Sun tax

[aeberbach]

OK buddy, you be you - enjoy that anger and believe what you want. All I see is a quote from a minister that says nothing new without offending anyone.

[wraper]

OK buddy, you be you - enjoy that anger and believe what you want. All I see is a quote from a minister that says nothing new without offending anyone.

Buddy, you said it's all BS with no sources. However somehow minister admits it exists. Which means you made a bunch of claims without reading the article.

OK buddy, you be you - enjoy that anger and believe what you want.

And it's gaslighting and projection considering:

Your source is the worst tabloid garbage there is, the TV equivalent of National Enquirer. Don't believe any of it.

[tom66]

Not sure how long it lasts but due to Octopus Energy participating in the ESO program I've read stories of people doing insane grid arbitrage and profiting as a result using their home batteries.  Buying electricity at 7.5p/kWh off peak and selling it at peak time at £4/kWh.  Even with a 10kWh battery if you manage that more than 10 times a year you'll pay back the battery very quickly indeed, especially with the other energy shifting benefits that can come as a result.  Sadly I do not yet have a home battery so cannot benefit...

I would be cautious about that. If a lot of people start doing that, prices will level out and you'll also be competing with large scale battery storage somewhere in the near future. You'll need to have a good insight and make projections (scenarios) to see how much you can gain from having a battery and use it that way.

Oh for sure - it can only be seen as a bonus and can't be relied upon.

One of the big issues for the grid in the UK is local interconnect capacity.  There may well be sufficient capacity on the grid in the form of batteries to act as a peaking supply, but the power can't always be moved to the right location without curtailment.  So there may be an advantage to paying domestic customers to supply energy into the grid.

Octopus already offer free energy on a local scale on days when this energy can't be moved out of the area due to DNO constraints:
https://octopus.energy/power-ups/

Though this is only offered in a few areas at the moment.

[Halcyon]

The moment I start getting charged for exporting solar, using infrastructure I paid for, is the moment I disconnect it from the grid. I suspect many others will be in the same position.

It's going to happen, if nothing else, on a "trial" basis. All the distributors in NSW are on-board with it.
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/sustainability/nearly-a-million-nsw-households-face-new-charges-for-solar-exports-20240516-p5je4c.html

This has been coming for some time and shouldn't really come as a shock to anyone. Those with solar should be encouraged to either use it, or store it.

[Someone]

So it looks like Aussie solar users will soon have to pay utility companies if they send too much energy back into the grid during peak hours. I assume by peak hours, they mean when the sun is shining and people are at work. What would be your strategy for minimizing the electrical bill? Getting a Tesla Powerwall? Running the A/C in an empty house? A kill switch? Anything else?

https://9now.nine.com.au/a-current-affair/sun-tax-set-to-charge-solar-panel-owners-who-send-excess-electricity-back-to-the-grid-at-peak-times/8bb2e8e6-feb8-4620-b1aa-806539e252de

The Aussies are not the only ones getting shafted. From the end of this month I'll be paying 250 euro/year for supplying the grid with electricity from my solar panels. The amount is based on amount of energy I supply. Every energy supplier in the NL has or is going to charge solar panel owners for supplying energy.

I have been looking at batteries but realistically I would need a 3000kWh (yes, three thousand kWh) battery or storage system to avoid the charge and be (mostly) self-supplying where it comes to electrity. A 5kWh to 10kWh battery would smear out usage over a day but with the solar panels able to deliver 100kWh+ in a sunny week, it is clear that a small battery is not going to do much in terms of avoiding the tax.

In the NL there is also the system of getting a kWh for a kWh as long as you consume more than you produce. In my mind this should be an incentive for the power companies to invest in storage. But that isn't happening at a large enough scale. So I agree with Psi about getting money from people is not the solution.

Please explain this further.
So you do currently have/did have "net metering" where you can consume your exports at a later time without additional cost for the storage?

Claiming a new 250 eurodollarpound expense means nothing if we don't know the existing arrangement.

[Someone]

Your source is the worst tabloid garbage there is, the TV equivalent of National Enquirer. Don't believe any of it.

Please point us to the truth on this matter as it's also been on NZ news today.

I think those claiming a Sun Tax would be the ones needing to provide some kind of source, but that's not what they do, it's about selling advertising on the show not verifiable facts.

Further reading ("https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-25/australians-with-rooftop-solar-charged-export-electricity-grid/100026336) says it is a proposal by the Australian Energy Market Commission. A fair way from the "soon, a solar switch will be flicked and it'll be the power punters who pay" garbage of Current Affair.

ABC quote: "The AEMC said the recommendation was not designed to create mandatory export charges, but to create more flexibility and pricing options."
also: "Among a raft of changes put forward in a draft determination released on Thursday is the removal of a prohibition on charging for energy exported into the grid."
AEMC Chief Executive Ben Barr: "The consultation with the poles and wires businesses and the Australian Energy Regulator signing off on any changes will take over 12 [months] to two years,"

So, PV owners TO PAY!? Greedy greenies get SOLAR SLUGGED?! No. Nothing will change for some time and many things could happen.

No surprise that a system where consumers are selling power to the grid for income while the wholesale price is negative needs some changing.

[Psi]

If the issue is too much export, surely the solution would be to incentivise users to allow remote control of export limits by the utility.

You assume they actually want a solution to the problem, they would rather have the cash and leave the problem for someone else to deal with in 10 years.

[NiHaoMike]

I have been looking at batteries but realistically I would need a 3000kWh (yes, three thousand kWh) battery or storage system to avoid the charge and be (mostly) self-supplying where it comes to electrity. A 5kWh to 10kWh battery would smear out usage over a day but with the solar panels able to deliver 100kWh+ in a sunny week, it is clear that a small battery is not going to do much in terms of avoiding the tax.

Find stuff to do with the excess, for example crypto mining or distilling water.

[wraper]

I have been looking at batteries but realistically I would need a 3000kWh (yes, three thousand kWh) battery or storage system to avoid the charge and be (mostly) self-supplying where it comes to electrity. A 5kWh to 10kWh battery would smear out usage over a day but with the solar panels able to deliver 100kWh+ in a sunny week, it is clear that a small battery is not going to do much in terms of avoiding the tax.

Find stuff to do with the excess, for example crypto mining or distilling water.

The problem with mining is that you want to break even with hardware cost ASAP as its value is deprecating real quick.

[soldar]

It seems to me energy for heating or cooling buildings could be stored as hot or cold water and that would be relatively low tech and allow the storage of lots of energy.

In very hot weather I run the a/c at night, when rates are lower, when outside air is cooler and so the heat pump is more efficient. So the house, which is well insulated, gets a bit colder than I need and later, during the day, the a/c is off but the house retains most of the temperature. I have some temperature swing but I am paying MUCH less than I would if I ran the a/c during the day.

If we installed some hidden heat storage units we could store the heat or cold when convenient and use it at a later time when needed.

[MT]

The moment I start getting charged for exporting solar, using infrastructure I paid for, is the moment I disconnect it from the grid. I suspect many others will be in the same position.

It's going to happen, if nothing else, on a "trial" basis. All the distributors in NSW are on-board with it.
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/sustainability/nearly-a-million-nsw-households-face-new-charges-for-solar-exports-20240516-p5je4c.html

This has been coming for some time and shouldn't really come as a shock to anyone. Those with solar should be encouraged to either use it, or store it.

Anti paywall edition.
https://archive.fo/ORwKo

[madires]

In a smart grid the local grid operator would tell your solar inverter to limit the feed-in power to a specific value (to keep the grid stable).

[m k]

The moment I start getting charged for exporting solar, using infrastructure I paid for, is the moment I disconnect it from the grid.

Where to put it?

A bot net of something useful, P2P of ChatGPT.
The next level of screensaver.

[Someone]

In a smart grid the local grid operator would tell your solar inverter to limit the feed-in power to a specific value (to keep the grid stable).

Yes, it would be rather rude to put a negative price on exports if the end user cannot set their inverter to avoid it. All this was supposed to be "solved" but never rolled out for consumers.

[coppice]

So it looks like Aussie solar users will soon have to pay utility companies if they send too much energy back into the grid during peak hours. I assume by peak hours, they mean when the sun is shining and people are at work. What would be your strategy for minimizing the electrical bill? Getting a Tesla Powerwall? Running the A/C in an empty house? A kill switch? Anything else?

https://9now.nine.com.au/a-current-affair/sun-tax-set-to-charge-solar-panel-owners-who-send-excess-electricity-back-to-the-grid-at-peak-times/8bb2e8e6-feb8-4620-b1aa-806539e252de

The Aussies are not the only ones getting shafted. From the end of this month I'll be paying 250 euro/year for supplying the grid with electricity from my solar panels. The amount is based on amount of energy I supply. Every energy supplier in the NL has or is going to charge solar panel owners for supplying energy.

I have been looking at batteries but realistically I would need a 3000kWh (yes, three thousand kWh) battery or storage system to avoid the charge and be (mostly) self-supplying where it comes to electrity. A 5kWh to 10kWh battery would smear out usage over a day but with the solar panels able to deliver 100kWh+ in a sunny week, it is clear that a small battery is not going to do much in terms of avoiding the tax.

In the NL there is also the system of getting a kWh for a kWh as long as you consume more than you produce. In my mind this should be an incentive for the power companies to invest in storage. But that isn't happening at a large enough scale. So I agree with Psi about getting money from people is not the solution.

Doesn't your power inverter allow you to control how much energy you pump to the grid?

[NiHaoMike]

The problem with mining is that you want to break even with hardware cost ASAP as its value is deprecating real quick.

Could mine Curecoin/Foldingcoin, then even if you don't make back the hardware cost, you'll at least advance biomedical research.

[David_AVD]

I would have thought that all modern solar inverters are able to be set to zero export. Mine is set to the max allowed (5kW), but could be changed if required.

I'm not sure how many have more sophisticated rules to allow for the export limit to be varied by time of day or other factors.

[tautech]

It's all about vested interests rather than proper government for the people !

WA where our eldest son lives, power is predominantly from non-renewables and mostly gas fired turbines which can be throttled down when solar or wind scales up....if they can be bothered or enforced to do so.
https://www.energy.gov.au/energy-data/australian-energy-statistics/data-charts/australian-energy-mix-state-and-territory-2021-22

But no, they'd rather penalise the renewables although these have been encouraged for years where many of the existing solar installations are still using dumb inverters not capable of remote control.

Staring at us are Gubbermints with little idea of the real world and being squealed at by Power Co's at the hard time they have getting a ROI on plant that has been in operation for years, if not decades.

Poor them but the squeaky wheel always first gets the grease. 

[Siwastaja]

You pay for supplying energy. Isn't that a good deal?

Then... don't supply? What's the problem?

It's the same for every producer. Negative priced hours are a reality everywhere with hourly (or 15-minute, or whatever) pricing based on auctioning on free market. We have negative priced hours here, and that actually means that the nuclear operator has to pay for dumping their unwanted energy into the grid, and consumers get paid by using this unwanted energy.

Every market in existence works the same way: people pay to get food when they are hungry, but if you go and force food down the throats of people not interested in eating your food, police gets involved. Why would electrical energy be any different? The grid collapses if you forcefully push more energy than is consumed, there needs to be a way to turn off excess production when unwanted.

And people do not act upon hopeful wishes. Money, aka giving negative cost (or actual fine) is the easiest way to make people comply. Unsurprisingly, some % of people are stupid enough they don't understand this at all and continue to push their product onto others and then complain about a "tax", which is not a tax, and has nothing to do with taxes whatsoever.

You can hit your head on the wall and wonder how it hurts, but you can also choose not to export energy when the grid does not need it:
* By increasing self-consumption (by using simple low-cost timers, or real automation system),
* and, lacking a way to further self-consume, just turn the damn inverter off;

every new solar inverter (I think at least in EU it's now by law) manufactured within last x years already have simple digital inputs that can be used to limit production - e.g. again with a simple timer if you don't have a real automation system.

Most of the electricity production methods never fully coincide with the use. For example, nuclear is nearly constant output + random and planned total outages. Usage patterns are far from constant, and by Murphy's law, outages coincide with worst case usage. Wind power produces power when it's windy, and solar power when the Sun's shining. And some % of that, on annual scale, is not going to coincide with consumption. Deal with it. Take it into account when building a system. Sheesh.

[soldar]

Sheesh.

Calm down, dear. Calm down.

[Zucca]

Ohhh yes...

here in USA, SC there is no sun tax but in order to interconnect your solar system to the power company grid, you need to bend over and take your pants down

1) install a bidirectional meter (which in 2024 is just remote config change in the current meter so one time $.01 cost for the power company)
This bidirectional meter will increase the base price from $12.5 to $30/month in your bill 
Ah... in the past it happened they all of the sudden increased the bidirectional meter "fee" from $20 to $30.
Basically they can ask as much as they want from you to get their business case green again.
2) They look back in the past 12month energy usage, and predict how much your solar system will generate.
If predicted generate power > used power in the past 12 month THEN NO NO you can't interconnect your system to the grid
3) You basically sell at 50% and buy back at 100% price/KWh
4) In case the grid goes down you need to turn off the solar panels for grid operator safety (no AC power feedback)... so a regular solar system it not acting as an UPS.

because of the above 4 reasons, I told my power company they can kiss my white italian ass and I decided to not feed back power to the grid...

So... ESS Victron system with 42KWh LiFePO4 and 14KW solar panels... life is good now. I am on grid 10% of the time more or less.
I pay the power company $12.5/month to have basically a silent and well maintained AC emergency generator.

[m k]

35x100Ah?

Finally quite small storage space.
Even less if more vertical.

[nctnico]

You can hit your head on the wall and wonder how it hurts, but you can also choose not to export energy when the grid does not need it:
* By increasing self-consumption (by using simple low-cost timers, or real automation system),
* and, lacking a way to further self-consume, just turn the damn inverter off;

This reasoning is the wrong way around. The grid should need the solar power. Always. In the end solar power only supplies a tiny bit (like 10% or so) of the total electricity consumption for many countries which are not in an area with constant sunshine. This means that generating capacity to deal with the full load is always there. So for solar power to make sense, there needs to be grid level storage which can absorb production peaks. Ofcourse you can come up with all kinds of contraptions but in the end these are just gimmicks for people who like to follow today's hype and don't care about cost, reliability and inconvenience. Timers, optimisers, home storage, price trackers, etc all need extra hardware and services from suppliers (who may cut the service at any time) which just add extra costs with very little ROI. The majority of the people simply want to watch TV and cook a dinner while it is dark outside. The grid should be laid out to deal with that as it always has been. Maybe the answer is that putting solar panels on people's roof wasn't such a good idea after all because the grid can't be made into needing the solar power in a cost effective way. The 'sun tax' starts to point in that direction.

[Someone]

You can hit your head on the wall and wonder how it hurts, but you can also choose not to export energy when the grid does not need it:
* By increasing self-consumption (by using simple low-cost timers, or real automation system),
* and, lacking a way to further self-consume, just turn the damn inverter off;

This reasoning is the wrong way around. The grid should need the solar power. Always. In the end solar power only supplies a tiny bit (like 10% or so) of the total electricity consumption for many countries which are not in an area with constant sunshine. This means that generating capacity to deal with the full load is always there. So for solar power to make sense, there needs to be grid level storage which can absorb production peaks. Ofcourse you can come up with all kinds of contraptions but in the end these are just gimmicks for people who like to follow today's hype and don't care about cost, reliability and inconvenience. Timers, optimisers, home storage, price trackers, etc all need extra hardware and services from suppliers (who may cut the service at any time) which just add extra costs with very little ROI. The majority of the people simply want to watch TV and cook a dinner while it is dark outside. The grid should be laid out to deal with that as it always has been. Maybe the answer is that putting solar panels on people's roof wasn't such a good idea after all because the grid can't be made into needing the solar power in a cost effective way. The 'sun tax' starts to point in that direction.

Yes, and the quickest way to make gird storage happen is to economicaly incentivise it.

You currently export to the gird when there are plenty of energy sources producing, which is worth less than your grid consumption during tighter supply. If wholesale/time-of-use pricing doesnt reflect the costs then where is the incentive for anyone to add storage?

The broken market is where you joined this thread, making complaints that it's unfair to you to pay for storage. But now you also want to somehow have incentives to add storage but not at any cost to you?

[nctnico]

I never wrote that storage shouldn't cost any money!

Read what Psi wrote earlier very carefully as it is right on the money. People shouldn't be penalised for supplying energy when it isn't needed but power companies should be penalised for not storing energy. In the end the storage costs will be carried by the consumers but this is only logical. However, I think it shouldn't have to make much difference in price per kWh in the long run.