FAQ's

FAQ's

Do I Have a “Good” Solar Roof?

A good solar roof will face within 30 degrees of true south (which is actually at 192 degrees in this part of Canada), will offer enough room with uniform orientation and solar exposure to comfortably contain the desired number of modules, will be easily accessible for the installers, will be close to the existing meter location, and will have no shade. A roof that has one large continuous area for your system will be easier and less cost to install than a roof with the same overall size but divided into different areas. A “10kW” system will require about 850 – 1000 sq ft of roof space.

A variance of up to 30 degrees from true south will still allow good return. More than that will erode your return quickly.

There is little difference in annual power output for arrays tilted between 25 and 45 degrees. A system on a roof that offers a 25 degree tilt (most common) will perform better in summer, poorer in winter than a system on a 45 degree roof. Even a “good” solar roof isn’t always ready to support a solar PV (photovoltaic) system: it must be structurally adequate and the roof covering (shingle, steel) should be in new condition. Most municipalities require a civil engineer’s assessment of the structural adequacy of the roof before allowing the building permit to install a system.

Cleaning the snow and bird droppings off your system does make a difference and needs to be done.

Your dealer can assess your roof, perform shading analysis and advise you on the likely capacity and performance your roof offers. WSE MicroFIT dealers have aerial tools that allow rough sizing and preliminary shading assessment in minutes. A thorough site survey must be done to verify these factors and to determine whether there are other hurdles (like difficult access, troublesome cable routing or lengthy cabling to meter location).

Top

If I Install a Solar PV Generating Facility Will I Have Power When the Power Fails?

No. When you install a solar PV system it will be attached to the power grid through a separate meter, and all power you produce will always go to the power company. They will meter and pay you for your production, based on your contract and the tariffs in effect when your project was initiated. If the power fails, all grid tied inverters automatically sense this and immediately shut down power generation. This is essential for the safety of those working on the power grid.

Top

What Rate of Return Should I Expect and Why Am I Seeing Such Different Claims?

Hard though it is for most people to believe, a well situated and designed solar PV project under the current microFIT rules will generate about 15% rate of return, pre-tax and pre-financing. This estimate ignores the cost of financing. Money is never free. The true ROR of a well positioned, unshaded, reasonably priced flush roof mounted microFIT system will be more in the range of 7-8% once you consider all of your costs including the full cost of financing (which is currently in the area of 3.8%).

Smaller systems generate less return because some of the installation elements bring costs equal to the larger systems. Our analysis suggests that careful consideration should be taken when considering systems smaller than 5kW as the return may be approaching the point where you are better off investing in long term high yield bonds instead.

Solar PV systems come in different levels of performance as well. Higher performance modules and inverters will contribute to a higher performance system, at higher purchase cost. You should expect such a system to generate more revenue over 20 years than a lower performing system. However, the rule that you get what you pay for generally applies: a system that yields more power costs more, and a system that yields less power costs less, and they may actually have the same overall rate of return for the customer, just a different level of 20 year cumulative revenue. Your provider should be able to net out the performance differences and estimate overall revenue and rate of return of different systems.

Whether a microFIT or FIT project is a good investment for you depends on your particular financial and tax situation. You should consult your accountant or tax advisor.

Over time, we expect the ROR to change: increasing interest rates and decreasing OPA tariffs will reduce the ROR. Most people in the industry expect costs of solar PV systems to decline slightly between 2011 and 2015 which will help improve ROR. If we look at the experience in Germany, we can expect to see overall decreases in ROR for systems over time between now and 2015. People considering investing in microFIT or FIT systems should act now. Overall, solar PV systems installed under the microFIT tariffs currently offer a great return compared to other investment vehicles. Canadian Government 30 Year bonds are currently about 3.7% and headed to 4.1% in later 2012 according to CIBC World Markets.

Life-Time Decreases in Module Performance:

Some system providers will take into account the 20 year estimated decrease in module output, and others will not. This makes a huge difference in what they propose to you in revenue output.

Solar modules decrease in output gradually over a long period of time. Warranties take this into account with an allowance, typically 20% decrease in performance over 20 years. Best modules offer a warranted 20% maximum decrease in performance over 25 years. That really means that revenue projections should be made to account for average performance over your 20 year FIT contract. Some providers will only tell you what your system should generate the day it is turned on, and others will represent a more honest assessment based on performance 10 years down the road.

This assessment of performance involves use of a ‘derate’ factor that scales back the expected level of performance based upon many factors. Aging of the modules can be built into this ‘derate’ factor to provide a better lifetime average estimate of revenue production.

Top

What is the Derate Factor and How Can I Compare Performance of Different Systems?

Derate factor is a system performance adjustment multiplier. It is simply a ‘real world’ adjustment to a solar PV system to allow us to better predict how a system will truly perform. Each of the parts of a solar PV system perform at less than 100% efficiency. Modules might be factory tested and rated at a named output power level, but they don’t perform at that level on your roof. California mandated a more realistic assessment of this difference in performance and demanded testing and labelling to set expectations closer to real world performance. We don’t have that legislation in Ontario. Typically a solar module made and used in Ontario will perform at somewhere between 85% and 92% of its named output in best conditions. Figuring out what that number is, and including that multiplier as a single part of a system ‘derate factor’ is important in comparing system offers. A good provider will be able to discuss this and compare your alternatives and the revenue they will truly earn.

Other contributors to your system ‘derate factor’ will be the operating efficiency of your inverters, some wire losses (typically 1-2% in a well designed system, maybe less if your wire runs are short, maybe more if your meter is hundreds of feet from your system), losses due to dirt and grime on your modules (perhaps 1% - 2% again), and the gradual lifetime decrease in module performance.

So, let’s build up a ‘derate factor’ for a typical medium performance system.

Start at 100% performance for a system engineered at 11,520wDC.

First, lets say that (for example) your modules offer an estimated real world performance of 89% (if your solar system provider can’t tell you that, then you have the wrong provider).

Your real estimated performance comes down to .89 x 11,520wDC = 10,252wDC, and the evolving ‘derate’ is at .89.

Next, consider the lifetime degradation of your modules. If the warranty offers 80% output at 20 years (typical for a moderate level module) and we assume linear performance degradation, then we will see a worst case 90% performance level 10 years down the road, and 90% performance average across the 20 year FIT contract.

Your real estimated performance for the system is reduced to .9 x 10,252wDC = 9227wDC, and the evolving ‘derate’ for the system is at .89 x .90 = .801.

Next, consider some level of dirt and grime on those solar modules. For this example, let’s assume the array is nicely scrubbed clean by rain and snow fall, and that it is accessible so that you can pull off accumulated snow with a soft snow rake, so the efficiency loss for this factor is very low, say 0.5%.

Your real estimated system performance for the system is reduced to .995 x 9227wDC = 9181wDC, and the evolving ‘derate’ for the system is at .801 x .995 = .797.

Next, consider the real operating efficiency of your inverter (usually in the specifications as ‘CEC’ efficiency), which for a good inverter will be 96.5% or so.

Your real estimated system performance comes down to .965 x 9181wAC = 8860wAC , and the evolving ‘derate’ reduces to .797 x .965 = .769.

Next, consider some nominal wire losses for the system. Let’s assume this is a typical residential roof top system with the array close to the inverters and the meter, and the wire losses are about 1% in total (the system is 99% efficient in this regard).

Your real estimated system performance comes down to .99 x 8860wAC = 8771wAC, and the evolving ‘derate’ for the system finally rests at .99 x .769 = .761. This is a finished estimate of what real life generation will be in best solar conditions on an average day over the lifespan of your 20 year project contract.

This is an important set of considerations and calculations in comparing proposed solar PV systems on close to equal terms, and in gaining a realistic view of your 20 year revenue for your project. A schooled system provider will be able to work through this kind of assessment and comparison with you. While this kind of analysis will help you develop a model for estimation of your likely revenue, these are only models, and can’t provide more than an educated estimate. When you look at the revenue or rate of return estimates in a solar PV proposal, the analyst who prepared that proposal used some derate factor in the estimation. It is important to understand how they built that derate factor.

It is also important to remember that the performance of the system when first commissioned should be much better than this model predicts, as this model anticipates average power generation at a point 10 years into your project. Start up generation should be closer to 9746wDC as your modules are performing as new.

Practically determined derate factors for systems can range between .75 and .85 depending on the quality of components and the installation variances. Those providers claiming very high derate factors near .90 are likely taking no account for lifetime degradation of the modules. It is important when comparing different system offers to use realistic and equivalent assumptions in your model to gain a balanced and truthful comparison, however conservative it might be.

We have reviewed performance of several of our installed systems to see how they perform relative to the expectations we have developed with this modeling and we find our estimates to be pretty accurate.

Top

Is a Tracking System Right for Me?

Tracking systems produce more yield than the stationary roof top systems. Manufacturers of the 2 axis tracking systems claim about 35% more yield than similar sized roof top systems. Early assessment of the tracking systems we have installed suggests this estimate is reasonable. Balancing that increased yield is a decreased tariff for these systems and increased cost of installation. Often, trackers are further from the meter and grid tie point, which means increased cable cost and equipment and install cost. Customers should take care in assessing full accurate costs for tracker installations, along with careful project management or risk facing unpleasant surprises. The cost of a high quality tracker plus installation can often surpass the cost of a frame building that would house a PV system of the same size, with better tariff.

There are many situations (you have no good south facing roof, you have lots of property) where implementation of a tracking solar PV system is the best alternative. Customers most often underestimate the size of a 10kW tracking system and how much it will change the aesthetics of their property. Those considering this alternative should go see one, and should discuss the project with neighbours if their homes are close by.

Top

What Issues Might Drive Up My Costs To Make a Solar System a Poor Investment?

The key things that can work against you to increase your costs are:

  1. Roof structural improvements of roof surface improvements that need to be fixed before putting a solar PV system on the roof
  2. A long cable run to the meter location: this can add thousands of dollars for cable and trenching.
  3. Difficult access to the roof which can increase installation time.
  4. Splitting a larger system up into many different zones of modules will increase installation time and cost of mounting.
  5. Lack of project management in your installation. Time overruns, changes in equipment, repeat ESA inspections, re-worked grounding and fusing and additional unplanned costs are all potential results of incomplete project planning or lack of project management. Be clear in your discussion with your provider or electrician who is in charge of the plan, and what the total costs and time are.

Top

What Might Diminish Performance of My Solar PV System?

Some of the things that can diminish performance of your solar PV system are:

  1. Shading of the modules: this can cost far more than the percentage area shaded if your system is installed in series. Generally, don’t put modules in shaded areas.
  2. Dirt on the modules: acts just like shade.
  3. Azimuth significantly off due-south, extreme tilt angle.
  4. Poor engineering: failure to build proper string sizing for your inverter can cause the inverter to perform poorly. Your provider should take special care with each system. A project may have conditions that favour different type of inverters, different size of modules, even different module technology.
  5. If your system is designed with micro inverters or MPPT devices (as it might be especially if different parts of your system see different level of sunlight, or you have shading to deal with, or your roof area is smaller and you have a limited number of modules) then system engineering will be different and the performance considerations will be different. Talk to your provider about performance and the impact of different engineering alternatives.

Top

How Does the OPA Measure System Size?

Your ‘nameplate’ system size as assessed by the OPA is the lower of:

  1. The nameplate aggregate DC power output of all the modules in the system, or
  2. The aggregated continuous AC peak power output of all of the inverters used in the system.

For example: If you have 48 modules in your system, each rated as 245wDC, then you have a total of 11,760wDC in your system array. If you are using two inverters, each rated at 4900wAC continuous power output, then your OPA ‘nameplate’ size for the system is 9800watts.

Another example: If you have 20 modules in your system array, each module at 230wDC, then you have a total of 4600wDC. If you are using one inverter, rated at 5000wAC continuous power output, then your OPA ‘nameplate’ size for the system is 4600watts.

Top

What Does PTC mean?

Solar PV Modules are sized by their manufacturer based on standard tests performed in the manufacturer’s facility, which are called STC (standard test conditions). If you buy a 250w module, then that means it produced 250w under STC.

Performance of the module in real world conditions is considerably less than STC would suggest. So, several US States demanded a set of ‘practical test conditions’ that better reflect the real performance of modules. Such conditions were established by a California consortium and titled PTC. PTC stands for PVUSA Test Conditions. PVUSA stands for PhotoVoltaics for Utility Scale Applications.

PTC are defined as 1000 W/m2 plane-of-array irradiance, 20oC ambient temperature, and 1 m/s wind speed. Adding these conditions of ambient temperature and wind speed result in a PV module temperature of about 50oC, instead of the 25oC for STC. Modules perform better at lower temperatures, so this real world adjustment results in considerably lower output power assessment for modules.

Even though PTC doesn’t accurately address how a module will perform in Ontario conditions, it is a far better estimate than STC, and you should ask your provider for the PTC number for the module in the system you are considering, or at least have a discussion around module comparable performance. Unfortunately, most of the Ontario made modules do not have a PTC assessment, and are not required to have one.

PTC is just one of the comparisons that merit consideration when deciding what modules are best. Other facets you should look at include warranty terms, cost, tolerances on power output and size.

Top

What Difference Does the Module Make in Overall Performance?

If your project is space constrained (as a lot of roof mount projects are) then you want the module that provides the most AC power per square foot per dollar. That is why we have standardized on the Opsun module: high efficiency coupled with excellent PTC performance makes it the best choice available for AC power per square foot per dollar. This makes a large difference in revenue for the project over 20 years.

If your project is not limited by space for the modules then your best choice for maximum rate of return will be the module that offers best PTC output per dollar of cost. Ground mount systems and some palatial rooftops fall into this category. The Opsun module provides PTC output per dollar of cost that is equal to most of the best-warrantied modules available.

Talk to your WSE MicroFIT dealer to calculate and compare AC power output of different modules.

Frame size matters, too. A roof might be shaped to favour a certain size of module to allow best overall coverage. These days, modules are tending to a standard size of about 1m x 1.65m in an effort to bring down manufacturing costs. So, size of the module isn’t a variable most consumers can control easily. Another size issue does matter: frame thickness. In our heavy snow conditions our modules must be adequately supported to resist bending under load. A thinner frame, typically 40mm, must be supported at midpoint by the underlying mounting to be properly supported. A thicker frame, typically 50mm, can span the length of the module in landscape mode (1.65m) without risk of bending under load. This difference can mean a significant difference in mounting cost and installation cost. At the end of the assessment, it is overall system cost that matters most to the consumer in determining overall ‘performance’ and this is just one aspect that has to be considered.

Other things matter: warranty differs typically from 80%+ output after 20 years and 90%+ output after 10 years for mainstream 'good' modules, up to 80%+ output after 25 years and 90%+ output after 12 years for top end modules.

Manufacturing tolerances matter: many modules claim output variances of 0% to +10%, others claim +/- 5%. Most top level modules claim output variances within +/-3% of rated output. A tighter range is the most important thing because series inverters like to see all of the incoming power streams at the same level in order to best convert more of the incoming DC power to AC power.

Most of our projects are roof mount, so we use a module that ranks near the very top of the list in terms of AC watts per square foot. This allows the project owner to obtain the highest possible yield from the available roof area.

Top

Micro-inverters vs Series Inverters vs MPPT Devices:

Whether to use micro-inverters or series inverters is a heated question in the business. Both have strong areas of applicability which is a fact usually ignored by the zealous supporters within each camp.

Series inverters are great on un-shaded roofs with uniform solar exposure. Micro-inverters are sometimes the only choice for a roof that has smaller areas with different solar exposure, or has potential for shading. Micro-inverters can allow better coverage for some roofs that just aren't sized right for the number of panels a serial string inverter might demand for best performance. Micro-inverters cost more, and significantly enough to create a difference in rate of return. Series inverters are more efficient, today, but that difference may be more than balanced by their inability to use the maximum output of each and every panel. If your panel manufacturing tolerances are +/- 3%, you might expect a 3% increase in power yield by the micro-inverter that takes the best from each panel. So, with poorer quality panels, the benefit in using micro-inverters gets better. You should, however, spend the money to use better panels.

Micro-inverters also present a potential downstream liability in treatment of failures. Inverters are not 100% efficient. Most of the top line series inverters offer about 96% CEC efficiency, while the micro-inverters lag that by about 1% (creating a slight performance difference). That 'inefficiency' is turned to heat, which limits the life of the electronics. Inverters will fail. When a series inverter fails you lose half or all (depending on configuration) of your output until the problem is fixed, but the fix is easy: replacement of a card that is easily accessible. When a micro-inverter fails you only lose a small portion of your power, but the fix is expensive: you have to start dismantling the array on the roof, which requires roof fall certified people to come with full body harnesses to do the job (if you are obeying your codes). The cost of that fix could be in the thousands, and then your choice, as the owner of the system, is whether you trust this will be the only failure, or replace them all while you have the panels removed: bad position to be in.

Inverters of all types like to see voltage within a specified range in order to generate peak power. With a series inverter your string size of modules must be carefully engineered to keep the incoming voltages within this range. This is an advantage for micro-inverters, which don’t require this attention to engineering. However, well designed string sizing with a series inverter can provide better power production than micro-inverters because of the relative peak power input voltage ranges and start voltages.

Recently we have seen a new entrant to this debate, known as MPPT devices. These devices attach to each module to vary the output of the module to provide a set and constant output that maximizes performance for the inverter. In doing so, it leaves the vital task of DC to AC inversion to a central inverter, which is easily accessed and serviced, but provides most of the advantages of a micro inverter at the module. One way of looking at these MPPT devices is that they may be able to offer the best of both worlds. These systems can outperform other alternatives in some situations, although the cost of these is closer to the cost of micro inverters than it is to series inverters. These systems can provide several other benefits:

  1. Ability to sense high temperature (indicating a fire) and shut down power production. This is going to be a required safety measure in future, although not much considered today. Your local fire department and your insurance company may have an opinion on this.
  2. Ability to replace any module with another module of different power or manufacture. Consider a broken module 15 years into your contract, with a series inverter: you would have to replace that module with an exact same module or see mismatches that erode performance. With recent MPPT devices, you would be able to add a module to bolster performance or to replace a module with another type, without any performance sacrifices.

    3. This is a complex issue that will be constantly impacted by innovation. You should ask your provider/system engineer their perspective on the right choice for your roof, and trust their guidance more than the marketing claims of the equipment manufacturers.

    Top

Why Do “10kW” Systems Vary in Size When Comparing Quotes?

People want to install systems that generate power levels as close to the OPA nameplate size of 10kW as possible to maximize their revenue over the 20 year microFIT contract. However, systems provided by different suppliers can be widely different in the capacity they are designed to deliver. For example: a system with modules totalling 10kW STC DC power and 10kW AC output power is going to be called a ‘10kW’ system by the OPA. A system with 11.76kW STC DC power and 10kW AC output power is also going to be called a ‘10kW’ system by the OPA. The first system might deliver 8kW of AC power in good conditions, and the second system might deliver 10kW of AC power in good conditions. There will be a huge difference in revenue generated over the life of the contract. When comparing system quotes, always try to reduce all quotes to AC PTC output power per dollar to see which is the better value. Your dealer should be able to assist you in performing this analysis. This is reviewed in more detail in the discussion around derate factors.

Top

Why Do Some Providers Oversize the System?

The capacity of the system in DC watts as calculated by the STC output of the modules will not be seen in normal operating conditions. A very good module might produce 90% of it’s nameplate power in normal operating conditions (see question on PTC) and this has to be taken into account in designing the system. Other losses arise from dirt on the panels, degradation of output power from modules over the years, wire losses in the system, inverter efficiency losses, losses due to mismatches in module output, poor configuration engineering and other causes. All of these losses combined can easily amount to 20% to 25% of your starting DC power. This assessment of total losses is planned into performance models and called the ‘derate factor’. When estimating the potential output power of a system your provider will make assumptions about performance about each element and derive a ‘derate’ factor they use to make these estimates. You should ensure your provider accurately and honestly assesses derate factors in promoting the output power their system may offer, and the resulting revenues. In comparing systems and costs, you will need to consider these differences in size and performance.

System designers will oversize a system to result in power production that is as close to the nameplate generation capacity as possible, without over-spending or without over-driving the inverter. Most inverters will generate 5-10% more than the nameplate rating, but will cap power generation at that point, so having more DC capacity will provide no additional benefit.

Typically a roof mounted system might be oversized by 15% before you are really just spending money for modules without being able to harvest all of the power. A two axis tracker should be in optimum conditions for more of the day than a roof mount system, because it continuously moves to face the sun. Therefore, a tracking system might be typically oversized by 5-10%.

Another way to approach this is to oversize the system less at the start of your contract and add modules in later years if your power production is reduced. With MPPT based inverter systems or micro inverters, this piecewise addition is possible. Not so easy with series inverters.

Top

What Happens Over the Life of My 20 Year Contract, and After?

PV modules decrease in output performance over time. Warranty terms for good modules predict 80% or better output after 25 years. Some decrease in performance is expected, but your system will continue to generate power for longer than your contract is in place. If Ontario progresses like Germany has, we will move from the attractive FIT program to a more conservative net-metering program over the next several years. In a net-metering program you get credit for your produced power at the same rate at which you buy power from the utility company. After 20 years we are likely to be in that scenario and you will be offsetting your cost of electricity at that time. Of course, newer more effective technology will be available then, and you will decide whether to upgrade or not.

Top

What If I Have a Different Kind of Roof?

Solar PV mounting systems must be designed for specific types of roofs.

Most projects are installed on sloped shingle covered roofs. Most commonly, the mounting systems employ lag bolt anchors into underlying joists, protected by flashing and caulking, with ‘stand-offs’ supporting the mounting rails that are specially designed to allow for height and lateral movement to allow straight and level mounting rails even if the roof isn’t very level (as is the usual case).

There are different anchor and stand-off systems for metal roofs. Some systems use a specially shaped footing that sits on top of the metal rib, using an existing mounting screw location, and protected with a gasket and caulking to prevent leaks. Others are based on anchors and stand-offs that sit in the valley between ribs, and anchor into underlying strapping.

Projects on flat roofs can be supported by mounting systems with wide diversity. Some anchor directly into the roof, some sit on the roof on rubber membranes with carefully engineered ballast weights balancing wind lift. Some sit on post and rail structures, some are based on enclosed plenums that nicely hide wires and connections. All flat roof projects must be specially engineered because of the structural variances, and the potential for wind lift caused by the elevated modules, and because of the increased snow entrapment.

Some roofs present difficulty: cedar shakes, clay tiles, specialty steel tiles, roof with parapets, etc can be challenging for solar projects, and may not be suitable.

Top

What If I Sell My Home After Installing Solar PV On The Roof?

If you sell your house the solar PV system could be an asset or a detriment. If your system was installed without care to aesthetics and professional finish, it might detract from the look of your home. If installed well, and delivering annual revenue, the system might contribute to the assessed value of your home by the present value of future income. There is provision in the OPA guidelines to assign ownership of the system if you sell your home.

Top

What Additional Costs Will I Encounter in Developing my Solar Project?

Many people simply look at the system cost when making a decision. Other costs beyond the system cost include

  • shipping
  • your building permit,
  • provision of a roof structural assessment by a civil engineer (your dealer can organize this for you),
  • the fee charged by your LDC (local distribution carrier) to actually grid-tie your system,
  • an accounting fee by the LDC to set you up to receive revenues,
  • the cost of cable and labour to connect to your meter (not usually part of the system cost) which is always a variable and can be expensive,
  • installation costs and potential over-runs if access is difficult,
  • impact on home insurance,
  • taxes paid on the system and collected on sale of power generated.

There are some additional benefits to consider: accelerated CCA of the system can offset other taxes. Recently CRA published a clarification outlining the eligibility of microFIT residential projects for Input Tax Credits to offset HST collected. Consult your accountant or financial advisor about these potential benefits and how you can use them.

Home insurance is something to consider early in your project. One of the reasons we offer Solar Edge inverters is because they feature a temperature sensor that cuts off power generation when temperatures suggest presence of fire. This may become a requirement sometime down the road to help ensure safety for emergency responders. Attributes of this sort may become more of a requirement as policies within the industry mature.

Top

What Maintenance and Cost of Maintenance Should I Expect?

Maintenance for solar PV systems is minimal. You should review your power generation monthly to ensure it is producing as it should: variances might indicate that you have poor physical connections or dirty/shaded modules. Modules should be cleaned if they become mired, and should be kept clear of snow.

Inverters may fail over your 20 year contract. Repair costs might be taken into account when calculating the performance of your investment. Extended warranties are available. Most proposals that offer a customer two 5kW inverters in their 10kW system should account for the cost of an inverter repair somewhere in the analysis.

Some people elect to subscribe to an ongoing service arrangement with their dealers: project management, financing, monitoring, reporting on power and revenue, and repair can be looked after for you by your dealer for an annual fee.

Top

What Benefit Does System Monitoring Provide?

System monitoring will tell you if you have a performance problem, whether you are being compensated properly for your energy production, will let you know what environmental improvement you are contributing, will educate your friends and children around the project and benefits, and is really handy if you wish to sell your house and want to ‘value’ the future revenues delivered by your project.

Some monitoring systems allow the provider or inverter manufacturer visibility into your system to diagnose and correct any error conditions.

Top

What is The Process to Implement a MicroFIT System and How Long Will it Take?

The first step in developing your own microFIT project is to register with the OPA online at http://microfit.powerauthority.on.ca/

This web page will be one of the most valuable sources of information throughout your renewable energy initiative.

You will register as an interested participant by answering a few easy questions in a few minutes, and you will receive a microfit registration number and user name and password. Future discussions between you and OPA will be conducted on their website behind a secure login, and they will send you progress emails. This first step is easy and accomplished in a few minutes.

Next, you will work with your provider to fill out a Form C which goes to your local power distribution carrier (“LDC”). This must state your microFIT registration number, and must have the same owner name as the name on your microfit registration. This is important. Many approvals have to be reinitiated because owners used “Bill” instead of “William” or some such difference. The Form C outlines the size of your project and what technology you will use, so you will need input from a trusted provider in completing this form. The form is submitted to your LDC and they ensure your technology is appropriate, and they ensure that they actually have the local capacity to accommodate your power generation project. In many areas of Ontario the LDC is out of capacity to take on and effectively manage new solar projects, and if you are in one of those areas, they will hold or reject your Form C. Timing for approval of Form C can be a couple weeks or a couple months, depending on the workload at the LDC.

Once you have an approved Form C, you apply to the OPA for a ‘conditional contract’ and begin to entertain system proposals. Once you have a ‘conditional contract’ your tariff rate will be set within the current tariff schedule and you will be able to safely invest in your solar system. Before you have these steps in place, you should not sign any binding agreements with any providers to acquire a system. Once they are in place, you can work with a provider to assess, engineer, acquire, install your system. This acquisition phase can be quite short if you have done your homework ahead of time and have a well educated provider. Usually, a system can be ordered and installed within a month as long as the research is already done and the roof is in good shape, and there are no long cable trenches to dig.

Once your system is installed, it will be need to be reviewed and approved by a local ESA inspector. You should ensure you are dealing with a provider and electrical contractor who is experienced in the certification requirements and electrical codes that govern ESA approval.

Your ESA approved system is then ready for grid-tie. Your ESA inspector will forward the approval documentation to your LDC. You will have to fill out standard forms provided by the LDC that indicate what bank account to deposit payments into and other administrative details. You will have to pre-pay the LDC standard fee for grid-tie (about $1400 in most of Ontario), and a grid-tie date will be set by your LDC. After that is done, the LDC notifies OPA that you are connected and the OPA then provides your final contract for signature, which usually takes a couple of weeks.

This total process will likely take 3 months or more. You should start now, while tariffs are attractive and interest rates are still low.

Most solar system providers will manage your approvals and project on request. Most will charge a nominal fee, more for the project management than for the approvals inputs, but this is reasonable given the work to be done. Many will simply complete the approval paperwork for customers at no commitment or cost. Some will offer full turn-key pricing to remove you from the difficulties in the process, but take care that the relative performance of the system you are getting is not a forgotten element in the process.

Top

Is There a Case for Off-Grid Solar in Ontario?

Not much of an economic case. As long as your property is attached to the grid to start with, there is no economic reason to use your own generated power, because the grid supplied power is cheaper. In a microfit project you may earn as much as $0.802 per kWhr you produce, and you are really only paying the electricity provider between $0.15 and $0.18 per kWhr for their power that you use. So, you will be grid tied and benefit financially.

In some rare instances an off-grid solar PV system will make sense: if you are a long way from any delivery point for electricity (remote locations, islands, etc) your cost of cable and installation to connect you to the grid might be as expensive as a full solar PV system with battery storage. This will be different technology than a grid tied system, as it will use a different kind of inverter and a solar charge controller to manage battery charging.

If you are in a region prone to power outages an off-grid solar PV system might make sense, but often a fuel powered generator will be less overall cost if outages are brief.

Off grid systems are effective for mobile homes, boats, seasonal remote cottages. Again, the technology for these systems is slightly different.

If you assess the value of an off-grid solar PV system, comparing capital outlay against the cost of the electricity you don’t have to purchase, your break even will be in excess of 20 years with current technology and electricity costs. Off-grid remains a specialty application, economically, but appeals to proactive environmentalists and those in remote situations.

Top

Is Solar Energy a Wise Choice for Ontario?

Yes, overall, but it is complicated and rife with mis-information and mis-understanding.

Many look at the rising cost of electricity in Ontario and like to put the blame on the Green Energy Act and the cost of solar and wind technology. This has become a political and economic issue of importance and visibility, but effective discussion is impeded by mis-information.

Some facts:

  • FIT and microFIT projects contribute a surprisingly small element to Ontario’s overall portfolio of generation capabilities, but the goal is to use these projects to replace some of the aging non-renewable generation provided by coal and other fossil fuels.
  • As consumers we are NOT paying $0.06 per kWhr for our electricity as some claim. The cost of electricity in Ontario is currently around $0.17 per kWhr when delivery, debt and administrative charges are included.
  • Ontario LDCs are not paying out $0.802 per kWhr for solar energy generation as some claim: 95% of the solar projects (in terms of awarded project capacity) are paid out at $0.44 per kWhr, which is the lowest level of FIT tariff today. Only a very small portion (less than 5%) of the contracted capacity of solar projects is at the residential level of $0.802.
  • Ontario is not seeking to replace our full energy portfolio with wind and solar: most of our energy requirements are going to be most cost effectively provided by our nuclear and hydro-electric facilities, which provide the 24/7 required level of power we need. It is part of the variable demand component of our energy that will be best met by wind and solar power and Ontario often has to buy this power from our neighbours at expensive rates to balance supply and demand on our grid.
  • The power grid is a resource that is carefully managed by IESO (Independent Electrical System Operators) co-operatively and they have the responsibility of continuously managing supply and demand so that things balance. Solar and wind present a problem to them in that they are not fully predictable. This is why the IESO operators want some constraints on how much wind and solar we turn on, and how fast. The small solar and wind projects are attached to the distribution side of the grid, where there are no throttling controls available. Large wind and solar farms are attached to the generation side of the grid, where there are controls. IESO needs to be able to control (“dispatch”) these larger projects, to make sure they can keep supply and demand in balance. These are complex and important responsibilities, and this is the reason we are going slower introducing solar and wind power than some would like.
  • Industry reports asses the cost of building capacity with wind, solar and nuclear to be almost the same in terms of capital cost per kW. Each has lifecycle capital costs around $6000 per kW of capacity. Of course this is very rough, and ‘industry observers’ have widely different views on these costs. Nuclear, however, doesn’t get built in small doses. Centralized plants are scaled to GW size, so the capital costs are pretty large. Nuclear, once built, operates at a very high duty cycle: it is on all the time. Wind generation works when the wind is in the right range – it has a duty cycle much smaller than nuclear, so it is relatively more expensive. Solar generation facilities have a duty cycle around 16% because we get 4.2 hours of sunlight per day in most of Ontario as an average. So, solar is currently 5 or 6 times more expensive than nuclear (although prices are declining nicely). That aside, it is really good at generating power at the point of demand, which eliminates a lot of the transmission losses presented by the large centralized generation facilities, and it puts the capital requirements in the private domain. Like any other machine: you can’t build it out of all-same parts, so solar, wind, nuclear and hydro-electric all have viable roles in a responsible Ontario energy plan and policy. We just need educated politicians and providers who can represent and build this appropriate blend responsibly.
  • Introduction of incented renewable power generation projects in Ontario has generated local leadership in a global growing field, and has created jobs in Ontario in a forward looking industry. This is a vital part of the overall benefit to us as residents. It isn’t all purely about power generation.

    • Ontario does have lower electricity costs than most of the world: thanks mostly to our solid base of cost effective hydro-electric power and a reasonable infrastructure. We are also among the biggest consumers in the world. So, costs are rising to add capacity, to refurbish some aging facilities (and phase out coal), and costs are rising as our people become more expensive. I’m sure the system could be better managed at slightly less cost, but those who put the finger on our new and forward looking renewable energy policy are mis-informed or just playing politics.

    Solar energy is great for Ontario, but it has to be introduced, priced and managed carefully. There is strong view – even within the solar industry – that the overall FIT tariff structure is a little too rich, and that it has heated up interest in the industry beyond our ability to smoothly scale up for. I think many of us expect to see that tariff adjusted to a level that generates a pace of business that is safely accommodated, and returns for investors that remain attractive relative to other financial investments.

    Top