Hundreds of homeowners and installers expecting to stack the federal battery rebate with cancelled state schemes have been left in the lurch, launching petitions and scrambling to get their deposits back as they ask the question: is it still worth getting a battery with the federal incentive alone?
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. When Energy Minister Chris Bowen first unveiled the Cheaper Home Batteries Program in April during the federal election campaign, he told an industry briefing that he’d consulted with his WA and NSW government counterparts about their respective state rebates.
“The [WA and NSW energy ministers] basically agreed that we’ll do collectively whatever it takes to make it stackable. My understanding this requires a small tweak to NSW legislation. But basically you’ll get both rebates,” he said at the time.
So Much For Stacking Rebates
Just a few months later, Bowen’s assurance is up in smoke before the federal rebate has even begun. WA has watered down its battery incentive scheme dramatically, and added a significant new requirement of mandatory participation in a Virtual Power Plant (VPP).
NSW went even further, effectively ditching its state rebate entirely. Similarly, the Northern Territory quietly ended its rebate and Solar Victoria halted its battery loan program, supposedly because both schemes had met their targets — the fact a new federal rebate was about to arrive in a matter of weeks was of course just a complete coincidence.
Installers across the country have subsequently been locked into phone call marathons with customers who had paid deposits based on quotes that relied on stacking both federal and state rebates.
Amidst the industry chaos, there’s been reports of homeowners facing long delays on replies to refund requests, while some installers have tried to offer unhappy clients additional battery capacity to dissuade them from cancelling the job.
Petition Calls For Battery Rebate Reinstatement
Some of the comments left on a petition calling for the reinstatement of the NSW battery rebate.
The epicentre of anger seems to be NSW, where hundreds of people have signed a petition launched by RenewCo Solar founder Matthew Summerville calling for the reinstatement of the scheme.
The petition claims that “industry stakeholders have expressed that the sudden policy shift was implemented without adequate consultation, leading to operational and financial challenges for small businesses in the solar and battery installation sector.”
One of the signatories, Sonny, left the following comment:
“My decision had always been not to have a solar battery due to cost but the combined federal and state rebates offered as a combined deal made it a financial possibility, as I’m sure it did for many people. To pull the rug from under existing contracts that can’t be installed before a sudden deadline etc is very unfair.”
Another, Philip, wrote:
Paid for 15KW + 24Kw battery install AFTER the federal rebate announced, in good faith … as I received the NSW grant – (and recent govt update NOW they are not stackable) I am no longer eligible for the federal rebate – a loss of over $10K. What a govt screw up!”
Battery Installers Warned In WA
WA authorities report that letters have been sent to around 1,300 retailers, promoters and installers to make sure that promotion of the state rebate is “consistent with official government information and do not mislead consumers”.
In one case, a trader has been accused of unlawfully using the State Government logo and falsely claiming that registrations were open, subsequently using questionnaires to gather personal information.
Plenty of people in WA have been unhappy with quotes secured before the state launches its rebate on July 1, but most of the ire is directed at the state government rather than installers.
In response to SolarQuotes coverage of the WA rebate changes, commenter Carilyn Bee wrote:
“We were promised a $5,000 rebate — now it’s $1,300. That’s not support, it’s a token gesture. And to make it worse, we’re forced into a VPP just to access it? This watered-down rebate is an insult to the people who planned in good faith.”
Another commenter, Rob Gregory, wrote of the WA scheme:
“We’re reclaiming our deposit in the basis that it’s completely different from what the provider was offering (and in fairness to them, expecting) making it no longer economical to expand our system even with the rebate, especially with compulsory VPP rolled in.”
Are You Entitled To A Refund On A Battery Deposit?
If you have paid a deposit on a quote that was conditional on state and federal rebates being in place, you should be able to secure a refund. If the installer didn’t actually specify that the quote was conditional on state and federal rebates, then you might even have a case to get the install done at the original quoted price, according to SolarQuotes’ resident-fact checker Ronald Brakels, who emphasises that he isn’t a lawyer and his advice isn’t to be taken as legal advice.
“If a person can’t get a rebate that was included in the quoted price, they should be able to get out of it without penalty. It’s the installer who’s more at risk of having to install at a low price if they only mentioned that the quoted price was conditional on rebates being received in small print,” Ronald says.
Are Batteries Still Worth It Without State Rebates?
Cities in states or territories where battery rebates/loans have recently changed are highlighted in yellow.
What does the loss or watering down of state schemes do to the payback period of batteries over the long term?
In Sydney, a 10kWh battery that relies on only the federal rebate has a simple payback period of 8.3 years, while in Perth it is 7.6 years. That doesn’t factor in the additional savings from the reduced WA state rebate, which further drops the payback period to 6.4 years.
This is all based on an overnight electricity consumption of 7kWh – someone with higher energy use would see a shorter payback time.
Joining a VPP, as is required to get the WA rebate, improves the payback period further still.
In both NSW and WA, the payback period for batteries is within a reputable battery brand’s warranty period of 10 years or longer even without a VPP.
The same can’t be said of battery installs in the other states and territories that have dropped their rebates or loans. In Victoria, a battery’s payback period is 13.9 years, while in the NT, it is 13.7 years.
Whether or not a battery is still worth the investment in Victoria and the NT depends on how much value one puts on blackout protection or the environmental benefits of displacing fossil fuels with batteries.
Read our dedicated explainer page for more on battery payback. We also have a page summarising federal and state battery incentives.
About Max Opray
RSS - Posts
“consistent with official government information and do not mislead consumers”.”
That’s rich, considering the WA government has been the most misleading. They continue to gaslight & deny they broke an election promise by still referring to a rebate of “up to $5,000”
And the media doesn’t help the confusion when they parrot the governments spin doctoring.
It still is $5,000 for Synergy customers in WA by combining the federal and state rebates together. I don’t understand what people are complaining about nothing that’s really changed except we didn’t get a windfall of $8,500 which was always over the top.
Ah yeah.. no subsidies no net zero. It’s obvious what it’s all about..
Hi Adam,
In the 2024–25 financial year, Australian governments provided about $14.9 billion in subsidies to fossil fuel producers and major users. This figure represents a 3% increase from 2023–24
Most of these subsidies were federal, accounting for approximately $12.5 billion (84% of the total), with the remainder provided by states and territories.
The largest single subsidy is the Fuel Tax Credits Scheme, which alone cost the federal budget around $10.2 billion in 2024–25. This scheme provides tax relief for off-road diesel use.
Other subsidies include concessional tax rates for aviation fuel and tax deductions for mining exploration and equipment depreciation
Queensland provided $1.8 billion in 2024–25, split between direct spending and tax concessions
Per capita, these subsidies equate to roughly $548–$563 per Australian per year
Forward estimates project that total fossil fuel subsidies in Australia will reach a record $67 billion over the coming years
Fuel Tax Credits Scheme, which alone cost the federal budget around $10.2 billion in 2024–25.
Yes, I assume these figures are correct to support our export industries namely Mining and Agriculture which dont use public roads. It was first introduced when Euro, USA and Japan in particular all started subsidised their industries big time This was Aus way of leveling the field by reducing our cost base which also helped keep downstream value adding industries sustainable.
The justification of the former reason is less justifiable today but the later probably more so than ever. If we want to keep any value adding in this country and keep some level of self sufficient in case of geopolitical forces cut off supplies at least we can feed our country and make some everyday essentials.
Yeah I thought that subsidies to fossil fuel producers and major users claim sounded suspect!
Since off road diesel users aren’t using the roads they aren’t supposed to be paying the tax. It’s thus not a subsidy but a return of taxes they’re not required to pay.
So with just one item removed you’ve eliminated almost 70% of so called fossil fuel subsidies.
But as EV use increase, and road tax\fuel excise drops, the government has to rethink its subsidy of EVs, hence why Treasurer Jim Chalmers is talking about looking at making EV drivers contribute their fair share of road costs. Fair’s fair right?
Hi George,
We import 90% of our transport fuel & diesel imports reached 30.67 thousand megalitres (30.67 billion litres) in FY2024, (excludes any domestically produced)
Excise on imported diesel alone would be approximately $15.58 billion (30.67 billion litres × $0.508/L).
That fuel doesn’t magically appear at mine sites, fuel & everything else has to be trucked in via the road network.
47% of net fuel excise revenue is spent on road-related infrastructure and maintenance by the Australian government.
The remaining 53% is directed to non-road purposes or general revenue.
Fairness would see the diesel tax rebate at least halved, even if you don’t consider the health burden created by PM2.5 particulates or other pollution costs, which is something EVs don’t create.
Anthony.
Most of these petroleum fuels in Australia are trucked in on roads, so claiming that this is a portion of road expenses, that should validate charging taxes on these fuels applies to both rural and city use.
What a total shambles the ‘transition’ to renewable energy is turning out to be…. There’s so much resistance by various parties to this ever happening, its ridiculous.
For the average home-owner, adding a battery seems at best to provide only a marginal benefit and a very low return on the additional outlay required. It also introduces a lot of complexity and in some cases potential unexpected problems due to the battery not performing as expected, and hence needing replacement.
With the much higher efficiency of the latest solar panels, even on an overcast winters day you still get a worthwhile output and a noticeable reduction in your power bill. With more and more people working from home, working part-time, or even just 3 days a week; its much easier to change the timing of when you carry out activities such a laundry, dish-washing etc.
Works for me OK. No way I can justify a battery purchase, the benefits are quire marginal.
I came to the same conclusion after doing extensive research using my 2024 smart meter data and I am in WA. What made the whole scheme worse are (1) the 3 installers I contacted are not carrying or quoting the Sigenergy 5 kWh battery so I am forced to oversize battery beyond my needs (2) it makes more sense for me to add more panels to my roof but sounds like installers are not going to touch existing install; my original installer is no longer in the solar industry. (3) If my use case is not unique and people are getting sucked in, we are adding to the landfill lots of perfectly functional panels and inverters. How is that good for the environment!
Be wary of Sigenergy. A YouTube video from a Qld installer visited the factory not long ago, although impressed with the technology they where not impressed with the build quality, particularly corrosion proofing and not in the least meeting Aus wiring standards. They consider the new product on the watch list till more user history and warranty claims are available both here and overseas.
So I have gone back to considering the Tesla Powerwall 3, the best and most proven product. However, it is a bit big, but after 10yrs it will loose 30% of rated capacity and after understanding its blackout capability you need spare capacity for the worst blackout timing. That is you never run the battery to zero. Recommended min 20% but to be useful probably closer to 40% maybe even 50%. So a oversized battery is needed.
However, no matter how I do the numbers its not a good investment, even after $5k subsidy, as payback in my place in WA would be 7yrs. Rather keep the money in super.
The other reason I don’t want to oversize battery now is that I am happy to wait for V2H to be a reality in a few years when I jump on the EV train. That makes more sense to me as the energy source for sunset to sunrise household use, as a retiree.
Andrew, it seems to me that an AC-coupled battery could be added to any on-grid system, without much ado. (Beyond programming discharge limits, etc.) So there is actually no real-world rational reason to scrap anything, merely to expand capacity, is there?
You may find that the reason no installer in your area stocks the 5 kWh Sigenergy module, is that all alert customers are grabbing the better price/performance 8 kWh module, gaining cheap future-proofing and overcast /blackout insurance. When swimming against the stream, it’s worth checking what secret the others know. ($4k for 5 kWh vs $5k for 8 kWh in your state. Most can do the maths: +$1k for +3 kWh is a case of grabbit&run.)
This solar stuff is a little bit technical, so making the effort to climb a bit of the learning curve helps avoid making things more awkward than necessary.
(Pretty much the case in any field.)
If cost is a big issue, a little delay may buy more for less. Prices are trending down, as expected.
To your first poiint, it is technically doable but the installers I have contacted do not want to do it, probably for support and warranty reasons. I guess they have enough demand to do simple straightforward installations so why bother.
Cost is not an issue – it’s the payback. If payback is so close to the battery 10 year warranty, then it is financially untenable because you are comparing paying power costs upfront/in advance vs at least a 5% return on investment. Plus the wastefulness of discarding my still great Fronius Primo. Noted that my use case as a retiree is quite distinct from the working population but the data from my 6 years old Fronius monitoring system (vs recent power bills) provides a solid basis for the conclusion,
I dont find the solar stuff overly technical after spending some time reading up on it.
What a surprise! As if they acted on their previous promise to make electricity cheaper. They are good at robbing Peter to pay John’s power bill.
Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me!
After that pirouette Labour expects the battery owners participate in their VPP or any other scheme?
Did some research on the WA VPP $1300 state rebate. Well, what a rip-off!. The VPP includes guaranteed access by Synergy of up to 30 days / yr compensating you 70c/kWh drained from your battery. Well, that means they will drain your battery during peak hours, denying you any benefit and requiring you to recharge at your own cost afterwards. Over the 10 yr life of the battery you are out of pocket so your pay back period increases not decreases. Youtube video by a WA sparky actually explains this in some detail. What an absolute sham !
So based on only the federal subsidy my packback period is under the very best scenario modelled with my PV setup and house usage with a Tesla EV is 10yrs using a 15kW Tesla battery costing $15k with all its smarts integrating the EV and home battery and potentially selling my power into the grid. The biggest problem in WA is the battery discharge is capped by Synergy to 5kW not the battery capability which is 10kW.
WA is a home battery unfriendly state
Do you have a link to that YT video please?
Are they really paying 70c/Kwh?
That seems like a very high price for them to pay and seems like a great deal for the battery owner. You can just buy electricity from the grid for 31c/ Kwh so you’re still pocketing 29c/Kwh which is almost like the golden days of early solar? Whats your issue with that?
I thought 70c/kWh was great till I saw the YouTube video I mentionedbefore….too long to explain, but it means for eg you cycle the battery 30 times more per year etc etc till your $1300 benefit is soaked up over the reduced life of battery. Further if peak prices are >>$70c/kWh why not sell it yourself into the market through a non Synergy VPP who will only charge you a tolling fee.
Another you tube video from the UK shows just how far advanced they are in incentivising the market to smooth supply and demand and reward people for it. We are still in the dark ages of market development. Our govts & market operator/regulator are completely asleep at the wheel !
Have you looked at Amber’s VPP?
You remain in control of your battery at all times…
Mediacritic, let’s not omit half of the cost/benefit comparison.
First: $8500 battery, rated 8000 cycles to 70% SoH gives for 20 yrs of 30 cycles p.a.: $8500*20*30/8000 = $637.50 cost for the 3.75% battery wear.
Second: $1300 subsidy + $0.70*20*30*10 bonus FiT = $5500 total benefit to offset that.
If self-consumption wear shortens battery life from the 20 yr max for LiFePO₄, then both social-cycle wear cost and bonus FiT are reduced – due to your own consumption.
But:
Third: If your battery energy cost is $8500/(8000*10kWh) ~ 11c/kWh, then you’ve saved (0.30 – 0.11)*8000*10 = $15,200 in usage costs as well. OK, present value of future gain, and all that, but while wholesale energy costs decline, retail will still increase, surely, as the corporate vacuum cleaners abhor any profit floating loose. So the savings rate may grow.
You’re probably cycling the battery every day regardless, so discharging it during peak hour and the recharging it the next day isn’t adding any extra cycles to you battery, is it..
Even if it were, you’re only required to be on the VPP for 2 years, so max 60 cycles on a battery warranted for 3500+ cycles, big deal?
And you’re getting paid 70c per kWh, which is more than the cost to import at any tariff, so you’re coming out ahead if you have to import power..
To me the only downside is the possibility of being left with a mostly drained battery in the event of a grid outage after an activation event
No you recharge to 50 to 80% ( user setting) after the Synergy battery draining event, usually overnight on off peak, to have it as backup until your PVs can take over the next day to fill it up for the next peak. That’s an extra cycle per day.
If you have it configure to recharge from the grid to maintain a minimum charge level in case of an outage, that’s your choice – my battery isn’t configured to do this.
Regardless, you are still charging to 50%, from the grid, then the rest of the way to 100% from your PV the next day – so where are the extra cycles?
Mediacritic, if you can schedule major consumption before or after the peak, then you’ll often have free self-consumption before, and ~30c/kWh cost after, having been paid 70c/kWh for the battery energy drawn. That’s still a 40c/kWh profit, even if not as good as direct solar consumption freeing up kWh for the full $7/10 kWh. You just need to divide the installed battery cost by the warranted kWh life to compare your c/kWh cost. The rest is profit, so long as the inverter lasts with the extra workload. (So depreciate half of that too, especially if the ATO wants the income declared.) In any event, the social cycles are paying even better than self-consumption, I figure.
If it’s only 30 days p.a., then it’s only when the grid price is $/kWh, so 70c/kWh for you is peanuts.
My excess goes into the BEV instead, returning 82c/kWh for the 2.56 MWh used there so far – if the petrol price is still $1.80/L. And it’s all fossil fuel displacement. Yay!
I concur and do as retirees. We max home power usage between 9am and 3pm, washing m/c, mowing & dishwasher, when my PVs are at max. It is also the time we charge our EV if needed and cook our main hot meal. So our peak consumption is minimised to running some lights and the TV. Its why I can’t get the battery return on investment to make sense with or without any govt rebates.
The politicians are all relying on the collective gold fish like memory of the electorate.
By the time the next election rolls around, people will have forgotten how they got bent over and will once again vote for them.
Stuff up from the government saying too much before things were confirmed.
But installers making promises and signing contracts based on political promises that were not yet locked in is naive at best. Refunds should be swift on false promises or the installer will look very untrustworthy in my eyes.
Remember the “simple payback” calculation does not include any cost of capital, if this and loss of FIT for charging battery were included none of the payback periods would be within the battery warranty period.
Our numbers do factor FIT loss into our simple payback calculation, and cost of capital does does not push all the payback periods beyond of warranty periods – our payback explainer covers all that.
The cost of capital @6% on 8500 is $510.
Your table states “simple savings” and payback per year:
Adelaide $1350 6.3y
Brisbane $1107 7.7y
Canberra $700 12.1y
Darwin $620 13.y
Hobart $410 20.7y
Melbourne $610 13.9y
Perth $1120 7.6y
Sydney $1030 8.3y
After subtracting $510 from the “savings”:
Adelaide $840 10.11y
Brisbane $597 14.23y
Canberra $190 44.74y
Darwin $110 77.27.y
Hobart $-100 never
Melbourne $100 85y
Perth $610 13.93y
Sydney $520 16.35y
None of those are below the 10 year warranty period.
Adelaide is very close. But the rest range from ~14y through to never.
As I’ve agreed with you elsewhere, the savings are nonsense if you don’t include the cost of capital. An $8,500 battery now is really $14,300 in 10 years (6%)
But similarly, it is nonsense to not apply a similar compounding treatment to the battery savings. It’s an income producing asset that has an annual return. Pop that return back into your home loan each year and and include its growth in the savings.
Additionally, with a battery and solar, you are effectively buying electricity futures. Today’s price for electricity to be used in the years to come. You must count both sides of present value.
My battery will ‘save’ me $1720 this year.
I’m indexing those earnings and investing them and including the interest each year in the savings. My simulation is even at Y6 ($11k) and $8k ahead at Y10.
Maybe there’s a mistake in my simulation. I’ll check. Happy to share assumptions and be corrected.
I’m using their numbers, which have a very high cost of electricity particularly if much of it is used overnight and their simplistic 365 days of sunshine. I agree that a fair approach would be to pop the “real savings” back into the offset and therefore earn back some of the initial capital cost. The result does very much depend on how accurate you want to be, for example no-one is modelling round-trip battery efficiency (5% loss?), annual battery degradation, annual holidays (2 weeks away can reduce savings through lower usage) and of course it’s hard to predict future electricity prices & FIT.
Matching my Enphase data to my retailer billing doesn’t work as the “netting” out of usage is rather random at the edges.
My approach has been to take an optimistic model and include the major cost items, if it isn’t a compelling result then it’s unlikely to be improved by reality.
Hi Harry.
There are different ways to work out capital costs, but I use a basic method of simply comparing when a household would be better off with a battery compared to an alternate investment, such as paying off a home loan.
If an Adelaide home puts $8,500 towards paying off a 6% home loan, after 8 years, they will have reduced their home loans by $13,540.
If an Adelaide home instead installs a battery for $8,500 & it saves them $1,350 a year it would have a 6.3 year simple payback period. If they put the savings towards their home loan, after 8 years they would have reduced their home loan by $13,660. So they’d be better off with a battery in just under 8 years and, after including the cost of capital, the payback period goes from 6.3 years to about 8 years.
Other things that can help are my home loan is now under 6% & I normally use real dollars to account for inflation.
The problem is the workings aren’t given meaning when people sub in their real world values they end up with vastly different outcomes. From memory my payback period is something like twice what your figures claim and well outside the warranty period. Why? Presumably I have a vastly higher FiT than you assume (10c/kWh), a lower flat usage charge (~30c/kWh off the top of my head), and because batteries shrink over the 10 years, I factor that shrinkage in to what I think I need and look for something slightly larger.
As my installer has said, batteries just aren’t worth it economically speaking.
Our estimates do include battery shrinkage, but yes its a general guide only, to factor in your personal circumstances our battery calculator gives a more detailed verdict.
Hi Max
I find the SolarQuote battery calculator to be a great tool and I am grateful for it. For your next update, can I suggest that you allow for a proper comparison between existing system on a fixed rate vs adding a battery with a TOU rate, which will yield a more accurate before and after battery savings, which then impacts the payback period.
Never buy or sign something in good faith. As much as I want a battery, even with that tiny rebate it makes no sense at all for us. The rebate did do the bare minimum of being able to just break even within the warranty period of the battery, usually 10years.
I’ve managed to get our nighttime use down to 3-4kwh, that includes cooking in the evening and watching tv. Basically just the fridge/freezer is running. And during the day solar is covering almost everything.
To justify a battery I need to break even way below 5 years. So either energy prices rises substantially or batteries get a lot cheaper or the warranty doubles to 20years. I guess that would work for me too.
Regardless of how I work the numbers, the price of the battery will need to fall by at least 66% of its current price. to be viable. The extension of battery warranty periods will not help bring the break-even point forward
Honestly, I’m glad to see the installers that took on a politician “promise” and started marketing heavily some ridiculous offers before the ink was dry.
We have always been very cautious in our communication and today have 0 backlash and can service our customers who have always known that both rebates were a possibility, but not a reality until legislation was changed.
Blaming the others is the easy way out when you are lazy and greedy. You should check out the instagram video of said RenewCo CEO, calling politicians “liars” and having “disgraceful behavior” when they should be thanking them for putting in place this federal rebate in the first place.
The NSW PDRS didn’t really make a big difference, this federal rebate will.
While what you say has some merit on the flip side announcements were made that the state and federal rebates would be stackable in some states. Personally I like to wait for deals to be live before making decisions at the risk of missing out on what seemed like a golden opportunity.
In this particular case, there was absolutely no way of missing out, since nothing could be done before July 1st. And the same rebate value is valid until December 31st, regardless of rebates being stackable or not.
All the companies who jumped the guns just wanted the business without thinking of the consequences of making false promises based on hearsay. As we say, “hope is not a strategy”.
And with their aggressive marketing/FOMO inducing strategies, they made believe thousands of customers that they would be missing out of they didn’t sign today. Another lie…
Guess who’s missing out (and crying) today.
Ah well if people didn’t believe politicians promises during elections to be the truth, then politicians would never get elected would they?
Personally I have a very good method of detecting when they are lying – its when their lips are moving…
Most people aren’t aware how much battery storage and solar is required to make them potentially justifiable.
For example, when you really need the stored capacity, your air conditioner using 5kW of power will run your 10kWh battery flat in less than 2 hours.
The following day your battery may not charge because all your solar is being used to run your air conditioner and other appliances (or charge your EV). So your battery remains flat and can’t be used overnight. During prolonged hot or cold periods your battery becomes useless.
You need to consider also increasing the capacity of your solar panels, but anything over 5kW automatically loses your feed-in tariff; so that annual loss needs to be taken into account too.
I analysed my actual generation and consumption figures over 12 months with the reduced rebates, and no combination of solar and battery could reduce the payback period to less than 14 years.
I cancelled my battery installation.
This matches my modelling in Sydney. I have a supposedly 16kW solar system that’s been producing around 33kWh a day for the last few weeks.
This level would not charge a battery during the day enough to get past peak let alone through the night.
First of all, a 5kW air conditioner typically only use around 1-1.5kW of actual power (the 5kW is marketing for the “equivalent heating/cooling effect”)
I have a 13kWh battery and a 7kW aircon, and have no problem running it for 2 hours every morning to get the house warmed up as we wake up. We also have enough in reserve to run it for a few hours at night if we need to.
We are however in the fortunate position to have an Electricity plan that gives 3 hours free electricity between 11am-2pm every day. This is huge as it means that we can be guaranteed of a full battery every day rain or shine, as well as running the aircon to pre-warm the house and also charge one or both EVs.
The limiting factor is in fact my switchboard which trips and isolates the battery whenever I draw too much (>15kW)
My AC is a 15kW 3 phase ducted system that consumes 3-7kW.
My 2 storey house is very well insulated and has 7 zones, but very open internally (and of course airflow is needed back to the return intake), so there’s quite a bit of air to heat or cool.
I have 5kW of solar. My daytime consumption is usually less than my solar generation, unless I run the AC.
Here in Perth in summer we can have weeks of temperatures in the high 30’s or low 40’s so that’s when I really need a battery to lower my cost of AC usage at night. I’d also like to reduce the cost of warming the house at night in winter. At the moment we use the AC sparingly in both summer and winter.
My analysis confirms that you need at least 25-30kWh of battery and 10kW of solar to be able to offset most of the AC usage at these very high cost times. The upgrade would cost around $25,000-$30,000 before subsidies, hence the very long payback period. The WA subsidy changes made the upgrade unjustifiable.
Paul, where on Earth is it currently the case that “anything over 5kW automatically loses your feed-in tariff”, whether panels or inverters? My brother is on-grid in NSW, with 19 kW of panels and 20 kW of inverters, 10 kW PV + 10 kW battery inverters. Export limiting enables him to earn ample FiT – it’s cashflow positive. He does not export from his 25 kWh of batteries, not least because that is just enough for a night and rainy day. Admittedly, the 5c FiT is about to drop to 3c, so he’ll be paid less p.a. now.
Otherwise, I agree. Maximise PV first. My 27 kW arrays yield only 1 – 3 kW in deep overcast, but even a daily 12 kWh top-up has my 46 kWh battery over 95% again. 30 kWh battery would have been enough, even off-grid. And 27 kW PV is ample for the BEV, charging at 7 kW on sunny days, maybe 3 kW in overcast.
Generator not started in 18 months now.
There may be better battery deals toward the end of the scheme – if one doesn’t miss out. But a battery is best with ample PV.
Hi Erik,
I think they have some weird rules in WA about 5kW and FIT, which is where the state battery incentive was largest and squealing is loudest now they’ve been moderated.
In Western Australia you lose your feed-in tariff with any system larger than 5kW. The inverters are capped to stop any generation above that.
You can of course do whatever you want if you don’t care about the feed-in tariff.
A 5kw air conditioner has 5kw of output but they only use a fraction of that in electricity, usually around 1.5kw. So a 5kw aircon will actually run for about 6 hours on a 10kw battery.
Yes and no. Yes if a/c in steady state on a not too hot a day 1.5kW out of 5kW is realistic. On a stinker of a day not in your nelle it will use the lot.
My central A/ c is 15kW. I always start my a/c early/mid morning before it gets too hot with the min of zones to keep the kW low. Other than on stinker days I can keep it below 10kW. Hence why I want WA to lift its stupid 5kW output limit to 10kW like every other state so a Tesla battery can cover it in the late afternoon when my PVs are dropping off but A/C load is max. Will not be buying a battery till this changes.
Synergy /Western Power already announced they are looking at increasing inverters for single phase to 10kw in July, hopefully it’ll get over the line, will make a huge difference. I’m not worried about the Fred in tariff losses, they can go to charging my battery anyway.
Thanks for the update. I will be watching for this change from 5 to 10 kW upgrade.
That’s a good point that will not be apparent until you have run through actual data for the 4 seasons. For my current 6.4 system, based on 2024 data, it’s clear I will not be able to fully charge up a 16kWh battery for overnight use except in Spring (I am in WA). In the mad rush to push out quotes, I doubt installers will be advising panel and battery sizing that addresses the needs of overnight use.
I don’t know why everybody is so surprised. State govts are desperate to claw back any money they can. When I asked my installer for a quote I actually asked him what would happen if the NSW Govt did not allow the rebate be stackable. He said well that would be awkward given the hundreds of quotes and many actual installs that had been done and weren’t being connected until July 1 as per Federal Battery rebate legislation.
I checked in a week later after I heard the NSW Govt had reversed their decision and asked him about it. He just sighed and said it’s been a difficult week…
Perhaps this will motivate people to go ahead 🙂
I had a 8kW solar for 5 years and added a PW2 just before this “rebate” and once the rebate was available my second PW2 also didn’t qualify as I already had one…
So no savings for us at all.
Now, I absolutely do not regret getting both batteries as our household consumes 20-30kW a day on a non hot/cold day with no AC or heating that is, if on, we go over 50kW easily (no Gas)
Solar (most expensive at the time) paid for itself as per this websites calculator (brilliant, thanks heaps).
1st battery so far saved 3,500 in a year so far.
Now add the “free UPS function” and when WFH this is priceless. In 1 year two outages, 1 full day and 1 lasting 4 hours. (spared us a yellow pool, unhappy aquariim inhabitants and kids screaming “no internet”)
Your mileage may vary, but I’m a happy camper despite losing any incentives bar the Solar credits and a once off $700 from Tesla.
I’m curious how you workout that a PW2 saved you $3500 in a year.
3500/365 = $9.59/day
9.59/13.5 = $0.71 (assuming your are fully using the battery every day)
Is the average rate you are paying overnight really 71c/kwh?
After accounting for capital cost you’ll find your savings are a lot lower than you think.
I’ve been modelling adding batteries (12.5kWh or 25kWh)to my 16kW solar system in Sydney with similar daily usage and am struggling to recharge the 12.5kW battery using remaining solar generation over the last 2 months, so a 25kWh would be too big for my current solar set up in winter.
You could still have qualified for the Federal Rebate on your second PW2 (even if you already had battery running) – but only if it was installed after July 1 when the Federal Scheme starts
I’ve got an existing (Sigen) battery system (24kWh) – which is already running (it only used the NSW PDRS rebate when I installed it – before the Federal Rebate was announced) – but I have booked in an install of some more battery modules (16kWh) to add to my existing system and that gets the Federal Rebate (because I’ve never claimed it before and it’s < 50kWh)
Max, a typo?: “overnight electricity consumption of 7kW ”
That’d be 70 kWh over 10 hrs, so a missing ‘h’, I figure.
(We need to be a bit OCD to always hit that extra key when needed.
I am assuming that’s not when you run the pool heater, admittedly.)
Good pickup, thanks Erik – fixed.
Albanese should sack Chris Bowen immediately.
Bowen has essentially destroyed potentially 100’s of companies with this bad error of judgment.
You mean 100’s of companies rushed to be first through the door, offering deals with double rebates that were available “in theory”, while the written legislation was still saying the opposite.
Those installers with greedy and deceiving strategies will not be missed.
How dare companies rely on the statements of government ministers. That must mean they are greedy …sheesh.
Statement as in “public statement” recorded on official government website or a “private statement” said in a private group reserved to solar professionals.
I was there and all I heard was “currently there are not stackable but we are working with the local governments to make it work”.
From this to MARKETING “double deeping is here, buy from us today!” there is quite some margin… and more.
In almost all states, the federal rebate is MUCH larger than what was there previously. And people still find way to complain and blame the politicians. This is remarkable!
“Look, we want them to work together. There’s some issues that, look, there’s always these challenges in terms of working, you know, how do you integrate them? How do you make them work together? I’m sure we’ll be able to work through that……. So, yeah we’ll work with the federal government. I’ve talked to Chris about how we can make sure that those things work together.”
NSW Energy Minister Penny Sharpe
Both rebates in NSW would have caused an unsustainable rush on installs (and associated warranty claims etc). I signed up expecting both rebates but I’m happy that the scheme will be more sustainable with just the federal rebate scheme.
Agreed, some greedy installers are crying foul and counted their chickens before they hatched. For me as a consumer, I can get double the rebate for a battery once the federal scheme begins.
I had my battery in installed 2 weeks before the NSW rebate announcement and found out I ineligible to use the rebate to increase my capacity (with no expectations of back dating it). It was obvious a from the get go that this wasn’t being done in good faith, weird that people thought it was. It should have been inclusive of all. Where was your outcry then?
Noel McKay, says
The WA Government warned that accredited installers and Battery brands were not yet certified, anybody who signed up and paid a deposit has taken a leap too far and too early. Hope you get your money back.
$5000 plus interest free to 100000 systems instead of $5000 plus something up to $3000 for only 20000 is a better and mor equitable scenario.
I am happy with the combined rebate as it is enough to help me buy a battery but equally enough to make a difference to the improvement on renewables contributing to the challenge of climate change.
Noel McKay
I am a bit pissed off by those whingers who say they want their $8000, if we go back to the pre-election scenario. F3ck the 80,000 other households who now get to contribute towards fighting climate change, I just want my extra $3k.
Are you buying a battery (with government money ) as a statis symbol or are you really committed to fighting climate change.
Good point Noel,
Even those who aren’t interested in a sustainable future will benefit from having more batteries on the network, because reduced peak demand means lower spot prices and less grid investment is needed.
It’s a win for everybody.
If the grid needs batteries to levelise demand and supply ancillary services its much cheaper to just install grid batteries !
It is wrong to assume that if you increase the cost of a battery in WA (by reducing the subsidy) you’ll get more people installing batteries.
That narrative is illogical political spin!
If they wanted more people investing in batteries they should increase the total amount budgeted and keep the amount claimable to what they promised during the election.
Making being in a VPP mandatory also breaks an election promise and could defeat the economics for installing a battery – there may be no storage left when you need it, your battery is getting degraded, and you still end up having to buy electricity from the grid!
This is so frustrating people keep saying that the battery rebate in WA has been reduced. The State government rebate ha been reduced so that combined with the federal rebate the total remains the same.
How much better to extend the availability of the rebate to more households rather than give a few households an unexpected additional saving.
The total promised was $8500 and VPP capable. It’s now $5,000 and VPP mandatory.
It reduces the potential customers to those who can afford (and justify) the extra cost.
It has turned my planned installation from being marginally justifiable to absolutely uneconomic.
I’ve cancelled my order.
People keep saying that because that is what happened – strange that.
It has been reduced from a promised 5000 odd from them down to 1300 odd from them, and the conditions for getting it have been changed as well.
What you might, or might not, get elsewhere has nothing to do with what they promised.
You’re just falling for their political double speak they are using top justify breaking their election promise.
I guess if you ordered a battery on the basis of the ALP election promise to give a $3,500 rebate and that it would be possible to combine this with State based rebates. You are in WA your battery would be uneconomic without the $8,500 rebate then perhaps you shouldn’t be getting a battery and cancelling the order would be wise.
It seems incredible the there is an expectation that taxpayers should contribute $8,500 to a battery costing perhaps $12,000 with a net cost to the home owner of $3,500 or less.
I contracted for a battery here in WA costing $12,000 with a $5,000 rebate. The net cost being $7,000. The payback is four to five years which I think is pretty good.
If I had got the full $8,500 the payback would have been two years which is fantastic.
Just be happy taxpayers are prepared to pay towards your battery
It has been reduced – my quote went from 8000 with state government subsidy only to 8500 with federal plus state due to admin fees on the STCs. I cancelled.
Did you work out your payback with your own 12 month usage data? And not rely on the installer’s estimate with power bills. Because the results can vary substantially from my recent experience.
I worked out the payback period using a spreadsheet I setup based on daily Western Power usage data over 365 days. I also did cross checks which matched so I think my estimated payback period is fairly robust.
I based the model on tariff arbitrage charging at cheap off-peak rates and discharging at high cost peak rates. I ignored the contribution of my solar system completely. This conservative assumption should mean that the payback period is actually shorter.
Next ELECTION is pay time
After reading some comments now I am wondering whether I will get the federal government rebate.
I already had 10 kw of Solar on my shed and only knowing about the NSW govt rebate I decided to install 5kw of panels on the house a fronius hybrid inverter and a BYD 16.6 kw battery, the new panels would charge the battery in case we had a prolonged power outage due to the shed panels only outputting AC underground to the house. The system was installed on May 2nd and by that stage the fed rebate had just been announced and it was said if you didn’t turn on the battery until the 1st July you would be entitled to claim the federal rebate which for me is about $6000 ….so the battery is still not connected.
My question to anybody who really knows is am I still going to get the Federal rebate or not .
The intended eligibility requirements at this stage (which could still be subject to change) are that as long as a certificate of electrical compliance is yet to be issued you should be ok. This point wasn’t made clear from the outset though so its possible this requirement won’t be strictly enforced for installs as early as yours – this is something we will be keeping a close eye on.
Thanks….. I’ll keep both my fingers and legs crossed and read the fine print 🤔
I’m in the same boat. Have you already paid in full and was the NSW rebate applied?
Yes I’ve paid everything and the NSW rebate of about $4500 was applied to a system that came in at $24500 originally, with the federal rebate it will bring the system down to around $13000.00.
I didn’t hear about the federal rebate until I had an install date and was putting the whole thing in because I thought it was the right thing to do and we have an EV and free power for that is great.
Mal, it’s those who make the effort who’ll reduce the number of climate refugees in coming decades. They’ll also keep the grid stable during our wobbly transition to 100% renewables – a venture far from risk free in the short term.
If the solar pays for itself, the EV can pay for the batteries, I figure. (Just the average 15,000 km/yr = 1,500 L x $1.80 = $2700 p.a. saved. That’s $27,000 off your $13,000 system over 10 years, even if petrol prices don’t take off.)
Looks like it takes money to save money, dunnit? (Unless the old ICE dunger had to go anyway.)
Here in winter, off-grid, my battery does contribute to EV charging. To let it go to 100% & battery balance, despite the sun going down, I took about 6 kWh of the 30 kWh EV charge from the house battery, pulling it down to 73% overnight, with all the other loads. Even on-grid, that could be good, if the tariff is 75c/kWh in the evening peak, as some have reported. (Assuming a capacious home battery – handy in a blackout too.)
According to my powerwall 3 warranty, if I participate in a VPP, then the warranty is reduced. Is that on other brands as well?
I think if the WA government rebate was $1300 and mandatory VPP from the start, nobody would be annoyed.
This backflip is deep. Even with VPP savings over the 10 years it still doesn’t come close to the original offering. The rug pull is a devastating for many, followed by the worst gaslighting garbage behaviour by the government.
A cynic might imply this was done for voting reasons. But never ascribe to malice what could easily be prescribed to incompetence. Any decent government should have done better modelling of the rollout, it’s just a shambles.
Instead of expanding this to more people like it suggests, it has just secured this as a bonus for financial well off people.
“The [WA and NSW energy ministers] basically agreed that we’ll do collectively whatever it takes to make it stackable. My understanding this requires a small tweak to NSW legislation. But basically you’ll get both rebates,”
This is turning into another debacle of policy shifts and backflips. Made worse as it was said on the back of an election campaign and therefore a potential influence on voters. If it wasn’t the government, the ACCC would be all over this for deceptive conduct. The NSW government’s replacement scheme is also a sub-par replacement and is no better than the federal government’s backflip!