this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
634 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
82620 readers
3973 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes but many inspectors and insurance companies won't want you to install electrical equipment on "real property" or buildings if it isn't UL as that falls into the scope of AHJs and insurance providers. If there's something that has the potential to start a fire, you need to have safety certifications so operating the system not only reduces the risk of fire, but also selling the house in the future to a new owner doesn't come with excess burden on behalf of the next insurer.
If your solar system is off-grid AND off-building, I see no reason that you need to have a UL listed system.
This is of course dependent on local AHJs and utilities, but UL 1741 covers both standalone (off-grid) and grid-interactive (on-grid) inverters. If you're choosing an inverter manufacturer that makes non-UL listed off-grid inverters, I would probably be suspect of their products' quality as it's easier to gain UL listing regardless of how the inverter is used: off-grid or grid-interactive.
That is a problem. Off-grid inverters that aren't certified to UL 1741-SB aren't required to have anti-islanding protection that cuts the inverters off if there's an absence of grid voltage. If a "balcony solar" inverter were to NOT cease to energize upon loss of grid and stay islanded, then voltage is introduced to the building's/community's shared local distribution system. If work were to be done on that portion of the distribution system or grid where lineman and wireman expect conductors to be de-energized, then you might have injuries as a result. Now, you may be able to say that lineman and wireman should always test for presence of voltage prior to doing work, and as a solar engineer I would absolutely expect folks to do this, but that's not always the case. People cut corners. And in the event that certain crews cut corners, don't check for voltage and investigate where the voltage source is, and start touching wires and introducing paths to ground, people can get seriously injured or die.
You may think that because solar panels are current-limited that this fact protects workers in the event of becoming exposed to live voltage, but any combination of voltage and current can kill.
In the context of safety, this is a good thing. Skirting DRM on movies or TVs won't mean you injure yourself or others or worse. Skirting inverter settings can cause inverters to operate in ways that are unintended, and could hurt people. These things are not the same, and it's concerning that you can't see the difference.
Also, having locks on settings means that other bad actors are deterred from changing those settings maliciously, whether intentional or not.
There is not substitute for a qualified person operating and maintaining an electrical system, regardless of voltage.
Agreed
...why would anyone care what those people want?
No you don't.
You're missing the point. Nothing is stopping anyone from installing off-grid inverters (or any inverter at all) in an on-grid system.
Have you ever looked at "top sellers" on Amazon? Most people do not care about quality, they just buy the cheapest shit possible.
I see the difference, I just don't care. It's concerning that you can't see the potential for exploitation, both from corporations and governments.