Smallfootprints ECO Blog

Chook Pen Design - Chicken Coop/Hutch - Chook House - Casa de Pollo - Call it what you will!

Ian — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 10:30:00 GMT

Actually some people call it the chicken palace - I call it IKEA because it can be flat-packed I haven't been blogging for a while and now you know why! I have been spending every spare minute creating a chook pen so we can get a cycle of life going on our little 1/3 acre block. We wanted to get chooks for the multitude of benefits they provide.

Create potent nitrogen fertiliser that can be added to your compost bin to help make great compost
Provide protein in the form of eggs that are great for vegetarians and meat-eaters alike
Provide some entertainment and enjoyment for the kids (and adults)

But before you can get chooks, you need to make sure they have somewhere suitable to live. My priorities were:

A chicken pen that can be fully enclosed at night to keep the chooks safe from birds of prey, foxes and snakes
An easy access point for collecting eggs and cleaning out the coop
A coop that is off the ground to enable the chickens to come down and scratch the earth before being let out.
A design that can be totally pulled apart so it can be moved into place.

I did a bit of research on the net of course and came up with this design for a chook house. I have made a few things before - mainly furniture - although I have no formal training or real world experience - so this is certainly in the realm of backyard chippies!

THE BUILD

The frame is made of hardwood. Although not cca treated (Copper-Chromium-Arsenate) as that can be fatal to chooks. I decided to make a slanted front to make the door stay open when it is swung out. The first steps were to make the framing and put in some bracing. This is made of 50mm x 25mm hardwood.

I then layed out each piece of frame on the ground and overlayed and cut out what is supposed to be aviary wire (12.4mm square I think), but works brilliantly as a more rigid and neater version of chicken wire. I hammered it onto the inside of the frame using galvanised u-nails (lot of em!)

I screwed and glued the frame to its bracing using batten screws (hex head - silver in the image above) and liquid nails. I didn't however connect the four walls together as I wanted to be able to take the chook pen apart to move it whenever I wanted including the first installation. I then used pine prefab boards that locked together for the walls of the coop. I measured then up and screwed them into place from the side. Do this before hammering on the wire to the side sections so you can get leverage to use a drill.

Here you can also see the roof framing. I was going to make an A-Frame roof but the wife made a suggestion to keep it simple and this was the excellent result. Perfect for a couple of sheet of corrogated iron.

My workshop - well actually it is our car port and I need to back the cars out to to any work! Oh for a nice big workshop shed...

Here you can see the door open. It sits on two hinges. There is a latch that automatically locks when you shut it. Although the chickens keep scratching rocks and dirt into the framing and they get trapped when you try to shut the door sometimes meaning you have to flick them out. There is a centre section of the coop in here where the coop floor and front wall drop out when you take off the four sides. You can see wheels on there if I every want to tilt it and move it like a chicken tractor once it is in place.

I built a ladder for the chooks to get in and out of the coop and down to dirt floor. They actually enjoy using it I am happy to tell. Here I am testing how it clips onto the chicken coop.

OK - now you are going to see how it comes apart and goes together. This was done at night as we picked up the chooks on the way to a birthday party and didn't get home till late (yes the chooks went into a friend's coop while the party was on). This is a side wall. You can see that the wood was been stained and sealed to make it look much better and make it weatherproof. I actually used a product called weatherproof and it is working well despite massive downpours.

Here are the other sections. You can see the front wall and floor of the coop in the centre. They are the only parts that are connected. They will lift up and slot into place when the side are bolted together using removable furniture screws shown above.

Here is the roof - ready to put on - it is by far the heaviest part. 2 sheets of corrogated iron make up most of the weight along with a large piece of hardwood timber used for the front (because I ran out of the prefab pine)

THE RESULT

Here it is complete in a test build before we moved it to the garden. Side walls are on and centre part and roof are both held in with two furniture screws.

Here you can see the rear of the chicken pen. I provides easy access to get to the coop to collect eggs, poo for your compost and to add clean bedding for the chooks. You can see that I mounted the pen on some ag-drain rocks of around 1cm diameter. This provides drainage and keeps the wood off the soil. I later added some more larger rocks on the inside of the pen to stop the chooks undermining these foundations.

You can also see the guttering system I made out of pvc pipe - which drains down into a hanging water container with overflow. When it rains the chooks get fresh water and the excess drains away over some rocks. Make sure that you put some sort of netting over the top gutter inlet to stop material clogging it and mice getting in.

When you open this door you will find...

Eggs of course - a couple of them at that. I have since added a perch for the chooks too and I think one likes to sleep on the perch and one on the nesting box. Even though the perch is made for two.

I hope you liked the tour. Sorry but I don't have plans as such as I kind of made it up as I went along. Feel free to make something similar if you feel like giving a chook a home. A charity collector that came to my home when I was making it actually asked if I could make him one. WIth the amount of time it took me - every weekend for a couple of months.. somehow I think this will be a one off for me...

The basic size is 1400mm square with the coop being 700mm deep x 1400mm wide and the height of the coop 700mm- about 900mm due to the sloping roof.

Cost of materials I think is around $350 (Australian dollars).

~ 35metres of 25mmx50mm hardwood - $2.20/metre = $77

~25metres of pine prefab board - ~$3/metre = $75

~50 batten screws 50mm+ long - = ~ $35

2 sheets of 1800mm x 900mm corrogated iron roofing @ ~$32/each = $64

~12.4mm aviary wire - 1400 high - ~6-7 metres @ $7 per metre = ~$50

Assorted screws (furniture, roofing, timber etc.) & pvc piping, flexihose for guttering = $50

= $351

If your used pine in place of hardwood it would be cheaper but wouldn't last as long.

Below you can see how the chook pen is now. They have a run of about 6 metres x 1.5 metres to scratch in and I built another gate mounted on star pickets that self-closes. The chook house is in the distance. Leave your comments - I would be interested to hear from you and what you use as a chook house.

Organic Gardening - Improving Soil Fertility with Beneficial Bacteria and Fungi

Ian — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 02:20:00 GMT

Just a short note to start - here is a cool frog who peeked his head into what I was doing in the garden. He's hanging off the branch of a tree fern. Looks like a baby tree frog. Frogs are a good sign that something is right in your garden. They are amongst the most sensitive creatures to non-organic substances - herbicides and pesticides.

I decided to try a BFA certified (Biological Farmers of Australia) product this week that apparently promotes nitrogen fixation, increased phosphorous availability and helps to create humus soil in your garden. It is a product that contains bacteria and fungi that are beneficial to your garden. Believe it or not, but 90% of soil is bacteria and fungus. It is a little like your gut. There are good and bad bacteria there too. More of the good stuff keep the bad stuff at bay. By brewing a couple of teaspoons of this product in a compost brewer, it creates billions of these good bacteria and fungi that can then be poured on your garden or fruit/nut trees to give them a helping hand. Being a totally organic product, it is in fact killed by herbicides and pesticides.

I have made compost teas in the past in which I have brewed compost for a couple of days to good effect. This product uses a similar process and I had all the gear so I thought I would try it out.

Here is what I used for this brew. A simple plastic bin, an aquarium aerator with flexible air stone tubing, an aquarium heater, some rock minerals containing essential minerals, a seaweed solution - always great for the vegie patch, some of the product - Nutri-Life 4/20 from Nutri-Tech, and some molasses. Ok here we go...

Make a loop out of the air tubing. This is an alternative to an air 'stone' and is flexible tubing with tiny holes - perfect for a job like this. I have a two outlet aerator here that pushes out twice as much air. Coil the tubing inside the base of the container so that it will create bubbles all the way round. Insert the aquarium heater.

Fill up with water and set the aerator and heater running. I set the heater at about 25 degree celcius. It can be set higher or lower depending upon whether you are looking for a brew with more bacteria or more fungus. Add a couple of tablespoons of rock minerals.

Add some seaweed solution diluted to what is states on your package. Some are pre-diluted and some are concentrate so look carefully. Then add the molasses. This is the food for the bacteria and fungus. They basically use that and the oxygen to reproduce. I added about a cup full here (250ml). That seemed to be enough although truthfully I was just guessing. The packaging for the Nutri-Life 4-20 stated that I should use their branded specific food but it is not organic certified, so I thought I would try using something that does a similar job and is organic.

I put in a heaped teaspoon and a half. I have a 250ml pack which is apparently enough for a few hectares and my plot is a few metres! Here is the brew in action.

Bingo! The packet said 1 day later, but I cooked it up for two because it wasn't frothing up much. It was actually frothing a lot more the night before but I wasn't about to spread it on the garden in the dark! The water had a lot of white particles floating in it - a good sign that the brew had allowed the bacteria and fungus to reproduce. The lower I got into the barrel the more particles there were.

I mixed the brew at a ratio of about 1/4 brew to 3/4 water and watered it onto the garden and fruit trees. I will post the results and any improvement in soil quality or plant health that I observe. The soil here is quite clay and it is slowly improving as I add compost/manures/lime etc. Remember - when performing all tasks with bacteria and fungi - wear a mask because they love to reproduce in warm, dark areas - just like your lungs!

A CSIRO Peak in the Future - Petrol $8.20 per Litre? - Electricity costs to Quadruple?

Ian — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:00:00 GMT

Get ready for higher oil prices.

A new study by CSIRO (Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) titled "Modelling of the future of transport fuels in Australia" has found that in any scenario, the cost of petrol is to rise, and it will do so markedly from 2010. The study considered that a petrol price of between $2.60 and $8 per litre would be required in order to constrain petrol consumption to the rate of production and availability.

As petrol production capacity reduces and demand increases, so does the price. Importantly though, this study only considers the increasing demand from Australia and not from the rest of the world, which would suggest to me that this price could be even higher?

In the study several scenarios are outlined that consider 3 key measures:

1) The emissions trading target adopted - both the Australian government's position of a reduction to 60% of year 2000 levels by 2050 (2000-60) and a more ambitious target of 95% of year 2000 levels by 2050 (2000-95) were modelled. The CSIRO chose two targets as it feels that the 60% target "..stills entails significant risk to the environment" and that the 95% target "...would significantly reduce the risk of irreversible climatic impacts associated with exceeding average global warming of above 2 degrees Celsius"
2) The speed of decline in oil supply - two scenarios were considered, one where we have a slow decline and another with a rapid decline due to a peak of supply
3) The speed of technological response - two scenarios were considered - one where we quickly adopt the technology required as an alternative to fossil fuels and one where we are slow to make the transition.

Under the best case scenario model where oil supplies decline slowly and we have a fast technological response to the shortages through the adoption of alternative energy, the price will peak at $2.60 per litre. Under the worst case scenario where oil supplies decline most rapidly and we do not adopt alternative technology the price peaks at $8.20 per litre. According to the study, the price bubble does not deflate until 2020 when it considers that bio fuels and synthetic fuels from coal and gas will be widely available. Below is a graph from the report - Page 46.

How will our vehicles be powered in the future?

When considering the government's current emissions target of 60% of year 2000 levels, the study found that by 2050, plug-in hybrid and pure electric that obtain their electricity from the grid will account for around 33% of vehicles on the road. Mild hybrids that generate their electricity on board will account for another 50% and traditional combustion engines will account for only 16% of vehicles. It is interesting to note that the CSIRO considers that the uptake of pure electric vehicles will be at a faster rate than hybrid vehicles within a year or two. Although it considers pure electric to be solely in the realm of light vehicles (<1200kg) and not in direct competition with hybrids. They obviously feel that the electric car will be adopted widely by consumers as the small family vehicle of choice. I differ in opinion though, as I do feel that advances technology in electric motors and batteries will allow us to also power heavier vehicles using electric motors in the foreseeable future.

The trend toward electrically powered vehicles in figure 6 takes into account the oil price shown in red in Figure 1 below. It shows that the oil price will peak at around $100 per barrel around 2009 and then decline to between $60 and $80 per barrel. When you consider that oil is currently just under $140 a barrel it is clear that there will be some difference to the model used. In fact, even the worst case scenario modelled, the oil price does not creep above $100 a barrel until 2030!

Of course higher petrol prices at the pump will be the most obvious effect of the price per barrel we are seeing at the moment, but it may also cause an accelerated uptake of hybrid and electric vehicles as more choice and quantity of vehicles become available in this sector. What car company is not going to want to be ahead of this trend?

So where is all this electricity coming from?

With this massive trend toward electric vehicles, there is going to be a corresponding demand for more electricity. Of course, what is the point of converting away from combustion engines to vehicles powered by high emission electricity production such as the burning of coal? In order to meet even the 60% emissions target set by the government, there will have to not only be a overhaul of the transport sector, but also one of the electricity generation sector. In the graph shown below you can see that by 2050, even if oil remains in the target band of $60-$80 per barrel, the electricity sector will be transformed from fossil fuel fuel dependent to one that primarily utilises renewable energy.

What does this mean for the cost of electricity?

The study found that in any scenario, the projected wholesale costs of energy will increase significantly from 2006. The wholesale cost increases always translate to a increase in the retail sector and we are already seeing this trend with, for example, the Queensland rate increasing 5.4% this year. This part of the study shows one area where a more aggressive emissions target of 95% will have a large effect. The study concludes that the 95% target could translate into a wholesale price of up to $120/MWh where a 60% target would peak at around $90/Mwh. If these increases translate directly to retail prices, it could mean that electricity costs could either triple or quadruple in the near future. Of course, consumers could take their energy future into their own hands and install wind or solar power generators at their home. This may involve a large initial outlay, however, as the cost of electricity from the grid increases, the installation of such a system will quickly become more cost effective.

Conclusion

This study goes into far more detail including the examination of the effects of the bio fuels industry. I suggest you read the full PDF of the study here for more information.

The most striking finding of this study for me is that under any scenario, the cost of transport and electricity is set to increase enough to have a significant effect on our lives. The thorough scientific investigation involved here and the conservative estimates as to the future costs of fuel make it apparent that our lifetimes will see paradigm shift. Whether we move now and make that shift have the smallest possible impact and with the best result for the future of our planet is a matter for all of us.

The opposition government in Australia refuses to support the current government's 60% of 2000 levels target by 2050 - a target that the CSIRO sees as "challenging" to adopt but still environmentally risky for our future. I believe the oppositions' position on the issue is going to polarise voters and cause the Labor government to reduce its stance in order to retain voter popularity. We are already seeing this with the issue of whether petrol will be part of the emissions trading scheme.

With these policies of "live well now" and "leave it up to future generations to deal with", there is no way we would ever reach the 95% of 2000 levels by 2050 that the CSIRO sees as required for the earth to avoid irreversible damage. Believe it or not - being sustainable does cost money and we're all going to pay in one way or another - think about it as a future fund for your kids kids...

The Hidden Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas Impact of LCD, PLASMA TVs and Notebooks - Nitrogen trifluoride

Ian — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 02:23:00 GMT

A new research paper by a respected climate change scientist points to the fact that a specialised synthetic chemical used in the manufacturing of flat-screen tvs and notebooks could be a large contributer to greenhouse gas emmissions. Professor Michael Prather of the University of California states in his paper that the gas - Nitrogen trifluoride , is 17,000 times more destructive as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

In his Geophysical Research Letters Vol 35, Dr Prather writes that Nitrogen trifluoride "CO₂, NF₃ has a potential greenhouse impact larger than that of the industrialized nations' emissions of PFCs (perflourocarbons) or SF₆(sulfur hexaflouride), or even that of the world's largest coal-fired power plants."

Nitrogen trifluoride is not included in the 6 gases voered by the Kyoto Protocol because it was not in wide use back in 1997 when the protocol was agreed to. With new factories being built across the world to meet global demand as developed nations increasingly adopt flat screen technology, the monitoring of Nitrogen trifluoride will become more relevant when tackling climate change.

Originally developed as a rocket fuel and later used in chemical lasers for the "Star Wars" missile defence system, production of the gas has only moved to large scale production beyond these niche markets in the last decade. 4000 tonnes is predicted to be made in 2008 - the greenhouse gas equivalent of 67million tonnes of CO2.

Apparently reports from the chemical industry report that only 2% of the gas is released into the atmosphere although recent studies show that this figure could be higher.

There must be an alternative to using the gas because Toshiba has already stated that it is going to avoid using the gas. I agree with Prof Prather that the next round of climate change negotiations needs to include this, and other newly adopted chemicals that have an affect on climate change, on the list of reportable chemicals.

I also think it would be great for companies such as Toshiba who are taking the lead to start labelling their TVs as "Nitrogen trifluoride Free" just as the "CFC Free" labelling is so prevalent now. This would bring other manufacturers into line and give consumers the ability to select a TV that has been produced without using this chemical which has only recently been brought to the attention of the general public.

The Annual Electricity Costs of Running Computers and Games Consoles

Ian — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 14:26:00 GMT

A new study by the consumer group choice has found that running a computer or games console in your home can be more expensive to run than other major whitegood appliances. They compared a number of computer products and games consoles to determine the costs of running such systems for a year in Australia. Interestingly the Playstation 3 came out as the most expensive to run with a total cost of $248.28 per year (@ 15c/kwh) if it was left on and idle.

Many homes these days have computers, printers, scanners, wireless network devices, speakers, monitors, game consoles and even home networks. All of these devices are pushing up energy bills and unfortunately, this is not something that can be easily quantified until the actual bill arrives in the mail. Many people think that because these devices are small they don't use much power but many small devices chew up kilowatts - some are just more obvious like a toaster or a heater.

Computers - How to Save

Comparing the common IT related items found in households today, they found that a Desktop Pc would cost $130.23 (868.18kwh) annually if left on. A iMac would cost considerably less at $80.05 (533.68kwh) and a Laptop (MacBook Pro) understandably comes in much cheaper at only $28.63 (190.84kwh). The reasoning here then is that replacing your desktop with a laptop will save you around $100 a year if you leave the device on - quite a saving. Many people on solar power have already discovered this fact and almost invariably if you go to someone's house with off-the-grid solar, they will have a notebook, not a desktop.

How to "Monitor" your Power Use

Other interesting facts found in the article are that replacing your old crt (cathode-ray tube) monitor with an lcd monitor would save you around $50 a year. The findings were that for a crt monitor it would cost $95.75 (638.34kwh) and an lcd only $43.13 (287.56kwh) if they were left on for the year. This is one area where technological advances are producing energy saving devices. Interestingly though a new 42" plasma tv would draw a large amount of power if left on for the year with a cost of $232.10 (1547.37kwh) - they do not list the power usage for an LCD (I would suggest it would be cheaper to run), but they do show that a CRT TV (not sure of the size) is actually cheaper than the plasma.

Not all Games Console are the Same!

Over in the console department, the main consoles in order from cheapest to most expensive to run per year are: Nintendo Wii which would cost only $23.26 if left on for the year, It then jumps up markedly to the Microsoft Xbox 360 at $184.32 per year and then to the Sony Playstation 3 at $248.28 per year. Now most games console users are loyal to certain brands and simple things like cost to run don't even come into it. If however you are off-the-grid solar or simply need to tighten the purse strings due to cost of living, it might give a great case for going for the Nintendo Wii. At less than 1/10 of the electricity cost of the Playstation 3 it presents as an obvious choice for energy savers.

Where to from here?

I don't think I have ever seen an energy rating sticker on a computer or console and this star rating for energy efficiency that is used in Australia doesn't even seem to apply to these devices. Maybe it is time for some sort of labelling to occur on these devices to allow consumers to make energy efficient choices as they can now with whitegoods and other household appliances. This study though will allow you to make a more informed choice if energy efficiency is something that is important to you.

The choice study referenced in this article can be found here: http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=106346&catId=100245&tid=100008&p=1&title=Computers'+energy+costs

Solar Power in Suburbia - An Australian Perspective on a Global Solution

Ian — Fri, 23 May 2008 04:47:00 GMT

Empowering Yourself

We finally took the plunge and took advantage of the many rebates on offer to have a grid connect solar system installed at our home. Too much of the media at the time was concentrating on industry wide solutions to the energy crisis in the face of global warming. Under the Liberal Government of the day, thought was moving towards Nuclear power with official studies even recommending sites close to us in Bribie Island and world famous Noosa. Quite frankly - the concept of a nuclear power plant within 50km of my home made me scared for my kids future. A radiation leak is something you can't see coming. It will just affect you. Why wreck a beautiful natural and protected area with a massive nuclear power plant? The push by the governmetn to make nuclear seem like the only option for our future power needs made me think that waiting for the government to make the right decision for us was just not going to work and that if I wanted a secure energy future I would have to take matters into my own hands...

The deciding factors

Grid Connect or off the grid?

Until the last decade or so, the only people installing solar power in their homes were those that either had no electricity service to their home, or the cost of connecting it up due to distance to the power poles was prohibitive. These off-the-grid systems are totally self-sufficient. They have a bank of batteries that are and charged and provide electricity throughout the day and night. Often generators are utilised to provide top up power when the sun has not provided enough energy for the usage required.

Nowadays it is more common to see the Grid Connect system of Solar install where a home is already connected to an electricity grid. This system does not utilise batteries. Solar panels are installed on your roof and through an inverter which converts it from 24-48v DC to 240 AC, provides electricity to power your home. The connection to the grid remains, allowing a two way flow of electricity. If you make excess power to your needs, the electricity flows back into the grid and is utilised by your neighbours. If you need more power than you are making it simply draws the required current back from the grid - eg. at night when no power is made. The system is totally transparent in that you notice no difference where the power is coming from as sophisticated technology in the invertor sychronises the internal system with the grid. There is only one major disadvantage to the grid connect system in that when there is a blackout on the grid, your system will also shut down as the power company does not want power leaking back into the system while they are attempting repairs.

There is one other type of system which is grid connect with battery backup. This would allow you to continue running during a blackout, but requires the use of another inverter and a battery bank. The cost of setup is several thousand dollars. It may be more efficient to have a small generator for use during blackouts (depending on how often you get blackouts though I suppose!)

Being already connected to the electicity grid, we decided to investigate whether a grid connect solar system would be viable for us to install.

Our roof was already at the correct angle of about 30 degrees and facing north which is perfect. This allow the installers to bolt the panels straight onto rails and onto our roof. If you have a flat roof, angled brackets will be used to create the correct angle to face the sun. If you don't have a north facing roof (southern hemisphere), you can actually get stand-alone systems that mount on a pole in your garden which not as aesthically pleasing but may provide better power generation. These stand-alone system can also utilise a sun tracker that uses various systems to follow the sun during its transition of the day. This optimises power generation. I looked into whether roof mounted systems can utilise a sun tracker but have found no information at all on a possible solution.

COST

At around $14,000, a modest 1kilowatt solar power system is beyond the reach of ordinary Australians. With the grants currently on offer though, it brings the price down to the equivalent of a large screen LCD or plasma TV.

The Australian Federal Government provides a solar rebate of $8 per watt up to a maximum of $8000. This means that a 1kw system is attracts the maximum rebate at the mimimum install cost and provides the best value. After this rebate alone, the fully installed system will come down to around $6000.

A recent development in this grant is the Rudd government's application of a $100,000 household income means test to the grant. This will mean that many Australian families would no longer be eligible for the grant and will scrap their intentions to install. I think the Rudd government is misguided in its use of this means test. I think giving all Australian's incentive to invest in our energy future including those on higher incomes is certainly the best model. Many ordinary working couples now earn over the threshold and will almost definitely not install a system now.

If you are reading this blog and you a solar panel owner or potential owner... Come and discuss your experiences with other owners in the Australian Solar Panel Owners Group forums of this website.

Another aspect to cost savings is the Renewable Energy Certificates or RECS that are given with the install of the system. These RECS are certificates created by the federal government to meet the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target to combat climate change. The RECS are worth a paper value and are traded by agents. Often the installer of your system will offer to purchase the RECS off you at a certain rate and even take it off the total price of install.

After the $8000 rebate and the purchase of our RECS, our fully installed $14,000 solar system cost us only $3700.

HIDDEN COSTS AND BENEFITS

Our home resides on the side of a hill with a steep roof that sits many metres off the ground. After initially inspecting the premises, the installer insisted on having a scissor lift to ferry the panels etc to the roof and give them an anchor point for ropes. This was something we had to cough up for - most hire places supply them at around $250-400 a day. We got it for the weekend for the same price and did some house painting to offset the cost.

The solar provider was initially going to install 6 x 167w panels (1002w), but they ran out of them, so we ended up with 7x 163w panels (1134w) for the same cost. They didn't get any argument on that one!

RETURNS

Once installed a grid connect system requires virtually no maintenance. If you want to maintain the highest possible output of your panels you can clean them every 6 months or so as they do get some dust and bird poo on them - generally though the rain does a good job. Therefore, you are left to sit back and watch your energy bills get reduced.

The reality of how much power and therefore money saved you get out of a 1kw system depends on a few factors. After our system was installed it rained for 3 months... solid... not kidding... The panels were outputting very low wattage per day and therefore we didn't offset much power - in fact it was only around $35 for around 2.5 months. In our last 3 month bill period we have had many more sunny days. This resulted in around $90 in electricity being saved or just over 1/3 of our bill which ended up being $140 total.

Another factor is what price your energy retailer will pay for the power you are feeding back into the grid. Make no mistake - the power you are making is green power - the energy company can resell this power at a higher rate to other customers. Why then shouldn't you be getting a higher amount off your bill. Some retailers are realising this an our current supplier buys power off us from cent 1 at a higher rate than we pay for power. That means that you don't have to be a net producer of power to get the higher buyback rate - every watt you make comes off your bill at a higher rate. Check with your power company for details and find one that works for you in your state.

The billing works by having two meters - the original one measures your power usage from the grid and the other measures how much power you have made. When they come to read the meters they take down two figures. The power you make is then taken away from the power you use to create a total. With a higher than standard rate feed-in tariff, like we enjoy, the power you make is calculated at the different rate and then taken away from the total giving you even higher cost benefits.

Always check your bills though. When we switched retailers, they managed to add the power from both our electricity meters together! Instead of getting a refund for the power we made, we were charged to make it! I sorted that one out in a hurry.

In countries such as Germany the government has set a much higher rate for this "feed in tariff" making the installation of solar power systems an investment in the future. I saw one documentary where a pig farmer had moved to creating a large solar array in one of his fields because it was providing better returns! South Australia provides such a scheme at the moment, but it is only for net producers, so you would need to install over a 2.5kw system to gain the benefits.

The cost of electricity keeps rising. As long as the tariff paid for the green power we make rises with it, the offsetting effects should continue. At a cost of $3,700 it will still take us around 10 years to recoup the money we outlaid on the system. But this is an investment.. in the future. There are of course some other benefits.

Increase the value of your home

Surveys such as one conducted by realestate.com.au suggest that 73% of buyers believe that having one of more energy efficient features in a home will make it more saleable. Think about it - you are in the market for a home and there are two homes you like - one home comes with an automatic 1/3 rebate on its power bill forever and another doesn't - which one looks more attractive?

Offset your carbon usage

Of course these days people are much more aware that they are creating a carbon footprint on the earth. Everything you do these days creates emmisions. Not many thinks offset it - you can plant more trees, change your lifestyle, but this is one way to not only make a difference, but actually see what that difference is. The new digital inverters have built in co2 offset reading for the power you are making. Australian's produce over 17 tonnes of co2 per person compared with OECD average of 11 tonnes. You can see here that in 6 months we have offset 486kg of co2 - a small amount but as start nonetheless.

Thinking more about your power usage

Having lived on only water tanks for several years, we knew what it felt like to live under a forced water restricition scheme. Every week we could peer into our tank and see how much water was left. Judging by the rainfall of the season we could adjust our water usage to suit our availability of water. Having a huge water network with massive dams makes it very hard for people to quantify how much they are using every week - having a localised system puts you in control of your own destiny with only you to blame if it runs out.

Put this into the context of electricity, a solar system with output readings for how much power you are making makes you much more aware of your electricity use. Things like turning off lights when you are using them, replacing bulbs with compact flourescent or led bulbs, having power boards that can be turned off with your feet or something like the power genie where turning off one product turns off many others - to reduce stop standby power usage. Standby power usage accounts for up to 12% of your total power bill! There are many ways to reduce your usage. Having a solar system just makes you think more about how you can reduce your bill.

Conclusion

Get out there and investigate how a solar system would work with your home. For the cost of an LCD TV you can get a device that not only provides you with monthly returns, but also offsets your carbon usage and put you in charge of your own energy future. There are two ways for government to invest in renewable energy - either through massive infrastrafructure project funding or through the application of rebates to individuals to create the same effect. I think the future for Australia involves a synergy of the two. Both the large scale investment in big energy projects and through partnering with individual families to shoulder part of the cost burdens of moving to renewable energy. This will empower Australians to take a stake in their future rather than just waiting to see what the government does for them.

How was your experience getting a solar system installed? Are you currently in the process.. Come and discuss your experiences with other owners in the Australian Solar Panel Owners Group forums of this website.