Plug in solar

[denso13]

I disagree, still think its meaning is clear and straightforward. The electrical supply itself is not shared, there is only one, and it terminates in the flat.

You don't agree with that, I get it.

I find it highly unlikely that such a glaring error would get past all of the detailed stages of writing and proof reading for things like this. Not one of the contributing organisations have publicly commented on the obvious mistake. There were responses to the consultation that showed some thought that plug in solar wasn't safe, so it has its critics, yet not one of them has gone public on it either. Maybe they have commented in private and the Government will issue an amendment. Who knows.

 

[morqthana]

I disagree, still think its meaning is clear and straightforward.

It's not, it really really isn't.

What they intended may well be clear and straightforward, but what they actually wrote was incompetently meaningless nonsense.

The electrical supply itself is not shared, there is only one, and it terminates in the flat.

Not shared, eh.

So where does the electricity for the other part of the building come from?

You don't agree with that, I get it.

What I agree with is what words mean.

You don't get that nobody may choose to invent new meanings to suit their own purposes unless they specifically redefine them in their limited context.

I find it highly unlikely that such a glaring error would get past all of the detailed stages of writing and proof reading for things like this. Not one of the contributing organisations have publicly commented on the obvious mistake.

I don't find it at all unlikely. What about the glaring error of using (3 times) the term "qualified electrician" when there is no official, legal, meaning of that. They probably thought there was. But they were ignorant.

The device shall not be connected to damaged, degraded or non-compliant socket
outlets. Users shall be advised to seek inspection and assessment by a qualified
electrician if there are any doubt regarding the condition or suitability of the installation;

Why, oh why, did they not write "...assessment by person registered in respect of the installation of fixed low or extra-low voltage electrical installations in dwellings. by a UKAS accredited competent person scheme."?

Because they were incompetent and ignorant, and in their incompetence and ignorance they wrote twaddle.

Where connection of the product requires modifications to the final circuit of the
domestic installation, this shall be clearly stated and identified as work that can only be
performed by a qualified electrician, e.g. replacement of the overcurrent protection
device of the concerned electric circuit in accordance with BS 7671 Section 551.7.2 for
the connection of a plug-in solar device;

Really?

On what legal basis do they rely for the restraint of trade "work that can only be performed by a qualified electrician"? There is no prohibition anywhere, of anybody replacing an overcurrent device.

Can the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero really create new laws on the fly like this, in product specifications?

Or is that more twaddle written by someone incompetent and ignorant?


I also don't find it at all unlikely because the world is full of people like you who look at the wording of a rule/law/regulation/specification/standard, decide what you think is a reasonable belief of what was intended, and then view the wording through those glasses.

I'm not doing that. In the context of this discussion I DGAS what anybody involved in writing that standard intended. I'm looking at what they actually wrote.

 

[ericmark]

I think the debate is looking at the wrong options, G98 or not hardly matters, what matters is grid-tie, or EPS battery.

Yes

What about the glaring error of using (3 times) the term "qualified electrician" when there is no official, legal, meaning of that.

I wonder how I am classed? At least 55 years in the trade, hold a Fdeng degree, a list of exams passed, but I have never been a member of any of the schemes, I was a member of the IET before I retired, and registered with many organisations so would class my self as a non practicing electrical engineer/electrician. An industrial accident cut short my working for a living, where my lock was removed, and the equipment turned back on. It means I am now too slow, but would consider myself as a "qualified electrician".

If I wanted more solar, then I would be asking my son for help, he has a far better degree to me, but still not a member of any scheme. His knowledge of electronics far exceeds mine, and what we are looking at is not standard electrics, but electronics, and really being a scheme member does not mean someone has an understanding of electronics.