Share
2,668 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 51
clock Created with Sketch.
17/03/24
22:55
Share
Originally posted by jopo:
↑
It is not a equitable arrangement Nursery. Up here in the NT the NTG are being deceptive and play on the ignorance of many who do not understand what electricity is. When you enter into a contract with them they say they have the right to use your electricity. The deception is they then qualify and quantify WHAT THEIR interpretation of electricity is which they claim is only KWHs. So yes they pay you 1/3rd of retail sector of $KWH exported but they do not pay you for KVAR production you put into the grid. KVAR is a HUGE cost to energy providers and is factored into your minimum daily surcharge to the energy provider whether you KWh's or not. So with my Solar PV cells what happens is that they utilise KVAR production from my PV and also from my batteries for no compensation. But here is the real kick in the teeth. When the grid demands from your solar to supply WORK from your batteries and PV cells in the form KVAR instead of KW's you are actually REDUCING the KWH's they compensate you for. Get this right. The more they demand from you to provide KVAR to the grid it results in YOU being compensated LESS. Irony now is they have less fuel cost as we are supply the KW's and the KVAR production to enable a operational grid (although it is flimsy) to the system for no compensation.
Expand
KVA vs KVAR is an old issue which swings both ways and doesn't really have much specifically to do with renewable energy. About 30 years ago I knew some electrical engineers who were matching reactive loads to their actual power consumption and so paying very little at all to the power companies. KVA vs KVAR is not a renewable energy scam, it's just a feature of AC power transmission.