The US plug-in solar divide: A state-by-state race to unlock the market

For Stryker, the case for balcony solar in the US begins with affordability and energy security. Rising energy costs, she argues, have made consumers increasingly eager to generate their own electricity and reduce their dependence on volatile energy markets.

“Folks are eager to be empowered to produce their own energy,” she says. “It is not just an energy affordability issue; it is an energy security issue.”

Bright Saver’s experience appears to demonstrate that demand is already present. According to Stryker, the nonprofit launched a plug-in solar system costing less than US$300 and received thousands of orders within weeks, despite customers facing delays in receiving the products.

“It’s sold out within days and we know people want it and the regulatory framework really is lagging behind,” she says.

The challenge, however, is not simply whether Americans want balcony solar. It is whether the country’s regulatory framework can allow manufacturers to supply the technology consistently across state borders.

A state-by-state policy landscape

Unlike the UK, where Stryker says government coordination helped establish a clearer pathway for plug-in solar, the US relies heavily on state-level interconnection rules and enforcement.

“First of all, we have a very fragmented policy landscape,” she says. “This makes interconnection rules and enforcement are determined at the state level.”

This fragmentation means that manufacturers must navigate different requirements in different jurisdictions. Stryker argues that the resulting uncertainty affects product development, costs and the speed of deployment.

As of September 2026, 11 US states have moved to support balcony, or plug-in, solar, although the legislative status varies between enacted laws and measures awaiting final enactment. Nine states—Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine, Utah, Vermont and Virginia—have signed balcony solar legislation into law, with provisions generally establishing a pathway for small plug-in systems and, in some cases, limiting the ability of utilities, landlords and homeowners’ associations to impose blanket restrictions.

Utah pioneered the movement in 2025 with a 1,200W limit, while several states followed in 2026. Colorado’s law, for example, is due to take effect on 1 January 2027, while New Jersey’s Garden State Balcony Solar Act is scheduled to take effect on 1 March 2027.

Meanwhile, California’s SB 868 and the Solar Up Now New York (SUNNY) Act in New York have cleared their respective state legislatures and are awaiting final enactment. The expanding list highlights the increasingly state-by-state nature of the US balcony solar market, with significant differences in system limits, interconnection rules, tenant protections and implementation timelines.

Stryker says the US had reached a point where “11 states have passed legislation legalising plug-in solar technology.”

PV Tech Premium spoke to Joseph Shangraw, research analyst for solar supply chains at Wood Mackenzie, to discuss the development of the US plug-in solar market [subscription required], the regulatory challenges facing deployment and its prospects for further growth.

The emerging model: New Jersey, Colorado and Virginia

For Stryker, legislation that addresses interconnection alone does not go far enough. The ability of tenants to install systems is equally important, particularly because renters and residents without suitable rooftops may otherwise be excluded from the market.

“New Jersey and Virginia and Colorado did that this year in one fell swoop,” she says, referring to tenant protections and interconnection reform.

She identifies these three states as particularly relevant models, adding: “And so I would consider those, those three states, the pieces that are closest to the model legislation that we need everywhere.”

The distinction is significant. A policy can permit plug-in solar while leaving landlords or building restrictions capable of preventing installation. For Stryker, tenant rights determine whether balcony solar can expand beyond homeowners and reach a wider section of the population.

“Because without renters’ rights, this remains restricted to a population that frankly can already get solar, already get rooftop, right?”

What should model legislation contain?

Stryker outlines three priorities for legislation. First is interconnection reform. She argues that small plug-in systems should not be subject to requirements designed for substantially larger rooftop installations.

“We can’t allow utilities to impose restrictions that are appropriate to large systems, but simply inappropriate to these local systems,” she says.

Second is tenant protection, including exemptions from building rewiring requirements below a defined system-size threshold. Stryker identifies a threshold of approximately 391W in several states discussed during the interview, although the exact limits and legal provisions must be assessed against individual legislation.

Third is the treatment of certification standards. Stryker cautions against embedding a specific private certification company or listing into legislation, arguing that standards can change and that laws need to remain adaptable.

“We cannot put a private company in statute,” she says.

This issue adds another layer to the US regulatory debate: policymakers must establish safety requirements without creating unnecessary rigidity or dependence on a single certification provider.

Utilities, certification and the safety debate

Stryker rejects the assumption that all utilities oppose balcony solar. She points to Con Edison in New York as an example of a utility that, according to her account, engaged with Bright Saver on safety questions and supported the legislation.

“I wouldn’t say that all utilities oppose this,” she says.

Her broader argument is that utilities, public utility commissions, certification organisations and manufacturers have different interests and responsibilities. Without coordination, each state must negotiate its own approach.

Safety is a central part of that discussion. Stryker disputes concerns about plug-in solar systems feeding electricity into the grid during an outage, explaining that the inverter is designed to shut down when power is lost.

“The reason why is because the technology itself, the inverter, shuts down within milliseconds of a power outage,” she says.

That claim should be assessed against relevant electrical-safety standards and independent technical evidence. The safety requirements for plug-in systems remain a critical consideration as states establish their legal frameworks.

PV Tech Premium spoke to Ken Boyce, vice president and principal engineer at UL Solutions, to examine the organisation’s assessment of the safety considerations surrounding plug-in photovoltaic (PIPV) systems in the US [subscription required].

The cost of a fragmented market

The consequences of state-level differences extend beyond regulatory complexity. Stryker argues that manufacturers may need to adapt products for individual markets, increasing research and development costs.

“And in the worst case, a manufacturer might have to have a different system in New York than they sell right across the line in New Jersey,” she says.

She adds: “The market is fragmented, and that is a really bad thing for all Americans.”

The concern is that different technical, certification and interconnection requirements could limit economies of scale. Instead of developing one product for a broad national market, manufacturers may need to accommodate multiple regulatory environments.

What comes next?

Stryker expects the states with established legislation to influence the next stage of market development. She identifies Colorado, New Jersey and Virginia as states to watch, while also mentioning Maryland and New York in the broader policy discussion.

“We’re going to have it state by state. There are going to be states that lead the pack,” she says.

Whether those policies accelerate wider adoption will depend on implementation, manufacturer participation, consumer access and the development of consistent safety standards. For now, the US balcony solar market is expanding through a collection of state-level decisions rather than a single national framework.

Stryker’s concluding assessment is clear: the experience of early-moving states could demonstrate both the opportunities and the limitations of fragmented regulation.

“The more that happens, the more obvious it will be to lawmakers that this fragmented policy landscape, it just doesn’t serve the people.”

This is PV Tech Premium’s third deep dive into the US plug-in solar market, forming the final part of a three-part series. Read our first and second features in the series here.