FCC issues a Notice of Violation to Solar City for RFI Inteferance

You are misinformed. Perhaps in your state there is no net metering (backward spinning meters) but in my state of VA and many, many other states a grid tied solar system does in fact spin the meter backward when pushing power to the grid. The vast majority of solar systems on houses, and as far as I know every one that Solar City installs, do not involve batteries or charge controllers. They simply make power and feed it into the home's electrical system. If the home uses it, that's less power they bought from the utility. If the home doesn't use it the meter goes backward. This is called "net metering" and it is the standard way of interconnecting grid tied solar systems in most states. The utility effectively does buy the excess generation from you at the retail rate, not wholesale.
I install these systems for a living: all day, every day. Solar City uses the Solar Edge product with optimizers which does increase the output of the system slightly by compensating for differences in panel outputs. Not all grid tied systems use optimizers. Some simply have the solar panels in series up to about 400 volts. This DC is sent to the inverter and comes out as 240V AC. The AC goes directly into the home's breaker panel. It is unfortunate that the manufacturers of these devices are not complying with FCC rules. I don't know how that get's missed at the UL and FCC testing labs; maybe they don't go to an FCC lab. The article in the April 2016 QST goes into great detail about one ham mitigating RFI from this exact type of system.

 

I run a pair of Morningstar MPPT45 charge controllers with very little noise(yes a few birdies but like 1 or 2 per band). Most of the noise isn't the charge controller, it is the inverters used. MPPT IS PWM but it is a variable pulse width to keep maximum current flowing from the panels.

 

So don't grid tie and run some circuits on a separate panel with an automatic transfer switch. Long as you have battery power you have solar power. Batteries hit the programmed set point(only available in high quality inverters! Or via an add on relay controller that can measure battery voltage.) and the transfer switch drops you back on grid with a delay of 30 seconds(needed because the inverter will not be in sync with the grid). How are they going to know what the solar panels are doing and they cannot regulate having them to charge batteries! That would be a massive constitutional violation and would not stand up in court.

 

Can you tell us the make and model number of some of these devices? Do they say anything about FCC compliance or have an FCC mark on them? They should be listed in a public database. Hopefully they have a UL listing mark.

The manufacturer of the device goes to a private test house and pays for FCC Part 15 certification testing if it's considered a consumer device, or Part 18 if it's considered an industrial device. (Industrial is more lenient, assuming that the equipment is used in a location where there are other noise sources and not many radio/TV services to interfere with.)

So these solar device manufacturers may be certifying under Part 18, or may not be doing any certification. Maybe they mistakenly only do the UL listing for the AC safety aspect. The local building inspector is only concerned with safety regulations, not radio.

 

More than likely something like that will be developed because it is just stupid to sell the power back to the utility at a loss. I see some negatives in constantly switching from grid (consumption) to internal solar however, storing surplus energy is the big issue. Solar and Wind are cool ideas that sound really cool. In reality the only winners were companies like GE that has/had most of the wind power patents and political connections/media manipulation skills to drive it home.

 

That is going away and might not be long before your state decides to change the policy, utilities are losing money, so they say.

Have you ever done a cost analysis on the systems you install?

 

Just because it has a UL badge or FCC type approval on the device does not mean it is actually approved. Think about this one........

 

I know net meter must eventually end. It is a terrible deal for the power companies. But, it's been the law of the land for the most part since the '70's I think. The whole electric/utility industry is going to have to change. It was never designed for distributed generation but we're trying to use it that way. It's worked for quite a while but greater and greater amounts of grid tied solar will eventually make the whole industry have to change.
Cost analysis? Like how long until the system pays for itself? About 8 or 9 years for a grid tied system with no batteries if you take full advantage of the 30% federal income tax credit. The warranty on a solar panel is typically 25 years and they will likely last well beyond that so it's really a pretty good long term investment. If a business is installing they can also take advantage of accelerated depreciation which can shorten the payback further. A typical residential system usually shows about a 7% ROI over 25 years.

 

My own system has an SMA SB6.0 inverter. It is listed to UL1741 which is quite typical and also FCC Part 15.

 

Fill me in. Your saying a device can have a label on it that says it is FCC approved but yet not be FCC approved? Are you insinuating a false label like the old Federal Pacific breaker panels used to have?
Sorry, I don't really keep up that much with UL and FCC testing procedures. I assume when I see the labels it means they've been tested.

 

Thanks. I didn't see a certificate of EMC testing on the website in the "certificates" section, the installation manual claims it complies with Part15 Class A and B.

If it is creating terrible RFI, then it seems that either the shipping product isn't the same as what was tested, or there is something different in a typical installation from what was tested. I would guess its the latter, probably the attached wiring was very short for testing compared to a typical installation.

 

YUP!!!!!! Who or what entity has the staffing to police something like FCC labels or UL certs being authentic. It is so easy to get illegal/ fake goods into the USA using China Post because they pass the package to USPS for a next to nothing in cost. Its not even remotely close to being funny. Before the online market places it was easier to catch the fake goods when a distributor would have a couple containers of the bootleg products sitting at the ship yard. Now with so many sealed packages entering the country, not to forget """" gift $1 value """"" on the declaration.

 

That is what is claimed, they neglect to state the output degrades significantly over time. The mono crystal Renogy panels I use have a degradation curve in the box ( I cannot find it on the website). After a few years its output is down to 80-90% (I am recalling this from memory so it might be incorrect) and I have NEVER found a manufacture that does not overstate. So in reality the life is not nearly as stated, will the company be around in 6 years? Does the home owner actually know what is going on? Fake news rules the less fortunate...........

I cannot justify the purchase of a new machine if it does not have 100% ROI in less than a year. The (home) solar set ups are typically under $30k and will never see a true ROI because the panels are consumable items. Then reaching out for 8 to 9 years is just plain nuts to even consider that as an investment. The switch gear it just depends, if lightening takes it out home owners insurance might pick that one up.

My shack is solar, its cool and neat and provides something to talk about on the air. Is it practical and viable, NOT EVEN CLOSE. Its not a green solution, its actually worse than burning fossil fuel, why you ask. What about end of life disposal of the panels?? Has anyone that is saying solar is green even thought about that one.

 

Just a question. Do these things pump out the QRM 24/7, or only when the sun's shining?

 

Yep. Even big box retailers can have problems. I recall a few years ago there was a rash of lamps and little electrical items with counterfeit UL labels that were never tested. If you look at UL labels on such goods they are now holographic to help thwart counterfeiting.

Third party cell phone and computer charger/power supplies and batteries are notorious for not having been tested, even though they might have a fake mark on the unit or box. IMO this is a situation where it's worth it to spend a few more bucks and buy the name brand since your safety as well as your expensive phone or computer are at risk.

And then there is the "CE" mark. The valid CE mark show testing to European Union requirements, while the "China Export" mark looks almost the same but means nothing. They can be distinguished if one looks carefully because the real CE mark has more spacing between the letters.

Do a search on counterfeit UL mark (or CE mark) and you'll see plenty of instances. A big one recently was a hover board manufacturer.