<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE type=text/css>P {
MARGIN: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18812"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Geoff,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Solar Integrated Technologies adheres its panels
on ground covers over landfills to capture landfill gases and
separately produce PV electricity. Perhaps a wrench with Powerlight experience
can tell us why rigid modules are not laid on a ground cover.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Joel Davidson</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=geoff@third-sun.com href="mailto:geoff@third-sun.com">Geoff
Greenfield</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
href="mailto:re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org">RE-wrenches</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, August 20, 2009 8:35
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [RE-wrenches] ballasted roof
rack - on the ground?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">esteemed
wrenches (or just steamed if youve been out in the hot lately)
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I'm curious why more folks don't use the same flat roof ballasted rack
approach for large ground mounts? Geotech weed barier and off we go...
my initial calcs sat its a cost saver... my instinct says it viable, but
my other instinct says "if it were this easy I would see it all the time (and
I've never seen it)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>what's up? frost heave/instability? wav-i-ness of the ground?
better performance at steep angle worth all the extra cost (not according to
my pencil with today's mod costs). Thoughts? <BR><BR>For a brighter
energy future,<BR><BR>Geoff Greenfield<BR>President<BR>Third Sun Solar &
Wind Power Ltd.<BR>340 West State Street, Unit 25<BR>Athens, OH
45701<BR><BR>740.597.3111 Fax
740.597.1548<BR>www.Third-Sun.com<BR><BR>Clean Energy - Expertly
Installed<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>----- "Dave Click"
<daveclick@fsec.ucf.edu> wrote: <BR>> Thanks all.<BR>> <BR>> It
was my understanding that we should still be running the conductors <BR>>
of the same circuit through the same raceway, even if it is the DC input
<BR>> into the inverter since that DC oscillates slightly (nowhere near as
<BR>> much as AC). I wasn't concerned about eddy currents in the FNMC of
<BR>> course but the metal box itself, a concern being voiced on this list
<BR>> before. I'd be more concerned about this if it were a 1MW inverter
<BR>> rather than a 7kW, but still.<BR>> <BR>> Thanks for the info on
the GEC tap and I'm glad the split bolts work here.<BR>> <BR>> The
conduit in question doesn't seem to be there just for physical <BR>>
protection; the wire runs from the east end of the array for 100'+ and
<BR>> only the last 3' are in conduit. If it were only for protection I'd
be <BR>> fine with it being open-ended on both ends, but since it's there
to feed <BR>> the conductors into the box, that's why I was treating it as
a regular <BR>> conduit that required a cord grip at the other end. Where
do others make <BR>> the distinction?<BR>> <BR>> Thanks,<BR>>
DKC<BR>> <BR>> -------- Original Message --------<BR>> Subject: Re:
[RE-wrenches] DC positive and negative in same conduit, <BR>> other
inspection issues<BR>> From: Kelly Keilwitz, Whidbey Sun & Wind
<kelly@whidbeysunwind.com><BR>> To: RE Wrenches listserve
<re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org><BR>> Date: 2009/8/19
21:10<BR>> <BR>> > Dave,<BR>> > Only GEC's are subject to the
"continuous" rule (250.64C). It sounds like<BR>> > your are talking
about an EGC tapped from the GEC.<BR>> > <BR>> > When splicing PV
GEC's required under 690.47D, either together (from<BR>> > separated
arrays) or to the existing AC GEC (if close enough), we have been<BR>> >
allowed to use split bolts instead of irreversible splices, per
250.64D1,<BR>> > "Grounding Electrode Conductor Taps" (at end of
paragraph). I.E., the<BR>> > "continuous" rule is only being applied to
the main GEC.<BR>> > <BR>> > I agree with Kurt on the LTNMF being
used only as extra (not required) wire<BR>> > protection for the USE-2.
We often do this when running PV conductors<BR>> > between short
separations in modules or rails. I would think that only<BR>> >
temperature and fill corrections would apply - and only if the length<BR>>
> requires.<BR>> > <BR>> > -Kelly<BR>> > <BR>> >
Kelly Keilwitz, P.E.<BR>> > Whidbey Sun & Wind, LLC<BR>> >
Renewable Energy Systems<BR>> > NABCEP Certified PV Installer<BR>>
> 987 Wanamaker Rd, <BR>> > Coupeville, WA 98239<BR>> > PH
& FAX 360-678-7131<BR>> > sunwind@whidbeysunwind.com<BR>> >
<BR>> > On 8/19/09 2:41 PM, "Dave Click" <daveclick@fsec.ucf.edu>
wrote:<BR>> > <BR>> >> For the grounding electrode wiring, it
seems that it's fine to me since<BR>> >> they ran the continuous #6
to each rail and then to the rod, qualifying<BR>> >> as the 690.47(D)
supplemental electrode. But the split bolts tapping<BR>> >> that GEC
to "ground the disconnect," these are required to be<BR>> >>
irreversible connections to the ground bus in that disconnect, right?<BR>>
> <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>>
> <BR>> > _______________________________________________<BR>>
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine<BR>> > <BR>> > List
Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org<BR>> > <BR>> > Options
& settings:<BR>> >
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR>>
> <BR>> > List-Archive:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR>>
> <BR>> > List rules & etiquette:<BR>> >
www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm<BR>> > <BR>> > Check out
participant bios:<BR>> > www.members.re-wrenches.org<BR>> >
<BR>> > <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>>
List sponsored by Home Power magazine<BR>> <BR>> List Address:
RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org<BR>> <BR>> Options &
settings:<BR>>
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR>>
<BR>> List-Archive:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR>>
<BR>> List rules & etiquette:<BR>>
www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm<BR>> <BR>> Check out participant
bios:<BR>> www.members.re-wrenches.org<BR>> <BR>> </DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>List sponsored by
Home Power magazine<BR><BR>List Address:
RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org<BR><BR>Options &
settings:<BR>http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR><BR>List-Archive:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR><BR>List
rules & etiquette:<BR>www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm<BR><BR>Check out
participant
bios:<BR>www.members.re-wrenches.org<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>