Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] solar panel safety revisited



Mike mentioned the first pointer I offered was faulty.
Here's a corrected version.

/snip/ it seems to me like a safer approach to point to URLs which offer NEC rule interpretation. Here are a couple....
[corrected?]
<http://www.nmsu.edu/~tdi/Photovoltaics/Codes-Stds/PVnecSugPract.html>


<http://www.altestore.com/howto/data/pdf/PV-NEC-V-1.9-opt.pdf>


Much the same sort of rationale I quote below, would apply to physics
teachers offering medical or legal advice. Probably authoritative,
probably helpful and well intended - but even more likely to attract
the attention of lawyers who need to make a living - in some cases,
a rather handsome living. I simply make the conservative suggestion
that one choose one's fights.

I see that the NEC is now acknowledging the
place for non-grounded solar systems, and I am pleased that it
stresses the need for fire-cladding the entry wires
from solar panels that penetrate attic areas.

My view, of course.

Brian W


Michael Edmiston wrote:
I read the PDF file from the second link that Brian Whatcott referenced (the first link does not work).
/snip/
If I am worried that a student might sue me someday because I didn't explain something exactly right, or my explanation was incomplete, or I somehow misled the student, then I shouldn't convey any factual information to students. /snip/ Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.