Sun tax

[Someone]

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.

Well then explain your opening post:

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.

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

It sure sounds like you're objecting to paying (a tiny fraction) of storage costs.

[tautech]

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.

Well then explain your opening post:

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.

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

It sure sounds like you're objecting to paying (a tiny fraction) of storage costs.

I would and bitterly. 

A worldwide push to renewables and when the public hears the subsidised call and contributes only to be penalised. 

If the Gen Co's don't like how the grid is run tough shit but these new technologies are here and will remain, subsidised or not.
If they were so worried about future grid supply one would imagine they might have been planning additional capacity a decade in advance to lessen the need for additional future supply.

But no, they underinvested in their core business and the inevitable growth in demand only to now have their grass mown by the myriad of domestic solar installations.

So what solutions exist for stability of supply ?
Proper governance placing users in charge with binding expectations on the Gen Co's to ramp up/down and match loadings ?
If not, why has domestic solar been promoted and subsidised all these years ?


Continuity of supply of mankind's greatest advancement in century's is at risk.

[Halcyon]

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?

No where. I would turn the entire PV system off so it's not feeding excess back to the grid, and just run off batteries/grid alone.

I would rather the PV system be off, than be charged to use my own equipment. Unless of course they want to pay me back for part of the original cost.

[vad]

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

The answer to this question is irrelevant. What difference does the current arrangement make if it can suddenly change tomorrow?

For example, where I live, like in most US states, net metering is the arrangement. However, these policies are not written in stone, and state legislatures have the right to repeal net metering at any time in the future.

An industry that runs on subsidies cannot flourish forever. Non-competitive policies, such as the net metering, which mandate utility companies to buy solar energy at off-peak times at retail rates, essentially is a subsidy often compensated by taxpayer money.

Consumers should beware before getting a loan and putting a lien on their house to buy that 20kW system for $60K. The salesman most likely lied to you when they presented how much your monthly bill would change if you did business with them. The loan is for 15 or 20 years, but net metering could end or the 'sun tax' could be introduced any time, as soon as voters are fed up with radical greens.

[Someone]

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.

Well then explain your opening post:

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.

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

It sure sounds like you're objecting to paying (a tiny fraction) of storage costs.

I would and bitterly. 

A worldwide push to renewables and when the public hears the subsidised call and contributes only to be penalised. 

If the Gen Co's don't like how the grid is run tough shit but these new technologies are here and will remain, subsidised or not.
If they were so worried about future grid supply one would imagine they might have been planning additional capacity a decade in advance to lessen the need for additional future supply.

But no, they underinvested in their core business and the inevitable growth in demand only to now have their grass mown by the myriad of domestic solar installations.

So what solutions exist for stability of supply ?
Proper governance placing users in charge with binding expectations on the Gen Co's to ramp up/down and match loadings ?
If not, why has domestic solar been promoted and subsidised all these years ?


Continuity of supply of mankind's greatest advancement in century's is at risk.

I'm pointing out the user who is specifically leaning on storage doesn't want to shoulder the cost. When they should be the one paying for what they use, rather than having everyone else who isn't explicitly creating demand for storage to contribute to its cost.

This is the problem with all the doublespeak and reactionary commenting around renewables. You've jumped onto the wrong ship!

Why should solar panel users have a subsidy on their use of grid storage? Thats the current situation for many (including nctnico).

I think that the wholesale pricing should be more exposed to all users equally, and not just for some.

[Someone]

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

The answer to this question is irrelevant. What difference does the current arrangement make if it can suddenly change tomorrow?

I was trying to tease out the silliness of quoting a 250 eurodollarpound "cost" when there was no other monetary information. A 250 currency unit cost is relevant if the other benefits are of similar magnitude, or if the person is complaining about losing a small fraction of an even larger benefit/subsidy that others do not have access to. Agree with the rest that buying into these things is a risk like any investment, all the loud complainers are out to distort the reality and hide their selfishness by making out like it affects "everyone".

[vad]

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

The answer to this question is irrelevant. What difference does the current arrangement make if it can suddenly change tomorrow?

I was trying to tease out the silliness of quoting a 250 eurodollarpound "cost" when there was no other monetary information. A 250 currency unit cost is relevant if the other benefits are of similar magnitude, or if the person is complaining about losing a small fraction of an even larger benefit/subsidy that others do not have access to. Agree with the rest that buying into these things is a risk like any investment, all the loud complainers are out to distort the reality and hide their selfishness by making out like it affects "everyone".

It is obvious that when taxpayer money runs out, ‘exporters’ will suffer. I do not know how each individual ’exporter’ would be impacted. If I were investing in solar today, I would assume that exports are valued at zero dollar. A fair market price for solar exports is a small fraction of retail rate, which can effectively be rounded down to zero for convenience.

There is no way a utility company can run a profitable business, without subsidies and mandates, buying solar energy at retail rates during the day when energy demand is low. Why would they pay top dollar if they can buy energy from wholesale generators at a fraction of the retail rate? Why would they invest in grid-level storage infrastructure and not pass the cost to customers?

[tautech]

I'm pointing out the user who is specifically leaning on storage doesn't want to shoulder the cost. When they should be the one paying for what they use, rather than having everyone else who isn't explicitly creating demand for storage to contribute to its cost.

Why should solar panel users have a subsidy on their use of grid storage? Thats the current situation for many (including nctnico).

I think that the wholesale pricing should be more exposed to all users equally, and not just for some.

Agree in part.
Wholesale pricing is made from many parts including spot pricing when demand is high and capacity is low.
Every country is different depending on what their base/core generation is.

Renewables are generally the lowest portion of total energy supply and some like hydro are effectively short term storage and have a real capability to respond to demand. Pumped hydro is another method to meet short term demand but at increased cost.
Nuclear and coal fired are much less so and best suited to base loads and effectively the safest investment for a stable ROI.

Here we have Gen Co's, the national grid operator and retailers but what clouds the waters are some Gen Co's also have retail arms which IMHO is a conflict of interest and needs be busted to allow for a bidirectional path of true market signals.

[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.

Well then explain your opening post:

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.

What is the arrangement of costs/payments that is in place for your grid exports and imports, currently/historically and in the future. You brought it up, but won't explain the actual detail/situation.

It sure sounds like you're objecting to paying (a tiny fraction) of storage costs.

Nope, you really are reading something which simply isn't there.

And no, bringing the spot market prices to end users isn't the solution. Electricity prices jumping all over the place is a clear sign that there is something really broken where it comes to electricity generation meeting demand versus time. With a switch to more renewables there has to be storage. At that point the electricity market prices should become more constant to indicate a healthy market where supply meets demand. IOW: the core of the problem needs to be fixed, not the symptoms.

[wraper]

^Spot prices jump this high because Nord Pool is an uncompetitive anti-consumer bullshit. Do you know why the price was this high in 2022? It's because everyone was paying natural gas generated electricity price despite that most of it was generated in other ways. The way the price is formed is absurd, it's basically an auction where electricity suppliers bid their price for blocks of electricity they are ready to supply until the last block of required amount is fulfilled for the lowest price available... and then every supplier gets paid exactly the same last most expensive block price even if it's 100x of what they had bid  . So electricity producers had a windfall while energy intensive industries and individual consumers suffered. I remember during one hour price was EUR 4kWh because they didn't fulfill the last block (IIRC some bids were rejected because they were for smaller smaller amounts that that last block) and EUR 4 was the cap put in the system.

[Someone]

And no, bringing the spot market prices to end users isn't the solution. Electricity prices jumping all over the place is a clear sign that there is something really broken where it comes to electricity generation meeting demand versus time. With a switch to more renewables there has to be storage. At that point the electricity market prices should become more constant to indicate a healthy market where supply meets demand. IOW: the core of the problem needs to be fixed, not the symptoms.

Variation in market pricing is what should pay for storage. Not market intervention to hide the cost.

[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?

No where. I would turn the entire PV system off so it's not feeding excess back to the grid, and just run off batteries/grid alone.

I would rather the PV system be off, than be charged to use my own equipment. Unless of course they want to pay me back for part of the original cost.

If there is a good cause would you donate it?

Is making your own hot water a norm there?

I have a cold water and electrical everything.
Swimming pool under a house would be nice.
(insulated, for the winter)

[NiHaoMike]

And no, bringing the spot market prices to end users isn't the solution. Electricity prices jumping all over the place is a clear sign that there is something really broken where it comes to electricity generation meeting demand versus time. With a switch to more renewables there has to be storage. At that point the electricity market prices should become more constant to indicate a healthy market where supply meets demand. IOW: the core of the problem needs to be fixed, not the symptoms.

It can be excellent with some crucial changes: add a "lifeline" level of 1kW or so (implemented as the average usage of 1kWh in one hour, so peaks won't result in high charges) that will always be capped at a reasonably low price. Also a limit of how many hours in a day can the price be above a certain point. So the essentials will never cost a lot to run and large loads can be scheduled to some time of the day.

More than anything else, we should give incentive to build thermal storage for HVAC anywhere there's significant demand for HVAC since that's the simplest and most economical storage technology we have.

[Zucca]

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?

No where. I would turn the entire PV system off so it's not feeding excess back to the grid, and just run off batteries/grid alone.

I would rather the PV system be off, than be charged to use my own equipment. Unless of course they want to pay me back for part of the original cost.

A PHEV/BEV car with solar panel system is surely a good idea IMHO.
BTW: newer electric cars can have a bidirectional flow of energy: when the house call for it, the car can deliver some energy.

Downside: car needs to be parked at home during the day. For SWMBO car surely a possible scenario.

[vad]

A PHEV/BEV car with solar panel system is surely a good idea IMHO.
BTW: newer electric cars can have a bidirectional flow of energy: when the house call for it, the car can deliver some energy.

Downside: car needs to be parked at home during the day. For SWMBO car surely a possible scenario.

Get an EV for solar energy storage and keep the ICE vehicle for commuting to work. Brilliant idea! Solves the “range anxiety” problem too.

[nctnico]

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?

No where. I would turn the entire PV system off so it's not feeding excess back to the grid, and just run off batteries/grid alone.

I would rather the PV system be off, than be charged to use my own equipment. Unless of course they want to pay me back for part of the original cost.

A PHEV/BEV car with solar panel system is surely a good idea IMHO.
BTW: newer electric cars can have a bidirectional flow of energy: when the house call for it, the car can deliver some energy.

That is the worst idea ever. You are going to wear the most expensive part of a car. People saying the effect on the battery is benign are overlooking one simple fact: a battery has a limited amount of cycles c.q. total amount of energy it can store. So every kWh going in/out causes wear. A car with a highly used battery will simply be worth less just like a car with a high mileage. All in all, buying a seperate electricity storage system will always be more cost effective compared to using a car's battery. Especially since you could size the storage system up to capacities exceeding any car's capacity by far.

[PlainName]

Currently, why do you export to the grid? Is it because you just feel good about it or do you get paid for it, or get it back when the sun goes down, or what?

[David_AVD]

Currently, why do you export to the grid? Is it because you just feel good about it or do you get paid for it, or get it back when the sun goes down, or what?

The power I export to the grid is paid to me at a rate approx 20% of the rate I pay for power coming from the grid. Obviously self consumption is the key thing. Use as much of that solar power yourself first and draw as little as possible from the grid.

I moved the HWS from off-peak to a timer set to only run during the day. I also swapped out the HWS element to one half the power. It takes twice as long to heat (still only a few hours), but it means that the house consumption can stay under the generation curve even on less sunny days. Similarly if it's a really hot day I can turn the AC on remotely and pre-cool the house with solar power and then use minimal power to keep it cool after I get home.

The fixed daily charges keep creeping up of course. If the exports ever start to get charged for (costs me money), I would implement export limiting for sure.

[SiliconWizard]

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?

No where. I would turn the entire PV system off so it's not feeding excess back to the grid, and just run off batteries/grid alone.

I would rather the PV system be off, than be charged to use my own equipment. Unless of course they want to pay me back for part of the original cost.

Agreed. To be fair, and I don't know about your own case, but many such installations have been subsidised, so you got "paid" at some point already to have your installation (again, may not apply to you specifically).

The problem with this though is that money doesn't necessarily circulate in a fair way.

But other than just money, this is also a question of leading people on. They were told they would get money from the energy they would supply the grid, and for a while, they did. Then once there are enough people with solar installations, the deal starts to look much worse. In that, it's exactly like with any of the big tech companies, luring people in with attractive deals and once there are enough customers, and these are hooked, bam, they start changing the rules completely and start charging ludicrous amounts of money for the same service. They may justify it with plenty of relevant figures, but you can't help but feel scammed.

Technically, of course, sure the problem is all with the storage, but it's nothing new. Everybody knows that it's still an unsolved problem for the most part. One can just wish all professionals involved were honest about it to their customers, rather than lead them on constantly, just to get more users.

As a owner of such installation, all you can do is to try and focus most of your daily power consumption around peak solar hours. Yes, unfortunately, with typical modern life, it's often exactly the opposite, but there are still ways to optimize that, and yes, that's something you need to be responsible for when you start being a "producer" of electricity, rather than just a passive consumer.

And yes, as some have said, you can just turn it off entirely at peaks hours instead of feeding the grid and having to pay for it. Assuming that you actually can do that with the installation you got. But that is so obvious that if there are still lots of people angry, sure that may be because they are all stupid, but that may also mean that there's a little more to this tax than this. And well, tax creators are so, uh, creative, that I would also be extra wary of not being able to circumvent the tax as easily as it looks.

[Zucca]

That is the worst idea ever. You are going to wear the most expensive part of a car. People saying the effect on the battery is benign are overlooking one simple fact: a battery has a limited amount of cycles c.q. total amount of energy it can store. So every kWh going in/out causes wear. A car with a highly used battery will simply be worth less just like a car with a high mileage. All in all, buying a seperate electricity storage system will always be more cost effective compared to using a car's battery. Especially since you could size the storage system up to capacities exceeding any car's capacity by far.

Depends on how it is done, without numbers/spec. on the table how can you be so sure? Imagine 4 cars in the garage delivering max settable xC... when needed.
For example grid fails, EV cars powers the home until grid comes back. With an anti-Islanding system installed of course.

Anyway if it is so stupid go and talk with the EV car companies that are implementing such idiot idea.

[Zucca]

Get an EV for solar energy storage and keep the ICE vehicle for commuting to work. Brilliant idea! Solves the “range anxiety” problem too.

No. SWMBO will use during the day for grocery and come back 30/45min later in the garage.
 

[Halcyon]

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?

No where. I would turn the entire PV system off so it's not feeding excess back to the grid, and just run off batteries/grid alone.

I would rather the PV system be off, than be charged to use my own equipment. Unless of course they want to pay me back for part of the original cost.

If there is a good cause would you donate it?

Is making your own hot water a norm there?

I have a cold water and electrical everything.
Swimming pool under a house would be nice.
(insulated, for the winter)

Sure, if I could find some way of donating it, but aside from running an extension cord to my neighbours house, I don't see how I could.

Electric hot water tanks are common here, but so is gas. My home is plumbed to natural gas for cooking and instantaneous hot water (the gas burner only heats the water, as required, when the tap is on).

Currently, why do you export to the grid? Is it because you just feel good about it or do you get paid for it, or get it back when the sun goes down, or what?

I export to the grid because I have no where else to put or consume the excess power generated. Sure, I could run air conditioning off it during the day, but most days, I don't need to. Once it's exported, it's gone and no longer "mine" to consume. I get paid a. pittance for it, I think it's 7.5c/kWh. In summer, it only equates to about $30 off my total bill.

[tautech]

So what are our feasible grid storage options ?

Excluding some flammable battery solution. 

Or is it even necessary if existing generation was to be better managed ?

[nctnico]

So what are our feasible grid storage options ?

I keep an eye on hydrite (hydrogen + metal) based storage systems for home use. These are quite safe and compact. However, I don't think these will become affordable this decade.

Grid will likely use hydrogen in gas form based storage. https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/Energy-storage/Underground-hydrogen-storage

[tautech]

So what are our feasible grid storage options ?

I keep an eye on hydrite (hydrogen + metal) based storage systems for home use. These are quite safe and compact. However, I don't think these will become affordable this decade.

Grid will likely use hydrogen in gas form based storage. https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/Energy-storage/Underground-hydrogen-storage

The advantage with Hydrogen is it can also be used in modified ICE vehicles.

We in NZ had some recent discussion when a large smelter considered shutting down and the local grid supply to it was too large to inject into the national grid which didn't support transmission from its remote location.

So a Hydrogen generation plant was suggested to use the 800MW from Manapouri and export it as liquid Hydrogen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manapouri_Power_Station

Not sure the alternative energy industry is ready for this yet or even if Hydrogen power generation is sufficiently developed.