3 ms·

I mean sure but right now in the UK you can only add one 800W source without planning permissions. I'm just not sure what we're trying to say here - can someon

I mean sure but right now in the UK you can only add one 800W source without planning permissions. I'm just not sure what we're trying to say here - can someone create a dangerous situation for themselves by ignoring the rules? Yeah of course. My example above was for a 32+ amp source(or a collection of sources) which can operate with the grid off, like most battery systems in the UK can - they just have a relay that disconnects the grid when the grid is offline. So it's not illegal, but it's also something that would require a planning permission to have. Can someone just go any buy themselves 10x800W modules, plug them all into one ring and burn their house down? Yes,but that was never a legal setup in the first place.

angry_octet 2mo ago
Traditionally we have been quite prescriptive about what people can do electrically on their side of the meter, in the name of protecting people from themselves. (Even with a grid isolation switch.) Allowing generation that isn't wired in by a licensed electrician is a big change in regulation, so people are jittery and vested interests are using that. So it isn't no risk and it isn't a huge risk. Some people will do stupid things. I think we could do more to protect people using plug-in generation, and simultaneously improve grid regulation and reduce costs. As engineers I think we are duty bound to achieve these objectives, but accountants run energy companies now and donate to politicians, and politicians run policy. What we have left is technical innovation that creates economic impetus. So I'm in favour of technology that makes low cost PV+storage safe and available, economically and with just enough regulation. With the US banning Chinese inverters, it will be interesting to see if that spawns new tech, or if they just licence build/assemble Chinese junk. Prices will be higher initially but competition should be strong. Unfortunately US standards for software/interoperability seem absent. IEEE 2030.5 is not nationally mandated in the US AFAIK, and it is weak on cyber assurance. IEEE 2030.5 is also designed for grid to consumer and doesn't anticipate having multiple PV devices that need to talk, let alone batteries. The Germans just exempted everything below 960W, so people routinely have several panels plugged in.

angry_octet 2mo ago

Traditionally we have been quite prescriptive about what people can do electrically on their side of the meter, in the name of protecting people from themselves. (Even with a grid isolation switch.) Allowing generation that isn't wired in by a licensed electrician is a big change in regulation, so people are jittery and vested interests are using that. So it isn't no risk and it isn't a huge risk. Some people will do stupid things. I think we could do more to protect people using plug-in generation, and simultaneously improve grid regulation and reduce costs. As engineers I think we are duty bound to achieve these objectives, but accountants run energy companies now and donate to politicians, and politicians run policy. What we have left is technical innovation that creates economic impetus. So I'm in favour of technology that makes low cost PV+storage safe and available, economically and with just enough regulation. With the US banning Chinese inverters, it will be interesting to see if that spawns new tech, or if they just licence build/assemble Chinese junk. Prices will be higher initially but competition should be strong. Unfortunately US standards for software/interoperability seem absent. IEEE 2030.5 is not nationally mandated in the US AFAIK, and it is weak on cyber assurance. IEEE 2030.5 is also designed for grid to consumer and doesn't anticipate having multiple PV devices that need to talk, let alone batteries. The Germans just exempted everything below 960W, so people routinely have several panels plugged in.