Safety study did not test protection devices installed in most households and of most concern to professionals and was produced by an apparently unqualified person.
We don’t have a Government looking after our safety, we have a bunch of cowboys on the make. Everything connected to Net Zero, EVs, Solar, Wind turbines, Electric buses, bikes are an environmental catastrophe.
California has a common-sense requirement for rooftop solar panels to protect utility workers who are working on recovery from a power failure. The rooftop solar panels must SHUT DOWN during a blackout to protect the workers from electrocution. Is this common-sense requirement being implemented for plug-in solar in the U.K? Or is it left to the owners to unplug their plug-in solar units during blackouts to prevent back-feeding?
Anti islanding isnt a physical disconnection of a generation source which is what the Electricity at Work Act requires. Fortunately DNO engineers are already trained for live working at distribution voltages so they can accept the risk of it not anti-islanding.
The test is quite simple. Unless the source detects a live mains feed it fail to energise the output plug/socket. This aspect has been in operation in Europe for some time. The concerns are more complicated and relate to the possibility of compromising the operation of the RCD and RCDO protection devices
So, imagine I have an EV which I normally charge at home. I have a long journey this afternoon and at breakfast I realise that I only have half charged battery, so I hook up for the morning for a full charge. In the afternoon I load up the car for my journey and discover, not a fully charged battery, but er... zero! Is this a plausible scenario?
Schadenfreude. The green blob proponents of unreliable wind and solar power are now denouncing Big Tech and their 24/7 always-on power-hungry data centres as religious apostates: https://envmental.substack.com/p/religious-conversion’
eFIXX on YouTube have covered this in some depth. They often do their own tests and studies and are qualified electricians and electrical engineers. Basically they know their stuff.
This might be of interest. Please note I am not defending either side of this discussion, I just follow this particular subject.
One aspect of plug in solar (and all other generation on the customer side of the meter) that never seems to be discussed is how it makes electricity more expensive for everyone else who doesn't get the solar.
Currently most of our fixed costs are recovered on a per kWh basis on bills and when this generation goes in the total kWh from the grid goes down so costs per kWh go up.
The net zero people are constantly talking about how they need to increase demand to spread out fixed costs and this is doing the opposite.
It doesn't surprise me that the government would fumble a technical study. But it is disappointing. Even if plug in solar is safe, cocking up the report is not good enough.
Consumers would still have to pay standing charges which is why all the fixed cost of the grid should now be loaded onto them. They wont be as that will be another disincentive for uptake but in the long run they will have to do something differrent.
I think that most of the incremental cost of the grid should be charged to the renewables generation that causes it. Loading those bills directly onto consumers following OFGEM's decision leads to perverted economics. However, where consumers opt for EVs and heat pumps they should pay for the local upgrades to cables and transformers.
Another excellent report. And I can't disagree with the primary conclusion - more testing needed with a representative range of protection. But Germany seems to have as many as four million of these, most unregistered perhaps. Are they are problem there? If not why not? And this also highlights an issue with old protection systems in UK. Perhaps UK should sort that starting with all public sector housing, and all private-sector rented housing.
The German standards are safer for plug in solar, but they have less safe plugs and sockets. Also 3 phase supply means higher voltages but lower currents for stoves etc..
A plug-in solar safety study contract for just £80k is bound to be superficial. No doubt the government will insist that these devices are “safe and effective”.
There are many risks that are ignored in the rush for Net Zero. Look at Electric double deck buses. There is an ongoing background of these buses catching fire mostly spontaneously.
So the chance of a single lithium cell failing is low, but the 5000 in a typical double deck increases the risk, then there are up to 96 passengers, half upstairs with only a narrow single staircase. Wait for the inevitable school bus fire.
In a previous life I was on one of the Electrical Installation Equipment Manufacturers Association technical groups (fuses and circuit breakers) we discussed in great detail the slightest changes and new developments, then it would go to a BSI committee, and after that to the IEC. It took years of cautious testing and discussion to change the existing rules. Now DESNZ is using consultants to short circuit (pun intended) the old safety rules.
So surely plug in solar has to comply with certain standards in the first place? Im guessing yes and its the interaction with domestic wiring installations that is the concern. Mind you given the proliferation of rooftop solar in my neighbour im already seeing >250Volts on high solar days yet no one stops those installations overloading the local network potentially. Like everything with renewables Miliband and his coterie dont care a hoot about the problems they are potentially creating its all about promoting themselves as saviours of the world.
I read the headline of this article, and realised that I had no idea what Plug-in Solar was. I paused reading to see what my electricity provider, Octopus, has to say on it, as they are often vocal on the technology. Naturally they are glowingly enthusiastic (their comments are here: https://octopus.energy/blog/plug-in-solar-panels-explained/ .
According to Octopus they are a "game changer" to the industry, and under the question "Are they safe?" They state "Completely. The 2026 regulations were specifically written with built-in safety rules. Compliant UK kits feature something called anti-islanding technology. This basically means the second you pull the plug out of the wall, the electricity shuts off instantly, and the plug is perfectly safe to touch." The article is written by Greg Baxter who styles himself as Marketing Manager. I was almost sold! I thought what a great Idea, I could have several of these plugged in different sockets. And as someone who considers myself a fairly basic DIY electrician a selling point is that I can install these myself with no electrician needed. What a great idea!
Then I read your piece, and I am mortified. Couple the problems you report with an aggressive sales campaign and we have the making of a disaster. I am going to pen a draft open letter to Greg Jackson, CEO of Octopus, which I intend to post here for comment. The public need to be made aware of this.
I share your horror at what has gone on with this safety study.
The other thing I didn't mention in the article is that the output from solar panels is very sensitive to being sited properly. South-ish facing and at an angle is ideal. How many of these plug-in panels will be installed in even a vaguely optimum location?
That assumes you don't move the panels. Mounted on a suitable frame, and if they aren't too shaded (a big problem for domestic installations) they could be tilted toward the sun from sunrise to sunset, or oriented parallel to the ground on cloudy days. You need a nice open South facing garden not on the North side of a hill.
Single axis rotation about N-S is favoured by solar farms like Cirencester, allowing a bigger harvest at each end of the day at the expense of maximum output at midday (which is much less valuable). Winter yields are also lower because sunrise/set are only a small angle off due South, rather than being either side of E-W at other times of year.
Twin axis installation can do a more accurate job of following the sun, but is not economic for solar farms (unless in the desert) because the panels must be widely spaced to avoid mutual shading and the mechanisms are more complex. Probably not suited for domestic installation either.
This would be hilarious if it wasn’t so stupid. Reality has a funny way of biting back, a slew of lawsuits from electrocution will follow.
As the recipient of a couple of nasty electric shocks in my youth, I’m pretty certain that none of these idiots have the faintest clue of the risks they are about to inflict on the public.
At the risk of appearing repetitive, Thank You, David.
I can't say I'm all that surprised at the lack of concern being displayed for the health and well-being of the British public by our vainglorious government over this though.
Net Zero policy has absolutely nothing to do with protecting public interests or the environment (indeed, it never has done), so I wouldn't expect this latest bit of tinkering around the edges to be any different.
For many, many years, our government has been taking the British people down a network of inexplicably bad policy pathways leading towards eventual financial, cultural and environmental ruin, and it is obvious to anybody who cares enough to look properly, that we are now deep up to our necks in a mire of green poo of 'our' own making.
It's going to take a huge amount of effort to pull ourselves out of this situation, but if we can't get our indoctrinated politicians and public to wake up to what has been (and still is being) done soon, we literally won't have enough energy left to stop ourselves from going completely under.
I'm more afraid of the mire of green poo surrounding me than I am of the completely unsubstantiated doom-mongering rhetoric regarding 'climate change' that is being generated and broadcast by the 'consensus' flock of screaming parrots!
I'm a reasonably good swimmer, but I'm feeling the need to invest in some snorkelling equipment coming on. Or perhaps diving equipment and a supply of oxygen tanks might be of more use?.......
A few minutes of internet search has produced competent bodies and companies that undertake electrical safety and compliance testing. It's extraordinary that the work was given to anyone outside this framework, if only from the point of view of covering one's arse.
Another government short cut to achieve net zero
To achieve the unachievable!
We don’t have a Government looking after our safety, we have a bunch of cowboys on the make. Everything connected to Net Zero, EVs, Solar, Wind turbines, Electric buses, bikes are an environmental catastrophe.
California has a common-sense requirement for rooftop solar panels to protect utility workers who are working on recovery from a power failure. The rooftop solar panels must SHUT DOWN during a blackout to protect the workers from electrocution. Is this common-sense requirement being implemented for plug-in solar in the U.K? Or is it left to the owners to unplug their plug-in solar units during blackouts to prevent back-feeding?
I think that's the anti-islanding test which all devices passed, but with one incomplete test.
Thank you. That is different nomenclature than is employed in the United States.
Anti islanding isnt a physical disconnection of a generation source which is what the Electricity at Work Act requires. Fortunately DNO engineers are already trained for live working at distribution voltages so they can accept the risk of it not anti-islanding.
The same applies to dedicated solar roof panels and batteries storage in the UK.
There is no such inbuilt safety feature in plugin solar that I am aware of, I cannot see how it could be implemented.
The test is quite simple. Unless the source detects a live mains feed it fail to energise the output plug/socket. This aspect has been in operation in Europe for some time. The concerns are more complicated and relate to the possibility of compromising the operation of the RCD and RCDO protection devices
24 A.I data centres planned for Scotland to 'save the planet.'
‘If all 24 applications were approved they will use up to one and a half times our PEAK energy use for the WHOLE of Scotland.’’
https://scotsparlclips.substack.com/p/first-ministers-questions25-jun-2026
This is why they want plug in solar. It is also why the grid can pull back electricity from plugged in Evs.
So, imagine I have an EV which I normally charge at home. I have a long journey this afternoon and at breakfast I realise that I only have half charged battery, so I hook up for the morning for a full charge. In the afternoon I load up the car for my journey and discover, not a fully charged battery, but er... zero! Is this a plausible scenario?
Maybe not yet.....
https://energized.edison.com/stories/can-evs-power-the-grid
Totally plausible - its happening in the UK already due to local network voltage instabilities tripping EV chargers:
https://youtu.be/-f6TD2OSup4
See YouTube: "Your Neighbour's Solar Is Your Problem Now" video by eFIXX
Schadenfreude. The green blob proponents of unreliable wind and solar power are now denouncing Big Tech and their 24/7 always-on power-hungry data centres as religious apostates: https://envmental.substack.com/p/religious-conversion’
eFIXX on YouTube have covered this in some depth. They often do their own tests and studies and are qualified electricians and electrical engineers. Basically they know their stuff.
This might be of interest. Please note I am not defending either side of this discussion, I just follow this particular subject.
https://youtu.be/hvtihZMB-GM?si=QA2abqWaS3el96Db
Very interesting - thank you.
Its well worth viewing this video, Oscar thanks for providing the link
One aspect of plug in solar (and all other generation on the customer side of the meter) that never seems to be discussed is how it makes electricity more expensive for everyone else who doesn't get the solar.
Currently most of our fixed costs are recovered on a per kWh basis on bills and when this generation goes in the total kWh from the grid goes down so costs per kWh go up.
The net zero people are constantly talking about how they need to increase demand to spread out fixed costs and this is doing the opposite.
It doesn't surprise me that the government would fumble a technical study. But it is disappointing. Even if plug in solar is safe, cocking up the report is not good enough.
Consumers would still have to pay standing charges which is why all the fixed cost of the grid should now be loaded onto them. They wont be as that will be another disincentive for uptake but in the long run they will have to do something differrent.
I think that most of the incremental cost of the grid should be charged to the renewables generation that causes it. Loading those bills directly onto consumers following OFGEM's decision leads to perverted economics. However, where consumers opt for EVs and heat pumps they should pay for the local upgrades to cables and transformers.
Another excellent report. And I can't disagree with the primary conclusion - more testing needed with a representative range of protection. But Germany seems to have as many as four million of these, most unregistered perhaps. Are they are problem there? If not why not? And this also highlights an issue with old protection systems in UK. Perhaps UK should sort that starting with all public sector housing, and all private-sector rented housing.
German domestic wiring arrangements differ substantially from the UK. There's a discussion highlighting differences here
https://engx.theiet.org/f/wiring-and-regulations/30560/german-standards
The German standards are safer for plug in solar, but they have less safe plugs and sockets. Also 3 phase supply means higher voltages but lower currents for stoves etc..
A plug-in solar safety study contract for just £80k is bound to be superficial. No doubt the government will insist that these devices are “safe and effective”.
Does DEZNZ employ any fully qualified professional electrical engineers?
https://chatgpt.com/share/6a40d9ae-0bec-83eb-970b-d239df9b9798?ogimg=plain
Sir Humphrey Appleby (Yes Minister): "Well, obviously I'm not a trained lawyer or I wouldn't have been in charge of the legal unit!".
There are many risks that are ignored in the rush for Net Zero. Look at Electric double deck buses. There is an ongoing background of these buses catching fire mostly spontaneously.
So the chance of a single lithium cell failing is low, but the 5000 in a typical double deck increases the risk, then there are up to 96 passengers, half upstairs with only a narrow single staircase. Wait for the inevitable school bus fire.
In a previous life I was on one of the Electrical Installation Equipment Manufacturers Association technical groups (fuses and circuit breakers) we discussed in great detail the slightest changes and new developments, then it would go to a BSI committee, and after that to the IEC. It took years of cautious testing and discussion to change the existing rules. Now DESNZ is using consultants to short circuit (pun intended) the old safety rules.
So surely plug in solar has to comply with certain standards in the first place? Im guessing yes and its the interaction with domestic wiring installations that is the concern. Mind you given the proliferation of rooftop solar in my neighbour im already seeing >250Volts on high solar days yet no one stops those installations overloading the local network potentially. Like everything with renewables Miliband and his coterie dont care a hoot about the problems they are potentially creating its all about promoting themselves as saviours of the world.
I read the headline of this article, and realised that I had no idea what Plug-in Solar was. I paused reading to see what my electricity provider, Octopus, has to say on it, as they are often vocal on the technology. Naturally they are glowingly enthusiastic (their comments are here: https://octopus.energy/blog/plug-in-solar-panels-explained/ .
According to Octopus they are a "game changer" to the industry, and under the question "Are they safe?" They state "Completely. The 2026 regulations were specifically written with built-in safety rules. Compliant UK kits feature something called anti-islanding technology. This basically means the second you pull the plug out of the wall, the electricity shuts off instantly, and the plug is perfectly safe to touch." The article is written by Greg Baxter who styles himself as Marketing Manager. I was almost sold! I thought what a great Idea, I could have several of these plugged in different sockets. And as someone who considers myself a fairly basic DIY electrician a selling point is that I can install these myself with no electrician needed. What a great idea!
Then I read your piece, and I am mortified. Couple the problems you report with an aggressive sales campaign and we have the making of a disaster. I am going to pen a draft open letter to Greg Jackson, CEO of Octopus, which I intend to post here for comment. The public need to be made aware of this.
I share your horror at what has gone on with this safety study.
The other thing I didn't mention in the article is that the output from solar panels is very sensitive to being sited properly. South-ish facing and at an angle is ideal. How many of these plug-in panels will be installed in even a vaguely optimum location?
That assumes you don't move the panels. Mounted on a suitable frame, and if they aren't too shaded (a big problem for domestic installations) they could be tilted toward the sun from sunrise to sunset, or oriented parallel to the ground on cloudy days. You need a nice open South facing garden not on the North side of a hill.
Single axis rotation about N-S is favoured by solar farms like Cirencester, allowing a bigger harvest at each end of the day at the expense of maximum output at midday (which is much less valuable). Winter yields are also lower because sunrise/set are only a small angle off due South, rather than being either side of E-W at other times of year.
Twin axis installation can do a more accurate job of following the sun, but is not economic for solar farms (unless in the desert) because the panels must be widely spaced to avoid mutual shading and the mechanisms are more complex. Probably not suited for domestic installation either.
This would be hilarious if it wasn’t so stupid. Reality has a funny way of biting back, a slew of lawsuits from electrocution will follow.
As the recipient of a couple of nasty electric shocks in my youth, I’m pretty certain that none of these idiots have the faintest clue of the risks they are about to inflict on the public.
At the risk of appearing repetitive, Thank You, David.
I can't say I'm all that surprised at the lack of concern being displayed for the health and well-being of the British public by our vainglorious government over this though.
Net Zero policy has absolutely nothing to do with protecting public interests or the environment (indeed, it never has done), so I wouldn't expect this latest bit of tinkering around the edges to be any different.
For many, many years, our government has been taking the British people down a network of inexplicably bad policy pathways leading towards eventual financial, cultural and environmental ruin, and it is obvious to anybody who cares enough to look properly, that we are now deep up to our necks in a mire of green poo of 'our' own making.
It's going to take a huge amount of effort to pull ourselves out of this situation, but if we can't get our indoctrinated politicians and public to wake up to what has been (and still is being) done soon, we literally won't have enough energy left to stop ourselves from going completely under.
I'm more afraid of the mire of green poo surrounding me than I am of the completely unsubstantiated doom-mongering rhetoric regarding 'climate change' that is being generated and broadcast by the 'consensus' flock of screaming parrots!
I'm a reasonably good swimmer, but I'm feeling the need to invest in some snorkelling equipment coming on. Or perhaps diving equipment and a supply of oxygen tanks might be of more use?.......
A few minutes of internet search has produced competent bodies and companies that undertake electrical safety and compliance testing. It's extraordinary that the work was given to anyone outside this framework, if only from the point of view of covering one's arse.
Indeed and a body such as the IET should have publicly denounced it