This was posted 7 years 26 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

AGL’s Virtual Power Plant - $3,849 [Metropolitan Adelaide Only & Other Conditions Apply] [Limited Offering Initially]

630
AGL’s Virtual Power Plant - $3,849 [Metropolitan Adelaide Only & Other Conditions Apply] [Limited Offering Initially]
Go to Deal
John Dough on 31/03/2017 - 12:57 aglsolar.com.au (2740 clicks)
Last edited 31/03/2017 - 12:57

AGL is building the world’s largest virtual power plant of its kind, which once completed will be made up of 1,000 connected batteries. It’s one of the latest innovations in solar energy, set to revolutionise how South Australians power their lives.*

Join the second phase of AGL’s virtual power plant, and get an innovative Sunverge 11.6kWh battery for a fraction of its usual price. Enjoy cutting-edge battery technology for only $3,849,* and save more than $25,000.** Power your life with solar energy at night or during blackouts,^ and help reduce your energy bills by using less power from the grid.

Home & Garden AGL Solar Solar Battery Solar Energy System

Related Stores

aglsolar.com.au
aglsolar.com.au

closed Comments

  • dasher86 on 31/03/2017 - 13:15
    +2

    sounds pretty good but it's like they are making customers pay for a solution for them not to invest in infrastructure and maintenance of the existing grid.

    • Pootie Tang on 31/03/2017 - 13:23
      +13

      Its not up to AGL to front up for infrastructure. They are a retail business with generation interests.

    • JohnHowardsEyebrows on 31/03/2017 - 14:52
      +10

      Learn how the market works.

      • [Deactivated] on 31/03/2017 - 15:43
        +26

        The big end of town will always screw over the little guy?

        AGL locks you into their supply charge for 5ura, which is where they make their money.

        Then it appears that you have to pay them an additional $900 to actually access the power stored in tour battery (wtf?)

        But the kicker is when demand for power soikes & out strips supply, they can tap into your battery, only give you your FIT rate (8c/kw) but sell it on the open market for a substantial markup. Or for the AGL customers who are on TOU plan, they can release the power from your battery when its most profitable.

        Oh and they pay no rent for having their little battery farm on your property.

        Good luck to them, but the market(ing) works well if your from the big end of town. Like Dasher said, it looks like they're trying to convince you to pay for their infrastructure investment. Its a win-win for AGL, but only a partial win for those who install this, but only if they stump up for the extra $900.

        • [Deactivated] on 02/04/2017 - 18:22

          probably for people who don't read the fine print and/or cannot afford the initial financial outlay.

          Yup, still big end of town screwing over the little guy. They only do that because they can.

  • ChrisLevo on 31/03/2017 - 13:20
    +41

    Ours was installed on the 3rd March, and we paid the extra to go to the battery if there is a power outage.

    We received a 7.5kWh battery, but it will be upgraded at no charge to the 11.6kWh battery in July.

    Figures for this month (first full month of operation) are 619kWh produced, 380kWh consumed, and savings of $119.

    There was a localised planned outage this week for some maintenance, and our battery kicked in giving us TV, PC and cold beers while everyone else in the street was out of power:-)

    Pretty much a no-brainer at the price, we reckoned.

    • unifex on 31/03/2017 - 13:38
      +1

      Doesn't include panels though right ?

    • Scab on 31/03/2017 - 13:40
      +4

      Problem is the supply charge.

      I don't use much electricity as it's just me, so 80% of my bill is supply.

      I would have to go completely off the grid for this to be viable.

      • Transparent on 31/03/2017 - 13:46
        +2

        Similar to my gas bill - $105 / qtr and $66 of that is supply :(

        • Jackson on 01/04/2017 - 13:12

          Get your own gas tanks and fill them at the servo

        • Transparent on 01/04/2017 - 13:25

          At first I dismissed this as a dumb idea….. now I'm thinking about it!
          Need to find out how many Cubic Metres of gas in a bottle.
          @Jackson:

        • Zephyrus on 01/04/2017 - 16:26

          @just-dave:

          You'll need to get all your appliances refit, the LPG and natural gas need different air/gas mixtures.

        • Jackson on 01/04/2017 - 19:08

          @just-dave: I know a few people who do this, it's way cheaper but yes you need to get the appliances fixed for LPG

        • Transparent on 01/04/2017 - 21:15

          @Jackson:
          We only have 1 appliance! The cook-top!!

        • Jackson on 02/04/2017 - 00:23

          @just-dave: so the way to do it is buy 2 9kg bottles for around 30 bucks, get the cook top converted to LPG and a gas fitter to change from piped to having the two bottles outside somewhere, hopefully your cooktop is against the outside wall but if not the pipes have to get outside some place. Any time one bottle finishes, you just pop outside, switch it over and voila

        • tunzafun001 on 02/04/2017 - 20:28

          @Jackson: what about those large lpg tanks you can get from industrial gas suppliers (guessing 150L each). Mate had 2 on his house. I recon he said it cost him $80 every 3 years.

        • Jackson on 03/04/2017 - 08:02

          @tunzafun001: i think either you aren't supposed to be allowed to fill those or the price is disproportionately expensive, although what you really want is the ability to fill up at car LPG prices, I think there's an adaptor for that if you can find somewhere that turns a blind eye

        • tunzafun001 on 03/04/2017 - 09:37

          @Jackson:

          Yes…there definitely is (though I would assume he would have just made a setup from an old car LPG set up), as he lies the big tanks down in the back of a ute and then just drives up and fills them up like he is filling up the car. Just make sure you incorporate the proper pressure relief/ over fill valves etc.

      • Hellman109 on 01/04/2017 - 22:53

        The supply charge differs with many retaillers, might be worth shopping around for a better deal

    • Geekomatic on 31/03/2017 - 13:43

      So, what was your total outlay to get going (w/7.5 battery)?

      Wondering how long for the savings to pay you for that?

      Ta!

      PS: having power when no one else does is pretty sweet….we just had a "planned outage" that lasted nearly 7 hours!

    • ChrisLevo on 31/03/2017 - 14:06
      +12

      Answers to some questions from below.

      1. We already had a 5.8kW PVA system, and it paid for itself in a little under 2 years, when our feed-in tariff was $0.21 per kWh.
        It's now $0.08 per kWh, and we pay $0.3327 per kWh when we drew from the grid, which we should never do again.

      2. Supply charge is $0.709 per day, which is way less than what we are saving by drawing nothing from the grid.
        I guess that keeps the infrastructure going, so not going to sook about it.

      3. We were in the first 150 to take up the offer, so paid a little less than the next lot.
        From the final quote:
        Sunverge 7.7 kWh battery (with post install upgrade to 11.6 kWh)
        • 7.7kWh Sunverge battery
        • Standard installation by a qualified electrician
        • 10 years energy storage monitoring and management services
        • 10 year manufacturer’s warranty
        • 5 year participation in the virtual power plant
        $3,499

      Additional products and services
      • Battery Active Link
      • Battery SWITCHBOARD CONFIG
      • Free Single Phase digital meter
      • Grid backup power option
      • Installation of a neutral bar
      $1,157

      Total $4,656, and the extra was to get the "switch to battery when their is an outage and my beer will get warm" option.
      Our switchboard has had a lot of changes in the last 41 years, so it was almost a start over job.

      Assuming that the feed-in tariff does not increase (and the rumour is that the SA Government is thinking of increasing it to encourage people to buy systems like ours), then probably somewhere from 5 to 7 years.

      However, we will then have a house that will never see power bills, and we will be well into our retirement by then, and really happy not to pay what huge price electricity bills will be by then.

      • Hirolol on 31/03/2017 - 16:21
        +2

        You would think they would increase the feed in Tarif to give people an incentive to buy solar panels.
        These guys make enough money.

        • WhyAmICommenting on 31/03/2017 - 22:08

          Haha thanks for the last sentence!

        • OzzyOzbourne on 01/04/2017 - 00:13

          The power companies lose money when people generate their own electricity and they make big political 'donations'. So now solar power is disincentivised.

        • Hirolol on 01/04/2017 - 12:17

          @OzzyOzbourne:
          I would think that buying power from the coal or hydro generating company would be more expensive than paying ordinary people with solar ponals through the feed-in tariff system.
          Is that not true? Who really knows those figures anyway….

          I understand that they would lose money from people not paying for electricity at all once they have solar panels installed but They lose money from people leaving too so it's all part of it, hell if a particular company was known for paying more than others people would go there, but sadly that's not how it works it it.

    • [Deactivated] on 31/03/2017 - 14:16

      Do you know why the consumption is less than production? Are you covering your entire usage?

      • ChrisLevo on 31/03/2017 - 14:59
        +5

        The system easily covers our consumption during the day, plus charges the battery to 100%.

        The battery still has way more than 50% charge left in the morning, so no need to ever draw from the grid.

        It won't be as good during the winter (although today has been overcast, and we have still nearly generated double what we have consumed), but we will still be in the black.

  • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 13:48
    +12

    Interesting offer, and very tempting on face value. I'll do some sums for my situation:

    FIT of 6.8c/kWh, imported power at around 30c/kWh. Assuming an 80% depth of discharge for the battery pack every day, that's 9.3kWh I can use instead of export. During winter on cloudy days my panels may produce much less than that, but let's keep it simple.

    9.3kWh exported at 6.8c * 365 days = $230
    9.3kWh used from battery pack at 30c * 365 days = $1018

    Subtract $230 from $1018 and my theoretical saving is $788 per year, probably under near ideal conditions (discharging the battery 80% every night).

    $3849 / $788 = 4.9 years to achieve pay back, assuming FIT and power prices don't rise. Not including interest, and being locked into AGL.

    365 days * 4.9 = 1788 deep depth discharges. I don't know about the sunverge product, but many others are warrantied to around 3000 cycles of 90%, so after pay back there's a decent amount of life left.

    Still, 4.9 years for ROI. I think I'll wait.

    • EagleLanded on 31/03/2017 - 14:10
      +3

      Thank you; this is very good info.

    • smoo on 31/03/2017 - 14:59
      +9

      at 4.9 years for return on investment that works out to be 15%pa which is a pretty good investment return for the little risk that I can see.

      • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 15:08
        +7

        That's another way to look at it. After ~5 years you have the equipment for free and start earning the first dollar. However for me that's too long to wait to start earning money. Risks include the batteries degrading as they age and are used. I would be interested to see what sort of capacity guarantees Sunverge offers. It stores 11.6kWh now, but won't store 11.6kWh in 5 years time. The Nissan Leaf for example loses about 1 bar of range on its meter per 18 to 24 months. It starts with 12 bars.

        http://livingleaf.info/2015/05/lets-talk-about-battery-degra…

        'On a final note, it seems that time is a bigger factor impacting battery degradation than are miles. '

        That's obviously a car instead of a household battery supply, but the same technology applies.

        Another risk is that in 2 years time a product with double the storage for half the price may be on the market. Achieving ROI faster with more capacity than installing it today and paying 2 years of interest.

        • callum9999 on 31/03/2017 - 16:37
          +5

          Though of course you're also valuing the environment (and having a bank up power system) at $0 in that analysis.

          Granted most people do the same in this country, but if you're someone who cares about the environment/air quality its something to consider.

        • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 16:46

          @callum9999: Environmental benefits are difficult to calculate, but they would certainly be there and are important. I am interested in both moving away from fossil fuels and the rational economic case for doing so.

          In my case I think this offer is interesting and very welcome, but I will be waiting to see what the competition offers. There's always a sweet spot for adopting technology. For SA solar PV owners it was just before September 2011, when the extremely generous FIT offer expired.

        • callum9999 on 31/03/2017 - 17:17

          @Cluster: Yeah I definitely agree that was much better, but you could be waiting forever for the next sweet spot missing out on the benefits in the meantime!

        • tunzafun001 on 31/03/2017 - 18:16
          +3

          @callum9999:

          Is it better for the environment though?

          Those batteries have to be made from raw materials that are dug out of the ground and transported, refined and transported, processed and transported, constructed then transported to a wholesale/ retail area, then transported again before they end up in your home. A fair carbon footprint it needs to offset.

          Why can't we harness wind, solar, tidal, wave, solar heat (See my full post below) and then harness it using more raw methods like (liquid salt) and using current water storage and water ways.

        • callum9999 on 31/03/2017 - 19:29

          @tunzafun001: Yes.

          I doubt the existing waterways are currently suitable for such projects, but there's no reason why any of that can't happen - this certainly isn't going to stop it.

        • tunzafun001 on 31/03/2017 - 22:15

          @callum9999

          Could generate a lot of power with the movement of water through the Murray and the gulfs alone.

        • jemichae on 31/03/2017 - 23:37

          @cluster:
          Don't forget to escalate the electricity unit costs in your ROI calcs.
          Whilst the unit price may be 30c today, over 5 years, that will surely increase significantly.

  • lomie on 31/03/2017 - 13:52

    Not eligible if you are currently on a government solar bonus scheme feed-in tariff

  • lomie on 31/03/2017 - 13:54
    +1

    Can I use my battery to power my home through a blackout?

    Yes. AGL’s Sunverge SIS 11.6 kWh battery is blackout protection ready, and can help power your appliances in the event of a power outage with additional work completed at your switchboard by a qualified AGL installer. Blackout protection can be enabled for an additional $899 (GST incl.), and requires sufficient excess energy being available in your battery at the time of a power outage event. During the power outage your battery will not be charged by the solar PV system.

    • resisting the urge on 31/03/2017 - 14:51

      Hardly a power plant if it can't use the cells when the grid is off. Only a power company would think that's a reasonable limitation ;-)

      So let me get this right, we buy a 7.7kWh Sunverge battery
      • Standard installation by a qualified electrician
      • 10 years energy storage monitoring and management services
      • 10 year manufacturer’s warranty
      • 5 year participation in the virtual power plant

      And what do they do, hang it off a wall in the garage? If the battery has a fault, how quickly will they notice and warn you? After 10 years, where will the alerts go? What if they mis-configure their alerts, or don't set them up right, can it explode?

      They're a great idea, but high energy batteries are massively dangerous, consider them in a separate concrete building designed to contain an explosion and give you time to evacuate is a good idea. One bad cell could result in a few seconds to evacuate if the thing is located inside the average house.

      • Rumbaar on 31/03/2017 - 15:00
        +1

        Yeah, I had the same issue when power would go out during the day and was producing enough via Solar. But they say it's to ensure that power isn't being supplied back if there are issues on the grid and reason for the power outage. But the smart switch should be able to handle that.

        Also remember AGL will be drawing any/if not all excess power. So you'll be not doing much time shift of power costs. Still sell back for 6c to buy back at 30c+

        • resisting the urge on 31/03/2017 - 15:06
          +1

          Indeed, the system could switch the grid delivery off both ways when the grid voltage dips. But someone lobbied the gubmint to make sure the regulations shut off all solar generation instead.

          The Clean Energy Alliance showed its dirty stripes when it did that, and also when introducing regulations that make existing inverters obsolete and non-re-usable. Which is a big thing for anyone that has one, as they certainly aren't recyclable.

          Seems the CEC is more of an allegiance of the status quo than an advocate for clean energy.

          But I digress, these batteries could explode even if their alerting systems works and they notice the alert at the time (esp. once they outsource that function to a SE Asian call centre which may or may not notice).

          For the moment, they may subcontract it to Engie who could provide the service using a few of its staff from Hazelwood whilst claiming a tax write-off for 'retraining'.

        • abb on 03/04/2017 - 08:35

          @zerovelocity: "the system could switch the grid delivery off both ways when the grid voltage dips" - umm, yes, that's what the $900 extra feature does. Is $900 a rip-off? Undoubtedly. They discount the base model then entice you with over-priced upgrades, it's one of the oldest sales tricks in the book.

          It's no grand conspiracy, extra electronics are required to perform the "islanding" function. It has to ensure with absolute certainty that no electricity is fed back into a black grid (may endanger workers, will overload your inverter when it tries to power your whole street), has to re-sync your inverter with the grid before reconnecting, etc. And they must be very reliable, which means expensive to make.

      • Diji1 on 31/03/2017 - 15:34
        +1

        They're a great idea, but high energy batteries are massively dangerous, consider them in a separate concrete building designed to contain an explosion and give you time to evacuate is a good idea. One bad cell could result in a few seconds to evacuate if the thing is located inside the average house.

        You have no idea what you're talking about rofl.

        • resisting the urge on 31/03/2017 - 16:04

          No? What do you mean exactly, Chemistry or Science or electronics… maybe evolution? Oh, perhaps maybe religion then?

      • [Deactivated] on 31/03/2017 - 15:45
        +1

        Now I know who bought up all those Samsung S7s.

  • jv on 31/03/2017 - 14:13
    +1

    AGL’s Virtual Power Plant

    Hazelwood?

    • froodh on 31/03/2017 - 16:34
      +1

      Torrens Island

  • iceborg on 31/03/2017 - 14:13

    Darn it, not moving into our house until June! Otherwise I'd be all over this

  • dlakers3peat on 31/03/2017 - 14:14

    hopefully this offer will be available in Sydney very soon

    • xuqi on 31/03/2017 - 14:18
      +1

      Nah, Malcolm el al will ship you lumps of Coal to enjoy.

      http://i63.tinypic.com/biseuv.jpg

      • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 14:28
        +4

        But it will be Clean Coal, so all good.

        • scrimshaw on 31/03/2017 - 14:46
          +1

          Coal is so clean, they put it into tablets that you can swallow, and market them as detoxifying elixirs of health.

          Surely there is nothing wrong with burning coal if you can eat coal, right? (Trump nods)

        • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 14:53

          @scrimshaw: Only if they're near pure carbon with a binding agent. I don't think anyone swallows tablets made of anthracite.

        • scrimshaw on 31/03/2017 - 14:55
          +3

          @Cluster:

          oh, you and your scientific alternative facts, and logical thinking. We don't need that in politics.

        • cannedhams on 31/03/2017 - 16:29

          @scrimshaw: How is Thomas going to pull Annie and Clarabel without coal? If it were up to you greenies he'd be sent to the smelter's yard. You should be ashamed of yourselves, you bastards.

        • xuqi on 31/03/2017 - 16:31

          @scrimshaw:

          They're all busy studying Trumpsonian Institute papers.

      • cannedhams on 31/03/2017 - 16:27
        +2

        Fifty years from now, my grandkids will ask me: "but what were our leaders doing Daddy?" "Funny you ask, sport, they were sitting in their government benches, hunched over, fiddling with their little lumps of coal".

  • vjknight on 31/03/2017 - 14:32

    how old are these batteries - released when ?

    have they been superseded ?

    • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 14:43
      +3

      If battery technology falls in price as fast as solar PV fell over the past 10 years, I expect we'll see prices plummet over the coming years. A friend installed 1kWh of solar PV in 2009 and it cost $8000 before government rebates ($1k after rebates). $8k can buy you a 10kWh system today.

      • Agret on 31/03/2017 - 15:07
        +1

        With the battery developments by Tesla focusing on home solar stuff I imagine that prices will fall. Renewable energy is definitely the way to go but you may be best waiting for the battery tech to catchup so that you can get a faster ROI

      • abb on 03/04/2017 - 08:37

        Minor correction: solar panels are rated in kW (power), batteries are rated in kWh (energy).

  • noramando on 31/03/2017 - 14:56
    +5

    Just out of curiosity, why do most Aussies are so intimidated by nuclear power? Most developed countries understand the need of power to increase productivity and lower the production cost. Yet in Australia we are still stuck in this coal and power shortage saga. There must be a balance for the environmentalist and productivity. I live in Sydney and I am counting the cost of Solar panels damaged by recent hail storms ie. the lost of energy production.

      • Agret on 31/03/2017 - 15:09
        +4

        That was caused by a tsunami. I think nuclear power would be great for Victoria as we don't get the wild weather seen up north in QLD. It's much cleaner than coal energy and Australia has the worlds biggest uranium deposits so I have no idea why we aren't taking advantage of this to power our nation instead of just exporting it all.

      • noramando on 31/03/2017 - 15:14

        I suppose I cannot complain about the high energy bill now.

    • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 15:13
      +2

      Nuclear plants are extremely expensive to build. Today Toshiba had to sell much of its memory unit as they've racked up billions in losses over their Westinghouse purchase. There is a general worldwide move away from nuclear. Germany is giving it up, Japan has restarted just a few plants, USA is building a few but the projects are billions of dollars over their budgets. Very few people are willing to accept high level waste for long term storage. Most is just kept in spent fuel pools of reactors.

      And when the plants go boom, we don't have the technology to clean up the building. Containing it and waiting seems the best we can do.

      I visited Chernobyl last year and generally am a supporter of nuclear power, but the problems associated with it and the public's distrust of government and industry is a huge hurdle.

      • aussieprepper on 31/03/2017 - 15:32
        +1

        Not to mention all the little problems npp have that cause radioactive leaks. They are allowed to release a certain amount of radioactive subsistences on a regular basis.
        Nuclear power is dead Toshiba is dropping nuclear after losing like 4 billion USD. Westinghouse nuclear filed for bankruptcy a few days ago.
        Japan won't restart any more reactors. France is phasing out nuclear the incident a few months back left elevated levels of radioactive iodine around Europe. All plants are off-line in Germany around the world more npp are closing then opening.

        • abb on 03/04/2017 - 08:38

          They are allowed to release a certain amount of radioactive subsistences on a regular basis.

          Whereas coal plants have no such limit, and release substantial amounts of radiation in their exhaust gases (plus many other nasty chemicals).

      • [Deactivated] on 31/03/2017 - 15:45
        +3

        Australia is probably the most suited country in the world for nuclear power, build it in North VIC or North SA where is literally no single major weather event… oh and not to mention of that sweet fuel we export..

        • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 15:54

          Nuclear plants are always located near large water sources for cooling water, so north SA is out. They also should be located near the major area of electricity consumption, so putting the plant far away from everyone leads to added transmission line losses. And there's always someone living somewhere that will kick up a NIMBY fuss.

          Mururoa atoll, where the French conducted nuclear tests in the 1990s was considered to be Australia's 'backyard' by protesters, and that's 8700km away from the center of Australia. Any planned nuclear plant anywhere in Australia would be considered the kitchen table by BANANAs.

          North SA is an ideal waste dump area, and look how difficult even something as relatively simple as that is to achieve.

        • aussieprepper on 31/03/2017 - 17:35

          Every single purposed location is next to a fairly dense population area. You can find studies that living within a certain distance of NPP will give you a much greater risk of cancer without any accidents. Its a German government study.
          Queensland:
          Townsville
          Mackay
          Rockhampton (e.g. around Yeppoon, Emu Park or Keppel Sands)
          Bundaberg
          Gladstone
          Sunshine Coast (e.g. near Maroochydore, Coolum or Noosa)
          Bribie Island area

          New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory:
          Port Stephens (e.g. Nelson Bay)
          Central Coast (e.g. near Tuggerah Lakes)
          Port Kembla
          Botany Bay
          Jervis Bay and Sussex Inlet

          Victoria:
          South Gippsland (e.g. Yarram, Woodside, Seaspray)
          Western Port (e.g. French Island, Hastings, Kooweerup, Coronet Bay)
          Port Phillip (e.g. Newport, Werribee, Avalon)
          Portland

          South Australia:
          Mt Gambier/Millicent
          Port Adelaide
          Port Augusta and Port Pirie

    • scupper on 31/03/2017 - 16:23
      +3

      Here's an article on the Westinghouse bankruptcy.

      Nuclear plants are expensive when you also have to consider security, decommissioning and waste management costs. Then include that there are only a handful of experts in the field, the risk of Stuxnet-style damage with cyber-war increasingly becoming feasible, renewables and batteries becoming cheaper, the economics for nuclear is not looking very good.

    • cannedhams on 31/03/2017 - 16:31

      There's only about enough uranium in the world to supply base load power to the worlds population for about 10-15 years, which incidentally, is about the amount of time it takes to build a nuclear power cycle.

      • Cluster on 31/03/2017 - 16:39
        +1

        Only enough uranium to supply 10 to 15 years of base load power to 7 billion people? Do you have a source for this information? Generally the figures I've seen stretched into hundreds of years for existing plants using current resources.

        Currently prices for uranium are deeply depressed and there's no incentive to explore for further resources. Also uranium extraction from seawater is an expensive, but potentially viable source.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining#Recovery_from_s…

        I don't think we'll be running out of uranium, and then there's thorium.

        • cannedhams on 31/03/2017 - 19:15

          If anything its less than that. See here:-

          http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fue…

          Enough known reserves at this point to continue current rates of consumption for 200 years. Of course, nuclear only supplies 5% of world energy consumption.

          If nuclear were supplying base load power to the worlds population (say 65% of world energy demand) then you're looking at about 15 years.

          The only country that might be able to use nuclear for the lion's share of its energy consumption in the long term is Australia, which has a large amount of uranium and a low population. If Australia used all its uranium domestically, it would have enough for 200 years of energy consumption.

          For the rest of the world, its a side dish at best.

        • furythree on 31/03/2017 - 22:59

          @cannedhams: meanwhile elon said something about covering a surface the size of texas with solar is enough the power the world

    • dufflover on 31/03/2017 - 17:29
      +2

      Yet in Australia we are still stuck in this coal and power shortage saga

      Because the shortage is due to Australia shipping pretty much everything out and leaving nothing for the locals unless we pay through the nose. Whether it's our beef, seafood or gas.

    • tunzafun001 on 31/03/2017 - 18:08
      +1

      Probably a half life of plutonium at 24 000 years and Spent Nuclear Fuel with a half life of 150 000 years has something to do with…and that is just a half life. As long as you're happy to walk (sprint) away from Sydney for 200 000+ years, then I can see no issue. Been some weird weather events lately, so I wouldn't call anywhere safe. I live up in far north SA and experienced my first earth tremor that shook my bins nicely, and technically we are no where near a fault line.

      Anyway, we don't need it. Our good friends gravity, the sun and even air itself are throwing buckets of energy at us, but we aren't picking up what it's throwing down.

      If we placed wind generators off shore, with solar panel blades, with floating pistons that move up and down with the waves and a paddle wheel below that spins with the tides, there is already a possible day and night energy generation source. If we could harness lightning, even better. This energy could be stored in liquid salt / silicone storage facilities to be drawn upon whenever needed. We could also use the current water reservoirs in a flow out in need/ pump back in surplus idea.

      In summary, plenty of free energy, we don't need nuclear. Fair to say we don't need to build fancy batteries either if we create day and night generation streams.

  • Rumbaar on 31/03/2017 - 14:56
    +2

    Isn't Elon Musk looking to help with SA's power problems.

    But looking at this setup, doesn't seem to make full sense. Installation of a 11.6kWh battery, but backup power is an additional $899 cost. So what is the battery doing, and how come it's not a backup battery automatically? Says it stores power to use when the sun goes down, so that's a backup battery? But it also says it'll redraw back to the grid if you're producing more than you're using.

    So you're paying extra to not even store you own power? What's the difference to this as the normal inverter?

    I think this is pretending to help the consumer, but is more so to benefit AGL.

    Wait for a Tesla powerwall 2?

    • noramando on 31/03/2017 - 15:08

      This is call redundancy or fail safe

      • Rumbaar on 31/03/2017 - 15:13

        What's the benefit of a battery then, without the extra $899 cost? Over the normal Solar Inverter?

        • ozmian on 31/03/2017 - 15:25
          +1

          the benefit of the battery is savings you make when the sun goes down.. so with solar during roughly 9am - 5pm your house can run off the panels, and charge the battery.. after 5pm (its actually much sooner) your panels can no longer sustain the house usage purely from the solar panels so it starts pulling from the grid at 30c+/kwh .. if you have energy stored in a battery you can use 11.6kwh (or whatever, doubt you get full capacity) so say 8kwh from the battery at night before relying on the grid so it could potentially save you $2.40/day .. all rough figures but basically instead of house power going solar <- grid you go solar <- battery <- grid. again you're obviously spending $3.8k up front so any savings come after paying that back after X years.

          the $899 is more about extra electronics and reconfiguring the house to switch off the grid entirely with safety measures and allow it to run off the battery in case of a power outage. normally everything shuts down to ensure nothing gets sent back to the grid potentially causing a hazard while repairmen work on it.. well thats what they say anyway, same reason why you're not supposed to go plug a generator in to a 240V socket to power your house.

        • Rumbaar on 31/03/2017 - 18:27

          @ozmian: in theory. Though AGL will be drawing down that extra power, so the battery will never store extra power to save on cost. Only if you are off grid during day will it be a benefit, and I can't see AGL wanting that.

        • ozmian on 01/04/2017 - 09:38

          @Rumbaar: not sure what you mean by never storing extra power mate? the batteries charge on sunny days before exporting to the grid. so the solar a) powers your house, excess then b) charges the batteries then finally c) once the batteries are charged exports to the grid.

          your house a) runs off the solar b) sun goes down so it starts drawing on the batteries c) batteries discharge to empty so finally it pulls from the grid.

          the only power AGL get is your excess solar generation just like always (only now its after charging the batteries first).

          thats why their site says:

          Power your life
          Use your solar energy at night, on cloudy days or during a blackout^.

          yes you have to pay extra for during a blackout for the extra circuitry, but remove that from the equation and the batteries are benefiting you every day (when the suns down).. again what the ROI will be is dependent on your own usage conditions but it will generally take at least 3-4 years to ROI.

        • Rumbaar on 01/04/2017 - 16:55

          @ozmian: This part "Sometimes, the virtual power plant will help support the electricity grid when it needs it, by discharging your battery to power your home. If the battery discharges more solar energy than you can use at the time, that energy may be exported to the grid."

          The may be exported part will be more than maybe, I'm sure. I'm sure it'll maintain a minimum amount of excessive charge on your local battery.

        • renza on 01/04/2017 - 18:09
          +2

          @Rumbaar: Discharge will generally only happen when the price hits VOLL ($14k/MWh), which is only a number of times a year. You do also get compensated for the discharge of the battery.

    • bbtlovebbt on 31/03/2017 - 15:17

      My understanding, when main powers is on, the battery is on. The main is off, your battery is off. You need to pay extra to keep your battery is always on.

      • ChrisLevo on 31/03/2017 - 15:19
        +1

        Correct.

        We paid the extra.

      • Rumbaar on 31/03/2017 - 15:20

        Which is what a normal Solar Inverter does, without the extra ~4K cost.

        • factor on 31/03/2017 - 15:30
          +3

          Without a battery when there is no sun you need to import grid power.

          With a battery you aren't importing power, but may still need the grid's 50Hz sync for your system to operate.

          Without an automatic isolator you can't use anything when the grid goes down. There can't be any chance of back-feeding the grid with your power & the inverter needs to stop trying to synchronise to the non-functioning mains.

        • ChrisLevo on 31/03/2017 - 15:44
          +1

          @factor: Well put.

        • Rumbaar on 31/03/2017 - 18:24

          @factor: that's fair enough. But AGL will be drawing down that extra power, so the battery will never retain any excessive power.

        • redfox1200 on 01/04/2017 - 18:39

          @Rumbaar:

          they will basically draw from the battery 3-4 times a year in peak summer times

        • Rumbaar on 01/04/2017 - 19:09

          @redfox1200: Where do you get that information from? That's it's not on a daily bases?

        • redfox1200 on 01/04/2017 - 22:16
          +1

          @Rumbaar:

          just from working in the industry. power prices peak only a couple of times a year in SA, right when we run out of generation, this is basically the only time that AGL are going to activate all the batteries. Even then they still said the household has priority during these times.

        • Rumbaar on 02/04/2017 - 09:38

          @redfox1200: Where does it say they the household has priority for battery storage over AGL drawing excessive power generated throughout a day? Also not sure what you mean by peak prices, as they buy it for around 6c and sell it back to you for 30c+ irrespective of any peak load issues.

        • redfox1200 on 02/04/2017 - 10:29

          @Rumbaar:

          from my phone conversation with them. power prices peal at 14k/MWh, has nothing to do with the feed in or the 30c+ we pay, it's how much the generators get paid to turn on. AGL don't draw from your battery during the day, they only do it when the state runs out of generation

  • Diji1 on 31/03/2017 - 15:35
    +1

    It's AGL in SA so there is no way.

    I hate this company.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join