Domestic solar PV quotes 2018

wexfordman2 · 12-11-2018 9:24pm

KCross wrote: »

I understand your point fine and I've explained already the logic to why that example doesnt stack up unless the system is automatically adjusting itself on a daily basis in advance based on weather forecasts.

Does your inverter do that? If yes, as I already said, I'd like to know exactly what inverter that is, so I can research it for myself.

If it doesnt auto adjust based on forecasts you wont get a full charge/discharge cycle every day.

The one _dof_ posted sounds promising but any of the inverters I was quoted for did not have the ability to auto adjust each day like that. I'd be surprised if yours does but please do detail what one you are getting so we can all learn.

My inverter installers next Monday

http://primehybridenergy.com/downloads/prime_brochure_july_17.pdf

I dont see a lot of difference featurewise tbh, nothing that isn't or can't be implemented with software features. The weather forecast is interesting, but nothing groundbreaking. Predicting usage and generation is pretty standard stuff (or should be for anything being installed these days).

Unless I am still missing something ?

unkel · 12-11-2018 9:38pm

wexfordman2 wrote: »

My inverter installers next Monday

http://primehybridenergy.com/downloads/prime_brochure_july_17.pdf

No EN50438 cert? That's interesting from a SEAI approved Solar PV installer.

wexfordman2 · 12-11-2018 9:54pm

unkel wrote: »

No EN50438 cert? That's interesting from a SEAI approved Solar PV installer.

When you say "interesting" is that with one eyebrow slightly raised, or is it with both eyebrowes retreating to the back of your head?

I might query it, I may be linking to the wrong product, this one here is similar spec, and it mentions advance forecasting, that KC has been talking about.

http://primehybridenergy.com/downloads/pdf_ac_coupled_residential.pdf

uck51js9zml2yt · 12-11-2018 11:03pm

Just to add to the debate - opinions appreciated - here's the spec i was offered. Is it good/bad or indifferent?
Remember I was offered a smaller inverter/ less panels than wexfordman for the same money. I've to talk to him about that still but would like some feedback....wexford - how does the equipment compare to yours ?

Project Overview
Figure: Overview Image, 3D Design
PV System
3D, Grid-connected PV System

PV Generator Output 4.55 kWp
PV Generator Surface 23.6 m²
Number of PV Modules 14
Number of Inverters 1

The yield
PV Generator Energy (AC grid) 3,211kWh
Grid Feed-in 3,211 kWh
Down-regulation at Feed-in Point 0 kWh
Own Power Consumption 0.0 %
Solar Fraction 0.0 %
Spec. Annual Yield 705.81 kWh/kWp
Performance Ratio (PR) 88.3 %
Yield Reduction due to Shading 0.0 %/year
CO₂ Emissions avoided 1,92

System Data Type of System3D, Grid-connected PV System

Simulation model used:
- Diffuse Irradiation onto Horizontal Plane - Hofmann
- Irradiance onto tilted surface - Hay & Davies

Module Areas x 2 (east & west)
1. Module Area - Building 01-Roof Area East
PV Generator, 1. Module Area - Building 01-Roof Area East
Name Building 01-Roof Area East
PV Modules 7 x Q.PEAK DUO-G5 325 Rev1
Manufacturer Hanwha Q.CELLS
Inclination 35 °
Orientation East 90 °
Installation Type Roof parallel
PV Generator Surface 11.8 m²

Inverter configuration
Configuration 1
Module Areas Building 01-Roof Area East + Building 01-Roof Area West
Inverter 1 Manufacturer SOLTARO
Model SOLTARO HYPER-3680
Quantity 1
Sizing Factor 123.6 %
Configuration MPP 1: 1 x 7 /MPP 2: 1 x 7

Simulation Results
Results Total System
PV System
PV Generator Output 4.6 kWp
Spec. Annual Yield 705.81 kWh/kWp
Performance Ratio (PR) 88.3 %
Yield Reduction due to Shading 0.0 %/year
Grid Feed-in 3,211 kWh/year
Grid Feed-in in the first year (incl. module degradation) 3,211 kWh/year
Standby Consumption (Inverter) 48 kWh/year
CO₂ Emissions avoided 1,927 kg / year

wexfordman2 · 12-11-2018 11:34pm

Brecken Tart Newscast wrote: »

Just to add to the debate - opinions appreciated - here's the spec i was offered. Is it good/bad or indifferent?
Remember I was offered a smaller inverter/ less panels than wexfordman for the same money. I've to talk to him about that still but would like some feedback....wexford - how does the equipment compare to yours ?

Project Overview
Figure: Overview Image, 3D Design
PV System
3D, Grid-connected PV System

PV Generator Output 4.55 kWp
PV Generator Surface 23.6 m²
Number of PV Modules 14
Number of Inverters 1

The yield
PV Generator Energy (AC grid) 3,211kWh
Grid Feed-in 3,211 kWh
Down-regulation at Feed-in Point 0 kWh
Own Power Consumption 0.0 %
Solar Fraction 0.0 %
Spec. Annual Yield 705.81 kWh/kWp
Performance Ratio (PR) 88.3 %
Yield Reduction due to Shading 0.0 %/year
CO₂ Emissions avoided 1,92

System Data Type of System3D, Grid-connected PV System

Simulation model used:
- Diffuse Irradiation onto Horizontal Plane - Hofmann
- Irradiance onto tilted surface - Hay & Davies

Module Areas x 2 (east & west)
1. Module Area - Building 01-Roof Area East
PV Generator, 1. Module Area - Building 01-Roof Area East
Name Building 01-Roof Area East
PV Modules 7 x Q.PEAK DUO-G5 325 Rev1
Manufacturer Hanwha Q.CELLS
Inclination 35 °
Orientation East 90 °
Installation Type Roof parallel
PV Generator Surface 11.8 m²

Inverter configuration
Configuration 1
Module Areas Building 01-Roof Area East + Building 01-Roof Area West
Inverter 1 Manufacturer SOLTARO
Model SOLTARO HYPER-3680
Quantity 1
Sizing Factor 123.6 %
Configuration MPP 1: 1 x 7 /MPP 2: 1 x 7

Simulation Results
Results Total System
PV System
PV Generator Output 4.6 kWp
Spec. Annual Yield 705.81 kWh/kWp
Performance Ratio (PR) 88.3 %
Yield Reduction due to Shading 0.0 %/year
Grid Feed-in 3,211 kWh/year
Grid Feed-in in the first year (incl. module degradation) 3,211 kWh/year
Standby Consumption (Inverter) 48 kWh/year
CO₂ Emissions avoided 1,927 kg / year

I would def query the inverter size, it may be an error .

My system was 18 panels, in the one south facing roof, so the yeild figures for yourself will be quite different as you are in two different roofs and not south facing.

I wonder, if the lower inverter size is perhaps because you may not get the full yeild if you are not as well orientated. I am guessing completely here, others may know better.

If it is the 3.6kw inverter and you are going for less panles (14) than mine there is def room for him to improve.the price.

What make of inverter and battery did he spec?

conor_mc · 12-11-2018 11:45pm

wexfordman2 wrote: »

I would def query the inverter size, it may be an error .

My system was 18 panels, in the one south facing roof, so the yeild figures for yourself will be quite different as you are in two different roofs and not south facing.

I wonder, if the lower inverter size is perhaps because you may not get the full yeild if you are not as well orientated.

If it is the 3.6kw inverter and you are going for less panles (14) than mine there is def room for him to improve.the price.

What make of inverter and battery did he spec?

If it’s an East-West setup, then the peak power is only about 50% of what the full setup on a south-facing roof is?

Water John · 13-11-2018 1:14am

That was my main concern, seeing the orientation of the panels. At most I'd have SE and SW. I understand, that's the roof you've got. Any garage or shed? Any ground room? I know that would cost more to install.
I'll leave the specs to the sparkys'.

air · 13-11-2018 4:54am

A 3.6 kW inverter is perfectly sized for that East West system, it is slightly over sized if anything IMO. Around 3kW would be perfect but no point splitting hairs.
The shallow slope will mean poorer winter performance and higher summer peak output but there isn't anything you can do about that.
Without a FIT the ideal slope is around 50 degrees for Ireland. It will provide better winter output when self consumption is higher. The slight reduction in summer output is moot since it is likely to be spilled anyway.

randombar · 13-11-2018 1:28pm

Hi Guys,

Bit nervous now about the panels based on angles, roof size etc.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zu8nj4p780fzqaz/Screenshot%202018-11-13%2012.24.49.png?dl=0

Two roofs.

Bigger one:

Approx 7.2m by 2.1m

Roof is facing South by South East

Velux in the middle that doesn't/won't open.

Also have another roof that is South West (I slated myself and could be replaced entirely with panels if that is an option)

Approx 5m x 2.4m

12 square metres.

Angle isn't great on that one from my reading of the above.

How many panels in total do you think I can get and am I mad

conor_mc · 13-11-2018 1:38pm

GaryCocs wrote: »

Hi Guys,

Bit nervous now about the panels based on angles, roof size etc.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zu8nj4p780fzqaz/Screenshot%202018-11-13%2012.24.49.png?dl=0

Two roofs.

Bigger one:

Approx 7.2m by 2.1m

Roof is facing South by South East

Velux in the middle that doesn't/won't open.

Also have another roof that is South West (I slated myself and could be replaced entirely with panels if that is an option)

Approx 5m x 2.4m

12 square metres.

Angle isn't great on that one from my reading of the above.

How many panels in total do you think I can get and am I mad

Set up a demo account on helioscope and you can play with the panel types/locations, and then run simulations to see how much each setup will generate per year.

randombar · 13-11-2018 2:08pm

conor_mc wrote: »

Set up a demo account on helioscope and you can play with the panel types/locations, and then run simulations to see how much each setup will generate per year.

Looks like 12 bisol 300 modules would fit maybe

https://www.dropbox.com/s/l0ifnhnbu3uctta/Screenshot%202018-11-13%2013.06.41.png?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qomm1ghxah380ba/Screenshot%202018-11-13%2013.08.33.png?dl=0

randombar · 13-11-2018 9:02pm

GaryCocs wrote: »

Looks like 12 bisol 300 modules would fit maybe

https://www.dropbox.com/s/l0ifnhnbu3uctta/Screenshot%202018-11-13%2013.06.41.png?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qomm1ghxah380ba/Screenshot%202018-11-13%2013.08.33.png?dl=0

I got this message from one installer.

"because the seai in their wisdom will not allow a panels edge within 50 cm of the edge of any of the roofs edges this makes the area work out to be instead of 7.2 it will be 6.2 and the 2.1 meters makes it 1.1 meters therefore we cannot fit a panel as the grant will not be issued"

conor_mc · 13-11-2018 9:52pm

GaryCocs wrote: »

I got this message from one installer.

"because the seai in their wisdom will not allow a panels edge within 50 cm of the edge of any of the roofs edges this makes the area work out to be instead of 7.2 it will be 6.2 and the 2.1 meters makes it 1.1 meters therefore we cannot fit a panel as the grant will not be issued"

I’d heard that before, and seen it mentioned here too. I think it’s to help prevent strong winds lifting the panels.

air · 13-11-2018 10:10pm

The 500mm minimum is for access as well as for avoiding uplift I believe. There's a similar requirement under the MCS scheme in the UK.
If you went with an in roof system and mounted them towards the bottom you'd be unlikely to have any issue in practice as they would be flush with the existing roof line and far less susceptible to uplift than an on roof system.
Do ground mount systems qualifty for the grant? Looks like you have plenty of room. A shame though as your roof orientations are decent.

uck51js9zml2yt · 13-11-2018 10:34pm

Is there much of a difference in cost between roof and ground mounted?
I was thinking that I could get mine on the ground to give me south facing panels.

Spoke to the company today. He was surprised I was quoted for a 3.6 kw inverter and not a 5 kw. He's gone away to redo the figures.

unkel · 13-11-2018 10:53pm

air wrote: »

If you went with an in roof system and mounted them towards the bottom you'd be unlikely to have any issue

Is an in roof system exempt from the 500mm rule? If it isn't then no SEAI installer will use that either and you won't get any subsidy

Pretty stupid rule anyway imho to enforce on anyone without regard for the situation. Should be up to the installer to decide what way it is safe to mount. Sure aren't they approved by the SEAI? That should be based on their knowledge and expertise.

air · 14-11-2018 8:41am

unkel wrote: »

Is an in roof system exempt from the 500mm rule?

I've no idea, I was only speaking from a practical perspective as regards getting his panels installed if he goes ahead without the grant.

I've only skimmed the headline figures for the grant - 800/kW to 2kW, 1k for battery system, additional 800/kW for 2kW up to 4kW with battery.

The 500mm rule is pretty sound in my experience. It's difficult / impossible to lift tiles near the ridge to fix roof hooks anyway without removing ridge tiles and having to reinstate them which is a lot of work.
The ridge and eaves are also the areas most prone to leaks and thus most likely to require access for maintenance so it's sensible to leave them free of panels.
The in roof systems are well suited to fitting right to the eaves however and are less likely to leak than slates or tiles if properly fitted.

The gap also maintains some access for getting onto the roof and around the panels. This is useful for maintenance and I believe fire brigades mandate it in some regions also for this reason.

randombar · 14-11-2018 9:49am

air wrote: »

I've no idea, I was only speaking from a practical perspective as regards getting his panels installed if he goes ahead without the grant.

I've only skimmed the headline figures for the grant - 800/kW to 2kW, 1k for battery system, additional 800/kW for 2kW up to 4kW with battery.

The 500mm rule is pretty sound in my experience. It's difficult / impossible to lift tiles near the ridge to fix roof hooks anyway without removing ridge tiles and having to reinstate them which is a lot of work.
The ridge and eaves are also the areas most prone to leaks and thus most likely to require access for maintenance so it's sensible to leave them free of panels.
The in roof systems are well suited to fitting right to the eaves however and are less likely to leak than slates or tiles if properly fitted.

The gap also maintains some access for getting onto the roof and around the panels. This is useful for maintenance and I believe fire brigades mandate it in some regions also for this reason.

Do slates need to be lifted on a slate roof too? I see some information in relation to solar limpets.

air · 14-11-2018 10:17am

GaryCocs wrote: »

Do slates need to be lifted on a slate roof too? I see some information in relation to solar limpets.

They do as far as I'm aware. I've never installed solar on a slate roof.
I hate the sight of slates having had the misfortune of ripping and replacing a few in the past. My all time least favourite roofing material - apart from shingles but I wouldn't consider those roofing material!

Shefwedfan · 14-11-2018 12:31pm

Was posted the following in one of the electric car groups: https://gallery.mailchimp.com/236de2600fcf5b4893837b699/files/fcd678de-4aed-454b-a42a-c10a372c6081/Nanosun_Price_List_OCTOBER_2018_actual_Sheet1_Tabulka_1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2iHWovzC58rw7W4jBPqTOK14XtCIojb3R0NHVoOn2W0ywccS0sHtxZeUI

Interesting the invertor seems fairly cheap and the panels seem cheap....please note cost listed against panel is the price per watt.....

unkel · 14-11-2018 1:12pm

€100 for a 300W panel. Plus shipping from continental Europe and VAT? Not much cheaper than you can get the panels here then?

Shefwedfan · 14-11-2018 1:52pm

unkel wrote: »

€100 for a 300W panel. Plus shipping from continental Europe and VAT? Not much cheaper than you can get the panels here then?

Probably not a whole pile cheaper

But the invertor looks cheap

I got quote of 1800 for the only one that would break out the pricing

wexfordman2 · 14-11-2018 1:55pm

GaryCocs wrote: »

Do slates need to be lifted on a slate roof too? I see some information in relation to solar limpets.

My roof is a slate roof, and the solar oables were fitted a few weeks back. They used limpets. They held off the installation until the limpet install was approved by seai.

air · 14-11-2018 3:21pm

Just had a look at those solar limpets and to me they look all kinds of awful.

They're totally reliant on the underlying roof members - do they fix to the slate battens or the rafters? It looks like it's the battens but it's not 100% clear from the installation video.
No possible way to inspect the condition of the timber you're fixing into, confirm it's dimensions or confirm that the fixing is centred in the member before or after you fix.
The structural certification they provide is based on a laboratory test on a perfectly installed fixing on a piece of timber that is far larger than a typical slate batten.
Waterproofing of your roof becomes entirely dependent on some outdoor sealant.

All my concerns may be totally unfounded but I wouldn't want a product without an established successful installation history on my roof.

randombar · 14-11-2018 3:23pm

air wrote: »

Just had a look at those solar limpets and to me they look all kinds of awful.

They're totally reliant on the underlying roof members - do they fix to the slate battens or the rafters? It looks like it's the battens but it's not 100% clear from the installation video.
No possible way to inspect the condition of the timber you're fixing into, confirm it's dimensions or confirm that the fixing is centred in the member before or after you fix.
The structural certification they provide is based on a laboratory test on a perfectly installed fixing on a piece of timber that is far larger than a typical slate batten.
Waterproofing of your roof becomes entirely dependent on some outdoor sealant.

All my concerns may be totally unfounded but I wouldn't want a product without an established successful installation history on my roof.

Ya will have to talk to a few installers. I'm in an ok position of having an open roof on the other side, i.e. I can see the rafters underneath on both lean to and garage.

KCross · 14-11-2018 3:27pm

air wrote: »

Waterproofing of your roof becomes entirely dependent on some outdoor sealant.

Now that would worry me.
Sealant isnt going to last 30yrs, is it?

air · 14-11-2018 3:30pm

GaryCocs wrote: »

Ya will have to talk to a few installers. I'm in an ok position of having an open roof on the other side, i.e. I can see the rafters underneath on both lean to and garage.

Looking at the structural analysis document properly they have de-rated the pull out strength to allow for poorly centred fixings in the rafters, so they're definitely fixed to the rafters and my concern about missed fixings was valid.
The next issue this raises is compression of the slate towards the rafter where the fixing is not on a batten.

wexfordman2 · 16-11-2018 7:56pm

air wrote: »

Looking at the structural analysis document properly they have de-rated the pull out strength to allow for poorly centred fixings in the rafters, so they're definitely fixed to the rafters and my concern about missed fixings was valid.
The next issue this raises is compression of the slate towards the rafter where the fixing is not on a batten.

So the concern is not over the product itself, but whether or not it is properly installed ?

air · 16-11-2018 8:03pm

wexfordman2 wrote: »

So the concern is not over the product itself, but whether or not it is properly installed ?

I'd have concerns (structural) about how likely it is to be properly installed, even with the most skilled and attentive installer.
That aside I'd have further concerns (leaks/longevity) even if perfectly installed.

wexfordman2 · 16-11-2018 8:13pm

air wrote: »

I'd have concerns (strucural) about how likely it is to be properly installed, even with the most skilled and attentive installer.
That aside I'd have further concerns (leaks/longevity) even if perfectly installed.

Thanks,

So assuming it is correctly installed, what are the risks ?

air · 16-11-2018 8:35pm

Roofing is not an area of expertise of mine.
I'm only going on my experience of having repaired / replaced slates a few times and having installed PV on tiled and steel roofs in the past.

That being said, even being correctly installed there's an appreciable risk that an excessive number of fixings will not be centred in the rafters. If this occurs, the pull out strength of the installation is compromised. Worst case scenarion the entire installation could fly off the roof in a storm.
It should be noted that the structural analysis provided by the manufacturer specifically acknowledges the risk of missed fixings. It's only a matter of time and odds before someone misses too many and runs into trouble.

The hole through the slate is at risk of causing the slate to split due to stresses imposed on the bolt by wind loads. Any resultant movement is likely to be exacerbated by the first point. .
A lesser risk is perishing or improper use of the sealant admitting water through the bolt hole.
Finally, depending on the particulars of the roof, there's potential to put stress on the slate due to the fact it's fixed rigidly at two points.
There is also potential for splitting due to thermal cycling of the slate depending on the clearance around the bolt hole and how tightly both bolts are fixed.
Any one of these four mechanisms has potential to cause leaks.

Having said all this an installation with perfectly centred fixings, torqued precisely and sealed perfectly may well be fine for a prolonged time. This is just my somewhat educated opinion on them.

As a final point, I wouldn't put any value on SEAI approval. They have approved some very dubious companies and products in the past in my opinion.

randombar · 16-11-2018 10:43pm

What kind of distances are you looking at from panel to inverter so as not to incur losses?

air · 16-11-2018 10:51pm

It's not a huge concern as the current is typically under 10A per string.
The percentage of total energy production the losses represent decreases the more panels you have in series also.

randombar · 16-11-2018 10:57pm

air wrote: »

It's not a huge concern as the current is typically under 10A per string.
The percentage of total energy production the losses represent decreases the more panels you have in series also.

So the only reason you wouldn't have panels dotted all over various roof sections is purely the additional work involved in the installation?

air · 16-11-2018 11:02pm

Yes, that and the fact it doesn't look great. You'll also use a few more hooks and clamps than a continuous row.

randombar · 18-11-2018 10:45pm

air wrote: »

Yes, that and the fact it doesn't look great. You'll also use a few more hooks and clamps than a continuous row.

Sooo putting them in the garden, is there an additional cost? Can you get some box iron fabricated for it etc?

Water John · 18-11-2018 10:53pm

That would be the extra cost, a frame with ground anchor points, also fence it off.

AstraMonti · 19-11-2018 9:41am

I got a quote from Electric Ireland as part of their pv panels roll out, 4240 (i think) for 1.8kw. Not sure where that stands comparing to others.
You can also apply the grand to this price.

Silent Running · 19-11-2018 10:19am

GaryCocs wrote: »

Sooo putting them in the garden, is there an additional cost? Can you get some box iron fabricated for it etc?

You wouldn't need planning as it's a temporary structure. Some ground mount systems just require big concrete feet to hold them down, no digging and pouring concrete. The angle can be set to the optimum, unlike a roof mount, and sun tracking is also a possibility.

randombar · 19-11-2018 10:39am

Silent Running wrote: »

You wouldn't need planning as it's a temporary structure. Some ground mount systems just require big concrete feet to hold them down, no digging and pouring concrete. The angle can be set to the optimum, unlike a roof mount, and sun tracking is also a possibility.

If the slope in garden was ok is there any reason I could mount them low to the ground, pretty much flat on the grass? Or even better dig them flush in

wexfordman2 · 19-11-2018 10:41am

Feck sake, supposed to be getting my inverter installed today. Took day off to ensure I was here when it was being done.

Just got a call from installer to say they can't install due to waiting for a "firmware upgrade"

I wouldn't mind, only I called them 3 times on Friday to confirm what time they were due to arrive today at, and was told each time they would ring back to confirm.

I smell Bs in that excuse.

2nd time they have done this, not best pleased

air · 19-11-2018 10:51am

GaryCocs wrote: »

If the slope in garden was ok is there any reason I could mount them low to the ground, pretty much flat on the grass? Or even better dig them flush in

Anything less than 15 degrees and you'll have to clean them.
Plus your winter production would be awful.

randombar · 19-11-2018 10:52am

air wrote: »

Anything less than 15 degrees and you'll have to clean them.
Plus your winter production would be awful.

I think the slope itself is 30 to 40 degrees. I'm wondering if I can just lay them on the grass (Obviously on the brackets etc) rather than having them a couple of feet up off the ground.

air · 19-11-2018 10:55am

Oh that would be fine once you keep the grass cut around them and they're securely fixed to Terra Firma obviously!

air · 19-11-2018 10:58am

Silent Running wrote: »

You wouldn't need planning as it's a temporary structure. Some ground mount systems just require big concrete feet to hold them down, no digging and pouring concrete. The angle can be set to the optimum, unlike a roof mount, and sun tracking is also a possibility.

You need planning for anything over 12sqm. There's an exemption up to 50sqm (IIRC) for commercial premises.
Tracking makes little economic sense. A simple manual tilt adjustment would be as much as I would consider personally

randombar · 19-11-2018 11:46am

air wrote: »

You need planning for anything over 12sqm. There's an exemption up to 50sqm (IIRC) for commercial premises.
Tracking makes little economic sense. A simple manual tilt adjustment would be as much as I would consider personally

What range would you be looking at for the manual tilt?

air · 19-11-2018 12:09pm

Maybe 30 to 60degrees or something similar.
If you look up the optimal angle for your location on PVGIS for both mid summer and mid winter those would be the limits to aim for.
I wouldn't fuss about it too much though if it made the mechanicals unnecessarily complex. 30/45/60 would do fine.

Gumbo · 19-11-2018 12:11pm

Silent Running wrote: »

You wouldn't need planning as it's a temporary structure. Some ground mount systems just require big concrete feet to hold them down, no digging and pouring concrete. The angle can be set to the optimum, unlike a roof mount, and sun tracking is also a possibility.

That's incorrect information.

1. There's no such thing as Temp Structures in Planning.
2. The Solar array has its own exemption limits that must be adhered to.

randombar · 20-11-2018 11:32pm

wexfordman2 wrote: »

Feck sake, supposed to be getting my inverter installed today. Took day off to ensure I was here when it was being done.

Just got a call from installer to say they can't install due to waiting for a "firmware upgrade"

I wouldn't mind, only I called them 3 times on Friday to confirm what time they were due to arrive today at, and was told each time they would ring back to confirm.

I smell Bs in that excuse.

2nd time they have done this, not best pleased

Any update? Does sound like the dog ate my homework, I don't know solar but I know software and older firmware can be upgraded. Can't they just install with the old firmware and upgrade later?

wexfordman2 · 20-11-2018 11:51pm

GaryCocs wrote: »

Any update? Does sound like the dog ate my homework, I don't know solar but I know software and older firmware can be upgraded. Can't they just install with the old firmware and upgrade later?

Spoke to them today, the issue I think is related to a bug in the firmware, which restrict the effeceincy over winter. Didn't get the full details, was supposed to ring them back at 2 o clock but work took over.

Think they are being sincere to be honest, offering to pay for my lost time.

Domestic solar PV quotes 2018

Comments