway, way happy I took the solar up but it would be good if we get daylight savings up here for the extra hour of sun.😬
Love your work Ruddy.👍👍🏾
Post by: Snapman007 on January 30, 2016, 07:07:11 PM
Post by: Wagon Man on January 31, 2016, 12:43:34 AM
We are about to loose our 66c in July,
Hairs who is paying 66cents per kwh
Post by: Hairs on January 31, 2016, 06:34:37 AM
Hairs who is paying 66cents per kwh
When we first installed our system with a Gross Feed in tariff meter the Country Energy(Now Essential Energy) paid us a cheque every quarter 66c per kw worth that our system put back into the grid.
The system has paid for it's self, but when the 66c finishes, I think it will be 6c kw, not sure they are very cagey about it all atm, saying it may change again when the time comes.
So, we will have a system that will feed into the grid, nobody at home through day light hours to take advantage of the power it produces. Of an evening and night use power from the grid and have to pay for that.
So the winners here are the power companies, all these generation systems pumping power into the grid, getting paid stuff all and then charge to use the power of a night.
Now, to harness the power our system produces through the day so we do not need to use the grid. (http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/hhmm.gif)
Post by: Jackdawg on January 31, 2016, 07:01:01 AM
Post by: oldmate on January 31, 2016, 07:09:06 AM
So the winners here are the power companies, all these generation systems pumping power into the grid, getting paid stuff all and then charge to use the power of a night.
Now, to harness the power our system produces through the day so we do not need to use the grid. (http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/hhmm.gif)
Yep, like I mentioned in another thread, head down to Lithgow and have a look around town. It's like a ghost town, with one power station closing and mines that fed it slowing down. Why? A few reasons, one being water supply, but another being, solar on roofs, including all the people that used to work there.
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 08:29:17 AM
Why? A few reasons, one being water supply, but another being, solar on roofs, including all the people that used to work there.
As you said , a few reasons.....water supply wasn't one of them, but the power station was at the end of it's serviceable life, a decline in major industry Australia wide and of course the solar panels making a small impact.
Lithgow was 1st built as a mining town, so the cycle continues.....downhill !
Post by: oldmate on January 31, 2016, 11:32:55 AM
Post by: prodigyrf on January 31, 2016, 11:56:41 AM
My power bill is about 1200 a quarter, as soon as battery technology gets there it is bye bye power companies, I'm going off the grid.
Don't hold your breath-
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/06/tesla-powerwall-crunching-the-numbers-for-australia/ (http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/06/tesla-powerwall-crunching-the-numbers-for-australia/)
Apart from pumping water uphill, and storing energy in the form of calories the total history of mankind's ability to store energy is rather pitiful and the technical/economic hurdles facing electrochemical storage shouldn't fill us with optimism. After all we're still using essentially the same lead acid battery in our cars and campers, Henry was plonking in the Model T.
Post by: prodigyrf on January 31, 2016, 12:13:24 PM
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/tesla-officially-details-the-model-x-suv/news-story/8edd68dd8dc93df8b1dab27dcfafff2f (http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/tesla-officially-details-the-model-x-suv/news-story/8edd68dd8dc93df8b1dab27dcfafff2f)
I was toying with chopping in the Zook on one but I'm not sure if it's AWD or not so I'll probably hang off for the reviews and feedback from Swaggers ;D
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 12:27:16 PM
No country on earth stores electricity on a large scale, but a couple of European countries are "sort of" doing it....using windmills to pump water back up hill during the day ( when there is wind ) to run the hydro system at night .
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 01:28:58 PM
GBC said the math was easy, no it wasn't. I crunched the numbers for over 12 months and could not work out how a government I didn't vote for wants to give me $80k over 25 years for an initial outlay of $8.4k. 🤗
It not bludging off the neighbours, it was probably the best investment opportunity offered by a government of all time. Everyone had equal opportunity to get on board and I bet none of us that did have sour grapes. I didn't take up the Ruddy cash handout as I thought that was just wrong but I'm not dirty at ones that did, just myself.
Anyway, way happy I took the solar up but it would be good if we get daylight savings up here for the extra hour of sun.😬
Love your work Ruddy.👍👍🏾
Except it isn't the Government chipping in the $80k out of general revenue, it is the non solar users (your neighbors) paying for it through increased electricity prices. It was a terrible piece of governance as it is effectively a poor tax, only those who can afford a house can take part so no there wasn't an equal opportunity for all, and this was introduced by a Party that claims to take care of the little guy. ::)
You might not like the term sponging but I cant see any way that it can honestly be looked at other than participants being able to gain a significant financial advantage at the expense of those not so well off.
On Daylight savings, I would love it if it didn't mean that the curtains will fade more and the cows stopped milking, wonder how the cows south of the boarder survive.
Post by: Snapman007 on January 31, 2016, 02:54:30 PM
Post by: xcvator on January 31, 2016, 03:06:31 PM
And any body that believes the use of solar power is the reason the energy companies have increased the tariffs, send me your address please I've got this big bridge in Sydney I need to sell
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 03:13:42 PM
Did you take the cash handout?Pretty sure I did and don't really have any qualms about it. I don't follow why you would have issues taking that but not the FIT. I am not passing judgment on anyone who took part in the 44c FIT, if I were in a position to take part in it I may have but I wouldn't be kidding myself about its fairness.
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 03:15:17 PM
Did you take the cash handout?
Who didn't ??
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 03:18:09 PM
And any body that believes the use of solar power is the reason the energy companies have increased the tariffs, send me your address please I've got this big bridge in Sydney I need to sell
So are you saying you don't think the FIT in any way caused Tarrifs to rise?
Post by: prodigyrf on January 31, 2016, 03:26:08 PM
Storage of electricity has always been a problem...on a large scale !
No country on earth stores electricity on a large scale, but a couple of European countries are "sort of" doing it....using windmills to pump water back up hill during the day ( when there is wind ) to run the hydro system at night .
You're right and in Oz the largest single storage of potential energy to be used for generating electricity is Tumut hydro but we already use that for storing excess coal fired power at night that would go to waste without it. Now SA has gone gung ho with wind but there are studies showing that with fossil fuel backup it only saves around 4% of the installed wind generation capacity, which is uneconomic by miles and hence the massive Govt/taxpayer subsidy required plus some of the dearest power prices in the world (the US averages around US15c /kwhr or 21c Aussie)
The best use of unreliables would be in powering desal plants where intermittency is not a major problem so long as the desired average water output occurs. The irony is with all Tim Flannery's rain that wasn't going to fall, the desal plants mostly sit idle while we clear away all the water to try find his drought underneath.
While Elon Musk and Telsla tap the global idle rich with expensive feelgood perhaps flow battery technology will make economic sense for large commercial/industrial users in the medium to longer term but I doubt the average burban punter will going off grid any time soon. Swaggers would know that better than most with their camping solar.
Post by: muzza01 on January 31, 2016, 03:31:56 PM
You might not like the term sponging but I cant see any way that it can honestly be looked at other than participants being able to gain a significant financial advantage at the expense of those not so well off.I am not a sponge and I take offence at being called one for putting solar panels on my roof. I have worked hard all my life, paid my taxes and deployed overseas in war like operations representing this country.
You might not like the term "Go fark ur self" but I can't see any way that I can honestly answer your stupid rant.
Post by: plusnq on January 31, 2016, 03:34:36 PM
http://www.solarreserve.com/en/technology/molten-salt-energy-storage (http://www.solarreserve.com/en/technology/molten-salt-energy-storage)
Post by: Snapman007 on January 31, 2016, 03:48:57 PM
Pretty sure I did and don't really have any qualms about it. I don't follow why you would have issues taking that but not the FIT. I am not passing judgment on anyone who took part in the 44c FIT, if I were in a position to take part in it I may have but I wouldn't be kidding myself about its fairness.
Your a hypocrite. Your happy to accept a tax payer funded cash handout but you begrudge the people who took up the solar just because you weren't in a position too. 🤑
Post by: Hairs on January 31, 2016, 04:03:15 PM
With the Broken Hill Solar Plant, who's subsidizing it?
http://www.gizmag.com/australia-nyngan-broken-hill-solar-photovoltaic-plants/41462/ (http://www.gizmag.com/australia-nyngan-broken-hill-solar-photovoltaic-plants/41462/)
:cheers:
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 04:12:02 PM
I think this technology seems to show some promise especially in countries like Australia. There are trial plants going in at the moment. One is in South Australia.
http://www.solarreserve.com/en/technology/molten-salt-energy-storage (http://www.solarreserve.com/en/technology/molten-salt-energy-storage)
Sounds too good to be true ? Cost for a huge plant ? Sodium nitrate....same stuff used in explosives....????
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 04:19:17 PM
I am not a sponge and I take offence at being called one for putting solar panels on my roof.
I never said you were a sponge, I don't think the term in this instance is really applicable, I did pause before posting my comment thinking some people who participated in this scheme might take offence but just kept to the facts as I see them and am more than happy for these to be challenged.
I have worked hard all my life, paid my taxes and deployed overseas in war like operations representing this country.
Sounds like you have been a good Australian, but this doesn't in anyway prove or disprove the fairness of this scheme.
You might not like the term "Go fark ur self" but I can't see any way that I can honestly answer your stupid rant.
You can use whatever terms you like but I find when people start playing the man not the ball there is a reason, I choose to believe in this instance it because I am revealing the other side of the coin. As I said happy to have my views challenged and remain civil.
Post by: plusnq on January 31, 2016, 04:21:25 PM
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 04:41:51 PM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-23/developer-of-australian-first-solar-thermal-pilot-plant/7051578 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-23/developer-of-australian-first-solar-thermal-pilot-plant/7051578)
Cost would be huge for a 600Mw station ! What if there isn't any sun for a week ?
But at least someone is trying. Someone like BHP should be investing in something similar....seeing as their ore prices are crap !!
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 05:06:53 PM
Your a hypocrite. Your happy to accept a tax payer funded cash handout but you begrudge the people who took up the solar just because you weren't in a position too. 🤑
Didn't you say you did the reverse?
Here is why I say its different. The 44c FIT is, as I understand it funded by an increase in the general tariff which is paid indiscriminately by electricity consumers no matter their financial situation.
The stimulus was paid from general government revenue which includes income taxes (form which those who have more pay more and those with less pay less) as well as business taxes, resource rents etc etc.
The stimulus was also available to everyone who had paid taxes in the previous year (from memory) where as the rooftop solar was only available to those who owned property and had the means to be able to purchase the solar systems.
The funding models were not so apparent when people signed up which is a big reason why I don't judge anyone who did and as I have said I may have if I were in a position to be able to do so.
I don't in anyway begrudge people putting solar on there roof or even getting some compensation for positively contributing to the environment which benefits us all, but I do have issues with people gaining significant financial benefit at the cost of others especially when that by design is the less well off.
Post by: plusnq on January 31, 2016, 05:40:19 PM
Cost would be huge for a 600Mw station ! What if there isn't any sun for a week ?
But at least someone is trying. Someone like BHP should be investing in something similar....seeing as their ore prices are crap !!
Apparently it loses a degree Fahrenheit a day. So considering it heats up to 600 degrees, it shouldn't really be an issue I suspect.
Post by: Snapman007 on January 31, 2016, 05:41:09 PM
Your earlier comment about the solar was suggesting we were taking food off our neighbours tables.
If you are unhappy about it, don't direct it to the people who signed up but towards those that voted for that government. Who did you vote for?
Post by: cruiser 91 on January 31, 2016, 05:44:10 PM
Didn't you say you did the reverse?
Here is why I say its different. The 44c FIT is, as I understand it funded by an increase in the general tariff which is paid indiscriminately by electricity consumers no matter their financial situation.
The stimulus was paid from general government revenue which includes income taxes (form which those who have more pay more and those with less pay less) as well as business taxes, resource rents etc etc.
The stimulus was also available to everyone who had paid taxes in the previous year (from memory) where as the rooftop solar was only available to those who owned property and had the means to be able to purchase the solar systems.
The funding models were not so apparent when people signed up which is a big reason why I don't judge anyone who did and as I have said I may have if I were in a position to be able to do so.
I don't in anyway begrudge people putting solar on there roof or even getting some compensation for positively contributing to the environment which benefits us all, but I do have issues with people gaining significant financial benefit at the cost of others especially when that by design is the less well off.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm. So you don't own or purchase anything? Everything you buy and pay for has something to do with your last statement.
You wouldnt happen to own any clothing made in sweat shops oversea's would you?
Post by: muzza01 on January 31, 2016, 05:46:11 PM
I never said you were a sponge, I don't think the term in this instance is really applicable, I did pause before posting my comment thinking some people who participated in this scheme might take offence but just kept to the facts as I see them and am more than happy for these to be challenged.:-* :-* :-*
You should of paused a lot longer. A lot of people have solar panels on their roof. They havnt sponged of others to do it. More likely hey have worked bloody hard and made a lot of sacrifices to do it.
Sounds like you have been a good Australian, but this doesn't in anyway prove or disprove the fairness of this scheme.
It's not fair? Really? Life's like that. Maybe you you need a tissue and a cuddle.
You can use whatever terms you like but I find when people start playing the man not the ball there is a reason, I choose to believe in this instance it because I am revealing the other side of the coin. As I said happy to have my views challenged and remain civil.
All you are revealing is that you are a bit precious. I wish I had the money for a new Landcruiser but I don't. I don't go on a rant saying it's not fair.
Post by: Moggy on January 31, 2016, 06:27:19 PM
PM sent with address, can you deliver?
And any body that believes the use of solar power is the reason the energy companies have increased the tariffs, send me your address please I've got this big bridge in Sydney I need to sell
Actually my BIL is 2ic at ergon in twmba & confirmed that that IS exactly reason for tariff rises, though in Qld they have now resorted to increasing the "Service Fee" as nobody challenges that
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: Hairs on January 31, 2016, 06:30:09 PM
:-* :-* :-*
Yep, we are one of those house holds that made a finical decision to draw against our home loan and make extra payments being told we would be doing a good thing, not just for the environment, but also for our own financial benefit.
Little did we know the sh1t fight it would cause from some accusing those that took it on that we were driving up the price of power for all and made to feel like we were the cause of their power increases.
Just another government scheme that has cost us all.
Which way to go now ???
(http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/Run%20for%20hills.gif)
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 06:37:37 PM
Apparently it loses a degree Fahrenheit a day. So considering it heats up to 600 degrees, it shouldn't really be an issue I suspect.
One degree a day sounds like VERY good insulation, but yes, the blurb sounds great, but we'll see how good the outcome when it comes on line ( if it hasn't already ).
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 06:59:49 PM
Hmmmmmmmmmmm. So you don't own or purchase anything? Everything you buy and pay for has something to do with your last statement.
You wouldnt happen to own any clothing made in sweat shops oversea's would you?
hmmmmmm is about right, I guess if you miss read the comment, take it out of context and apply it to a incomparable situation you have a point.
Just in case I need to spell out the difference, the 44c feed in tariff is the equivalent to me making a purchase paying for it up front and the expecting others less well off to pay for it several times over without them getting anything in return.
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 07:01:11 PM
Little did we know the sh1t fight it would cause from some accusing those that took it on that we were driving up the price of power for all and made to feel like we were the cause of their power increases.
If it wasn't solar, it would be normal increases driving up prices anyway !
I see panels on other peoples roofs and really don't have an opinion on them either way, but if I was rich enough to have an off grid solar setup capable of running pool pumps ( filtration and solar heating ) and air conditioning, plus compressors for my workshop ( don't forget I'm rich !! ), then hell yeh, I'm there......
Post by: Hairs on January 31, 2016, 07:14:12 PM
If it wasn't solar, it would be normal increases driving up prices anyway !
Cheers mate, I guess I'm sick of some that believe that we are the reason for thier problems.
I see panels on other peoples roofs and really don't have an opinion on them either way, but if I was rich enough to have an off grid solar setup capable of running pool pumps ( filtration and solar heating ) and air conditioning, plus compressors for my workshop ( don't forget I'm rich !! ), then hell yeh, I'm there......
I see many solar systems in my travels each day around the Clarence Valley and I don't judge or even think about how/why, I say good on them ;D.
Post by: duggie on January 31, 2016, 07:17:11 PM
hmmmmmm is about right, I guess if you miss read the comment, take it out of context and apply it to a incomparable situation you have a point.
Just in case I need to spell out the difference, the 44c feed in tariff is the equivalent to me making a purchase paying for it up front and the expecting others less well off to pay for it several times over without them getting anything in return.
I am having trouble understanding where you are coming from with all your posts on this subject.
I borrowed $10,000.00 plus another $1,000.00 deposit to be able to fit up my house with solar. I am not rich, I made the decision that when I get older, I do not want to be paying power bills. So while I could afford the repayments I went ahead with the solar set up.
There are many people who were on pensions and went ahead with the solar scheme , they too paid off the loan and now are reaping the cheaper power that we all were signed up for.
As far as using others tax dollars to support this, in the past 20 years of my working life ( I have been working and paying tax for over 40 years ) I have paid to the Australian Tax Department in excess of $ 750,000.00 .
I think that I am entitled to get some of my tax dollars back.
Post by: Rumpig on January 31, 2016, 07:27:34 PM
:cup:
And any body that believes the use of solar power is the reason the energy companies have increased the tariffs, send me your address please I've got this big bridge in Sydney I need to sell
Post by: Banjo16 on January 31, 2016, 07:30:07 PM
Post by: Hairs on January 31, 2016, 07:33:21 PM
Looks like another case of here we go again,let's all go camping instead.And setup our Solar panels to keep our beers ice cold :angel:
:cheers:
Post by: briann532 on January 31, 2016, 07:37:10 PM
.................... I think that I am entitled to get some of my tax dollars back.
Sorry Duggie - That's where you're WRONG!!!!!!
You're a worker. Just bend over, keep paying and suck it up.....
Just kidding mate. Its always the hard working honest ones that get shafted!
Enjoy the benefits of you're investment and talk about it round a BIG a$5 campfire offsetting your carbon footprint!!!
Cheers mate.
Brian
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 07:55:07 PM
I never said you were a sponge, I don't think the term in this instance is really applicable, I did pause before posting my comment thinking some people who participated in this scheme might take offence but just kept to the facts as I see them and am more than happy for these to be challenged.
You should of paused a lot longer. A lot of people have solar panels on their roof. They havnt sponged of others to do it. More likely hey have worked bloody hard and made a lot of sacrifices to do it.
I have specified in several of my comments that this is directed at people on the 44c FIT, if they made sacrifices it would only be in the short term and they are then overly compensated for it going into the future, paid for by the people who don't. Yes some people will have worked bloody hard to get the solar panels on their roof, and then others will have to work bloody hard to pay for the FIT with nothing in return.
Sounds like you have been a good Australian, but this doesn't in anyway prove or disprove the fairness of this scheme.
It's not fair? Really? Life's like that. Maybe you you need a tissue and a cuddle.
I can always do with a cuddle, ;) I think with the limitations of forums you have mistaken my care factor,
knowing that my electricity bill is higher because of others FIT probably makes me mildly annoyed if I think about it. When someone carry's on about how good they have it with their 44cFIT or asks how they can try and game the system to continue taking advantage of it and knowing that those with the least are having to chip in for their FIT is what raises up my annoyance levels enough to comment on a forum.
You can use whatever terms you like but I find when people start playing the man not the ball there is a reason, I choose to believe in this instance it because I am revealing the other side of the coin. As I said happy to have my views challenged and remain civil.This was not me going on a rant, far from it, this is me in choosing my words carefully to use as least emotive words as possible, maybe I should have a go in the rant thread to show you what the difference is. As alluded in the previous comment me complaining that this isn't fair is not me having a whinge about my lot in life, I am happy enough with that. It is me pointing out the injustice of those who are far worse of than me having to pay for the FIT of people who have much more.
All you are revealing is that you are a bit precious. I wish I had the money for a new Landcruiser but I don't. I don't go on a rant saying it's not fair.
:-* :-* :-*
Post by: Banjo16 on January 31, 2016, 07:57:07 PM
Post by: Snapman007 on January 31, 2016, 08:12:44 PM
There's a big difference between being envious and jealous.🌵
Post by: Bill on January 31, 2016, 08:15:39 PM
I have specified in several of my comments that this is directed at people on the 44c FIT, if they made sacrifices it would only be in the short term and they are then overly compensated for it going into the future, paid for by the people who don't. Yes some people will have worked bloody hard to get the solar panels on their roof, and then others will have to work bloody hard to pay for the FIT with nothing in return.I am on the 44c FIT.
I certainly made sacrafices to pay for my solar.
So obviously your talking about me.
But I dont care what anyone thinks of me or my solar, especially someone in cyberspace Ive never met nor am I likely to ever meet.
But I have to say, You sure are entertaining to read in this thread. ;D
Bill
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 08:21:16 PM
Yep, we are one of those house holds that made a finical decision to draw against our home loan and make extra payments being told we would be doing a good thing, not just for the environment, but also for our own financial benefit.
Little did we know the sh1t fight it would cause from some accusing those that took it on that we were driving up the price of power for all and made to feel like we were the cause of their power increases.
Just another government scheme that has cost us all.
You made a good decision for the right reasons, the Government of the day just didn't set the scheme up well at all.
Which way to go now ???
(http://www.hairfysh.com/images/Icons/Smileys/Run%20for%20hills.gif)
As the entry to the 44c FIT ended long ago its not going to drive up prices any more and as people drop out they wont lower them again so keep on taking it. If you feel conflicted maybe give a little extra to the next flood/bush-fire/disaster appeal when it inevitably happens. I am not trying to make people feel bad for something they did with good intentions but am trying to point out the flaws of a terribly thought out scheme and why it was ended especially to those who are trying to game it to get extra FIT.
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 08:29:58 PM
That's correct, both my wife and I didn't take the cash handout but I have zero issues with anyone that did. The money was there for the taking and in hind sight I would take it.
Your earlier comment about the solar was suggesting we were taking food off our neighbours tables.
If you are unhappy about it, don't direct it to the people who signed up but towards those that voted for that government. Who did you vote for?
Certainly not them! although no government is perfect. I hope that my original "terrible governance" the many other comments I have made since then clarify's where I aim the blame.
Your earlier comment about the solar was suggesting we were taking food off our neighbours tables.
Which one was that?
Post by: rotare on January 31, 2016, 08:31:03 PM
Can't see the point in berating people for making a choice simply because others decided not to.
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 08:36:37 PM
I am having trouble understanding where you are coming from with all your posts on this subject.
I borrowed $10,000.00 plus another $1,000.00 deposit to be able to fit up my house with solar. I am not rich, I made the decision that when I get older, I do not want to be paying power bills. So while I could afford the repayments I went ahead with the solar set up.
There are many people who were on pensions and went ahead with the solar scheme , they too paid off the loan and now are reaping the cheaper power that we all were signed up for.
As far as using others tax dollars to support this, in the past 20 years of my working life ( I have been working and paying tax for over 40 years ) I have paid to the Australian Tax Department in excess of $ 750,000.00 .
I think that I am entitled to get some of my tax dollars back.
If it was actually tax dollars you were getting back I wouldn't have many issues with it. Unfortunately the government didn't set it up that way. Hope this clarifies it a bit.
Post by: Snapman007 on January 31, 2016, 08:39:06 PM
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 08:44:49 PM
It's all good banjo, just robust discussion. 👍👍🏾
Ahh at last we agree, maybe except the bit where Muzza told me to go !@#* myself.
There's a big difference between being envious and jealous.🌵
I am not sure what you mean by this
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Envy_vs_Jealousy (http://www.diffen.com/difference/Envy_vs_Jealousy) ?
Post by: cruiser 91 on January 31, 2016, 09:02:33 PM
Post by: briann532 on January 31, 2016, 09:03:57 PM
Caution! Trolls frequent this area. Do not feed them. 💊
WHAT???? ??? ???
You mean I can't mention the 66c FIT????
:'( :'( :-[ :-[
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 09:07:40 PM
Post by: cruiser 91 on January 31, 2016, 09:08:03 PM
Dam the capital gains tax
Dam the family tax benefit
Dam the first home owners grant
Dam the small business start up grant
Dam social security
should I go on?
Dam those that are better looking than most of us.
Post by: cruiser 91 on January 31, 2016, 09:09:19 PM
If I was to install panels tomorrow, what is the best FIT I could expect from anybody ??
Bugger all, start working night shift.
Dam those shift rates :D
Post by: xcvator on January 31, 2016, 09:10:17 PM
PM sent with address, can you deliver?
Actually my BIL is 2ic at ergon in twmba & confirmed that that IS exactly reason for tariff rises, though in Qld they have now resorted to increasing the "Service Fee" as nobody challenges that (http://emoji.tapatalk-cdn.com/emoji6.png) (http://emoji.tapatalk-cdn.com/emoji6.png)
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Can I make a suggestion, go and ask your bil if the energy companies are going to DROP the tariffs AFTER all the 44c fit's end.
I bet he'll just laugh and ask if you're joking.
Energy company ceo's are the same as politicians and will spin the lies and truths to suit themselves.
Post by: xcvator on January 31, 2016, 09:13:15 PM
If I was to install panels tomorrow, what is the best FIT I could expect from anybody ??About 6c
Post by: cruiser 91 on January 31, 2016, 09:18:06 PM
My son works for SA Power Networks formerly known as ESTA. These guys earn mine money with the luxury of going home each night. All their equipment and machinery are first class and is changed over for new every few years. They are also owned by a foreign company and need to keep share holders happy. Starting to get my drift? You think banks are the only ones ripping us off? think again.
Post by: briann532 on January 31, 2016, 09:27:08 PM
I camp for a month every year without power and survive VERY comfortably.
If you want to save power, don't use it.....
Its really that simple.
Now before you think I've fallen off my tree or had too many reds (as if that could happen - It would like Speewa having to many green cans!!!)
I'm deadly serious.
We have pages of threads talking about led lighting. Why not integrate it into your home?
We are setting up down at our property to run entirely off grid.
A few solar panels, gas for the HWS and everything run off 12volt.
OK no AC, but if you need that, then sacrifice the cost or upgrade to more panels.
It can be done and very cheaply.
I recently setup a caravan with a 260watt solar system for under $400.
Add the cost of a decent deep cycle battery and you have 4 -5 years of trouble free power.
Can run the fridge, lights and charge laptops, ipoods and fit twats etc etc.
We pay for the convenience of being able to flick a switch in our house, then complain about the cost.
Yep, I'm guilty too.
Currently have the AC on, ceiling fans going, 2 x TV's, lord know how many appliances such as DVD, clock, PC, printer, and the 25 lights my kids are unable to turn off.
Post by: tryagain on January 31, 2016, 09:46:32 PM
I'm certain there's been hundreds of different subsidies and schemes offered over time by the government. Some are offered to everyone, some are only offered to certain groups. Isn't living "smartly" making most of what is on offer to you without breaking the law?
Can't see the point in berating people for making a choice simply because others decided not to.
Yep, probably still are. I cant think of any other though where the poorest third (renters) are excluded and then expected to directly pay those that took advantage of it to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars on top of their actual costs. Not berating people for taking advantage of it but for ignorant comments like anyone could of taken advantage of it or trying to pretend that its not their neighbors paying for it.
edit, by directly pay I don't mean walk over and hand them a wad of cash but directly through increased electricity costs as opposed to general government revenue.
Post by: gronk on January 31, 2016, 09:56:44 PM
Currently have the AC on, ceiling fans going, 2 x TV's, lord know how many appliances such as DVD, clock, PC, printer, and the 25 lights my kids are unable to turn off.
That will be hard to train the rest of your family to avoid those luxuries !! ;D ;D
Post by: Bill on January 31, 2016, 10:00:07 PM
Yep, probably still are. I cant think of any other though where the poorest third (renters) are excluded and then expected to directly pay those that took advantage of it to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars on top of their actual costs. Not berating people for taking advantage of it but for ignorant comments like anyone could of taken advantage of it or trying to pretend that its not their neighbors paying for it.I can honestly say my neighbours do NOT pay for my FIT
I can say this because I live in a Close and we all have solar on our roofs.
Bill
Post by: BaseCamp on January 31, 2016, 10:10:26 PM
Storage of electricity has always been a problem...on a large scale !This guy had the key in the 1970s.... Buckminster Fuller... Inventor and creator of many things - including bucky balls...
No country on earth stores electricity on a large scale, but a couple of European countries are "sort of" doing it....using windmills to pump water back up hill during the day ( when there is wind ) to run the hydro system at night .
I am on tapatalk so I can't provide links atm...
But basically he argued that (a) the cheapest and most efficient form of base load power was large scale generation as we still have today - nearly 50 years after he put the following arguments forward. .... (coal; nukes; etc).... (b) that large scale generation works best when run at full load 24/7... but power stations have to shed power off peak and at night etc (c) Bucky theorized that one day the technology would hopefully exist to be able to construct high tension transmission lines from nation to nation.... (d) so his idea was that the world wound need less aggregate power stations - because as the earth rotated each day - say Stanwell (Qld) could be going full tilt during the day for Qld ... then keep going full tilt 24/7 sending / selling its power 1,000s kms on high power transmission lines to another country in asia that was still in peak hours
(E) He wrote that this concept could be extrapolated all the way around the world. .... As long as the ultra long distance transmission lines existed. .. Power Generation at night being "load shifted" / sold to other parts of the world still in peak daylight conditions
He also said that abundant "free and efficient" power distribution like this would drag the 3rd world out of poverty. ...
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: muzza01 on February 01, 2016, 05:13:10 AM
Ahh at last we agree, maybe except the bit where Muzza told me to go !@#* myself.Wish you would instead of trolling on this thread.
It started off as a decent discussion until you called some of us sponges.
Post by: Moggy on February 01, 2016, 06:20:08 AM
Can I make a suggestion, go and ask your bil if the energy companies are going to DROP the tariffs AFTER all the 44c fit's end.No need because like you i know that wont happen. And whilst i agree with Tryagain in that the 44c fit has undoubtedly contributed to higher general tariffs, i am now wondering if the high fit was all part of a government/power company conspiracy to justify the recent high increase in prices
I bet he'll just laugh and ask if you're joking.
Energy company ceo's are the same as politicians and will spin the lies and truths to suit themselves.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: grafy82 on February 01, 2016, 07:44:13 AM
I'm not going to feel bad at all about my 44c fit that I took a loan to pay off. I am one of the people having to pay to prop up the serial dole bludgers and people who don't want to work hard because of a bad government dole scheme that was put into place. Sound familiar tryagain?
Post by: Fizzie on February 01, 2016, 09:27:34 AM
where the poorest third (renters) are excluded
See this time after time, that we're (& yes, we also get 44c :D) responsible for rippling off the poor renters - OK, so someone renting a house can't decide to put panels on their roof, but what's stopping their landlord from putting panels up?
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 09:36:28 AM
Wish you would instead of trolling on this thread.
It started off as a decent discussion until you called some of us sponges.
Please try to get your facts straight. I didn't call anyone a sponge, I merely pointed out some facts, I have even said I don't think the term sponge really applies to the 44c FIT, If you think others having to pay you several times over for your solar setup makes you a sponge then that is your issue to deal with not mine.
If in pointing out the facts somehow ruined a decent discussion we have a very different definition of "decent discussion". Are you alluding to the earlier pages of this thread where people discussing how/if they can increase their their output in order to claim more for others as being the decent bit?
I have said several times that I don't have issues with people who signed up in good faith believing that it was a good thing to do. I do have issues with the government who introduced it and people who are relatively well off (ie house owners) continuing to try and game the system so that people poorer than them have to pay even more for it.
Post by: Bill on February 01, 2016, 09:56:19 AM
Bill
p.s I still have a care factor of 0
Post by: muzza01 on February 01, 2016, 10:09:22 AM
Please try to get your facts straight. I didn't call anyone a sponge, I merely pointed out some facts, I have even said I don't think the term sponge really applies to the 44c FIT, If you think others having to pay you several times over for your solar setup makes you a sponge then that is your issue to deal with not mine.
I got my facts straight.
So you didn't say the below? ???
Or are you now retracting what you said?
You might not like the term sponging but I cant see any way that it can honestly be looked at other than participants being able to gain a significant financial advantage at the expense of those not so well off.
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 10:12:46 AM
The high electricity prices are largely attributed to the massive network infrastructure and line upgrades that ergon decided they needed to keep up with future demand.
I'm not going to feel bad at all about my 44c fit that I took a loan to pay off. I am one of the people having to pay to prop up the serial dole bludgers and people who don't want to work hard because of a bad government dole scheme that was put into place. Sound familiar tryagain?
I have never said the FIT is responsible for all of the general Tariff increase, I have only said that the 44cFIT is paid for by an increase to the general Tariff, I've heard the "we had to take out a loan" line from a few different people in this thread but am not sure why its brought up, you do realise its others who are effectively paying it off for you and getting nothing in return.
Yes there are definitely issues with the welfare system, I am not it anyway denying that but have several times now pointed out how I believe this scheme, by design is far worse. I honestly cant see how anyone can reasonably have an issue with the welfare system in this country but not the 44cFIT without being hypocritical.
Post by: UIZ733 on February 01, 2016, 10:26:23 AM
Well I must be a double sponge because I also use my solar panels in the few caravan parks we frequent, which must drive up the price for those who use the 240 provided.Exactly the way I operate and think. I think this thread is done to death.
Bill
p.s I still have a care factor of 0
Some of us forked out our hard earned in good faith when the scheme was operational. Many including some on here though we were mad OR that it was a poor deal for whatever reason.
The reality is that it was a good deal. We got lucky for once. So what! In my case I have received 'Jack Shit' from any form of government up to then.
A significant Government rationale behind enhanced feed in tariffs at that time was to bring 'solar' into the consciousness of the house-owning public form my memory of events. If that has proven to be wrong, so be it. Those who don't make mistakes, make nothing.
Self righteous clap-trap that suggests we are in some way using the system, are wealthy and don't' care about those less well off or have been responsible for price increases in electricity is nonsense. Prices go up.
Wealth is relative. I can't afford to give the 'love of my life' a 10 million dollar engagement ring or buy a house in Toorak. I guess that is my problem. I just need to 'man up' and accept my situation OR shut up and do something about it.
By the way, I now know that to keep the 'subsidy', the account must remain in my name.
Thanks all for clarifying the matter. :cup:
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 10:31:05 AM
I got my facts straight.
So you didn't say the below? ???
Or are you now retracting what you said?
I certainly said that, if that sentence was calling you a sponge it would have said "You might not like the term sponging but I cant see any way that it can honestly be looked at other than sponging" instead I kept to pointing out the facts with "than participants being able to gain a significant financial advantage at the expense of those not so well off" I though that would be fairly clear. The reason I think its not sponging is I attribute that term sponging to the "have not's" leaching of the "haves " for lack of a better phrase, where as this is a case of the opposite.
Post by: GeoffA on February 01, 2016, 10:48:34 AM
See this time after time, that we're (& yes, we also get 44c :D) responsible for rippling off the poor renters - OK, so someone renting a house can't decide to put panels on their roof, but what's stopping their landlord from putting panels up?
A trick question, perhaps??
Why would a landlord stump up thousands for solar panels, when the tenant would reap the saving??
Post by: GeoffA on February 01, 2016, 10:52:41 AM
The reality is that it must be recovered from somewhere.....
:cheers:
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 11:01:14 AM
I can honestly say my neighbors do NOT pay for my FIT
I can say this because I live in a Close and we all have solar on our roofs.
Bill
IF they all got in on the 44c FIT then you are correct.
Well I must be a double sponge because I also use my solar panels in the few caravan parks we frequent, which must drive up the price for those who use the 240 provided.
Bill
I cant see how that drive up the prices, I would think it would drive down more than anything but perhaps I am not following properly.
p.s I still have a care factor of 0
This actually makes a lot more sense to me than that of those trying to defend the scheme. The "Yep the scheme is crap but I went into it with good intentions, its not my fault the government of the day stuffed it up" is a logically defensible position to take.
Post by: Bill on February 01, 2016, 11:31:36 AM
IF they all got in on the 44c FIT then you are correct.So before the solar scheme what "excuse" did all these electrical companies use for their price hikes?
Indeed they did.
I cant see how that drive up the prices, I would think it would drive down more than anything but perhaps I am not following properly.
Well the caravan park isnt making extra money by my use of their electricity so they must be charging the other users extra to compensate for me.
This actually makes a lot more sense to me than that of those trying to defend the scheme. The "Yep the scheme is crap but I went into it with good intentions, its not my fault the government of the day stuffed it up" is a logically defensible position to take.
You misunderstand. In order to defend myself I would have to care what you or anyone thought. I dont.
Bill
Post by: BaseCamp on February 01, 2016, 12:04:36 PM
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 12:15:00 PM
So before the solar scheme what "excuse" did all these electrical companies use for their price hikes?
Bill
Same as everyone else I guess, increase in costs to supply the service. The hikes just had to become bigger to cover the 44c FIT
Post by: KingBilly on February 01, 2016, 12:19:55 PM
This thread has turned to total crap... Mods; please pull the plug on it....
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
No it hasn't. Just because you mightn't agree with some of the points raised, it doesn't mean the thread should be shut down. Both sides are raising valid points and afterall we live in a liberal democracy where free speech is encouraged and not censored like you wish to do.
Just play the ball fellas, not the person, and please continue
KB
Post by: BaseCamp on February 01, 2016, 12:30:45 PM
I tire of trolling; and attacks/needling of forum members. ...
Like for example: do you think I appreciate reading your erroneous claims that "I may not agree with some of the points raised" ... Why say this? Plainly wrong. ..
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: KingBilly on February 01, 2016, 12:39:28 PM
I am happy to read and learn factual points about how the FITs work, and whether the schemes are economically viable?
I tire of trolling; and attacks/needling of forum members. ...
Like for example: do you think I appreciate reading your erroneous claims that "I may not agree with some of the points raised" ... Why say this? Plainly wrong. ..
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Mate you have a bit of a habit of trying to be the moral guardian on myswag sometimes.
Nobody is trolling, certainly not me. And I haven't seen any evidence of anybody else trolling in this thread either. I would humbly suggest that perhaps your perception of what trolling is differs from mine :D
Only one person engaged in a personal attack which was wrong. All others comments have been either fact or somebody's opinion. Nobody has to agree with another's opinion, but everybody should respect the right of that other person to express their opinion.
KB
Post by: BaseCamp on February 01, 2016, 12:46:47 PM
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 02:27:22 PM
Post by: Bill on February 01, 2016, 02:42:19 PM
The hikes just had to become bigger to cover the 44c FITBut we dont know that for sure do we?
Lets be honest here.
We (the consumer) have no idea what the price of electricity would be today had the solar scheme not happened.
Bill
Post by: Banjo16 on February 01, 2016, 03:59:35 PM
This thread has turned to total crap... Mods; please pull the plug on it....X 2
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
This is not informative or robust discussion,sounds more like a schoolyard spat b
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 04:16:02 PM
But we dont know that for sure do we?.
Lets be honest here.
We (the consumer) have no idea what the price of electricity would be today had the solar scheme not happened.
Bill
A very quick google reveals this old article that seems to confirm it as well place a $$$ figure on what everyone else is having to contribute with (a predicted) $276pa for non solar households this year, I hadn't read this article before but seems to confirm everything that I have said here.
Post by: jetcrew on February 01, 2016, 04:27:16 PM
It is plainly obv that prices went up as a result of or at the same time as the FIT system that was implemented in Qld/AUST.. to blame those who undertook the system is a bit silly ..infact its very silly IMHO.
If those people did not stump up the $$$ for those first few years of solar harvest feed back into the grid and the Power mobs had to build and install all that solar you can bet we would be paying a lot more right now.
So it was inevitable that prices would go up but how much is the real question..would we be paying more with or without the solar subsidy system. No one will ever know but I do know that regardless of the 44c FIT prices would have sky rocketed and maybe be even worse.
Those people who installed at the start and were encouraged to spend $$$ to do it and become quasi shareholders IMHO providing the needed infrastructure to the power companies and in return for their early investment they are now rewarded with continued 44c FIT , those of us who were cautious and hung back and came to the table later only get a 6c FIT.
Its like buying shares before or after a company makes it big ..you take the risk you reap the reward. Was the 44c FIT unsustainable YES was it designed to simply get the panels out and on roofs generating much needed kWh to the grid YES... did they always plan to roll it back ....YES .. so it had a limited shelf life but it achieved its desired outcome.
paying early investors 44c FIT could well be a lot less than if no one ever took it up... and we were paying the energy companies for them having to invest the $$$, so I think even trying to apportion an increase in elec costs to early 44cFIT people is off the mark...the increase was always coming and it could have been much / much worse or even had consequences of long term power failures.
so I guess my point is.. if you want to save power turn Shit off ...if you dont then pay the bills ..if you want to blame someone for the high bills blame us all who want 2 fridges and 100 lights on every night... we are the end user and when demand is high so is the price ..esp if you need to continually upgrade the network as each year demand increases, if you can prove your usage has decreased over the past 3 years then disregard my comments, for the rest of us honest enough to admit we use more and more each year, then understand we will pay more and more each year.
But everyone is entitled to an opinion and thats just mine ;D ;D ;D ;D
Other will think different ..but we can all agree the less you use the less you pay ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
jet :cheers:
EDIT - yes that article puts a $$$ figure on it $276P/A to cover the early investors and owners of the infrastructure, imagine the cost PA to each household if you were paying back a billion $$$ loan for the power company each year..... you keep missing the point ..one way or another you and me were always going to pay more , your just upset it goes to other normal people I am happy it does.. and the environment benefits too.
Post by: cruiser 91 on February 01, 2016, 04:42:51 PM
Same as everyone else I guess, increase in costs to supply the service. The hikes just had to become bigger to cover the 44c FIT
Actually that is in correct. Electricity suppliers only contribute a maximum of 0.06c to FIT's per KWH and that is purely up to them, they dont have to pay jack shyte if they dont want to but the Tax Payer makes up the the overall .44c plus, its just like any other handout previously mentioned in this thread. You must get your facts right b4 stating ill fuel comments.
I must also mention that my 2.65 solar system cost twice as much if not more than the cost of a same sized system today.
Would you agree I was ripped off in 2010 :-*
Electricity suppliers hike up prices because they can, pure and simple.
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 05:28:40 PM
Actually that is in correct. Electricity suppliers only contribute a maximum of 0.06c to FIT's per KWH and that is purely up to them, they dont have to pay jack shyte if they dont want to but the Tax Payer makes up the the overall .44c plus, its just like any other handout previously mentioned in this thread. You must get your facts right b4 stating ill fuel comments.
I must also mention that my 2.65 solar system cost twice as much if not more than the cost of a same sized system today.
Would you agree I was ripped off in 2010 :-*
Electricity suppliers hike up prices because they can, pure and simple.
Pretty sure I have got my facts straight and have posted a link to back it up, Can you please post proof to the Taxpayer footing this bill through general revenue? I remember reading something similar to what you have written except I think you will find that it is the not the tax payers but the other electricity consumers like I have said all along.
Post by: BaseCamp on February 01, 2016, 06:32:56 PM
From what I recall (and my recall is a bit hazy here), Katter said that in the Jo era - Jo demanded that Gladstone Aliminum smelter supply power to the grid for practically free... and that is why electricity was so cheap back in those days....
Tba?
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: gronk on February 01, 2016, 06:55:46 PM
I recall an interview on ABC radio last year with Bob Katter....
From what I recall (and my recall is a bit hazy here), Katter said that in the Jo era - Jo demanded that Gladstone Aliminum smelter supply power to the grid for practically free... and that is why electricity was so cheap back in those days....
Tba?
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Aluminium smelters are one of the most power hungry industries on the planet......they consume vast amounts, so they wouldn't be in a position to supply any power to the grid.
Maybe Jo was charging them heaps, so subsidising the rest of the state ??
Post by: prodigyrf on February 01, 2016, 07:20:20 PM
http://www.sa.gov.au/topics/water-energy-and-environment/energy/energy-supply-and-sources/renewable-energy-sources/solar-energy/solar-photovoltaic-systems/solar-feed-in-scheme (http://www.sa.gov.au/topics/water-energy-and-environment/energy/energy-supply-and-sources/renewable-energy-sources/solar-energy/solar-photovoltaic-systems/solar-feed-in-scheme)
Notice for early adopters like me we get 44c ex GST and that's via SA Power Networks (the old ETSA) who own the poles and wires billing each retailer and effectively passing it on to me via the reatiler and guess who they have to get it off? Not the broke State Gummint that's for sure and why it was too easy for them to legislate that into being because it had no effect on State coffers. Then notice the extra retailer commitment (6.8c from Jan 1) estimated by escosa to be fair wholesale value for the excess power generated (was 5.3c on my last bill in 2015) The 44c is the real kicker that's simply fed into everyone's bills via SA Power Networks charges and as that link points out that's way above what the wholesale price is really worth.
Hence the beggar thy neighbour power policy and why when power prices were rapidly rising due to other forces at work (mainly other RECs schemes, wind power subsidies and particularly States having milked their power utilitiesfor years and not providing for adequate depreciation and hence the selloff to let private enterprise be the messenger), the legislators had to pull back on the FIT scheme largesse for the sake of struggletown.
Edit: The other factor to add to the perfect storm for power prices was the rapid takeup of aircons while all this was going on and the need to gold plate the network for a few weeks of summer stinker days particularly between an interconnected SA and Vic. It's estimated the network and generation capacity is 25% larger in order to cope with a few weeks worth of summer days and we all have to pay for that, particularly the plethora of gas peaking plants that lay idle for most of the year. A bit like our idle desal plants all consumers have to pay for that backup with no rolling brownouts.
Post by: BaseCamp on February 01, 2016, 07:20:49 PM
Apologies, I don't recall all the details about the interview.
Like I think Katter also said that the Gladstone Smelter closed down because of environmental issues and the pollution was exported to China... (smelting galore) ..... (Wasn't gaim to post this last time in case I was all wrong. ...? A bit embarrassing if that smelter is still going in happy rock?? :) lol...
Kteer then said the power distribution was later privatized, in Qld?
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: gronk on February 01, 2016, 07:52:56 PM
Post by: Moggy on February 01, 2016, 08:14:04 PM
Mad hatter Katter and Flo and Jo......you poor queenslanders have had your share eh ?? ;D ;DWe've still got them.....
Clive palmer
Rudd
Can do campbell
State of Origin (winning) team :-)
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: rags on February 01, 2016, 08:18:00 PM
We've still got them.....
Clive palmer
Rudd
Can do campbell
State of Origin (winning) team :-)
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
And curtains that don't fade
Post by: tryagain on February 01, 2016, 08:27:42 PM
I haven't sat down and done the sums but I cant really conceive of a more expensive way to introduce solar, with most people here talking about break even after about 4 years but continuing to get the inflated FIT for the remainder of a couple decades it would have even been cheaper for everyone else if the government borrowed the money to purchase and then gave away solar systems without a FIT as then people without the ability to get solar would only have to pay for others solar set ups once plus interest not multiple times.
I have also read that due to the design of the 44cFIT and participants switching consumption form daytime to night time to maximise their return it has placed additional load into peak periods and has therefore actually resulted in the network requiring additional generation capacity to meet the increased peak as opposed to reducing it.
The scheme was exceptionally successful in getting solar onto rooftops but I think it would be hard to find much of a worse way of achieving it.
EDIT - yes that article puts a $$$ figure on it $276P/A to cover the early investors and owners of the infrastructure, imagine the cost PA to each household if you were paying back a billion $$$ loan for the power company each year..... you keep missing the point ..one way or another you and me were always going to pay more , your just upset it goes to other normal people I am happy it does.. and the environment benefits too.
As I stated earlier even giving away the panels would surely have been cheaper, I am interested to know though what likely scenario you can envisage there being a more expensive outcome. Yes electricity prices were always going to go up in a move to cleaner supply that doesn't we shouldn't want the best value for money or desire a fair and equitable distribution of those costs.
Post by: jetcrew on February 01, 2016, 08:46:33 PM
I can't claim any more knowledge than anyone else mate..
But nothing the gov ever does is equitable ...power company executives and gov ministers sit down to work out a solar scheme ...hmmm wonder who the smart ones were ...
It's not equitable , it's not fair , it's just how it is and it was imho needed .., people who have it can't be blamed for the system ...do you blame the player ..or do you blame the game ....
Giving away panels not sure if the costs on that mate ..they only wanted a certain amount of power so how would they choose who gets it ..even less unfair .
The scheme was announced ..people chose to buy in or not ..if people could not afford to then obv they chose not.. Can't blame those who could and did ...
Jet :cheers:
Post by: grafy82 on February 01, 2016, 09:21:48 PM
.
A very quick google reveals this old article that seems to confirm it as well place a $$$ figure on what everyone else is having to contribute with (a predicted) $276pa for non solar households this year, I hadn't read this article before but seems to confirm everything that I have said here.
Wow, a huge 76c a day. Here's a tip, try turning your Aircon off for a couple of hours a day and you'll offset the cost of having to pay for my FIT. I hardly ever run my Aircon to save power, I'm sure you could get used to it too.
Post by: prodigyrf on February 01, 2016, 09:44:49 PM
Post by: grafy82 on February 01, 2016, 10:17:45 PM
Either that or solar fans cough up to leave the grid altogether if they don't want to contribute their fair share.
Believe me, most people with solar would love to go off grid, but then the have nots will still complain and moan because they have will have to pay higher prices again as power companies won't be making as much money. People just need to get over it. Complain to the government about it, not the ones who took up the opportunity when they saw it.
I don't smoke and I don't drink, but I still have to pay to cover the cost of health effects for those who do. See, we could start this sooky argument about any number of things we don't like to have to pay for. Get over it.
Post by: Symon on February 01, 2016, 11:04:10 PM
I recall an interview on ABC radio last year with Bob Katter....
From what I recall (and my recall is a bit hazy here), Katter said that in the Jo era - Jo demanded that Gladstone Aliminum smelter supply power to the grid for practically free... and that is why electricity was so cheap back in those days....
Tba?
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
That could have been it?
Apologies, I don't recall all the details about the interview.
Like I think Katter also said that the Gladstone Smelter closed down because of environmental issues and the pollution was exported to China... (smelting galore) ..... (Wasn't gaim to post this last time in case I was all wrong. ...? A bit embarrassing if that smelter is still going in happy rock?? :) lol...
Kteer then said the power distribution was later privatized, in Qld?
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
OK, a few things here.
1. Aluminium smelters consume electricity, not produce it. Power is unsurprisingly produced in a power station.
2. The aluminium smelter you refer to is in Boyne Island, not Gladstone
3. The power station you are referring to is in Gladstone
4. The aluminium smelting industry in Australia has been under substantial pressure in recent years due to a combination of factors, namely the rapidly rising costs of energy in Australia, the high labour costs in Australia, and the global oversupply of aluminium mostly due to China building new smelters at a rate of about one per month.
5. The Boyne Island smelter is still running, and is pumping out heaps of metal. It is however at risk of closing due to the factors I mentioned above.
6. The Gladstone power station (the thing that makes power) was originally state owned. For this reason it was an environmental problem, those who lived in Gladstone in the 90's would remember the smoke haze that was always over the city. When the station was privatised, management could no longer hide behind public service bureaucracy and had to fix the stack emissions. Bag houses were installed and the smoke haze is now gone.
7. In Queensland the electricity generation (that's the power stations) have been privatised
8. In Queensland the transmission (Powerlink), and distribution (Ergon, Energex) are still state owned. The retailers (AGL, Origin, etc) have been privatised. Other states differ in the amount of privatisation.
Hope that clears things up.
Post by: Symon on February 01, 2016, 11:29:18 PM
I have also read that due to the design of the 44cFIT and participants switching consumption form daytime to night time to maximise their return it has placed additional load into peak periods and has therefore actually resulted in the network requiring additional generation capacity to meet the increased peak as opposed to reducing it.
Well, not really.
The price of electricity has increased due to a number of factors -
1. Ageing of the power stations. There has not been any capital investment in new, more efficient power stations for some time. As the stations age it costs more to keep the old clunkers going. There has been an increase in the amount of renewable generation being constructed, but with the exception of hyrdo, renewable energy costs more to operate and maintain on a $/kWh basis.
2. Fall in consumption. Thanks to education campaigns and schemes such as rolling out energy saving lighting, people are more energy efficient and demand has actually been in decline. Less consumption equates to less revenue for the generators, and since there are income guarantees set for them (a condition of privatisation) the regulator increases the energy charge to compensate.
3. Over capitalisation of the distribution network. Planned upgrades of the network are set against forecast consumption, however these projects are planned years in advance and cannot allow for government schemes like aggressive solar targets. Hence you have the so-called 'gold plating' of the network where upgrade costs are not recouped by consumption charges. The money has to come from somewhere, and this is seen in higher network charges.
4. Increase in renewable energy generation. The network is designed for power to only flow in one direction, from generator to consumer. Now that you have power flowing in the opposite direction this causes all sorts of issues for network stability. This requires costly changes to the network, and those costs get passed on.
My $0.02
Post by: oldmate on February 02, 2016, 05:52:29 AM
My $0.02
Is that before or after your 44cFIT?? ;D
Post by: BaseCamp on February 02, 2016, 06:34:58 AM
Curious - does anyone know how many megawatts are coming off roofs in Qld; and how many power stations that represents? Eg: 0.4 or 1.6 etc etc
Cheers
BaseCamp
.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: richee on February 02, 2016, 06:57:03 AM
http://pv-map.apvi.org.au (http://pv-map.apvi.org.au)
Richard
Post by: plusnq on February 02, 2016, 07:04:20 AM
Is that before or after your 44cFIT?? ;D
Lol. ;D
Post by: gronk on February 02, 2016, 08:46:37 AM
The price of electricity has increased due to a number of factors -
1. Ageing of the power stations. There has not been any capital investment in new, more efficient power stations for some time. As the stations age it costs more to keep the old clunkers going. There has been an increase in the amount of renewable generation being constructed, but with the exception of hyrdo, renewable energy costs more to operate and maintain on a $/kWh basis.
And this in itself has become a double edged sword. Due to the "new" green agenda, as well as the above mentioned increase in renewables, getting a new "dirty" power station built probably won't happen.
The greenies would applaud that, but without a reliable base load, we leave ourselves open for future blackouts , especially if industry picks back up and a few big consumers ( like an aluminium smelter ) come back on stream.
Post by: tryagain on February 02, 2016, 09:08:58 AM
Well, not really.
The price of electricity has increased due to a number of factors -
1. Ageing of the power stations. There has not been any capital investment in new, more efficient power stations for some time. As the stations age it costs more to keep the old clunkers going. There has been an increase in the amount of renewable generation being constructed, but with the exception of hyrdo, renewable energy costs more to operate and maintain on a $/kWh basis.
2. Fall in consumption. Thanks to education campaigns and schemes such as rolling out energy saving lighting, people are more energy efficient and demand has actually been in decline. Less consumption equates to less revenue for the generators, and since there are income guarantees set for them (a condition of privatisation) the regulator increases the energy charge to compensate.
3. Over capitalisation of the distribution network. Planned upgrades of the network are set against forecast consumption, however these projects are planned years in advance and cannot allow for government schemes like aggressive solar targets. Hence you have the so-called 'gold plating' of the network where upgrade costs are not recouped by consumption charges. The money has to come from somewhere, and this is seen in higher network charges.
4. Increase in renewable energy generation. The network is designed for power to only flow in one direction, from generator to consumer. Now that you have power flowing in the opposite direction this causes all sorts of issues for network stability. This requires costly changes to the network, and those costs get passed on.
My $0.02
Think that's all spot on, my comment though was in regards to how badly the 44cFIT scheme was conceived in that its design actually increases (probably only marginally) peak demand as opposed to reducing it.
The other big increase to network costs from what I have read is the widespread take up of air conditioners, They quoted the figure of $7000 in grid costs per air conditioner installed to be able meet the peak demand.
I never have said the 44cFIT is responsible for all the price increases in power bills but just that it was funded out of power bill increases, I hadn't commented on all the other causes of increases due to this predominately being about the 44cFIT not the cause of power bill increases but what you say is correct.
Post by: tryagain on February 02, 2016, 09:26:32 AM
Wow, a huge 76c a day. Here's a tip, try turning your Aircon off for a couple of hours a day and you'll offset the cost of having to pay for my FIT. I hardly ever run my Aircon to save power, I'm sure you could get used to it too.
My air-con hardly gets turned on, after working out in the QLD sun most days just getting in the shade and not doing physical work is cool in comparison, but sometimes happy wife equals happy life.
So are you volunteering to cut back your little aircon use so to be able to pay me 76c/day? I can PM you my address and you can send me a cheque for $69 each quarter if you like. ;D ;D ;D
Post by: Symon on February 02, 2016, 10:30:15 AM
I never have said the 44cFIT is responsible for all the price increases in power bills but just that it was funded out of power bill increases, I hadn't commented on all the other causes of increases due to this predominately being about the 44cFIT not the cause of power bill increases but what you say is correct.
Yes true, but I find it helps to take the heat out of a discussion to give a wider view. Energy costs have gone up due to a combination of factors, and the FIT and renewable energy are only part of the mix, not the sole reasons.
It also varies from state to state due to the different political landscapes and the configuration of their energy industry.
Post by: Spada on February 02, 2016, 11:36:49 AM
I got a $1500 subsidy to install solar hot water so I dont have to use all that expensive electricity to have a warm bath, and then they gave me $1400 worth of free insulation for my roof so I use even less electricity to cool the house with the aircon 8). I did have to pay out of my own pocket to put in solar panels though , but at least now I'm making a motza by generating 30 odd kilowatts a day at 50cents (44c from the government and an additional 6c from the suplier), so fair's fair I suppose :laugh:
With all the money I'm saving on electricity, I've been able to run my aircon non stop for months, and I think we can now afford to put in a pool. It was a borderline decision untill I discovered Energex will pay me $200 to connect it to the cheap tarrif 33 suply. That means I can sell the power to energex at 50c, and then buy it back for 21c ;D
But there's no point having these luxuries if you cant enjoy them, so I have a cunning plan. The wife is about to be made redundant, so I reacon she should go onto the dole, and I'll cut back to part time hours. That way we can reduce our family income so that we're eligable for free health, child care, and family tax benefits.
:cup: to everyone for working hard and helping me out ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D.
Sorry, the above isn't true, but I just couldnt help myself. This thread needs to be lightend up a bit.
Post by: prodigyrf on February 02, 2016, 12:32:37 PM
Post by: oldmate on February 02, 2016, 02:08:48 PM
All in all, you gotta thank the various governments for lending a hand :D
I got a $1500 subsidy to install solar hot water so I dont have to use all that expensive electricity to have a warm bath, and then they gave me $1400 worth of free insulation for my roof so I use even less electricity to cool the house with the aircon 8). I did have to pay out of my own pocket to put in solar panels though , but at least now I'm making a motza by generating 30 odd kilowatts a day at 50cents (44c from the government and an additional 6c from the suplier), so fair's fair I suppose :laugh:
With all the money I'm saving on electricity, I've been able to run my aircon non stop for months, and I think we can now afford to put in a pool. It was a borderline decision untill I discovered Energex will pay me $200 to connect it to the cheap tarrif 33 suply. That means I can sell the power to energex at 50c, and then buy it back for 21c ;D
But there's no point having these luxuries if you cant enjoy them, so I have a cunning plan. The wife is about to be made redundant, so I reacon she should go onto the dole, and I'll cut back to part time hours. That way we can reduce our family income so that we're eligable for free health, child care, and family tax benefits.
:cup: to everyone for working hard and helping me out ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D.
Sorry, the above isn't true, but I just couldnt help myself. This thread needs to be lightend up a bit.
Tell them you seperated to, then she can get single parents as well, may as well get the most you can for tryagains tax dollar ;D ;D
Post by: GBC on February 02, 2016, 02:36:18 PM
All in all, you gotta thank the various fiscally inept labor governments for lending a hand :D
I got a $1500 subsidy to install solar hot water so I dont have to use all that expensive electricity to have a warm bath, and then they gave me $1400 worth of free insulation for my roof so I use even less electricity to cool the house with the aircon 8). I did have to pay out of my own pocket to put in solar panels though , but at least now I'm making a motza by generating 30 odd kilowatts a day at 50cents (44c from the government and an additional 6c from the suplier), so fair's fair I suppose :laugh:
With all the money I'm saving on electricity, I've been able to run my aircon non stop for months, and I think we can now afford to put in a pool. It was a borderline decision untill I discovered Energex will pay me $200 to connect it to the cheap tarrif 33 suply. That means I can sell the power to energex at 50c, and then buy it back for 21c ;D
But there's no point having these luxuries if you cant enjoy them, so I have a cunning plan. The wife is about to be made redundant, so I reacon she should go onto the dole, and I'll cut back to part time hours. That way we can reduce our family income so that we're eligable for free health, child care, and family tax benefits.
:cup: to everyone for working hard and helping me out ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D.
Sorry, the above isn't true, but I just couldnt help myself. This thread needs to be lightend up a bit.
FIFY
Post by: tryagain on February 02, 2016, 02:38:41 PM
Tell them you seperated to, then she can get single parents as well, may as well get the most you can for tryagains tax dollar ;D ;D
haha go for your life, tax dollars are a different kettle of fish.
Post by: gronk on February 02, 2016, 02:44:06 PM
Tell them you seperated to, then she can get single parents as well, may as well get the most you can for tryagains tax dollar ;D ;D
That's the latest thing they're going to try and crack down on !!
I go on the dole next week and I can tell you nearly all the benefits you are entitled to...and free health care ?? All australians are already on it..
Post by: rags on February 02, 2016, 06:38:53 PM
"roof top solar panels saved the power network from failure due to excessive power consumption"
Post by: gronk on February 02, 2016, 06:57:33 PM
The Bribane Chanel 9 news message across the bottom of the TVs screen tonight when the they ran the story about the Brisbane heatwave read
"roof top solar panels saved the power network from failure due to excessive power consumption"
What would have happened if they had a very hot CLOUDY day ??
Post by: muzza01 on February 02, 2016, 07:42:13 PM
What would have happened if they had a very hot CLOUDY day ??Probably wouldn't have had a heatwave.. Sorry Mate, just saying. :cheers:
Post by: gronk on February 02, 2016, 07:56:31 PM
Probably wouldn't have had a heatwave.. Sorry Mate, just saying. :cheers:
I had a what if scenario and you stuffed it right up !!! ;D ;D
Post by: UIZ733 on February 02, 2016, 08:38:58 PM
Excellently presented factual outline of the current (pun intended) scenario. It is almost like a replay of dialogue that was being canvassed about 10 years ago, except things have moved on so rapidly.
How many of us will have the balls to jump this time?
South Australia are offering $5000 rebates for battery purchase.
Deja Vu?
Post by: Symon on February 02, 2016, 11:03:05 PM
If you are remotely interested in the topic of 'Solar' tonight's Catalyst on ABC is essential viewing.
Excellently presented factual outline of the current (pun intended) scenario. It is almost like a replay of dialogue that was being canvassed about 10 years ago, except things have moved on so rapidly.
How many of us will have the balls to jump this time?
South Australia are offering $5000 rebates for battery purchase.
Deja Vu?
That is a good episode. Quite refreshing to see factual reporting, showing the complexities of the grid, and giving that rubbish Telsa the amount of attention it deserves (about 10 seconds worth).
Post by: KingBilly on February 03, 2016, 08:47:25 AM
KB
Post by: Fizzie on February 03, 2016, 08:53:10 AM
But there's no point having these luxuries if you cant enjoy them, so I have a cunning plan. The wife is about to be made redundant, so I reacon she should go onto the dole, and I'll cut back to part time hours. That way we can reduce our family income so that we're eligable for free health, child care, and family tax benefits.
But, even more important, you will then be able to spend more time out camping! 8) ;D
:cheers:
Post by: Fizzie on February 03, 2016, 09:03:18 AM
Curious - does anyone know how many megawatts are coming off roofs in Qld; and how many power stations that represents? Eg: 0.4 or 1.6 etc etc
Hey BC
Have a look at http://reneweconomy.com.au/ (http://reneweconomy.com.au/) & keep checking it during the day.
Graph over the right hand side shows where power is coming from Australia-wide, more or less live.
EG as at 8.35 this morning, "APVI Small Solar" in Qld, was generating 385MW. By 8.45, that had increased to 393MW, which, at least to my mind, isn't a bad effort. Don't know how it compares to a proper power station - Symon, Jet?
Edit: answered my own question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Queensland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Queensland), so just on 400MW (395 at 8.50) is pretty good!
Brilliant sunny morning (at least here on the GC), so I'll keep an eye on it & see what it's doing at 2-3pm.
Graeme
Post by: BaseCamp on February 03, 2016, 09:48:23 AM
"Free" - that is - after a certain group have picked up the tab.... Yes/no?? Am I understanding the concerns over FITs correctly?
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
Post by: Moggy on February 03, 2016, 12:58:43 PM
Heard on ABC radio that Qld Government has been advised and/or are looking into bringing forward the end date of the .44c FIT scheme.
I didnt get all the details but got that much of it
Post by: duggie on February 03, 2016, 01:03:42 PM
Looks like the states power brokers (pun intended) have been reading this thread...
Heard on ABC radio that Qld Government has been advised and/or are looking into bringing forward the end date of the .44c FIT scheme.
I didnt get all the details but got that much of it
I don't know how they can/will we all have a signed contract, the courts will be backed for years if this is true.
Post by: plusnq on February 03, 2016, 01:04:57 PM
Post by: Moggy on February 03, 2016, 01:18:35 PM
I don't know how they can/will we all have a signed contract, the courts will be backed for years if this is true.Its the government they can do what they like.
Its a bit like the GST, i thought it could only be raised by a referendum but judging by the current talk its purely a political vote, so as good as a done deal
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: prodigyrf on February 03, 2016, 01:52:04 PM
In your dreams-
http://archive.treasury.gov.au/documents/1156/HTML/docshell.asp?URL=01_Brief_History.asp (http://archive.treasury.gov.au/documents/1156/HTML/docshell.asp?URL=01_Brief_History.asp)
The Howard/Costello Govt went to an election with the proposal for a GST reform of the ubiquitous Wholesale Sales Tax and was elected so claimed a mandate for it and then had to do deals with the Senate for the nuts and bolts of it. Although they wanted universal cover of a GST with no exemptions, in order to tackle other ubiquitous State taxes like stamp duty and payroll tax, they had to water down that universality to satisfy the Australian Democrats at the time. Also to negate the 'Canberra Octopus and !0% today and who knows what tomorrow folks!' critique the GST legislation gave the States the rights to all the GST revenue and only they had the power to request it be raised in future if they were all in agreement. That's why you see strange bedfellows now with Mike Baird and Jay Weatherall wanting more revenue and knowing the GST is the best way for them to get their hands on it while Turnbull and Morrison have to do the hard yards to implement any increase with Shorten and Co playing the 'working families' friend.
Bottom line is we're all living beyond our means publicly and we either cut the suit to the cloth or continue down the Greek path and leave it all in the too hard basket for the kids and grandkids.
Post by: scblack on February 03, 2016, 02:10:00 PM
Well said.
Bottom line is we're all living beyond our means publicly and we either cut the suit to the cloth or continue down the Greek path and leave it all in the too hard basket for the kids and grandkids.
Post by: Symon on February 03, 2016, 02:43:12 PM
http://reneweconomy.com.au/
In my experience that site is 90% bullsh1t, and 10% fact which is mostly taken out of context. The live consumption widget is however credible.
Quote
EG as at 8.35 this morning, "APVI Small Solar" in Qld, was generating 385MW. By 8.45, that had increased to 393MW, which, at least to my mind, isn't a bad effort. Don't know how it compares to a proper power station - Symon, Jet?
Barely a blip I'm afraid, a modern coal fired unit can make over 1GW. Like I said before, the stations we have here are old tech.
Post by: Fizzie on February 03, 2016, 03:49:47 PM
In my experience that site is 90% bullsh1t, and 10% fact which is mostly taken out of context. The live consumption widget is however credible.
Barely a blip I'm afraid, a modern coal fired unit can make over 1GW. Like I said before, the stations we have here are old tech.
Agree with you most of what is written is "somewhat" over-hyped! :D
Only look at it to see that graph occasionally.
Incidentally, for today 12.00 509MW, 1.00 604 & by 2.05 production had dropped to 405 as cloud started building. When you have a look at that list of power stations, 600MW isn't too bad though.
Post by: BaseCamp on February 03, 2016, 04:09:25 PM
re: Axing the 44 cent FIT
"The QPC believes the Solar Bonus Scheme has done its job by stimulating the local solar PV industry and helping to make solar energy more affordable for Queenslanders," the commission found.
"Therefore the QPC has recommended the government consider the merits of an earlier end to the scheme than the planned 2028 closure.
"The QPC estimates that by the middle of 2020, most participants will have recovered the costs of their systems. The Solar Benefits Scheme has added around $89 to an average household bill and around 9 per cent for an average business customer in 2015-16."
Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-electricity-rebates-should-be-adjusted-inquiry-20160203-gmkb57.html#ixzz3z5AJ5Va0 (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-electricity-rebates-should-be-adjusted-inquiry-20160203-gmkb57.html#ixzz3z5AJ5Va0)
Follow us: @brisbanetimes on Twitter | brisbanetimes on Facebook
Post by: duggie on February 03, 2016, 07:59:31 PM
From the Productivity Commission report...
re: Axing the 44 cent FIT
"Therefore the QPC has recommended the government consider the merits of an earlier end to the scheme than the planned 2028 closure.
Tonights News, The Queensland Government stated that the .44c FIT will continue until end of contract , 2028 .
Post by: Moggy on February 03, 2016, 08:03:07 PM
Tonights News, The Queensland Government stated that the .44c FIT will continue until end of contract , 2028 .
$hit you'd have to be worried now wouldn't you ;D ;D ;D
Post by: Garfish on February 03, 2016, 09:30:30 PM
Tonights News, The Queensland Government stated that the .44c FIT will continue until end of contract , 2028 .
The Queensland productivity commission released a 157 page document on electricity pricing in qld. If any one is bored, could they read it and provide a summary :angel:
Apparently the solar scheme adds $89 to the average account every year,
Post by: Fizzie on February 04, 2016, 08:04:02 AM
Apparently the solar scheme adds $89 to the average account every year,
Yes, but we evil solar owners >:D are also being charged that extra $89, so we're paying ourselves! ???
Other change they're talking about is scrapping the Senior's Card rebate (~$320 a year, so I wonder how much that adds on to every bill?) & then paying the rebate to everyone with a health care card, which includes everyone on Newstart, Sickness Allowance, Disability Pension etc, so will probably increase the number of rebates!
Did mention though, that last year, the Qld State Govt pulled in $4 billion profit from electricity - to my mind, that would sort of suggest that they could cut electricity prices by 75% across the board, save everyone $100's a year, & still make $1 billion themselves - nah, stupid idea ::)
Post by: grafy82 on February 04, 2016, 08:32:49 AM
Did mention though, that last year, the Qld State Govt pulled in $4 billion profit from electricity - to my mind, that would sort of suggest that they could cut electricity prices by 75% across the board, save everyone $100's a year, & still make $1 billion themselves - nah, stupid idea ::)
Best comment of the entire thread. To all the haters, please tell me again how people with solar are the cause of your bills increasing???
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 08:33:20 AM
Other change they're talking about is scrapping the Senior's Card rebate (~$320 a year, so I wonder how much that adds on to every bill?) & then paying the rebate to everyone with a health care card, which includes everyone on Newstart, Sickness Allowance, Disability Pension etc, so will probably increase the number of rebates!
I'll be on the dole next week ( I already have my health care card ) and I have already sorted my rebate for elect bills !! :cup:
AND, I get a rebate for my gas bill as well !! :cup:
Post by: UIZ733 on February 04, 2016, 08:42:47 AM
then paying the rebate to everyone with a health care card, which includes everyone on Newstart, Sickness Allowance, Disability Pension etc, so will probably increase the number of rebates!That is nearly whole phucking population of Qld. We'll ALL be doomed then. :'(
Post by: tryagain on February 04, 2016, 10:27:58 AM
Apparently the solar scheme adds $89 to the average account every year,
thats $89 per bill so my assumption would be $356.
Best comment of the entire thread. To all the haters, please tell me again how people with solar are the cause of your bills increasing???
As previously stated not the only cause but still a significant one.
I'll be on the dole next week ( I already have my health care card ) and I have already sorted my rebate for elect bills !! :cup:.
AND, I get a rebate for my gas bill as well !! :cup:
You don't get it for having a health care card, only a seniors card, that would require this government following the advice of the QPC and actually doing something which from what I have seen find it very unlikely to happen.
Post by: gronk on February 04, 2016, 11:45:22 AM
.
You don't get it for having a health care card, only a seniors card, that would require this government following the advice of the QPC and actually doing something which from what I have seen find it very unlikely to happen.
You wanna bet ?? I was in contact with my provider yesterday and she asked me what sort of card it was and yep, we'll sort the rebate out for you !! :cup: :cup:
Ps; I don't know what the QPC is, but I live in NSW. We even get an hours extra sunshine than Qld, so there !! ;D ;D
Post by: tryagain on February 04, 2016, 01:35:08 PM
You wanna bet ?? I was in contact with my provider yesterday and she asked me what sort of card it was and yep, we'll sort the rebate out for you !! :cup: :cup:
Ps; I don't know what the QPC is, but I live in NSW. We even get an hours extra sunshine than Qld, so there !! ;D ;D
Yes in NSW you would but not in QLD. The QPC (queensland productivity commission) recommended it would be better to apply to the means tested Health care card as opposed to the seniors card. It makes sense to me but I cant see this QLD government doing it or much of anything else for that matter.
Post by: Spada on February 04, 2016, 04:46:52 PM
For the full billing period, separate to consumption charges and solar credits, Origin have included a "Supply Charge" of $105.92 (116.398 c/day). I believe this is a charge that is levied for being connected to the grid, and is applied to all customers.
In addition, there is a new charge which was only applicable for 12 billing days (from 1/1/16) called a "Solar Meter Charge" of 6.767 c/day which I assume is only charged to customers with solar feed-in systems ? It's a nominal amount with no significant effect on the total bill, but it is there.
With all of the Utilities companies that we use, there is a charge for being connected to their systems, whether we consume their product or not. If we don't want to pay the charges, then there are way's to opt out (difficult and possibly expensive, but it can be done). If you disconnect your home phone or internet, you no longer get charged for being connected to the data lines that run past your house. If you disconnect your electricity from the grid, then you no longer get charged for being connected to the poles and wires that run past your house.
But what gets me cranky is that I am 100% self sufficient for water, and do not need a council supply. There is mains water running past the house, but even if I was not connected to it, I must still pay $294 per year for a "Water Access Charge". I've checked with the council, they are happy to disconnect me from the supply and remove the meter, but I would still be charged the access fee because the service is available. Using it or not is my choice, but because it is available, council deem that I must pay for it.
Same applies to sewerage. I'm not connected to the network as We have installed a HSTP system, so nobody has to deal with my s#it except me. Yet council deem I must pay a sewerage charge (around $150 per year, cant find my rates notice to confirm).
So I'd like to do a deal with anyone that does not have a solar system. You stop complaining about your power bill, and I'll stop complaining about my water and s#it bill ;D Sometimes life throws us a lemon............. :D
Post by: rags on February 04, 2016, 07:05:41 PM
Same applies to sewerage. I'm not connected to the network as We have installed a HSTP system, so nobody has to deal with my s#it except me. Yet council deem I must pay a sewerage charge (around $150 per year, cant find my rates notice to confirm).
[/quote]
Spada curiosity proms me to ask which council you are in, as my understanding a permit to operate as issued by Council to operate an onsite waste water system in areas that is serviced by a Service Providers sewer system will not be issued under the plumbing act. But you are correct that the Service Provider can charge you an availability charge regardless of if you use the service.
But then again if you had a house fire as a result of your roof top solar system, be assured that the fire brigade will use that available water main passing your house on your behalf as it was available to you!
Post by: Garfish on February 04, 2016, 09:40:39 PM
Just out of curiosity, I had a look at my last power bill.That's the charge to provide and read your meter, if you have tariff 11, 31/33 and solar its 3 charges all different costs, it used to be included in your electricity price but they've now separated them
In addition, there is a new charge which was only applicable for 12 billing days (from 1/1/16) called a "Solar Meter Charge" of 6.767 c/day which I assume is only charged to customers with solar feed-in systems ? It's a nominal amount with no significant effect on the total bill, but it is there.
Post by: Moggy on February 04, 2016, 09:51:06 PM
That's the charge to provide and read your meter, if you have tariff 11, 31/33 and solar its 3 charges all different costs, it used to be included in your electricity price but they've now separated themThats what the bloke who read my meter told me too.
I said phuck ring me up & I'll save you the trip :-)
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Post by: prodigyrf on February 05, 2016, 12:23:38 AM
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1913721 (http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/1913721)
Even renting one 45kg with your own 8.5kg backup to reorder seems very competitive when you consider some of the consumption anecdotes in comparison to the NG fixed service charges I came across. If you had solar panels on FIT it would probably pay to run a Rinnai instant HWS and a gas cooker on LPG to max out the feed-in tariff, rather than solar hot water with electric boost. Horses for courses eh?
Post by: Spada on February 05, 2016, 05:56:55 AM
Spada curiosity proms me to ask which council you are in, as my understanding a permit to operate as issued by Council to operate an onsite waste water system in areas that is serviced by a Service Providers sewer system will not be issued under the plumbing act. But you are correct that the Service Provider can charge you an availability charge regardless of if you use the service.
But then again if you had a house fire as a result of your roof top solar system, be assured that the fire brigade will use that available water main passing your house on your behalf as it was available to you!
We're in Logan City Council (not by choice, we were forced there when the state government amalgumated our local shire council). We are in a semi-rural area, and sewerage is not available. Also, the water mains is a low pressure system, and not able to support fire fighting services, we need to provide our own water for that.
Interestingly, talking to the firies (RFS volunteers) at the local shops one day, they told me that if a house with solar panels is on fire, they can only fight the fire externally (hose the house from outside), as the feed in power is still live within the building even if the mains has been isolated at the street.
I'm not complaining about the fire/solar issues as it was our choice to take that risk, just highlighting them.
Post by: cruiser 91 on February 05, 2016, 07:08:59 AM
I'm in SA and have all my bills since putting solar on. I can can firm kw prices with those that don't have solar. It would be interesting to see the comparison.
:cheers:
Post by: Fizzie on February 05, 2016, 09:04:10 AM
That's the charge to provide and read your meter, if you have tariff 11, 31/33 and solar its 3 charges all different costs, it used to be included in your electricity price but they've now separated them
Yes, the metering charges were supposedly always there included in usage price & now shown separately, but the electricity prices haven't gone down at all >:(
Post by: UIZ733 on February 05, 2016, 10:53:28 AM
but the electricity prices haven't gone down at all >:(And we better all toughen up, they will not go down, ever.
Solar, batteries and any other renewable innovations will not have any positive impact on prices. Power utilities and governments will continue to blame everything and anything for price increases. The reality is power companies (and governments?) are selling a commodity we desperately need and they will make as much profit as they can from the venture.
Post by: Symon on February 05, 2016, 12:31:11 PM
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 04:10:45 PM
And yep, I think it's innately unfair that it was mostly those with money that benefited from the huge rebates. If i had the money at that time I would have done it too. I wouldn't blame anyone for having the resource to capitalise on the rebate thing but it really is an unfair system. You only have to drive around well-off suburbs and see house after house with solar compared to other modest suburbs.
We sold lots of systems to retirees looking to plan for the future with something they could rely on as a fixed cost as much as possible but now there are higher rates for those with panels and the increasing "service fee" has diminished that whole fixed cost reliance.
maybe a fairer way would be attaching the level of rebate to your medicare levy and / or means testing.
Post by: briann532 on February 10, 2016, 04:29:36 PM
Even myself. I installed a system (rather cheaper than most I'll admit) but at a time when we were stretched for money.
Most people I work for have "earned" their money and if they choose to use it to get cheaper power instead of a better foxtel package or a trip to Bali, then why should they be persecuted for it?
Now in Sh17ney we only have the net metering with 6c feed in tarrif, so its only worth using the power you generate.
If you are going to invest your hard earned money to save yourself buying power from the authorities, then good on you I reckon.
Remember too, a lot of people borrowed money to finance their systems.
I'm building a new house and it will be running on solar panels and eventually off the grid, when prices of storage come down.
Alternatively I could use the money to buy more booze, get the foxtel on and upgrade my 30" tele to a huge muther@@#$er.
What do you reckon I'm going to invest in???
We make our choices and our lives, so no point complaining the grass is greener on the other side.
I have friends who are very well off, but it all came at a price. They worked day and night for years and years and didn't spend a lot of time with their families.
Now they hear constantly how "lucky" they are. Funny how the harder they worked, the luckier they got.
Ahhhh entitlement......... It's a great suburb to live in!!!!
(Sorry - just my 2c worth of the debate)
Brian
Post by: cruiser 91 on February 10, 2016, 04:38:00 PM
I was selling solar for a bit and soon discovered there's not a lot of point in getting solar now unless you have a battery system or a crud load of panels... 6.4kw+I suppose the same goes for those that have purchased a home eh?
And yep, I think it's innately unfair that it was mostly those with money that benefited from the huge rebates. If i had the money at that time I would have done it too. I wouldn't blame anyone for having the resource to capitalise on the rebate thing but it really is an unfair system. You only have to drive around well-off suburbs and see house after house with solar compared to other modest suburbs.
We sold lots of systems to retirees looking to plan for the future with something they could rely on as a fixed cost as much as possible but now there are higher rates for those with panels and the increasing "service fee" has diminished that whole fixed cost reliance.
maybe a fairer way would be attaching the level of rebate to your medicare levy and / or means testing.
I can remember back in 2010 some of my mates who decided to spend their hard earnt cash on a overseas holiday instead of a solar system, wow are they now pissed.
But I do recall the baby boomers getting free uni degrees, I'm gen Y, I missed out ;D, I'm not complaining :cup:
I also almost worked in the industry of selling solar a few years back. I quit after half way through the second week of training. High pressure selling tactics were aimed mostly at pensioners.....................the whole game is was wrong! Many paid 10 times the price for a 1.5kw system to market value back in 2010. $8.5k plus for a 1.5kw system.................and they got away with it.
My parents paid 30k for their first home, at the time a single income earner per household was all that was needed...........shame on them?
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 04:41:59 PM
I suppose the same goes for those that have purchased a home eh?Not so much but i guess a little.
Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk
Post by: Trrrumping Beast on February 10, 2016, 07:30:12 PM
And that is the end of it. Anyone criticising those who took up the offer is really just bitter at themselves. Schemes come and go. Ever is it the way of governments. No different to all the whining when capital gains tax was introduced.
The only people to blame for any perceived subsidising etc are the elected politicians who introduced the schemes, not those who took them up.
Post by: WCN_Bren on February 10, 2016, 09:35:19 PM
The only people to blame for any perceived subsidising etc are the elected politicians who introduced the schemes, not those who took them up.
I do agree. But that doesn't mean it's fair to leave it that way. Generally, when we make mistakes we try to fix them. You also can't blame people for not being able to afford the panels. We supply schools and hospital / medical services based on being a citizen no because you can afford xyz. getting a rebate because you could afford XYZ and having those that can't afford xyz isn't really found anywhere else in tax / business / society. BUT we all claim whatever we can n our taxes and there is no reason a person shouldn't have purchased the systems with the rebates etc.
The thing that erks me the most is companies charging higher rates to those with panels. We finally bought a house and the plan was to put panels on but now it looks like it's not really worth doing unless I can go off-grid altogether. mr Musk is already working on the Tesla Powerwall 2
Post by: Trrrumping Beast on February 11, 2016, 04:32:03 AM
Qld had a "first home owner's" grant scheme for a while - those who couldnt afford to buy a house didnt get it. Same principle.
Debating the fairness of political decisions gets us nowhere. I just wish people would stop bashing on those who were able to. We all have phases in life where for whatever reason we simply dont have access to finance or have the funds for some venture. The government is solely to blame for any inequality here, not the people who were able to benefit from their scheme.
End of story.
Post by: BaseCamp on February 11, 2016, 05:23:39 PM
He made a couple of interesting comments which I thought I'd like to share...
(These are his words and thoughts - I'm just passing them on...).
## The biggest domestic load is occurring between 4pm and 6pm - when solar is not effective...
## The biggest power demand during the sunny hours; (say between 11am - 3pm) - is from factories and commerce...
## But there are "no votes in it for the Govt" - giving 0.44 cents kickback to factory and shopping centre owners...
## But there are heaps of votes to possibly come from the domestic Jo's with solar on their roofs...
## However the biggest boost to the economy would be for factories etc etc to have the cheaper power - and that shopping centre roofs and factories should be covered in Govt kickback solar...
## Only problem is how would the Govt get the kickbacks to the businesses operating in the factories and shopping centres
## Most times these guys are lessees... not property moguls...
## A solar panel will be stuffed within 20 - 25 years... with the cheap Chinese stuff burning out in maybe 15--20 years...
## Then after this time; all the solar sitting on roofs will have to be replaced...
## It takes 5 years worth of solar generation from one panel - for its costs in terms of greenhouse and dirty pollution -- to be repaid...
## That solar panel has "to be made" -- via a dirty coal power station... LOL