Roof Solar Panels For Your House

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Ace

Here is the trick (learned this from an ex-enmax employee). If you get a solar system installed by enmax, they only credit you the usage charge (not variable fees) that you give back to the grid (they put on a new meter to your house).

If you happened to install it yourself what it would do is actually turn your existing meter backwards. This reduces your total usage, which is important because many of the fees are tied to your usage.

Basically Enmax installed = 7 cents (or whatever) credit
Self installed = 7 cents + variable fees

I'm not sure if there is a legal requirement to notify enmax, essentially you'd only be modifying the electricity in your home (past the enmax infrastructure)...

I've looked into this extensively. It's against the rules to run your meter backwards, as the variable fees are still there. I could probably talk myself into that not being a big deal, but there is also a safety issue.

If your system isn't properly installed, you have the risk of creating "islanding" where your generation keeps a portion of the grid energized during a blackout. That is a potential safety risk for power linemen, and I'm not sure what woul happen if your illegally installed generation equipment hurt someone, bit it wouldn't be good.

All that being said you have a properly installed grid tied, anti islanding U/L listed inverter, I think it's very likely you'd get away with it, especially if you don't go nuts on the sizing of the system. (If your meter goes backwards in total during July enmax will notice)

[Ace]

^i think the key thing here is enmax is ridiculous to not bill on a net usage basis. It's a cash grab, if you are generating power back to enmax no way you should pay fees on what you pull and not get those back on what you push.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by Ace

If you happened to install it yourself what it would do is actually turn your existing meter backwards. This reduces your total usage, which is important because many of the fees are tied to your usage.

I'm not sure if there is a legal requirement to notify enmax, essentially you'd only be modifying the electricity in your home (past the enmax infrastructure)...

It should be picked up by the Validation systems as a change in historical consumption and upon investigation would be identified and replaced with a bi-directional meter.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

It should be picked up by the Validation systems as a change in historical consumption and upon investigation would be identified and replaced with a bi-directional meter.

Hypothetically, you could add panels one or two at a time so the change was gradual.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Hypothetically, you could add panels one or two at a time so the change was gradual.

You could yes

also - one month where you generate more than you consume and now you have a meter rollover which also flags validation. Or a Meter Reader who notices you have panels but no bi-directional meter etc...

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Ace

^i think the key thing here is enmax is ridiculous to not bill on a net usage basis. It's a cash grab, if you are generating power back to enmax no way you should pay fees on what you pull and not get those back on what you push.

How the hell does that even begin to make sense?! You should pay the fees both ways. You wouldn't be able to sell back to the grid without Enmax's wires. That ain't free.

[Ace]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

How the hell does that even begin to make sense?! You should pay the fees both ways. You wouldn't be able to sell back to the grid without Enmax's wires. That ain't free.

Makes sense to me. If I'm only using 300kw total, that's my usage. I pay all the fixed fees, and it's already been determined that the other fees are usage dependant. Plus it's so uneconomical to put in solar, why wouldn't they incentivize it.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by accord1999

A Calgarian on reddit posted their experience in this detailed article:

http://imgur.com/a/aJ4BG

Lol, bonus feature made me laugh pretty hard.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Ace

Makes sense to me. If I'm only using 300kw total, that's my usage. I pay all the fixed fees, and it's already been determined that the other fees are usage dependant. Plus it's so uneconomical to put in solar, why wouldn't they incentivize it.

But that's not your usage of Enmax lines. Solar peak production is around noon but peak consumption is late afternoon to mid-evening. Basically you're using Enmax as an incredibly reliable and high capacity battery and you consume only a fraction of your solar generation.

Plus it's so uneconomical to put in solar, why wouldn't they incentivize it.

Better yet since it's so uneconomical there's no reason to incentivize it all and any subsidies (if any) for solar should be at the utility scale.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

You could yes

also - one month where you generate more than you consume and now you have a meter rollover which also flags validation. Or a Meter Reader who notices you have panels but no bi-directional meter etc...

Pretty much. FYI I decided against this for a variety of reasons, but I think it's pretty likely you'd get away with a small system.

At least in my case my meter is on the back of my house facing north, I'd put panels on the front facing south, so the 2 seconds the meter guy spends in my back alley isn't likely to correlate with panels on the front.

You definitely would have to size small enough that you never went negative, which would reduce the size of what you could do substantially, and I think doing it without a proper anti-islanding grid tie UL rated inverter with automatic shut-off would be very unethical due to the potential danger.

Anyway, I definitely don't recommend doing it without telling the utility, if you're going to do solar, pay the variable charges on the energy you need and sell the energy at what they give you. I still might get one properly installed (I have a big south facing roof at a 45 degree angle), but I'm waiting to see if the NDP comes out with some crazy incentives to pay for it for me.

[PaperBagger'14]

I'm going to chime in and highly advise against installing solar at this time. About 8 months ago I designed a system for my friends home which took into account winters minimum solar insolation values and was capable of fully powering his house. His cost was around $45000 with a 40 year return on investment. The one big assumption (to my knowledge) that people are making is that as electricity costs go up, the refund pricing from enmax will as well.

I do not believe (I am not certain however) that enmax has any obligation to raise their buy back rate with increased electricity costs. The next thing to be weary of is the expected lifetime of your solar panels, here's a hint, it's closer to 20 years at 80% rated output. At 40 years this should be drastically reduced, prolonging the ROI period.

Battery storage systems come with their own headaches too. Life expectancy issues, battery maintenance schedules and controller issues would highly dissuade me from doing that.

Would I install PV cells in a remote location such as a cabin where usage is minimal? You bet. At my primary residence while viewing it as an investment and expecting a return? Not a chance. If your reasoning is more holistic and to lessen your usage, well go knock your socks off, but the odds are you won't be making or saving a whole bunch (especially if you take out a loan to do it).

[bizaro86]

The alberta microgeneration regulation requires a retailer (including enmax) to buy your power back at whatever they are charging you for energy.

[V]

Do they not have AMI in Calgary yet?

I would strongly recommend against tampering with meters. I don't know how the system works down there, but it would not go well for you up here.

[Calgary14]

Provincial government announced a new rebate program that will lower the cost of residential solar panels by up to 30%. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...sses-1.4002193

[DoubleK]

Let me guess, this will be funded through the Carbon Levy...

[Slava]

Well the announcement is just that it's coming, but no details are out at this point. I did have a laugh at the removing 100,000 cars from the road line though. I mean sure, these are panels for your roof and have nothing to do with vehicles, but apparently that's the going measurement.

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Let me guess, this will be funded through the Carbon Levy...

Yup, so thanks ndp.....don't forget that in addition to the 100,000 vehicles off the road they will be creating 900 new jobs.....

[DoubleK]

I can't wait until I can get to work and do errands via my subsidized roof-mounted solar panel.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well the announcement is just that it's coming, but no details are out at this point. I did have a laugh at the removing 100,000 cars from the road line though. I mean sure, these are panels for your roof and have nothing to do with vehicles, but apparently that's the going measurement.

You should probably re-read the article if that's what your interpretation was. They didn't say they were taking 100k cars off the road, they just said that the amount they will be reducing greenhouse gas emissions would be the equivalent of taking 100k cars off the road.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Let me guess, this will be funded through the Carbon Levy...

Of course. Where else is going to get the money