Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
New AMA with a US police officer (he's back!). You can ask your questions here

Domestic Solar PV installs - grant stats

  • 24-08-2020 1:34pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,215 ✭✭✭✭ KCross


    Some interesting stats for Solar PV installs in Ireland to date under the grant system which were published by the Govt...


    The old 2018 grant system: Only 71 systems totalling 177kWp!

    The new 2019 system: 1827 systems installed totalling 4941kWp

    And another 1700 grant applications opened waiting completion.


    The 2019 grant has really taken off!

    Only reference to FiT is that there is to be a decision of some kind in Jun 2021.


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭ graememk


    And that's not counting on installs without grants. Been pricing ones and depending on circumstances you'd get a straight pv without a battery for cheaper than a grant with a token battery for extra grant to 4kwp.

    Off topic, would the ESB/eirgid have any idea of how much excess solar is coming into the grid?
    The transformers can work backwards? Ie say if I was the only person on the transformer, and I was exporting my full 6kwh, that should go back out onto the MV network.


    But the ball is definitely rolling on the grant, have been seeing loads of ads for solar installers, even before I started looking into it. More and more is being done and it's only gonna get bigger.

    Even on farms, once a fit comes in it will suddenly be viable for low usage farmyards to install solar.

    18-20 panels on a roof? 2 rows 10 m long.
    Then there is also accelerated capital allowances. Eg we have an outfarm, loads of sheds, but our useage is so low that we have to make sure we don't go with a supplier that has a low useage charge.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Mad and not a single one measured the system to see if it was viable.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 58,892 CMod ✭✭✭✭ unkel


    Mad and not a single one measured the system to see if it was viable.

    The very generous subsidy makes it viable. I wish we had just got a FIT instead. Far more efficient use of tax payers money towards increasing renewables.

    "Wind is Ireland's oil" - An Taoiseach, 25/05/2022



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It doesn't for two reasons. The installers are pocketing the subsidy and the payback/network enhancement would be better without battery coupling.

    Have you measured your round trip efficiency yet Unkel? Please do. Data is truth.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 58,892 CMod ✭✭✭✭ unkel


    Have you measured your round trip efficiency yet Unkel? Please do. Data is truth.

    I didn't get any subsidy!

    I'm not doing too badly on the finances of my battery, don't worry, Sir Liamalot. Sold the lead acids I got for free for and just bought some LiFePo4 for well less than what that paid me. So even if I gave these away in the morning for free, I'd still have more money than before I got any battery :p

    Round trip efficiency is not only completely irrelevant to me, it also doesn't interest me.
    It doesn't for two reasons. The installers are pocketing the subsidy and the payback/network enhancement would be better without battery coupling.

    That's exactly what I was saying. It's far more efficient use of tax payers money to let any subsidy go directly towards materials (PV panels) with minimal install cost / DIY rather than overpriced labour and profit for installers.

    "Wind is Ireland's oil" - An Taoiseach, 25/05/2022



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's academic Unkel and a figure we ought to be discusing because it'll expose the sham for what it is. I can only speak for my hardware and I currently have 4 systems that are similar to what's being flogged as the solution to no FITs on the basis that all the calcs are founded on contrived marketing figures and not real world applications.

    From what I've documented lead acid & li-ion are about 95 - 99% efficient. Chargers are about 75% to 85% efficient and inverters are 60% to 95% efficient. In the real world where we use these systems. This is a best case with ideal loads, there are many many derating factors to be accounted for in day to day use.

    My best performing system according to the testing I have done is ironically lead acid and it's 60% round trip. If I lost the battery and charger solar input would be ~90% power on the network.
    All the added expense of battery, switchgear, installation etc is not going to be met within the lifetime of the system if I was buying power at €0.16 per kwh and selling it to myself for €0.26 per kWh.

    If I coupled my solar to a battery I would turn my 2.5kW array into effectively a 1.5kW array and pay an extra maybe €3k for the service of using it at night.

    What people are advising with battery coupling is extending payback time, reducing system performance and increasing upfront costs. There's nothing green about it.

    If the system is too big to meet the user demands then get a smaller system instead of throwing hardware losses at it until there's nothing significant left except warm electronic devices.

    I say it over and over again. If the cost of the battery was put into just solar there'd be double the power on the network with 30% less losses at the source.

    How can anyone say that a system is working if they don't measure it? What's that based on? What the person selling it said? Or they read on a forum that was unfounded?

    I am using decade old proven hardware that's the parent and inspiration of these newfangled whizzbang boxes that sprouted like mushroom fields.
    I'm highly curious that they're any better and would love to see some evidence. So far I have not and I'm on the tools every day, granted I only work on systems where utility is at best not permanent or my own house.

    People giving advise about things they haven't measured or documented holds no water.
    As far as I'm concerned people are paying in the order of €4k over the odds to keep 60% of what the could have produced with SEAI approved battery coupled systems. ...after the grant is applied.

    If a datasheet says 95% efficient more often than not; real world it is 80%.

    kWh counter out / kWh counter in x 100 = round trip efficiency. The best eye opening €50 you can spend.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 58,892 CMod ✭✭✭✭ unkel


    As far as I'm concerned people are paying in the order of €4k over the odds to keep 60% of what the could have produced with SEAI approved battery coupled systems. ...after the grant is applied.

    They are not though. An SEAI install of a 4kwp system with a small battery but no diverter costs about €5.5k after all grants (best possible quote we have seen in this forum)

    If you'd do a DIY install of just those panels (no battery), the materials alone would cost you a good €2.5k. And of course very few people could do an install like this (including hooking up the electrics into the consumer unit!) fully DIY. Pay a roofer and an electrician and you're looking at €3.5k. Without a battery.

    "Wind is Ireland's oil" - An Taoiseach, 25/05/2022



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Can you tell me what the measured empirical payback time financially and in terms of net usable energy of such an example system is compared to a batteryless system?
    Or is that a trivial detail?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,095 ✭✭✭ Yellow_Fern


    Avoid the grant if you can


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 58,892 CMod ✭✭✭✭ unkel


    Can you tell me what the measured empirical payback time financially and in terms of net usable energy of such an example system is compared to a batteryless system?
    Or is that a trivial detail?

    It seems nobody even has any competitive quotes for batteryless systems...

    "Wind is Ireland's oil" - An Taoiseach, 25/05/2022



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 410 ✭✭ phester28


    I know my system is small but €4.440k gross for 2.4Kwp East west on slate with Wifi, solis inverter 3.5kw and 8 x 300 Amerisolar panels. Is not bad by what I have seen on here. Its small but its the biggest I could fit.

    So + BER of 250 and getting grant back I should be out of pocket to the tune of 2890 for 2.4Kwp


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    And what is the import offset value of the battery system per annum?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭ garo


    And what is the import offset value of the battery system per annum?

    4.8kW system, 2.4kWh battery - in 1 year I have received 1131kWh from the battery. That's output not input. All of that power would have gone to the grid had I not had the battery so for all practical purposes the power is free until a FiT comes in. So in 1 year I'd say the battery has saved me E180.

    I'm not going to argue efficiency and I agree that a FiT would be better. But answering your specific question - the import offset value is 180 p.a. for me.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    So the battery cost? Roughly €1k?

    Battery payback 6 years? Not including the inverter to use it or install. Life expectancy 10 years.

    €1k of solar instead = 1000Wp producing ~€200 per year (if used as offset)
    minus losses in 4.8kW battery coupled system having removed said battery = ~3MWh offsetting fossil fuel energy producion on the network.

    I'm not saying a FIT would be better. I'm saying the battery is an expensive efficiency reduction device.

    The power to make the battery came from the grid...and will only be returned by end of life.
    Solar return is being retarded by having to finance the battery as well as itself.

    I can get a lead acid 2.4kWh battery for ~€300


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭ garo


    On the old grant, adding a battery allowed an extra 2400 grant. But we have been through this so many times and Sir Liam you are beating a dead horse.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I know the amount of times I ask users to measure their system to quantifiably validate it's merits to share with the rest of us and the outcome is...

    I guess it's an unimportant detail to comparatively measure energy production of a generation system.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭ garo


    And what is the import offset value of the battery system per annum?

    You asked a specific question. I answered it. I even said I am not going to argue efficiency. But you fighting your imaginary demons.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm not having a go Garo. There's no real world data on the comparative viablilty of these systems. It is the first thing I would ask for. I'm trying to get more people to ask the same question. I have measured all of mine and the answer is always not competitive with utility (unlike just solar).

    Would anyone like to buy this ambiguous amount of petro-chemicals from me?
    Does that sound absurd? €2k to you + €1k from the government.

    This solar battery thing is all too similar to buying a wind turbine before the anemometer.

    Apologies if my manner is abrasive...I'm a cynic because I measure against manufacturer claims.

    The power isn't free if you buy a battery and extend the solar payback substantially to be reimbursed for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭ garo


    Look I don't disagree with the substance of what you are saying. But when that battery is getting me 2400 in additional grants it is a no-brainer. Would I buy a battery out of my pocket - no way.

    But I think you fixate on efficiency too much. The thing with renewable energy sources that are intermittent such as wind and solar is that you need to over-provision and store the excess even if it is wasteful. Right now in 2020 it makes no sense to buy storage as the grid can easily accommodate the excess. But when RE is providing > 80% of our energy we will need to store.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I agree and I don't believe any current chemical battery charge/discharge topographies can cut it.

    I fixate on efficiency? Yes.

    Can you swap me a score for 3 fivers?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭ garo


    I have an apple tree in my garden and come September I have more apples than I can use. Sure I will give you a score in September and you can give me back three fives in January.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Thanks Garo but yer alright I have my own 4 year payback orchard working great in the Summer and in the Winter the utility network is quite reasonable compared to Apple carts.


Advertisement