COCT are looking at using a bi-directional meter costing closer to R2k IIRC.
2 Likes
I will get one tomorrow.
And they are talking R4.95 (?) per month for the fee.
Now that makes sense financially. Iâll also get one of our Munic catches on.
I think the one they had on offer in previous years, is probably a very high end 3-phase meter. The demand was probably too low to do anything else.
A bit like the early ESS years in the Victron ecosystem, when only the EM24 meter was supported (a R4500 meter), but then later the ET112 was added (which was more like R1000).
A 2k meter would be impressive.
@plonkster. if one had oneâs own self-interest and that of Victronâs in mind.
One would be forgiven for getting involved before the COCTâs eventual meter choice.
I sense the opportunity for an arrangement that may be a Win-Win-Win-Win arrangement regarding the COCT, Victron, the meter manufacturer, and the end user.
Imagine a meter that the manufacturer discounted to the end user because Victron had developed it to be compatible with their ESS. That way, the ESS user would save the Carlo Gavazzi meter cost and as a result, said user would be very amenable to exporting his excess power to the COCT. As a bonus, Victron would become the go-to system for solar installations in the COCT.
And probably beyondâŚ
There is an opportunity here. Elon wouldnât miss this trick, Gwede neither for that matter. Symbiosis: a lot to gain and little to lose by trying. Set up a meeting.
The COCT mayor and Victronâs head guy seem a cut above. It will work, itâs worth millions to all players, and the end user will benefit.
2 Likes
Indeed @Phil.g00 , there is a meter standard in Europe called DSMR (Dutch Smart Meter Requirements), which is also used in Belgium to some extent. It is a serial protocol and from what Iâve heard DSMR5 is fast enough that you can run ESS directly against it. The first version is a bit too slow if you want to avoid feed-in altogether, but fast enough if you donât mind little bits slipping in. The boss man even wrote a driver for it long ago.
1 Like
If I were a mayor contemplating how to supply cheaper meters to entice my bailiwick to work together for the welfare of my city, Iâd like to know this before meter supply contracts were negotiated.
If I were a meter manufacturer, I would implement DSMR2 if it meant I would get a contract to supply a cityâs meters. Primarily a city that is the forerunner of nationwide policy in that regard.
Itâs worth a phone call from a COCT forumite, methinks.
I have some difficulty understanding the exact business case though.
I can understand that this makes the home ownerâs life better. He doesnât have to buy an expensive meter.
Iâm unsure how it helps the city. Their meter is already, due to economies of scale and all that stuff, probably about the same cost as a Victron meter (btw, Victron is moving away from using third party meters for their systems. The RS-inverters, which is the future, will use the blue CAN-bus/Ethernet meter only).
If you are using the meter to prevent selling to the city (ESS âzero feedinâ), how does it help the issue of the very expensive bi-directional meter, since that meter does the opposite, it promotes selling to the city?
The one use case I can see, is if the meter has a communication interface of some sort that makes adding of self-consumption systems easier. But I am entirely uncertain how to word such a request. Sure, it helps Victron sell more inverters (because they save a thousand bucks on an additional meter), but how does it help CoCT? 
As excellent as the idea is, I do not see the âstressâ adding anything to Victronâs bottom line.
Not to mention NERSA changes the ârulesâ.
And Victron is not the biggest SA supplier either.
So methinks, let the city sort out its network connections, Victron deals with their part.
KISS.
I think the problem is that thereâs very few municipalities that requires registering or even has a process which is not SSEG / allowing feedback through expensive tarrifs / charges / meters etc. I know COCT requires registration and sorts you with a meter, but I know COJ, for example, doesnât have such a process except for if you want to sell back. In my case Iâm not registered (like pretty much everyone), but I happen to have a meter that doesnât trip / tamper when feeding a little bit back.
For some reason I assumed the OP is in Cape Town, but you are correct, this might not be the case.
Whatever system is used, the user has to face the issue of buying a bi-directional meter from the city.
It is likely the user also has to purchase a second meter that is compatible with his/her particular solar set-up.
If a Victron system can interface with the cityâs meter and avoid the cost of that second meter, then the Victron system has the edge over other systems.
Ergo, Victron has a superior product offering, and its ZA market share will increase.
Victron wins.
The city is trying to procure the best deal possible for meters to entice solar users to export power. The COCT mayor has said as much.
So right now, they are looking to place a tender worth Mega, and they can specify precisely what they choose. That doesnât cost extra.
Yes, economies of scale and all that.
The vendors will bend over backwards to accommodate demands because they know the COCT is the gateway drug for nationwide contracts.
Edit: see my reply to @fredhen below.
The Vendor wins.
What is the cost to a user if he no longer has to buy a CG meter for his system as well?
Or, to think of the proposition alternatively, it is akin to the COCT saying you donât have to buy a meter. Weâll use your CG meter. Same thing. One meter that was going to be bought by the user anyway serves two masters. The second meter is essentially free.
The user wins.
So effectively, the COCT will not only procure a cheaper meter than before but save a Victron user the price of a CG meter. The mayor of COCT delivers on his promise. Victron users can easily export power to the COCT. And as argued above, the number of Victron users will multiply.
The COCT wins.
That is a temporary condition.
It is true that other cities are not as proactive as the COCT, but theyâll get there.
If the COCT makes a success of things they will all follow suit.
Civil servants will beaurocrat, as sure as eggs is eggs.
Oh, Iâm sure of that.
I have had City Power around twice in the last 2 months to come and inspect my meter for potential tampering as the usage is extremely low and I saw the extremely long list of inspections to do. Just that alone makes me think that forcing people to register their grid-tied installs, getting it signed off and entered into a system is not a bad idea just to save on the time / cost of the inspections alone.
1 Like
But is it âpoliticallyâ the right move?
Since the thread is derailed anyway I found this interesting.
Our new meter could/should be allowed to do this as well - future proofing I guess.
1 Like