Eskom answers questions about Nersa's solar power user tariff plans and grid connection fees

[WollieVerstege]

Anyone who can come up with a way to hide a solar installation so the authorities can't find it will become a very rich person in South Africa.

Easy to hide a solar system, impossible to hide the drop in consumption.

 

[R13...]

What a load of garbage. Solar installations can only reduce load on the grid.

Nobody runs just the solar panels and doesn't have some sort of storage system for evenings and cloudy days.

This is just going to lead to people permanently disconnecting their grid feed.

Some of the companies who put up solar seem to only use it when the sun is up. They then use generators if the grid isn't available outside of sunshine times.

 

[McGuywer]

Some of the companies who put up solar seem to only use it when the sun is up. They then use generators if the grid isn't available outside of sunshine times.

The audacity!!!

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Easy to hide a solar system, impossible to hide the drop in consumption.

Not an issue, they asked us to reduce consumption didn't they? Now they want to charge us for listening to them.

All these arguments they're trying to make will fall flat when it eventually ends up in court...

 

[Benedict A55h0le]

We've long been City of Cape Town a fixed connection charge for the basic connect, irrespective of being a solar user or not. But it does sound very much like the Post Office = can't provide mandated service = loses revenue = abuses it's monopoly status.

The ANC gets their ideas from the successful extortion schemes run by the DA. They will be splitting up all tariffs between solar house and non-solar. A solar house will pay like a R750 grid connection fee and a non-solar house will pay R400 and the indigent house pays nothing. Pure socialist madness. Oh and more beauty to be had all these new unfair tariffs will also go up by the same rate as the elec price. Oh and by the way if you feed into the grid that price stays the same of what you receive, oh wait lets make that price less so you can get less back.

 

[WollieVerstege]

Not an issue, they asked us to reduce consumption didn't they? Now they want to charge us for listening to them.

All these arguments they're trying to make will fall flat when it eventually ends up in court...

Yeah, probably. But if your consumption drops by 90/95/100%, the only reason can be a solar system.
So you cannot install one unnoticed as the person I was replying to was asking.

 

[Magnum]

Sounds to me like there will be a number of guerrilla solar installations popping up in the near future…

Ya think.....You have no idea what is currently in my backyard.

 

[Benedict A55h0le]

Do the people of Cape Town demand refunds on the connection charge every time there is loadshedding? After all, during loadshedding you are being disconnected from the network

That is not how things work in a socialist DA utopia. In DA land the people are happy to pay more because they believe it is their social responsibility to hand over more money to the DA for their "social projects". I am clearly not a socialist, I need to flee.

 

[porchrat]

Some of the companies who put up solar seem to only use it when the sun is up. They then use generators if the grid isn't available outside of sunshine times.

Fair enough, but even so they're not increasing load on the system, they're decreasing load during the day and the load is the same as it would have been pre-solar in the evenings at worst.

Eskom talking out of their asses there.

 

[porchrat]

Do the people of Cape Town demand refunds on the connection charge every time there is loadshedding? After all, during loadshedding you are being disconnected from the network

If anything the DA is going to start to charge a service fee for the labour required to turn us on/off during loadshedding. Those switch-flickers don't work for free.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Yeah, probably. But if your consumption drops by 90/95/100%, the only reason can be a solar system.
So you cannot install one unnoticed as the person I was replying to was asking.

Sure, I just don't think it's anything to be concerned about just yet. This is just Eskom fear mongering to try and discourage new installations.

There's still too many unknowns to be considered:

• What do they define as a solar user? Someone with a solar geyser? 2 panels, 12 panels, 20 panels? Do they all pay the same price? If so, why?
• If the argument is about increasing peak evening loads when the sun sets, what about those with batteries to run the house at night? What justification is there to charge them based on their argument?
• As per the panel argument, the amount of batteries you have directly correlates with how much you might draw from the grid. Do they charge people with a higher capacity of batteries the same as people with smaller banks?
• How do they determine the size of battery banks for each households?
• If the weather is bad and/or there is load shedding, people charge their batteries during off peak periods to prepare for the peak periods when there is a higher risk of outage. This also kills their argument.

Could go on but there's simply too many legal obstacles to overcome. They're just having 30%-er brainstorming sessions, going to the media with it and hoping to discourage new installations for fear of being charged anyway.

The best they could get maybe away with is at a city level (like CoCT), in which case none of it goes to Eskom anyway. I say maybe, because should more municipalities start doing this, as more solar installations go up, it will bring CoCT's fee into the spotlight...

 

[Benedict A55h0le]

If anything the DA is going to start to charge a service fee for the labour required to turn us on/off during loadshedding. Those switch-flickers don't work for free.

It`s not cheap to process all those aerial photos either, the DA need their social funds to uphold the social system.

 

[Corelli]

Dont worry the city of its Cape Town with its Bylaws will slap you with soo many rules about using solar panels, you will just give up. I know of a user that can run 10MW or power but limited by the City to only 1MW

 

[Benedict A55h0le]

Sure, I just don't think it's anything to be concerned about just yet. This is just Eskom fear mongering to try and discourage new installations.

There's still too many unknowns to be considered:

• What do they define as a solar user? Someone with a solar geyser? 2 panels, 12 panels, 20 panels? Do they all pay the same price? If so, why?
• If the argument is about increasing peak evening loads when the sun sets, what about those with batteries to run the house at night? What justification is there to charge them based on their argument?
• As per the panel argument, the amount of batteries you have directly correlates with how much you might draw from the grid. Do they charge people with a higher capacity of batteries the same as people with smaller banks?
• How do they determine the size of battery banks for each households?
• If the weather is bad and/or there is load shedding, people charge their batteries during off peak periods to prepare for the peak periods when there is a higher risk of outage. This also kills their argument.

Could go on but there's simply too many legal obstacles to overcome. They're just having 30%-er brainstorming sessions, going to the media with it and hoping to discourage new installations for fear of being charged anyway.

The best they could get maybe away with is at a city level (like CoCT), in which case none of it goes to Eskom anyway. I say maybe, because should more municipalities start doing this, as more solar installations go up, it will bring CoCT's fee into the light...

They already have all these things covered in their by-laws. And believe me it`s all madness designed to prevent you from escaping a high household bill because of your solar system. Maybe someone will fight them in court, but the fact that the DA could get away with new levy taxes opened up the path for governance to extort money via the household bill any way they seem fit.

 

[Corelli]

Do the people of Cape Town demand refunds on the connection charge every time there is loadshedding? After all, during loadshedding you are being disconnected from the network

No but the city severely will limit your use of solar using bylaws.

 

[Aslandrian]

"It is possible that additional work may be required by Eskom to ensure the solar installation is a technically compliant connection"

Yeah, that would need a lot of work, Buddy Spokesperson. Eskom cant even demonstrate its own technical compliance in using a toothbrush.

 

[Hicklethumb]

The only business that gets to charge you for not using their product.

 

[TimTDP]

I wouldn't have invested in solar if Eskom was properly managed.
They used to be one of the cheapest in the world, had lots of excess capacity, and were reliable.

And then came the anc........

 

[maumau]

Yeah, probably. But if your consumption drops by 90/95/100%, the only reason can be a solar system.
So you cannot install one unnoticed as the person I was replying to was asking.

Household dropped from 5 adults to 1 adult when everyone emigrated so consumption dropped suddenly.
.
.
.
P.S. They came back but not to live with me

 

[mypetcow]

Ya think.....You have no idea what is currently in my backyard.

My point exactly