Imagine a major household appliance that, instead of consuming electricity, generates and feeds renewable solar electricity to the house, EV and grid using a 240V plug-in connection through a receptacle.
GismoPower® has developed the MEGA®, a Mobile Electricity Generating Appliance, a portable solar charging station on removable wheels integrating a high-power bifacial PV system and a powerful Class 2 EV-Charger, which also generates electricity for adjacent buildings and the connected grid. The MEGA fits neither the rooftop nor the ground-mounted solar PV categories.
This photovoltaic technology targets non-millionaire “energy prosumers,” including renters, utilizing previously untapped surface areas for solar power generation: Commercial, residential, and public driveways and parking areas. Our market focuses on small businesses, modest family homes and everyone else who needs to move.
Mobile MEGA appliances enable moderate income Americans to adopt renewable energy generation in their parking lots and driveways for a fraction of the cost of comparable systems where neither rooftop nor ground-mounted solar work. MEGA’s plug-in connection to the electric grid simplifies solar power integration, eliminating complex wiring and permitting processes and functions like an appliance—quick to install, expandable, and cost-effective. Unlike traditional solar systems, MEGA is engineered for quick deployment, extreme durability, and scalability, making it ideal for various applications.
Key Benefits:
MEGA includes a mobile racking system, PV modules, and UL-1741 compliant electronics conforming to the latest safety standards. This ensures high performance and compliance with distributed generation requirements.
Unlike conventional rooftop systems, MEGA allows easy access to PV modules, electronics, and wiring for cleaning, troubleshooting, and upgrades. This simplifies maintenance and reduces long-term costs.
The U.S. Department of Energy has approved publication of GismoPower's final report for our completed SBIR Phase II award, "The MEGA: Cost-Effective Plug-in Portable Solar Electricity for Lower-to-Moderate Income Homes and Small Businesses." The report is available through DOE's Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI): https://www.osti.gov/biblio/3011045
This work is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Award Number DE-SC0022708. GismoPower thanks the Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) and the DOE SBIR/STTR Programs Office for their support.
UL published Version 2 of its Outline of Investigation "UL 3700, Interactive Plug-In PV (PIPV) Equipment and Systems" on October 1, 2026. This Outline of Investigation is not yet an ANSI-approved consensus standard. UL 3700 was developed without public review and comment, and it still needs substantial improvement. A block diagram of the MEGA appears as Figure B.5 on page 43. Link to UL-3700
Link to full article
Innovation doesn’t always have to mean “deep tech” and new materials. In the United States, Gismo Power is working on a portable, plug-in approach to reduce the cost of PV carports and has found that regulation is its biggest obstacle. PV MAGAZINE spoke with Gismo Power CEO Antonia Ginsberg-Klemmt about its approach and market potential.
Prefabricated solar carports already exist, but they are priced for fleets and municipalities, not households. Beam Global's EV ARC, a transportable 4.3 kW solar canopy with 20 to 40 kWh of battery and a 5.76 kW EV charger, listed at $59,400 and sold for an average of about $65,000 per unit; it is marketed through the federal GSA schedule to government and fleet buyers. Paired Power's PairTree, a 4.6 kW bifacial canopy (rated as equivalent to a 5.3 kW conventional array) with up to 42 kWh of storage and one or two Level 2 chargers, is priced from $28,000 to $78,000 depending on battery size and charger count, with installation adding up to $5,000 more. Both are off-grid EV charging stations: they power a car, not a home. Neither connects to a house panel to offset household electricity. Even a standard rooftop solar system can be more expensive than a comparable MEGA system, and when combined with backup batteries to ride through power outages, an EV charger, and a canopy or carport, the cost advantage becomes significant.
Rooftop Solar Cost
The average cost to install a 6.5 kW premium-quality residential rooftop solar system in the United States varies with equipment selection, installation complexity, and geographic location. Premium systems, which use high-efficiency panels and top-tier inverters, generally cost more than standard installations. As of 2026, the 30 percent federal residential solar tax credit (Section 25D) has expired, so buyers no longer receive a federal offset, and net costs now equal gross costs for most homeowners.
Battery Backup for Rooftop Solar
Equipment only:
Including labor, permitting, and additional equipment, the total installed cost for a solar battery system typically ranges from $13,000 to $17,000. As of 2026, standalone batteries no longer qualify for the federal tax credit.
Level 2 EV Charger Cost (2026)
Hardware $200 to $900; installation $400 to $1,500 (labor and permit); typical all-in $800 to $2,000. The Section 30C credit (30 percent, up to $1,000) applies only in eligible census tracts and expired June 30, 2026.
Carport Cost
The average cost to install a residential carport in the United States ranges between $3,089 and $9,450, with a national average of approximately $6,238.
Size and capacity:
Material selection:
Construction type:
Additional features:
Adding It Up: Rooftop Stack vs. MEGA
A 6.5 kW premium rooftop system ($19,500 to $29,250), plus a 13 to 14 kWh battery installed ($13,000 to $17,000), plus a Level 2 EV charger ($800 to $2,000), plus a single-car carport ($3,089 to $9,450) comes to roughly $36,400 to $57,700, before any concrete slab, electrical runs, or permits for the carport. The combination also involves three or four separate contractors, a roof penetration, and a utility interconnection for the rooftop array.
A single MEGA (6.39 kW DC, bifacial, with 16 kWh of storage, on its own carport structure) sells for $23,925. A dual-rack MEGA (12.8 kW DC) with 16 kWh is $34,991, and with 32 kWh it is $37,290. Each is one appliance, delivered and plugged in.
MEGA® Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) over 25 Years
Production figures are from PVWatts for Laguna Hills, CA (flat mount, bi-facial, 14 percent system losses). Costs include the battery; no federal tax credit is applied.
What the MEGA Is Worth on a Real SCE Bill
Using Laguna Hills (SCE territory, Orange County,CA) as the baseline: a single MEGA, mounted flat with bifacial modules, generates approximately 10,000 kWh per year. The average California household consumes about 8,100 kWh annually. One unit therefore covers 100 percent of a typical household's electricity, with roughly 1,900 kWh left over for an electric vehicle.
What that electricity is worth depends on when you use it, and this is where honesty matters. SCE's residential time-of-use rate (TOU-D-5-8PM) charged $0.34 per kWh off-peak and $0.74 per kWh on-peak, 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. on summer weekdays, on a September 2026 bill. Winter rates run about $0.38 off-peak and $0.60 in the same evening window. Solar alone cannot touch that evening peak; generation ends before it begins. This is exactly why the MEGA ships with storage.
The MEGA's 16 kWh battery operates in peak-shave mode: it charges at midday, discharges into the 5 to 8 p.m. window first, then carries the household through the night, while holding 10 percent in reserve for outages. The system is configured for zero export, so nothing is sold back to the grid and NEM 3.0 export pricing never enters the calculation. No federal tax credit is assumed, since the residential 25D credit expired after 2025.
Scenario 1: single MEGA, 10,000 kWh household with an EV. That dispatch displaces about $3,840 per year in SCE charges: roughly $1,700 from daytime self-consumption, $1,300 from the evening peak, and $840 overnight. At a system price of $23,925, the simple payback is 6 to 7 years. For a 20,000 kWh all-electric household, the same single unit saves about $4,480 per year and pays back in 5.3 years, because more of the battery's output lands in the expensive evening window. Over the system's 25-year life, that works out to under $0.10 per kWh for electricity SCE currently sells for $0.34 to $0.74.
Scenario 2: dual-rack MEGA with 32 kWh of storage, 20,000 kWh all-electric household with an EV. A dual 12.8 kW MEGA generates about 20,000 kWh per year in Laguna Hills, matching the household's annual load. With two 16 kWh battery packs, the system serves 10,000 kWh of daytime load directly (including midday EV charging), shifts 4,000 kWh into the 5 to 8 p.m. peak, and carries another 4,500 kWh through the night. Only about 500 kWh per year goes unused. In total the household draws 93 percent of its electricity from its own carport, and the dispatch displaces about $7,680 per year in SCE charges: roughly $3,390 from daytime self-consumption, $2,610 from the evening peak, and $1,680 overnight. At a system price of $37,290, the simple payback is 4.9 years, and the 25-year cost of the electricity works out to about $0.075 per kWh. This configuration also avoids about 4.4 metric tons of CO2e per year on the California grid, or over 7 metric tons against the U.S. average.
The time-of-use rate matters in both scenarios. On a flat $0.34 per kWh tariff, the single MEGA would save about $3,150 to $3,240 per year and pay back in roughly 7.5 years, and the dual-rack system would save about $6,300 per year and pay back in 5.9 years. SCE's time-of-use pricing improves the return by 20 to 40 percent, entirely because the battery shifts midday generation into the 5 to 8 p.m. peak.
The EV advantage: the roughly 1,900 kWh a single MEGA produces beyond typical household use converts to 7,600 to 11,400 miles of driving at typical EV efficiency of 4 to 6 miles per kWh. For a household transitioning to electric vehicles, that is free driving on sun-generated electricity, charged at midday when the rate is lowest and the panels are producing. In the dual-rack scenario, the EV's charging is already inside the 20,000 kWh load and is served almost entirely from the carport.
The carbon impact: displacing California grid electricity at roughly 0.24 kg CO2e per kWh, a single MEGA avoids about 2.4 metric tons of CO2e per year (nearly 4 metric tons against the higher U.S. average grid). Because the system generates more clean electricity than the household consumes, it drives the household's electricity-related carbon footprint (about 1.9 metric tons per year on the California grid) net-negative, displacing more grid emissions than the household creates.
Electricity operates according to fundamental physical laws discovered by Ohm, Maxwell, and Kirchhoff. These principles, defined by mathematics, inherently support distributed electricity generation and dictate how energy flows through electrical systems—independent of any human oversight or corporate committee approvals
When an EV charges while a solar system generates electricity behind the same meter, the locally produced electricity directly supplies the EV battery first. Surplus energy powers the home, and any further surplus is fed into the grid. If solar generation is insufficient, the storage battery or the grid provides the shortfall.
With increasing EV adoption, grid demand will rise. However, GismoPower’s MEGAs enable direct solar-to-EV charging, reducing reliance on grid-supplied electricity and minimizing infrastructure strain while lowering peak loads and reducing the need for expensive grid upgrades.
A strong MEGA infrastructure, combined with Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) bi-directional chargers, further stabilizes the grid. These battery-connected appliances act as distributed energy assets, decreasing dependence on fossil fuel-powered peaker power plants. MEGAs, paired with EVs can also provide off-grid emergency backup power, reducing the need for dedicated home battery systems.
Beyond grid benefits, MEGAs provide environmental advantages by shading pavement and parked cars, reducing heat island effects and improving air quality.
GismoPower turns driveways into decentralized power stations, empowering EV owners to be active participants in the clean energy revolution.
This mobile racking system will open the solar PV market to renters and people on the move. No dedicated single-use real estate area is needed for the MEGA. Fitting in neither rooftop nor ground-mount category, MEGA racks can be wheeled into garages and barns during adverse weather conditions.
Solar installation companies can increase productivity by deploying several standardized GismoPower MEGA systems per day via flatbed trailer, instead of getting caught in unexpected complications during tricky customized rooftop installations which sometimes require dangerous, acrobatic efforts at elevated heights.
The secret sauce to GismoPower is its Solar On Wheels®. Heavy-duty wheels allow the individual racks to be elevated and wheeled around without major effort. Bad weather ahead? Simply lower the side panels and wheel it into a shelter. The car still fits underneath.
The metal racks can optionally be anchored and bolted on asphalt or concrete surfaces. The solar panels pivot up when deployed, and are folded down when the units are wheeled into a garage or shelter. Florida is notorious for its hurricanes, but look at what just happened with hurricanes in New York & Connecticut and other high wind events in the rest of the nation.
GismoPower will give its owners a chance to “unplug and store” beforehand, instead of “install and pray” during storm events.
Sixteen months after NV Energy stalled the expansion of the first utility-approved plug-in solar interconnection in its territory, three things have happened in the space of one month. Clark County confirmed in writing that the MEGA needs no building permit. The Public Utilities Commission of Nevada issued a written order on October 16, 2026 opening an investigatory docket on plug-in photovoltaic appliance interconnection, the first proceeding of its kind before any state commission, and stated in that order that how a utility treats an appliance the county does not permit or inspect "is a question about the utility's tariff and NAC 704.8823, not about county authority." And the homeowner, representing himself, filed a petition for judicial review in the Eighth Judicial District Court in Las Vegas (Case No. A-26-959617-P, filed October 15, 2026) against both the Commission and NV Energy, asking the court to set aside the Commission's dismissal of his complaint and to order the utility to put his application back in the queue while the case is decided. The single to dual MEGA upgrade itself is still not approved. Here is what happened.
The short version
In December 2024, NV Energy approved a single-rack MEGA at a Las Vegas home for net metering. It was the first plug-in solar appliance the utility had ever interconnected. In June 2025 the homeowner applied to add a second MEGA to the same inverter at the same location. That application has not been approved sixteen months later, and the reasons given have shifted five times: a missing solar permit, a missing licensed contractor, a county code case that the utility's own inquiry set in motion, a zoning setback, and finally a reading of NRS 704.774 under which the utility waits for "full approval by Clark County" of something the county's Building Official has said it does not permit at all.
Along the way, four things were settled that matter well beyond one driveway:
What is not settled: NV Energy wrote on October 5 and again on October 14 that it cannot proceed, first until the county's setback question is resolved or waived, then because the unit "has not been granted full approval by Clark County." Both emails attribute their facts to a telephone conversation with a code enforcement supervisor. Neither mentions the Building Official's letter. The October 14 email also reports that the county "has issued another notice of violation." On October 15 the homeowner went to the Code Enforcement office; no one there knew of any new notice, and none has been received.
How the dispute unfolded
The full sequence, in order. Docket filings are public; the section at the end explains how to open them.
December 2024. NV Energy approves the single-rack MEGA for net metering (application NVE-152554, filed November 2023). First plug-in solar interconnection in NV Energy territory.
June 2025. The homeowner applies to add a second rack to the same inverter (application NVE-177532, 4.86 kW to 9.72 kW DC). The inverter, outlet and location are unchanged.
August 20 to 26, 2025. An NV Energy engineer asks Clark County whether the "permit" for the project was approved. The county answers that the permit is for an EV charger and shows no solar permit. Five days later the engineer sends the county photographs of the unit. County staff forward the matter internally "since it came from NV Energy," and on August 26 an official directs: "Please open a case for unpermitted solar on the carport." Case CE25-24615 is opened the same day.
September 9, 2025. Clark County Code Enforcement issues a notice of violation describing the MEGA as an unpermitted "shade structure" in the front setback.
September 20, 2025. NV Energy correction notice: provide a local solar permit, a licensed C-2 contractor, an engineering calculation, and corrected plans by November 8.
October 9, 2025. The homeowner files a formal complaint with the PUCN (later Docket 26-05022).
November 9, 2025. NV Energy marks the expansion application "Cancelled" in its PowerClerk portal, two days after a "Documentation Corrections Needed" status.
November 2025. The Commission's consumer complaint division reports NV Energy's position: the 2023 EV-charger permit had been "mistakenly accepted" in place of a solar permit when the first unit was approved; the utility had contacted Clark County about the unit; and the county had told the utility that a wheeled, movable unit falls outside its inspection scope.
January 6, 2026. Clark County Comprehensive Planning advises that the MEGA is treated solely as a carport, not as small-scale electric generation, and that its location in the front setback requires a waiver of development standards.
April 21, 2026. In a meeting with GismoPower, NV Energy's senior engineer for renewables offers to approve the expansion application while honoring its original filing date. GismoPower confirms the offer in writing the same day, with PNNL and Department of Energy staff copied, and asks to be corrected if anything was misunderstood. No correction follows, and no approval.
May 13, 2026. GismoPower delivers the twelve months of billing data NV Energy had identified as a requirement. June 11: NV Energy says it will review the request and respond. June 14 and 24: follow-ups go unanswered. July 21: the engineer transfers departments.
August 12, 2026. The PUCN dismisses the complaint for lack of probable cause, finding the utility properly declined for want of a solar building permit and a licensed-contractor contract. Footnote 1 expressly declines to decide whether a utility may refuse a mobile, portable solar unit by classifying it as a fixed structure. Finding 18 states that Clark County opened its case "on its own."
August 14, 2026. The homeowner files a petition for reconsideration and rehearing in 26-05022, tendering the county's public records. The Commission later refuses to consider them.
September 8, 2026. GismoPower's amended petition for rulemaking is accepted as Docket 26-09004. Notice is published in four Nevada newspapers on September 24.
September 17, 2026. PUCN Order on Reconsideration in Docket 26-05022: dismissal reaffirmed, but the order spells out the two cures and preserves a renewed complaint if the utility denies on mobility grounds. The homeowner learned of the September 17 session from an acquaintance who saw it on the posted agenda.
September 21 and 22, 2026. Clark County issues two written determinations (next section). GismoPower resubmits the expansion application to NV Energy with both determinations, the NSCB owner-builder exemption, the stamped dual-configuration plans, and the Commission's order.
September 25, 2026. Public comment deadline in 26-09004. Comments are filed by PUCN Staff, Solar United Neighbors, the homeowner, and GismoPower (attaching both county determinations and the PNNL/LBNL interim report on MEGA-type plug-in PV).
September 29, 2026. PUCN open meeting, Agenda 18-26, Item 4A: the Commission votes to adopt its General Counsel's recommendation on Docket 26-09004.
October 5, 2026. NV Energy writes that it cannot proceed with the expansion application until Clark County resolves or waives the Title 30 setback question, citing "the PUCN's ruling." GismoPower asks NV Energy to identify the rule that makes setback compliance an interconnection condition, or to issue a formal written determination.
October 14, 2026. NV Energy answers by quoting NRS 704.774(1) and stating that "since this unit has not been granted full approval by Clark County, NV Energy cannot proceed." The email adds: "Even if not stated in the Commission's order, NV Energy must follow the NRS law."
October 15, 2026. The homeowner visits Code Enforcement: no new notice of violation on file or received. He submits a public records request for all communications between NV Energy and the county. That evening he files his petition for judicial review in the Eighth Judicial District Court; the Clerk accepts it within two minutes as Case No. A-26-959617-P.
October 16, 2026. The PUCN issues its written order in Docket 26-09004.
No building permit. The county said so in writing.
For fourteen months the single most repeated demand was a "solar building permit" for a device that has wheels in a driveway and plugs into an outlet. Clark County's Building Department told the homeowner verbally in September 2026 that it could not issue such a permit because the unit is not a structure, and that it did not write letters saying so. On September 21, 2026, it did.
Building Official James Gerren, P.E., C.B.O., confirmed that under the Clark County Building Administrative Code the MEGA requires no building permit and no inspections while it is portable, has wheels, is unanchored, and cord-and-plug connected with no permanent connection to the building's electrical service equipment. He further confirmed that permit BD23-62238 had "previously permitted, inspected, and approved" the 250 V plug-in PV outlet with its shutoff switch in 2023.
That is the position GismoPower has argued since 2021, in Sarasota County, at NEC Code-Making Panel 4, in the UL 3700 process, and in the PNNL CRADA: an appliance that plugs into a permitted receptacle is regulated as an appliance, through product certification and the outlet's permit, not as a construction project. Clark County is the most populous jurisdiction in the United States to put that in writing for a 6.4 kW plug-in solar carport. The same letter answers, in the county's own words, the two objections NV Energy raised in 2025: there is no solar permit to obtain, and the outlet permit the utility said it had "mistakenly accepted" was in fact the correct and only permit.
The same day, Comprehensive Planning Director Jason Allswang issued the county's land-use determination, formally adopting the January 2026 analysis: under Title 30 the MEGA is treated solely as a carport with solar panels, not as electric generation, so no special use permit is needed; because it stands in the front setback, a waiver of development standards is required to keep it there. That is a zoning question between the homeowner and the county. It applies equally to a 25-year-old shed on the same lot. It has nothing to do with whether an inverter may connect to the grid.
Why there will be no waiver application
The homeowner prepared the waiver application the county invited and decided not to file it. A waiver of development standards is a discretionary grant: the Planning Commission may approve it, deny it, or attach conditions, on findings about neighborhood compatibility in which, by the county's own statement, the solar panels are irrelevant. Filing it would have meant accepting the county's classification of a wheeled, cord-and-plug appliance as a "structure," paying about one thousand dollars in fees, and waiting months for a vote on a question that has nothing to do with the electrical installation. It would also have handed NV Energy exactly what it asked for on October 5: a county proceeding on which to hang the application indefinitely.
Instead, each MEGA is being registered as a trailer, with license plates. Under Nevada law a trailer is "every vehicle without motive power designed to carry property or passengers wholly on its own structure and to be drawn by a motor vehicle" (NRS 482.125). A registered vehicle standing on its owner's driveway is not a building; Title 30 itself provides that parking may be located within required setbacks. The Commission's October 16 order quotes, without objection, the sentence in GismoPower's proposed regulation that "registration of the appliance as a trailer or other vehicle under the laws of this state does not render the appliance a structure."
Nevada law also speaks directly to what the county may do. NRS 278.0208 provides that a governing body "shall not adopt an ordinance, regulation or plan or take any other action that prohibits or unreasonably restricts or has the effect of prohibiting or unreasonably restricting the owner of real property from using a system for obtaining solar energy on his or her property," and deems unreasonable any restriction that cuts a system's performance by more than ten percent without a comparable alternative. The county's planning department has stated there is no location on this lot outside the front setback. The alternative its setback allows is removal.
The PUCN Complaint Docket: 26-05022
The homeowner, representing himself, filed a formal complaint against NV Energy in October 2025. The Commission's Regulatory Operations Staff investigated, briefed the Commissioners, and on August 12, 2026 the Commission dismissed the complaint without a hearing, finding no probable cause. The order held that NV Energy had correctly declined the application for lack of a valid building permit and a licensed-contractor installation contract under NRS 704.774 and NAC 704.8823, and that the Clark County code case was outside the Commission's jurisdiction.
The order also did something useful. Footnote 1 stated that the Commission was making no finding on whether a utility may deny interconnection to a mobile, portable solar unit by classifying it as a fixed structure. That question, the one that matters for every plug-in appliance, was left open on purpose.
The homeowner petitioned for reconsideration. On September 17, 2026, the Commission reaffirmed the dismissal but wrote down, in paragraphs 13, 26 and 33, exactly what cures the two deficiencies: a Clark County building permit or an exemption from Clark County, and a Nevada State Contractors Board owner-builder exemption. Paragraph 15 added that if NV Energy denies the application because the unit is mobile or portable, the homeowner may renew the complaint.
Four days later, Clark County supplied the exemption in writing, the State Contractors Board exemption was obtained, and both went to NV Energy. By the order's own terms, the deficiencies the utility relied on no longer exist. The utility's October 5 and 14 responses do not dispute that; they raise a different subject, the zoning setback, which appears nowhere in the order, in the utility's 2025 correction notice, or in the statutes the Commission applied.
The Petition for Judicial Review
Nevada law gives a party thirty days after the Commission's final action on reconsideration to ask a district court to review it (NRS 703.373). The homeowner filed on October 15, 2026, within that window, in the Eighth Judicial District Court in Clark County, Case No. A-26-959617-P, naming both the Commission and Nevada Power as respondents. The petition asks the court to set aside the dismissal and send the matter back to the Commission with instructions, and it asks for interim relief while the case is decided: that NV Energy restore the application to pending status with its original 2025 date, state in writing any technical deficiency within ten days, and file its communications with Clark County so that the basis of its refusals is on the record.
The grounds are the ones this page has described, now in legal form. The Commission ordered compliance with a permit the record already showed the county does not issue. It reserved the controlling question while deciding on grounds that depend on it. It found that the county opened its case "on its own" and then refused to look at the county's records showing otherwise. It found no genuine issue of material fact on a record in which the utility said the unit "does not appear mobile" and the county said a wheeled unit is outside its scope. It denied interim relief in June as premature and in September as too late. It applied a rule about evidence that "could not have been introduced at the hearing" to a complainant who never had one. It declared the utility's approval of the identical appliance in 2024 "immaterial." It disclaimed jurisdiction over its own tariff in August and, through its General Counsel, asserted that jurisdiction in September. And the petition sets out NRS 278.0208 in full, with the argument that neither a county setback nor a discretionary waiver can be a permit "required ... for the installation" of a net metering system.
Against NV Energy, the petition records the April 21 offer and the five months of silence that followed, and the fact that both October refusals rest on what a code enforcement supervisor said on the telephone rather than on anything in writing from the official with jurisdiction over permits. The interim relief asked for is less than the utility's own engineer offered in April.
A renewed complaint before the Commission, the path the September 17 order itself preserved, is prepared and will be filed once the trailer registrations are in hand.
The PUCN Rulemaking Petition: 26-09004
While the complaint was pending, GismoPower filed something no plug-in solar manufacturer had filed before any state commission: a petition under NRS 233B.100 asking the Commission to adopt regulations governing the interconnection of plug-in photovoltaic appliances, or, in the alternative, to open an investigatory docket. The petition proposed definitions for a cord-and-plug appliance (up to 60 A at 240 V, NRTL-certified or meeting interim criteria), a clarification that trailer registration does not make an appliance a structure, an appliance certification pathway in place of a building permit, an export-limited option, and a simplified interconnection procedure. It cited the PNNL CRADA, the SLAC and NC State FREEDM grid impact studies, the LBNL barriers study, German practice under VDE-AR-N 4105, Utah's H.B. 340, and UL 3700.
The petition was accepted as Docket 26-09004 on September 8, 2026. Notice ran in the Elko Daily Free Press, Las Vegas Review-Journal, Reno Gazette-Journal and Tonopah Times-Bonanza. Comments were due September 25. Solar United Neighbors supported further proceedings. PUCN Staff did not oppose them. GismoPower's supplemental comment placed both Clark County determinations and the PNNL/LBNL interim report before the Commission.
On September 29, 2026 the Commission voted to adopt its General Counsel's recommendation, and on October 16, 2026 it issued the written order. The order declines to adopt the proposed regulation text now, for reasons of timing and drafting, and directs the Commission Secretary to open an investigatory docket to examine the interconnection of plug-in PV appliances. Three findings in it matter:
On certification, the order notes that the MEGA is not yet listed to a product safety standard and that the proposed transitional pathway "is difficult to square with NRS 704.774(2)." That is a fair description of where the standards stand, and it is why GismoPower has a CSA Group certification project under contract to UL 3700, whose Issue 2, published October 1, 2026, extends the Outline of Investigation to string-inverter systems like the MEGA. The docket is the right place to settle what a transitional pathway should look like while that work is completed.
Nevada now has the first open regulatory proceeding in the country devoted to how plug-in PV appliances connect to the grid.
Where things stand
As of October 17, 2026:
Expansion application NVE-177532. Shown as "Cancelled" in NV Energy's portal since November 2025. The cures were submitted on September 21 and 22, 2026. NV Energy's position, stated October 14, is that it cannot proceed until Clark County grants "full approval." The petition for judicial review asks the court to order the application restored to pending status with its original date while the case is decided.
Clark County. The waiver of development standards will not be filed. Each MEGA is being registered as a trailer with license plates. The code enforcement case remains open; no notice beyond the September 2025 notice has been received, and the county's own records on how the case began are now before the court.
Docket 26-05022, the complaint. Dismissal reaffirmed September 17, 2026, now under judicial review. A renewed complaint under paragraph 15 of that order is prepared.
Docket 26-09004, the rulemaking petition. Written order issued October 16, 2026. Next comes the opening of the investigatory docket and a procedural schedule of workshops and comment rounds. GismoPower will participate and will raise the question this dispute poses: whether a county land-use matter can condition utility interconnection of a cord-and-plug appliance after the building department has exempted it.
PNNL/LBNL CRADA 747. The interim report is filed in 26-09004. The CRADA concludes in November 2026, when the final deliverables, including the permitting white paper, are due. The Commission's order says it will receive them.
UL 3700 certification. Issue 2 of the Outline of Investigation was published October 1, 2026, extending its scope to string-inverter systems like the MEGA. The CSA Group certification project is under contract, with testing in 2027.
One thing we will not do is relocate the unit. There is no compliant location outside the setback on this lot, and a product whose purpose is to put solar on a driveway has to be able to stand on a driveway. The setback question is a legitimate land-use conversation with the county. It is not a reason for a utility to refuse an interconnection that its own regulator has told it how to process.
Direct LINK to the PUCN order of October 16, 2026 and to the PUCN briefing memo.
How to read the dockets yourself
Everything described above is on the public record.
The court case can be followed on the Eighth Judicial District Court's public portal (Clark County Courts, Case Search) under Case No. A-26-959617-P or you can use the Direct DOWNLOAD LINK
Several MEGA sites offer online monitoring to provide performance statistics:
SITE #0 (Prototype - 20X 375W) Sarasota/FL
SITE #1 (MEGA - 9X460W) FREEDM - Raleigh/NC
SITE #3 (MEGA - 9X490W) - Walnut Creek/CA
SITE #6 (MEGA - 9X540W) Residence - Las Vegas/NV
SITE #7 (MEGA - 9X540W) Solar Center - South Dakota
SITE #8 (MEGA - 8x705W) Residence - South Dakota
%20and%20Measurements.png/:/rs=w:600,cg:true,m)
An eight-module MEGA (8 x 705 W, 5.64 kW DC) on the Pine Ridge Reservation produced 4,493 kWh between January and June 2026, as recorded by the inverter's integrated production monitoring.
NLR's PVWatts calculator had projected 4,148 kWh for the same site and period. That is 8.3 percent more electricity than the industry's standard model predicts. The margin came in the months that matter: March ran 19 percent over projection, April 11 percent, May 20 percent and June 10 percent, when the bifacial modules on the MEGA's open, low-tilt canopy pick up light reflected from the ground that a conventional rooftop array never sees. January and February came in under projection (285 and 464 kWh against 387 and 493), which is what snow cover on the High Plains does to any solar array, and the MEGA still finished the half-year ahead.
Scaled to today's production unit, the same six months at the same site work out to about 5,090 kWh for a single 6.4 kW MEGA (9 x 710 W modules) and about 10,000 kWh for a dual-rack MEGA (12.8 kW, two racks on one inverter), against PVWatts projections of roughly 4,700 and 9,400 kWh. In May alone, a dual-rack unit at Pine Ridge would have delivered about 2,400 kWh, enough to run an average American household for more than two months.
These are not laboratory numbers. They are production readings logged at the inverter of a plug-in appliance that was rolled into place, plugged into a 240 V outlet, and interconnected under one of the initial utility-approved plug-in solar interconnect agreements in the United States.
The MEGA®, enables self-consumption and generation of renewable electricity at distributed sites.
Every kilowatt hour generated and consumed behind the electric meter at the same location does not need to be transported through the electric grid. Increasing self-consumption at distributed locations can effectively reduce the need to expand electric grid infrastructure. This is especially valuable for the ongoing transition to electric vehicles, which will significantly increase our reliance on distributed electricity.
Follow the link to NCSU's Grid Impact Analysis research report.
SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory validated NCSU's findings and included California specific areas with high EV acceptance rates in their scope of work.
● Most solar PV installers do not serve renters.
● Community Solar with remote net-metering is against the applicable laws in Florida which exclusively favor the utility corporations.
● The sole solar choice for most renters in Florida is to participate in a utility owned solar project.
● If renters in Florida would be able to offset their real estate costs and the installation costs for their solar PV systems through guaranteed revenue, they would become owners and not remain renters.
Electric Utility Corporations like Florida Power & Light are legally entitled to offset real estate costs and all operating expenses for their utility scale solar farms through capacity charges with guaranteed revenue, while residential PV system operators do not benefit from such regulatory entitlements.
Residential PV systems therefore play an irrelevant, almost negligible role in solar power generation. The actual share of Florida's overall solar electricity generation capability reached 6.99% while residential and commercial solar PV stagnated around 1% in Q1 2024.
Florida Power & Light enforces unfavorable policies which limit privately owned solar system installations to 115% of PAST usage and requires an extraneous, unjustified liability insurance for all PV systems above 10KW.
In 2019, the Gismo team made an attempt to fix this issue by filing a petition with the Florida Public Service Commission against Florida Power and Light (FPL) who disincentivises powerful residential solar systems and appealed the FPSC's denial of the petition.
- May 13th 2020 - SC19-1873 Initial Brief of Merits
- July 4th 2020 - SC19-1873 Reply Brief
In 2020, we intervened before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in support of net-metering and just monetary compensation for generated solar electricity.
Florida Statute 163.04
Energy devices based on renewable resources.
F.S. 163.04 (2) A deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources from being installed on buildings erected on the lots or parcels covered by the deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or binding agreement. A property owner may not be denied permission to install solar collectors or other energy devices by any entity granted the power or right in any deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement to approve, forbid, control, or direct alteration of property with respect to residential dwellings and within the boundaries of a condominium unit. [..]
For well over a decade, the Sarasota County Department of Planning & Development Services has been embroiled in corruption and misconduct scandals, involving former Building Officials Kathy Croteau and Greg Yantorno as well as a former code enforcement officer.
Disregarding the state-wide FSEC 203-17 certification by the Florida Solar Energy Center , the Sarasota County Building Official withheld our solar permit application.
- Nov 12th 2021 Electrical Review: APPROVED
- Jan 26th 2022 Zoning Review: NOT REQUIRED
- Jan 25th 2022 Building Review: FAILED
The Sarasota County Building Official neither approved nor denied the building permit application:
- STEVE BELL: DECISION February 9th 2022
Pursuant to Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act (“FLUEDRA”):
- Appeal against withholding the Solar Permit
- Sarasota County responds to the Appeal
Building Code Board of Adjustments upholds the decision:
- Theresa Toole WRITTEN ORDER Building Code Board of Adjustments & Appeals
- Special Magistrate recommends denial of Solar Permit
The article titled "Barriers to Balcony Solar and Plug-In Distributed Energy Resources in the United States," published in Energies (Volume 18, Issue 8), explores the potential of plug-in distributed energy resources (DERs) like balcony solar systems in the U.S. energy landscape. These systems, which connect to homes via standard AC outlets, offer a portable and cost-effective alternative to traditional rooftop solar installations, particularly benefiting renters and those with limited access to conventional solar options.
Despite their success in Europe, the adoption of plug-in DERs in the U.S. faces several challenges. The authors identify technical issues such as touch safety concerns, breaker masking, and the need for bidirectional ground-fault circuit interrupters. Additionally, regulatory hurdles stemming from Underwriters Laboratories (UL) standards and the National Electrical Code (NEC) complicate their integration into the existing energy infrastructure. Utility perspectives and interconnection challenges further impede widespread deployment.
By addressing these barriers, the article suggests that plug-in DERs could play a significant role in democratizing access to renewable energy and enhancing grid resilience. The full article provides an in-depth analysis of these issues and potential pathways for overcoming them.
A TALE OF TWO CONTINENTS
North American Clean Energy Magazine
September/October 2024
GismoPower now popular in China
【图】随时充电 美学生发明便携式太阳能车棚_汽车之家
