Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. Not completely true, as batteries are stored energy systems and while they may be disconnected, are still energized regardless of the state of other systems. -Original Message- From: David Brearley david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Sent: 1/22/2014 22:48 To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29 Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-scared-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, SolarPro magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org wrote: From: Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 2014 690.12 Rapid Shutdown Date: January 22, 2014 2:16:18 PM CST To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Reply-To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org David, My sincere thanks to all of you who worked to keep the module level disconnect requirement out of the 2014 code cycle. That ruling would have amounted to a knockout punch for string and central inverters on buildings. What was the driving force behind this push for immediate module level disconnection? There has clearly not been a rash of firefighter deaths due to PV systems. Although PV needs to continue evolving safety standards that take into account the concerns of firefighters, there is no crisis that would justify thwarting one of the few growing sectors of our economy. The PV track record has been amazingly good. So far, I've found no accounts of solar related firefighter deaths or injuries. The NFPA statistics show that the highest cause of firefighter death is heart attack. http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2013/july-august-2013/features/firefighter-fatalities-in-the-united-states-2012 This push for crippling regulation bears the earmark of ALEC’s extensive and effective war on solar. As you can read in the following links, the massively funded, Koch brothers-linked ALEC is lobbying heavily, on every level, to derail solar. All who are associated with the solar industry need to be aware of this powerful lobbying campaign. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/04/alec-freerider-homeowners-assault-clean-energy http://www.salon.com/2013/12/05/alec_freeriders_with_solar_panels_must_pay_for_robbing_the_system/ http://beforeitsnews.com/environment/2014/01/alec-gain-an-inside-track-on-colorado-solar-2490132.html Is there any way that the solar community can be alerted when threats to our industry are being put before the NEC? Although few contractors have the time or money to walk away from their businesses and attend code writing committees, a substantial number might have the time to make phone calls and send letters or emails to code writers. The solar industry needs a strong lobby of its own. Drake [The entire original message is not included.]___ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change email address settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
This is where my gripes on signage originate. Discos module level vs remote string vs rooftop string vs battery backup. How to label? How to educate firefighters? On Jan 23, 2014 5:50 AM, Glenn Burt glenn.b...@glbcc.com wrote: They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. Not completely true, as batteries are stored energy systems and while they may be disconnected, are still energized regardless of the state of other systems. -- From: David Brearley david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Sent: 1/22/2014 22:48 To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29 Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-scared-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, *SolarPro* magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.orgwrote: *From: *Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org *Subject: **Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 2014 690.12 Rapid Shutdown* *Date: *January 22, 2014 2:16:18 PM CST *To: *RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org *Reply-To: *RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org David, My sincere thanks to all of you who worked to keep the module level disconnect requirement out of the 2014 code cycle. That ruling would have amounted to a knockout punch for string and central inverters on buildings. What was the driving force behind this push for immediate module level disconnection? There has clearly *not* been a rash of firefighter deaths due to PV systems. Although PV needs to continue evolving safety standards that take into account the concerns of firefighters, there is no crisis that would justify thwarting one of the few growing sectors of our economy. The PV track record has been amazingly good. So far, I've found no accounts of solar related firefighter deaths or injuries. The NFPA statistics show that the highest cause of firefighter death is heart attack. http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2013/july-august-2013/features/firefighter-fatalities-in-the-united-states-2012 This push for crippling regulation bears the earmark of ALEC’s extensive and effective war on solar. As you can read in the following links, the massively funded, Koch brothers-linked ALEC is lobbying heavily, on every level, to derail solar. All who are associated with the solar industry need to be aware of this powerful lobbying campaign. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/04/alec-freerider-homeowners-assault-clean-energy http://www.salon.com/2013/12/05/alec_freeriders_with_solar_panels_must_pay_for_robbing_the_system/ http://beforeitsnews.com/environment/2014/01/alec-gain-an-inside-track-on-colorado-solar-2490132.html Is there any way that the solar community can be alerted when threats to our industry are being put before the NEC? Although few contractors have the time or money to walk away from their businesses and attend code writing committees, a substantial number might have the time to make phone calls and send letters or emails to code writers. The solar industry needs a strong lobby of its own. Drake [The entire original message is not included.] ___ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change email address settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules etiquette: www.re
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
Dan, I believe you are referring to the Sedona fire when you talk of the energized fence. I believe the fire department was in error when they reported that the rooftop EMT energized the fence. It is pretty clear from a review of the facts that the ac service drop burned free from the house and landed on the fence energizing it. The PV got blamed for it. Further evidence that the fire department was in error is that the PV array was consumed by the time the firefighter touched the fence. Unfortunately, the fire department version was reported by NFPA as fact when it was in error. Bill. From: re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org [mailto:re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org] On Behalf Of Dan Fink Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 11:21 PM To: RE-wrenches Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29 Drake, Wrenches; There have been firefighter injuries requiring a hospital visit, but no deaths that I know of. I try to keep track, as I train firefighters in renewable energy safety, and teach an IREC accredited class for RE installers on how to start a local firefighter outreach program. But mining the NFIRS database is tricky because keywords vary so much. The most recent firefighter injury I know of was a serious electrical shock resulting from rooftop EMT that became live during a rooftop fire and contacted a chainlink fence; the firefighter was touching the fence. Rooftop flashing, eaves, metal roofs etc can all cause what UL calls 'unexpected current paths' in their recent testing. Their results on testing FF PPE for protection against electrical hazards were also sobering.it does very little, and about zero when wet, which it usually is. As David stated, a big issue right now is how fire commanders are forced to change (and back off from offensive to defensive) their fire attack strategies when PV becomes an 'unknown.' Firefighters are scared of the the unknown, and we never assume *anything*just like how that metal water drum in a garage fire might actually contain diesel or used motor oilor magnesium shavings. I have a whole file of incidents with PV systems where local fire commanders had to back off because they just didn't know. That said, there will be a *great* panel discussion in Denver in March at the NABCEP CE conference regarding these topics and more. The first session involves the new UL2703 racking and fire rating standards; the second one (on which I am honored to be a panelist) the ICC 2012 setbacks and labeling requirements. As a firefighter and PV installer I have a big mouthfull to say about signage.. The new law that NJ Gov Chris Christie just signed into being is very interesting.I'll be analyzing it before the NABCEP conference. I think with all the stakeholders involved, a just and fair equilibrium will be reached, and *hopefully* will be a continuously evolving dialogue between all stakeholders. The last thing RE installers, firefighters, AHJs, and home and business owners want to see is the unknown. Scares the crap out of all of us! On Jan 22, 2014 8:48 PM, David Brearley david.brear...@solarprofessional.com mailto:david.brear...@solarprofessional.com wrote: Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-sca red-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building-except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org http://solarancs.org . David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, SolarPro magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com mailto:david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 tel:541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org wrote: From: Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org mailto:drake.chamber
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
I must jump on my soap box, as I have so many time in the past, and follow up Glenn's comment here. We worry so much about details of PV arrays, while batteries are serious safety hazards that no one (including the NEC) ever wants to address. Not only can they not be de-energized, they have amazing short circuit potential (unlike PV) and they can explode as well. Meanwhile in normal operation, they off gas poisonous fumes. The whole industry is looking at energy storage now, as well, so this isn't just confined to the off grid fringe anymore. Further, many industrial complexes have large battery banks for UPS systems and electric forklifts. Why is the NEC still not making any real changes on battery storage? There have been some fairly interesting fires from utility scale battery systems, seems its more than about time. R.Ray Walters CTO, Solarray, Inc Nabcep Certified PV Installer, Licensed Master Electrician Solar Design Engineer 303 505-8760 On 1/23/2014 5:49 AM, Glenn Burt wrote: They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building---except for PV systems. Not completely true, as batteries are stored energy systems and while they may be disconnected, are still energized regardless of the state of other systems. From: David Brearley mailto:david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Sent: ?1/?22/?2014 22:48 To: RE-wrenches mailto:re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29 Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-scared-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building---except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org http://solarancs.org. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor,/SolarPro/magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com mailto:david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org mailto:re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org wrote: * From:*Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org mailto:drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org *Subject:**Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 2014 690.12 Rapid Shutdown* *Date:*January 22, 2014 2:16:18 PM CST *To:*RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org mailto:re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org *Reply-To:*RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org mailto:re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org David, My sincere thanks to all of you who worked to keep the module level disconnect requirement out of the 2014 code cycle. That ruling would have amounted to a knockout punch for string and central inverters on buildings. What was the driving force behind this push for immediate module level disconnection? There has clearly_not_been a rash of firefighter deaths due to PV systems. Although PV needs to continue evolving safety standards that take into account the concerns of firefighters, there is no crisis that would justify thwarting one of the few growing sectors of our economy. The PV track record has been amazingly good. So far, I've found no accounts of solar related firefighter deaths or injuries. The NFPA statistics show that the highest cause of firefighter death is heart attack.http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2013/july-august-2013/features/firefighter-fatalities-in-the-united-states-2012 This push for crippling regulation bears the earmark of ALEC's extensive and effective war on solar. As you can read in the following links, the massively funded, Koch brothers-linked ALEC is lobbying heavily, on every level, to derail solar. All who are associated with the solar industry need to be aware of this powerful lobbying campaign. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/04/alec-freerider
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
Ray-- What poisonous fumes do lead-acid batteries off-gas? I know they off-gas hydrogen, which can be an explosion hazard -- but hydrogen isn't poisonous. Or were you thinking about a different type of battery. Jeffrey Quackenbush On Thursday, January 23, 2014 8:19 PM, Ray Walters r...@solarray.com wrote: I must jump on my soap box, as I have so many time in the past, and follow up Glenn's comment here. We worry so much about details of PV arrays, while batteries are serious safety hazards that no one (including the NEC) ever wants to address. Not only can they not be de-energized, they have amazing short circuit potential (unlike PV) and they can explode as well. Meanwhile in normal operation, they off gas poisonous fumes. The whole industry is looking at energy storage now, as well, so this isn't just confined to the off grid fringe anymore. Further, many industrial complexes have large battery banks for UPS systems and electric forklifts. Why is the NEC still not making any real changes on battery storage? There have been some fairly interesting fires from utility scale battery systems, seems its more than about time. R.Ray Walters CTO, Solarray, Inc Nabcep Certified PV Installer, Licensed Master Electrician Solar Design Engineer 303 505-8760 On 1/23/2014 5:49 AM, Glenn Burt wrote: They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. Not completely true, as batteries are stored energy systems and while they may be disconnected, are still energized regardless of the state of other systems. From: David Brearley Sent: 1/22/2014 22:48 To: RE-wrenches Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29 Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-scared-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, SolarPro magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org wrote: From: Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 2014 690.12 Rapid Shutdown Date: January 22, 2014 2:16:18 PM CST To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Reply-To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org David, My sincere thanks to all of you who worked to keep the module level disconnect requirement out of the 2014 code cycle. That ruling would have amounted to a knockout punch for string and central inverters on buildings. What was the driving force behind this push for immediate module level disconnection? There has clearly not been a rash of firefighter deaths due to PV systems. Although PV needs to continue evolving safety standards that take into account the concerns of firefighters, there is no crisis that would justify thwarting one of the few growing sectors of our economy. The PV track record has been amazingly good. So far, I've found no accounts of solar related firefighter deaths or injuries. The NFPA statistics show that the highest cause of firefighter death is heart attack. http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2013/july-august-2013/features/firefighter-fatalities-in-the-united-states-2012 This push for crippling regulation bears the earmark of ALEC’s extensive and effective war on solar. As you can read in the following links, the massively funded, Koch brothers-linked ALEC is lobbying heavily, on every level, to derail solar. All who are associated
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
Thanks for the correction on that sedona fire Bill; I had only seen the incorrect fire dept report. I wish there was a clearinghouse for information on RE incidents and close calls as they are all teachable moments for both RE professionals and firefighters. I ditto the need for more NEC guidance on battery banks. In my firefighting career, I've been at about a dozen structure fires involving RE equipment. Only 4 were actually caused by the RE equipment. *All* of those originated in or near the battery bank. 1 internal battery short circuit, 1 mouse chew inside battery box, and 2 bad connection when charging with a generator. I'd like to get involved, BillI have lots to say about wooden battery boxes, parallel fusing, signage, and more. What are the first steps for getting involved? Dan Fink, Executive Director; Otherpower Buckville Energy Consulting Buckville Publications LLC NABCEP / IREC accredited Continuing Education Providers 970.672.4342 On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Bill Brooks billbroo...@yahoo.com wrote: Jeffrey and Ray, Batteries can off-gas hydrogen-sulfide gas when under heavy charge or overcharge. It is the nasty rotten egg smelling gas. Definitely not to be inhaled since when it hits your lungs it turns back into sulfuric acid. To address Ray’s point, the new 690.12 regulation that has been getting a lot of air time on this list does, in fact, address battery circuits for PV systems. Any circuit that is part of a PV system inside a building within 5’ must be controlled to 30V, 240VA within 10 seconds. This includes all the ac output conductors from a backup PV inverter and the battery inverter input circuit as well. This provision matches the new requirement for battery systems in 690.71(H) that requires “A disconnecting means and overcurrent protection shall be provided at the energy storage device end of the circuit. Fused disconnecting means or circuit breakers shall be permitted to be used.” Ideally we try to keep our battery conductors to 5’ or less and that means that no additional disconnecting means would be necessary according to the new 690.71(H). If we have to go longer than 5’ and the conductors are inside the building, a rapid shutdown capability would need to be on that circuit and it would need to have a disconnecting means and overcurrent protection. The best way to meet this requirement would probably be to have a shunt-trip breaker, similar to what Midnite Solar provides with their birdhouse setup. There are definitely much more discussion going on in the NEC about energy storage now than ever before. This next code cycle will be very busy on the subject. It is likely that article 480 will soon be turned into “Energy Storage” or a new article in Chapter 6 or 7 will cover “Energy Storage Systems.” It was proposed last cycle and failed, but this time there is much more interest in the subject. The solar industry needs to be involved, so it sounds like this is your year for both of you to get involved. Bill. ___ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change email address settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
I'm definitely interested in being involved too. I really respect how difficult the language crafting can be, and the frustration to have certain intent be misconstrued by an AHJ some where else later. R.Ray Walters CTO, Solarray, Inc Nabcep Certified PV Installer, Licensed Master Electrician Solar Design Engineer 303 505-8760 On 1/23/2014 4:17 PM, Dan Fink wrote: Thanks for the correction on that sedona fire Bill; I had only seen the incorrect fire dept report. I wish there was a clearinghouse for information on RE incidents and close calls as they are all teachable moments for both RE professionals and firefighters. I ditto the need for more NEC guidance on battery banks. In my firefighting career, I've been at about a dozen structure fires involving RE equipment. Only 4 were actually caused by the RE equipment. *All* of those originated in or near the battery bank. 1 internal battery short circuit, 1 mouse chew inside battery box, and 2 bad connection when charging with a generator. I'd like to get involved, BillI have lots to say about wooden battery boxes, parallel fusing, signage, and more. What are the first steps for getting involved? Dan Fink, Executive Director; Otherpower Buckville Energy Consulting Buckville Publications LLC NABCEP / IREC accredited Continuing Education Providers 970.672.4342 On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Bill Brooks billbroo...@yahoo.com mailto:billbroo...@yahoo.com wrote: Jeffrey and Ray, Batteries can off-gas hydrogen-sulfide gas when under heavy charge or overcharge. It is the nasty rotten egg smelling gas. Definitely not to be inhaled since when it hits your lungs it turns back into sulfuric acid. To address Ray's point, the new 690.12 regulation that has been getting a lot of air time on this list does, in fact, address battery circuits for PV systems. Any circuit that is part of a PV system inside a building within 5' must be controlled to 30V, 240VA within 10 seconds. This includes all the ac output conductors from a backup PV inverter and the battery inverter input circuit as well. This provision matches the new requirement for battery systems in 690.71(H) that requires A disconnecting means and overcurrent protection shall be provided at the energy storage device end of the circuit. Fused disconnecting means or circuit breakers shall be permitted to be used. Ideally we try to keep our battery conductors to 5' or less and that means that no additional disconnecting means would be necessary according to the new 690.71(H). If we have to go longer than 5' and the conductors are inside the building, a rapid shutdown capability would need to be on that circuit and it would need to have a disconnecting means and overcurrent protection. The best way to meet this requirement would probably be to have a shunt-trip breaker, similar to what Midnite Solar provides with their birdhouse setup. There are definitely much more discussion going on in the NEC about energy storage now than ever before. This next code cycle will be very busy on the subject. It is likely that article 480 will soon be turned into Energy Storage or a new article in Chapter 6 or 7 will cover Energy Storage Systems. It was proposed last cycle and failed, but this time there is much more interest in the subject. The solar industry needs to be involved, so it sounds like this is your year for both of you to get involved. Bill. ___ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change email address settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org ___ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change email address settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-scared-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, SolarPro magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org wrote: From: Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 2014 690.12 Rapid Shutdown Date: January 22, 2014 2:16:18 PM CST To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Reply-To: RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org David, My sincere thanks to all of you who worked to keep the module level disconnect requirement out of the 2014 code cycle. That ruling would have amounted to a knockout punch for string and central inverters on buildings. What was the driving force behind this push for immediate module level disconnection? There has clearly not been a rash of firefighter deaths due to PV systems. Although PV needs to continue evolving safety standards that take into account the concerns of firefighters, there is no crisis that would justify thwarting one of the few growing sectors of our economy. The PV track record has been amazingly good. So far, I've found no accounts of solar related firefighter deaths or injuries. The NFPA statistics show that the highest cause of firefighter death is heart attack. http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2013/july-august-2013/features/firefighter-fatalities-in-the-united-states-2012 This push for crippling regulation bears the earmark of ALEC’s extensive and effective war on solar. As you can read in the following links, the massively funded, Koch brothers-linked ALEC is lobbying heavily, on every level, to derail solar. All who are associated with the solar industry need to be aware of this powerful lobbying campaign. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/04/alec-freerider-homeowners-assault-clean-energy http://www.salon.com/2013/12/05/alec_freeriders_with_solar_panels_must_pay_for_robbing_the_system/ http://beforeitsnews.com/environment/2014/01/alec-gain-an-inside-track-on-colorado-solar-2490132.html Is there any way that the solar community can be alerted when threats to our industry are being put before the NEC? Although few contractors have the time or money to walk away from their businesses and attend code writing committees, a substantial number might have the time to make phone calls and send letters or emails to code writers. The solar industry needs a strong lobby of its own. Drake ___ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change email address settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
Re: [RE-wrenches] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 7, Issue 29
Drake, Wrenches; There have been firefighter injuries requiring a hospital visit, but no deaths that I know of. I try to keep track, as I train firefighters in renewable energy safety, and teach an IREC accredited class for RE installers on how to start a local firefighter outreach program. But mining the NFIRS database is tricky because keywords vary so much. The most recent firefighter injury I know of was a serious electrical shock resulting from rooftop EMT that became live during a rooftop fire and contacted a chainlink fence; the firefighter was touching the fence. Rooftop flashing, eaves, metal roofs etc can all cause what UL calls 'unexpected current paths' in their recent testing. Their results on testing FF PPE for protection against electrical hazards were also sobering.it does very little, and about zero when wet, which it usually is. As David stated, a big issue right now is how fire commanders are forced to change (and back off from offensive to defensive) their fire attack strategies when PV becomes an 'unknown.' Firefighters are scared of the the unknown, and we never assume *anything*just like how that metal water drum in a garage fire might actually contain diesel or used motor oilor magnesium shavings. I have a whole file of incidents with PV systems where local fire commanders had to back off because they just didn't know. That said, there will be a *great* panel discussion in Denver in March at the NABCEP CE conference regarding these topics and more. The first session involves the new UL2703 racking and fire rating standards; the second one (on which I am honored to be a panelist) the ICC 2012 setbacks and labeling requirements. As a firefighter and PV installer I have a big mouthfull to say about signage.. The new law that NJ Gov Chris Christie just signed into being is very interesting.I'll be analyzing it before the NABCEP conference. I think with all the stakeholders involved, a just and fair equilibrium will be reached, and *hopefully* will be a continuously evolving dialogue between all stakeholders. The last thing RE installers, firefighters, AHJs, and home and business owners want to see is the unknown. Scares the crap out of all of us! On Jan 22, 2014 8:48 PM, David Brearley david.brear...@solarprofessional.com wrote: Drake, As far I know you are correct. There have not been any firefighter deaths due to solar. However, a fire chief in New Jersey did suggest that he let a warehouse burn down due to the presence of a PV system on the roof: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/23313172/multiple-alarm-fire http://www.theatlanticcities.com/technology/2013/09/why-firefighters-are-scared-solar-power/6854/ That suggests to me that while there is no crisis today, there is certainly the potential for one down the road. Imagine the insurance industry's response if fire fighters make a habit of not responding to structural fires due to the presence of PV systems. Fire fighters want touch-safe PV modules. And they have a reasonable complaint. They can safely shut down any electrical system in a building—except for PV systems. SEIA and SEPA are the solar industry lobby. Please do engage and support them. SEIA even has a political action committee, the SolarPAC. Part of the way that I try to stay on top of evolving Code issues is by attending SEIA- and SEPA-sponsored events. Also, over the past 4 or 5 years, the Solar America Board of Codes and Standards has scheduled annual meetings that coincide with Intersolar. Those are very informative sessions. I think the sessions are even archived online at solarancs.org. David Brearley Senior Technical Editor, *SolarPro* magazine NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional david.brear...@solarprofessional.com Direct: 541.261.6545 On Jan 22, 2014, at 8:18 PM, re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.orgwrote: *From: *Drake drake.chamber...@redwoodalliance.org *Subject: **Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 2014 690.12 Rapid Shutdown* *Date: *January 22, 2014 2:16:18 PM CST *To: *RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org *Reply-To: *RE-wrenches re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org David, My sincere thanks to all of you who worked to keep the module level disconnect requirement out of the 2014 code cycle. That ruling would have amounted to a knockout punch for string and central inverters on buildings. What was the driving force behind this push for immediate module level disconnection? There has clearly *not* been a rash of firefighter deaths due to PV systems. Although PV needs to continue evolving safety standards that take into account the concerns of firefighters, there is no crisis that would justify thwarting one of the few growing sectors of our economy. The PV track record has been amazingly good. So far, I've found no accounts of solar related firefighter deaths or injuries. The NFPA statistics show that the highest cause of firefighter death is heart attack.
