On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 10:05:49 AM UTC-4, wrote:

He's not in a high population density area, though. And, the grid
isn't the most stable where he resides. So, Solar made sense for him.


Ha, thats the best part.

Does he know that most grid tie inverters will NOT function without the grid.

Bingo! I just asked Diesel to provide us with the
spec sheet for the inverter he claims to have
installed that he says will work without the grid.
Every installer pitch I've heard, every story about
actual installation, they all tell you that if the
grid goes down, you have no power. Unless you have
a battery bank, which no one here is hawking, that's
for sure, because it just makes the economics worse
and you can ride your free connection to the grid.



What that means in practical terms, he cannot use the electricity from solar during a power failure.

I think that is a travesty and the rules re inverter designs should be changed.


The fundamental problem here is that without
the grid or a battery bank, there is no ability
to provide consistent power. It suddenly gets
cloudy, then what? Brown out?



Right now this behavior is REQUIRED by the rules to prevent the possibility of backfeeding power to a dead power line.

m

I don't think that's the real problem. The same
potential for backfeeding exists with any alternate
power system, eg generators and it's routinely
handled with an interlock, etc.