Why do you think this is based on consumer surveys? From the ANAO audit:
quote
Inspections of small generation units
Inspection requirements
4.23
The regulator is required under the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000 (the Act) to arrange inspections of a statistically significant selection of small generation units that are installed each year for conformance with Australian standards and any other relevant requirements.
unquote
Relevant data is already being collected by the CER, all I am saying is that it should be actioned effectively.
I seem to have misunderstood your intention on that. If not consumers, can I then presume those surveys are from the self regulating industry participants who diligently report their own shortcomings?
Despite WH&S being a state responsibility the Feds were the ones that paid to do a 100% fix after it went so sadly wrong.
The CER and STCs all fall under the Feds.
If the level of defective PV systems is as high as suggested:
It would need experts to do the checks on the work of the so called expert installers. They exist, at great expense and are typically found attached to professional engineering consultancies. If would seem inappropriate to ask the PV Industry to provide the expertise?
And there is a feeling at my end the funds should come from the government purse, because it is the government that has failed us!
P.s. It would be interesting to see the report on the systems inspected separated out by installer. In particular those systems installed through customer agreements with retailers like Origin or AGL assuming a 100% clean report card?
It’s more effective to do the work reliably and right initially. That includes assurance of product quality. I’d prefer stronger action on the accreditation and up front QA than expensive chase after the event!
That is common sense to many of us, thus unlikely. More likely is the politicisation like occurred with pink batts.
Government funded a worthy activity and expected private enterprise would do the right thing. What a surprise that every dodgy operator realised there were dollars to be had and they went for them. It should have been solely on the dodgy operators who should have had jail time, but was put and stuck to the heads of the government of the day in spite of standards that were supposedly in place for quality as well as training.
No from the Clean Energy Regulator (the government regulator). That is who the ANAO audit was auditing, see quote of section 4.23 above. The Clean Energy Council (the industry body) would also have their own surveys, as they do act against members who fail sometimes, but I haven’t looked.
At the risk of repeating myself, the CER has the data, is charged with dealing with the issue, gets audited by the ANAO about whether they do or don’t but doesn’t visibly do anything.
The CER looks more like the ACCC monitoring NBN performance. They seem somewhat removed from a significant ‘boots on the ground’ participation. From their annual report, their interest in solar is allied but
For example, we use data matching with the Australian Energy Market Operator to confirm installation of solar panels and cross-check information provided by renewable energy power stations in order to provide assurance on the renewable energy certificates we validate. We use data analytics to identify anomalies and assure reported greenhouse and energy data. We collaborated with the solar industry on a new app based regulatory scheme that validates solar panel installations to reduce the potential for fraud and help households get what they paid for.
Their activity is focused on installations subsidised by STCs, which I agree would be at or near 100% of them, but. They are primarily enforcing the criteria for STCs, not enforcing industry standards, although ‘a’ begets ‘b’, at least so far as STCs go.
Much of it.
only as far as the STCs are involved from what I can glean from the annual report
I’ll allow that is more something than nothing. The few prosecutions referenced seem to be about STC related fraud rather than safety or quality.
The CEC is the industry body representing industry.
Got it! But since each state does their own thing would a statistically significant population include for example, 1 million inspections in [state] X and none in any other state, but that could be 20% of the national installations and thus statistically significant?
There are many including those which rebadge/rebrand cheap inverters and panels, get then certified by the Clean Energy Office and sell them onto the average to punter knowing thay if there is a problem with them they can close up the company and walk away from the problems they created.
Maybe the government should ban rebadged/rebranded inverters, panels and switches to protect the consumer. At least if the dodgy contractor goes belly up, the consumer still has the oportunuty to take up their problems with the manufacturer. This might cost the consumer more, but would reduce the potential for poor quality equipment entering the market and burning the consumer in ofher ways.
Peacock says in that article “We need a step change in system safety. The simple solution is up to 100% inspections by state and territory electrical regulators.”
He gives no reason for this. He doesn’t say how you decide if 100% is required or some lesser figure. He doesn’t address the question of the cost of 100% inspection, who would pay for it or its efficacy compared to other approaches. He doesn’t say if he wants a one-off inspection to bring all current installations up to standard or for this to apply to all installations into the future. More an off hand remark than a policy plan.
It’s a bit hard to know just what he wants as anything at all is “up to 100%” including the current system which he rightly lashes as inadequate.
What he probably wants is for every installation to be safe and proper. If you have less than 100% and you have a string inverter system that shorts to your metal roof with 600VDC running hot you may not care that (say) 98% of installs were OK.
My installation was by a well respected installer, but who had not previously installed some of the very new micro-inverter kit. Micro-inverters are 240VAC on the roof, not 600 VDC and generally safer. It worked as far as I could tell, but when the inspector came he knocked it back because some of the wiring was not 100% correct. The installer was back in hours to correct it, and was then reinspected and certified. Who would want less?
editorial addition: The wiring error was because the manufacturer changed some instructions from the previous model just phased out to the newer one I bought and the installer used his experience with the previous model that was apparently wired just the same, only so slightly different, so not any level of incompetence but an honest oops error in missing the change. It is not just dodgy operators who can make mistakes.
Not just regulation but efforts to reuse as much material as it is possible to do so. Economy of course will dictate that some material is just too costly either energy or environmentally to recover but I would hope a large majority of material is worthwhile recycling.
Best not to believe one word written or uttered by any Solar company unless you have the speaker and a lawyer present and have papers signed and witnessed by both. As I have rambled on about some while ago, I paid $14,000 for the ‘top of the range, German made, guarantied 25 years blah, blah’, rooftop system. Well, let’s be fair, it did work well for 18 months . Never managed to get it fixed when it stopped working over five years ago…
Take the money and run… and if the company goes bust, just keep running and the authorities will not bother to chase you… seems like a good way (to those so inclined) to make a fortune without much outlay!
Thinking about a completely new system… without the meters and things being out the front where the locals can get to them…
Anyone know anything about the ‘Sun whatever’ company? One quarter of the original price and several more panels to go with it?
What was wrong with it? Unless multiple panels are damaged, it should be a matter of just replacing a component of the system - much less expensive than buying a complete new system.
Unfortunately sometimes it can be hard to find a suitable electrician to work on some other company’s installation, mainly due to warranty issues.
Looking online, it appears that Blueline solar sourced many of its components from companies including Solar Edge and Ever Solar. Neither Solar Edge or Eversolar are German companies or specialise German made products. Eversolar is now known as Zeversolar and was renamed after SMA bought an interest in the company…it is a Chinese company which manufactures in China.
There are German links. Solar Edge has offices in Germany (headoffice in Israel) and Zeversolar is partnered by SMA…a German solar energy equipment supplier. Their website says…‘Since 2013, we have become a part of the world´s leading manufacturer of inverters for photovoltaic systems: SMA.’
If you still had the inverter, which now appears to have been removed by someone, one could have checked to see if it was a rebadged Zeversolar one. While Blueline rebadged solar equipment under their own name (which may make difficult to have a recourse against the manufacturing company), it may have been worthwhile contacting Zeversolar using the contact details on their website to see if they could have been of assistance. As the original inverter is long gone, this opportunity has possibly gone.
While it won’t assist you, but for anyone else considering installing solar it is often suggested to only purchase renown and recognised branded solar equipment components, rather than those which have been rebranded by an Australian company for onselling. It is easy to identify rebranded equipment from doing simple internet searches on the companies involved.
Dealing with a renown and recognised brand, while it may be slightly more expensive, provides opportunity to deal with the manufacturer/Australian distributor in the case where the installer business no longer exists. If the installer used rebranded products, particularly of their own, it can be very difficult to resolve any faults which occur in the warranty period (either the manufacturer’s or under the Australian Consumer Law).
I do sympathise with you as you have been left with what appears to be a dud product with no avenue for a recourse against the installer/equipment supplier.
Which particular Sun company? Lots of solar companies like to use the word Sun!
If the panels and their layout are any good, I’d suggest having a Fronius inverter put in, rather than replacing the whole system. You might need to replace the rooftop isolator too, plenty of them sold a few years ago turned out to leak water. They were a stupid idea in the first place, I think Oz is about the only country that requires them, and I fail to see any logic in putting an isolator up there.
A risk driven decision where the assessment of the hazard appears to have been poorly understood.
So for a dual string inverter there are four DC isolators. Two on the roof and two next to the inverter. That’s not including the AC side isolator, or DC isolator often built into or provisioned in any European compliant inverter designs.
Accessing any in the instance of a fire is unlikely if we were to relate the layout of our two PV installations.
