A battery is not like a smoke detector. Batteries can kill when abused and renters have no skin in the game if the house burns down. So for that reason I wouldn’t install one unless I actually lived in the house and could spend some time daily for monitoring and maintenance. That’s the same reason I didn’t install one at my mom’s house. But there I did install solar, which requires intermittent maintenance that can be easily done.
Comment on Labor's home batteries policy could help people who will never take it up. Here's how | Adam Morton
DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 3 weeks agoNo way in hell they would ever make it mandatory for rentals. They’ve barely made smoke detectors mandatory for rentals. Removing negative gearing won’t help. It will make rentals more expensive.
werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
New solar, by itself, is not very valuable because the grid has a surplus of power when the sun is shining. The feed in tariff is near zero. It can offset some of your own usage but most people are out in the middle of the day.
werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Entirely incorrect. Not only can the state store energy in reservoirs during the day to produce hydro at night, there are battery banks like that one in LA that went into flames. But most importantly, they use an app to throttle solar into the grid to reduce fuel use. I mean, that’s the whole point! If you make enough solar, they can stop running some random power plant somewhere. Some power plant’s cannot easily be turned off or throttled down. That’s a them problem.
DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 2 weeks ago
Do you have any links to an Australian government storing excess energy in hydro during the day? I don’t think that’s something available in any part of Australia currently.
werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You don’t want a dead renter or a dead battery.
Auzy@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
So what’s your solution then for rentals?
You complain if they put incentives to stop buying multiple properties and increase the availability to people who want to stop renting, you complain if they don’t?
Negative gearing mainly benefits wealthier people, and I know we had customers with 14+ houses they owned. They’re the main problem, because the more properties they buy, the bigger power they have over the market (monopolies).
There already is a first home owners grant which benefits first home buyers (I know, because I used it).
They need to add incentive for people to stop buying multiple properties, so more people can stop renting, and eliminating negative gearing could help with that.
DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
Why do you assume renters want to stop renting? Mostly renters just want better renting conditions. I support many changes to rental laws. But I don’t think skipping all the low hanging fruit and enforcing solar and batteries is realistic.
Insulation should be a must. Repairs should be done in a timely fashion.
Auzy@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
It sounds like you want the best of all worlds
If you want cheap rent and all that, the solution is to buy, not to buy
Yes, it requires more responsibility, but that’s life.
DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone 3 weeks ago
If I want cheap rent, the solution is to buy?? Ok boomer
stib@aus.social 3 weeks ago
@DavidDoesLemmy @Auzy Can't believe that people are still parroting the "abolishing negative gearing will make rentals more expensive" line. Like trickle down economics and the benefits of privatisation, It was a crock of shit in the 80s it's a crock of shit now.
Putting the money that we're giving to landlords into social housing will make rentals go down. Reducing the price of property which is being pushed up by investors with their wallets stuffed with handouts will make rentals go down.