Give peace a chance [RE-wrenches]

[Bill Brooks]

Tom and Chuck,

Here and I thought that the Wrenches List was a monolithic group of PV
installer that all thought the same way. Well, I guess that's not the case
and I believe that to be one of its true benefits. Tom and Chuck, you
obviously have strong opinions on one end of the spectrum as it relates to
the certification of installers, but there are several sides to this issue.

It's great that our industry has such wonderfully opinionated people like
you and it is part of what makes it so fun (I'm never ever opinionated on
any subject myself, but I see that others are ;-)). However, your opinion is
one of many and represents a portion of the solar industry that is either
unlikely to need the certification or is easily able to obtain certification
if they deem it necessary for their business.

I didn't notice references to Don Loweburg of IPP, who is on the board of
NABCEP, and Allan Sindelar, of this Wrenches List, who is on the technical
committee. I am also the secretary of the technical committee and this
wrench list--but we already established that not everyone thinks the same on
this list.

As a result of additional concerns raised by several folks related to the
Wrenches List, Sandia National Labs is setting up an industry forum to
better incorporate comments from the industry. This new industry forum will
likely be organized by Marlene Brown who teaches with SEI on a regular
basis. The forum is intended to get as much input as possible related to the
advantages and fears of the installing community over these issues.

To be honest, I have been a bit of a foot-dragger in this certification
process because I knew that it had to bring value for the industry to
embrace it. It has made tremendous strides in working toward that value and
it needs to make more. The people working on the committees are dedicated
and carefully listen to all viewpoints.

I have strongly argued that we need to keep the union influence at bay for
the real and perception problems they bring. When I reviewed all the
responses and comments on the first draft of the certification requirements,
I spent 4 hours reading the non-union responses and less than an hour
reading the union responses. Why is that? For obvious reasons, the union
responses were organized and very repetitive (imagine that--we have much to
learn from our friends in the electrical union--they are far better
organized and effective in achieving their goals).

The non-union responses were original and showed a variety of viewpoints and
understanding of the issues. Please realize that many in our industry
provided detailed comments as outlined below. These comments were taken very
seriously and major changes were made to accomodate those comments. When you
see the new list of requirements to sit for the certification exam, I
believe you will be pleasantly surprised at the level of changes.

When I finished reading ALL the responses, I came to the conclusion that
some things absolutely had to change and other things needed to stay the
same. I also was convinced more soundly than ever, that we need this
process--at least in California and other places where rebates exist--to
help reduce the number of bad installations and unhappy customers. Are you
aware that the requirements to become certified changed DRAMATICALLY from
the first version to the second version. No one in these threads has
acknowledged that very key fact. Those changes were made because of good,
constructive comments received by several stakeholders that were in the
minority of the responses.

I can understand the frustration and annoyance with various bureaucratic
requirements, and who in their right mind would want another one? It has
everything to do with consumer protection and the proper use of public
money. You and Chuck are quick to point out the waste of funds in
bureaucracy that we are all familiar with, but you don't tell the side of
the story that points to wasted funds in squandered rebates on PV systems
that never work and give the whole industry a bad name.

I don't think it is possible to turn your opinion with a long or short email
message, but you must be aware of some of the problems that bad installers
bring to our industry. This process is one of several steps needed to turn
that around. The installers that I know personally have talked to numerous
PV  system owners that are unhappy with their PV systems because installers
were not qualified and did a poor job. There is little or nothing in place
to qualify whether an installer is good or bad (our current C-46, Solar
Contractor license in California is a total joke--no PV questions at all).

Installer certification is not a silver bullet and will not solve all the
industry problems. It is simply one of many things our industry needs to
embrace to grow up and move from the adolescent stage toward adulthood. Good
installers that are bidding against crappy installers are united on this
issue. Do they love bureaucracy?--heck no, but given the alternative of
losing jobs to fly-by-nights who are destroy their industry's reputation, a
reasonable level of regulation is tolerable.

NABCEP does not require training and yet you and Chuck seem to indicate that
it requires training and that the existing industry has wonderful training.
I'm sorry that you feel that our industry provides great training, because
my experience is the exact opposite. I'm familiar with all the training that
is going on related to grid-connected PV in our industry in the U.S., and I
can tell you that I am sincerely disturbed with the level of training our
industry provides. Even my 3-day training course (that I objectively believe
is the best ;-)) could be much more rigorous and beneficial to the industry.
I am using the most up-to-date information I can gather and yet most
programs do not major on the critical code and safety issues that face our
grid-connected PV systems. I wonder where people learn this stuff--the
answer is that many do not and it shows in installations.

Whether you believe it or not, many dedicated people like myself care deeply
about our industry, and get reminded everyday that things can and need to
improve if this industry is to grow to the potential I believe it can. Not
everyone will or has to agree on the process, but whether you believe it or
not, these activities are being approached with utmost integrity and serious
deliberation. Your constructive comments and assistance is always welcome.

Bill.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane, Energy Conservation Services [mailto:tom at ecs-solar.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 7:32 AM
To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
Subject: [RE-wrenches]



I am in full agreement with the opposition to the NABCEP certification
program.

****snip****

- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://www.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/

List rules & etiquette: http://www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquete.htm

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/index.html

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================