Einsatzbereiche für Festkörper-Energie: IoT bis Infrastruktur
Leistungsskalierung: IoT-Sensoren vs. Kritische Infrastruktur
Diese Seite beschreibt die Zielanwendungen der VENDOR-Festkörperenergietechnologie. Diese Szenarien stellen unsere strategische Roadmap dar, basierend auf technischer Analyse, Branchenforschung und verifizierten physikalischen Prinzipien.
Aktueller Status: VENDOR befindet sich auf TRL 5–6 (Laborvalidierung abgeschlossen, über 1000 Betriebsstunden). Pilotinstallationen sind für 2026–2027 geplant, die kommerzielle Verfügbarkeit ist für 2027–2028 vorgesehen.
Die folgenden Anwendungen zeigen, wo die VENDOR-Technologie nach Abschluss der Feldvalidierung Wert schaffen wird.
Wie Man Diese Seite Liest: Deep-Tech-Anwendungslogik
VENDOR ist kein Softwareprodukt, bei dem Anwendungen sofort starten.
Deep-Tech-Energiesysteme folgen einem sequenziellen Entwicklungsweg:
1. TRL (Technology Readiness Level) → Funktioniert die Physik unter kontrollierten Bedingungen?
2. Feldpiloten → Funktioniert es in der realen Welt (TRL 7)?
3. Zertifizierung (CE/UL) → Kann es kommerziell eingesetzt werden?
4. Marktanwendungen → Erst nach Validierung und Zertifizierung.
Diese Seite beschreibt daher Zielanwendungen basierend auf:
- validierter Physik (TRL 5–6),
- wirtschaftlichen Modellen,
- Marktschmerzpunkten,
- und technischer Analyse.
Dies sind noch keine kommerziell verfügbaren Deployments.
Jede Anwendung wird erst möglich, wenn die Technologie die Stufen TRL 6 → TRL 7 → TRL 8–9 durchläuft.
VENDOR technology targets two distinct power domains:
VENDOR.Zero: Battery-Free Micro-Power Applications (3.3–12V DC)
Target Market: IoT sensors, edge devices, building automation, safety systems
Technical Approach:
- Solid-state DC generation (3.3V, 5V, 12V outputs)
- No batteries, no external power, no consumables
- Designed for 15–20 year operational lifespan (design target based on solid-state architecture analysis, pending field validation)
- Target: Replace battery-powered sensor infrastructure
Development Status:
- Architecture validated in laboratory conditions
- Prototype specifications defined
- Pilot program design underway
- Target TRL 7: 2026–2027
Primary Applications:
- Smart buildings (HVAC, CO₂, leak detection)
- Security systems (locks, cameras, motion sensors)
- Industrial monitoring (pressure, vibration, temperature)
- Environmental sensing (air quality, water, perimeter)
- Agriculture IoT (soil, irrigation, weather stations)
VENDOR.Max: Autonomous Power Nodes (2.4–24 kW)
Target Market: Off-grid facilities, telecom infrastructure, emergency response, critical systems
Technical Approach:
- Modular solid-state generation (2.4, 6, 12, 18, 24 kW configurations)
- Scalable architecture (parallel clusters to 100+ kW)
- No fuel, no batteries, no grid dependency
- Designed for remote/harsh environments
Development Status:
- Core physics validated (1000+ lab hours)
- TRL 5–6 trajectory (rebuilding laboratory Q4 2025 → Q3 2026)
- Pilot discussions with telecom, defense, emergency response operators
- Target TRL 7: 2027
Primary Applications:
- Off-grid housing (cabins, remote facilities, research stations)
- Telecom infrastructure (remote towers, edge computing, backup power)
- Infrastructure nodes (roads, tunnels, water systems, public facilities)
- Mobility support (small charging, depots, autonomous equipment)
- Emergency response (disaster relief, field hospitals, command centers)
Two Product Lines
From micro-power sensors to kilowatt infrastructure — one architecture, two scales
- IoT sensors & edge devices
- Building automation
- Security systems
- Environmental sensing
- Agriculture IoT
- Off-grid housing & facilities
- Telecom infrastructure
- Infrastructure nodes
- Mobility support
- Emergency response
Top 10 Use Cases for Solid State Generators
VENDOR.Zero Applications (Micro-Power)
Smart Buildings: Eliminating Battery Maintenance in HVAC & Safety
Industry Challenge:
Commercial buildings deploy thousands of sensors (HVAC, CO₂, occupancy, leak detection) that require battery replacement every 2–5 years. For a typical large facility:
- 500–2,000 sensors deployed
- Replacement cost: $50–150 per sensor (battery + labor)
- Annual cost: $25K–300K (depending on scale)
- Maintenance complexity: Reactive failures, unpredictable scheduling
Global commercial real estate sensor market: $3.2B annually, with 40% of costs attributed to battery replacement and maintenance (Source: Smart Building Research 2024).
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Battery Lifespan: 2–5 years in practice, often shorter in harsh environments
- Sleep Cycles: Sensors must sleep to conserve power, creating data gaps
- Maintenance Burden: Thousands of service calls annually for large portfolios
- Environmental Waste: Millions of batteries disposed yearly
VENDOR.Zero Technical Approach:
Solid-state DC generation (3.3–12V) integrated with sensor modules. No electrochemical storage, no degradation, no replacement cycle. Architecture designed for 15–20 year continuous operation.
Target Use Cases:
- HVAC optimization sensors
- CO₂ and air quality monitoring
- Water leak detection
- Occupancy and lighting control
- Building envelope monitoring (temperature, humidity)
Modeled Economics (1,000-sensor building):
Baseline (Battery-Powered):
- Initial deployment: $100K
- Annual replacement (40% rate): $60K
- 10-year total: $700K
Target (VENDOR.Zero):
- Initial deployment: $150K (VENDOR modules integrated)
- Annual maintenance: $5K (remote monitoring)
- 10-year total: $200K
Projected Savings: $500K over 10 years (71% reduction)
Environmental Benefit: 4,000 batteries eliminated
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Financial modeling pending pilot validation. Assumes 15-year sensor lifespan vs 2.5-year battery baseline.
Development Status:
- TRL 5–6 (laboratory validation)
- Pilot partner discussions underway (commercial real estate)
- Target: First building deployment Q3 2026
Security & Access Systems — Always-On, Maintenance-Free
Industry Challenge:
Security systems (locks, cameras, motion sensors, access control) face critical reliability requirements. Battery-powered systems create vulnerabilities:
- Unpredictable failures (sensor dies, security compromised)
- False alarms from low battery warnings
- Maintenance burden (technician visits for battery swaps)
- Liability concerns (security breach due to dead battery)
Global commercial security sensor market: $8B annually, with battery replacement representing 15–20% of lifecycle costs.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Reliability Risk: Battery depletion = security vulnerability
- Maintenance Cost: $100–200 per sensor replacement (battery + labor)
- False Alerts: Low-battery warnings create operational noise
- Weather Dependency: Outdoor cameras/sensors degrade faster
VENDOR.Zero Technical Approach:
Integrated power modules (5–12V DC) for security devices. No battery anxiety, continuous operation, years between service. Target: Critical security infrastructure with zero maintenance windows.
Target Use Cases:
- Smart locks (commercial, residential)
- Outdoor security cameras
- Motion detection perimeters
- Access control nodes
- Intrusion detection systems
Modeled Economics (100-device security system):
Baseline:
- Devices + batteries: $20K
- Annual replacement (25% rate): $5K
- 10-year total: $70K
Target (VENDOR.Zero):
- Devices + VENDOR modules: $30K
- Annual maintenance: $500
- 10-year total: $35K
Projected Savings: $35K (50% reduction)
Reliability Benefit: Zero security downtime from power failures
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Modeled assuming 15-year device lifespan vs 4-year battery replacement cycle.
Development Status:
- Architecture validated in lab
- Pilot discussions with security system integrators
- Target: Field trial Q2 2026
Industrial IoT: Powering Sensors in Harsh Environments
Industry Challenge:
Industrial facilities deploy sensors in harsh conditions: high temperature, vibration, humidity, chemical exposure. Battery-powered sensors fail prematurely:
- Average lifespan: 1–3 years (vs 3–5 in benign environments)
- Replacement cost: $150–300 per sensor (difficult access, hazardous areas)
- Data gaps: Sensors sleep to conserve power, miss critical events
- Safety risk: Undetected leaks, pressure failures, equipment malfunction
Industrial sensor market: $12B annually, with 25–30% of operational costs attributed to sensor replacement and maintenance in harsh environments.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Environmental Degradation: Heat, vibration, chemicals degrade batteries faster
- Access Difficulty: Sensors in hard-to-reach locations (high structures, confined spaces)
- Sleep Cycles: Cannot support always-on edge AI or real-time alerts
- Regulatory Burden: Frequent maintenance in hazardous areas requires safety protocols
VENDOR.Zero Technical Approach:
Solid-state modules designed for industrial conditions. No electrochemical components to degrade. Target: Continuous sensing in 50°C, high-vibration, chemically exposed environments.
Target Use Cases:
- Pressure monitoring (pipelines, vessels, hydraulics)
- Vibration analysis (rotating equipment, structural health)
- Temperature sensing (furnaces, reactors, thermal processes)
- Leak detection (chemical, gas, fluid)
- Asset tracking (location, condition, utilization)
Modeled Economics (500-sensor industrial facility):
Baseline:
- Deployment: $150K
- Annual replacement (50% harsh environment rate): $75K
- 10-year total: $900K
Target (VENDOR.Zero):
- Deployment: $225K
- Annual maintenance: $10K
- 10-year total: $325K
Projected Savings: $575K (64% reduction)
Safety Benefit: Always-on monitoring reduces undetected failure risk
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Assumes harsh environment conditions accelerate battery degradation to 2-year avg lifespan vs 15-year VENDOR target.
Development Status:
- Lab testing at elevated temperature/vibration
- Industrial pilot partner identification underway
- Target: First industrial deployment Q4 2026
Agriculture IoT — Remote Farms, Years Between Service
Industry Challenge:
Precision agriculture requires distributed sensors across large areas: soil moisture, weather stations, irrigation control, livestock monitoring. Rural/remote deployments create maintenance challenges:
- Access difficulty (dirt roads, seasonal flooding)
- Battery replacement cost: $200–400 per sensor (travel + labor)
- Unreliable connectivity (cellular/LoRa coverage gaps)
- Weather damage (extreme heat, cold, moisture)
Global agricultural IoT market: $5B annually, with battery replacement representing 30–40% of lifecycle costs in remote deployments.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Remote Access: Travel costs exceed sensor value
- Weather Degradation: Outdoor conditions shorten battery life
- Seasonal Constraints: Limited service windows (harvest, winter)
- Connectivity: Sleep cycles miss critical events (frost, irrigation failure)
VENDOR.Zero Technical Approach:
Weather-resistant solid-state modules (5–12V) for outdoor sensors. Designed for years of autonomous operation. Target: Install-and-forget agricultural infrastructure.
Target Use Cases:
- Soil moisture monitoring
- Weather stations (wind, rain, temperature)
- Irrigation control valves
- Livestock tracking and health monitoring
- Environmental stations (remote fields, orchards, vineyards)
Modeled Economics (100-sensor farm deployment):
Baseline:
- Deployment: $30K
- Annual replacement (40% harsh weather rate): $16K
- 10-year total: $190K
Target (VENDOR.Zero):
- Deployment: $45K
- Annual maintenance: $2K
- 10-year total: $65K
Projected Savings: $125K (66% reduction)
Operational Benefit: Seasonal maintenance windows eliminated
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Assumes outdoor conditions reduce battery life to 2.5-year average vs 15-year VENDOR target.
Development Status:
- Environmental testing (temperature, humidity, UV exposure)
- Pilot discussions with precision agriculture providers
- Target: Farm deployment Q2 2027
Environmental & Safety — Perimeters, Air Quality, Water Monitoring
Industry Challenge:
Environmental monitoring networks (air quality, water, perimeter security) require distributed sensors in remote or exposed locations. Battery limitations constrain:
- Deployment density (maintenance cost limits sensor count)
- Data frequency (sleep cycles reduce granularity)
- Network reliability (sporadic failures, data gaps)
- Environmental compliance (regulatory monitoring requires 24/7 uptime)
Global environmental monitoring market: $4.5B annually, with battery-powered sensors representing 60% of deployed base.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Coverage Gaps: High battery replacement cost limits sensor density
- Sleep Cycles: Miss pollution events, water contamination spikes
- Weather Exposure: Outdoor sensors fail prematurely
- Compliance Risk: Data gaps create regulatory liability
VENDOR.Zero Technical Approach:
Always-on sensing with no battery replacement. Target: Dense monitoring networks with years of continuous data. Designed for outdoor exposure, regulatory compliance, real-time alerting.
Target Use Cases:
- Air quality monitoring (urban, industrial, roadside)
- Water quality sensors (rivers, reservoirs, wastewater)
- Perimeter security (borders, facilities, protected areas)
- Wildlife monitoring (conservation, migration tracking)
- Radiation monitoring (nuclear facilities, emergency response)
Modeled Economics (200-sensor environmental network):
Baseline:
- Deployment: $100K
- Annual replacement (35% outdoor rate): $35K
- 10-year total: $450K
Target (VENDOR.Zero):
- Deployment: $150K
- Annual maintenance: $10K
- 10-year total: $250K
Projected Savings: $200K (44% reduction)
Compliance Benefit: Continuous data eliminates regulatory gaps
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Assumes outdoor conditions reduce battery life to 2.8-year average vs 15-year VENDOR target.
Development Status:
- Lab validation complete
- Pilot discussions with municipal environmental agencies
- Target: Urban deployment Q3 2026
VENDOR.Zero Applications
Five target markets for micro-power autonomous sensing
Smart Buildings
HVAC optimization, CO₂ monitoring, leak detection, occupancy sensing
Security Systems
Smart locks, cameras, motion sensors, access control
Industrial Monitoring
Pressure, vibration, temperature, leak detection in harsh environments
Agriculture IoT
Soil moisture, weather stations, irrigation, livestock monitoring
Environmental Sensing
Air quality, water monitoring, perimeter security, compliance data
VENDOR.Max Applications (Power Nodes)
Off-Grid Housing — Cabins, Remote Facilities, Research Stations
Industry Challenge:
Off-grid living and remote facilities traditionally rely on diesel generators, solar+battery systems, or limited grid connections. Each approach creates burdens:
- Diesel: $8K-20K annual fuel + maintenance, logistics dependency, noise, emissions
- Solar+Battery: High CAPEX ($30K-80K), 5-10 year battery replacement, weather-dependent
- Grid Extension: $50K-200K per km, often economically prohibitive
Global off-grid housing market: 1.5M new installations annually, with 60% using diesel or solar+battery systems.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Diesel: Fuel logistics in remote areas, noise pollution, ongoing costs
- Solar: Winter/cloudy regions underperform, battery replacement expensive
- Battery Storage: Degradation, thermal management, disposal burden
- Grid: Prohibitive connection costs for truly remote locations
VENDOR.Max Technical Approach:
Modular solid-state generation (2.4-12 kW) designed for residential/small facility use. No fuel delivery, no battery storage, no weather dependency. Target: Install-once, 20-year autonomous operation.
Target Use Cases:
- Mountain cabins (year-round use)
- Remote research stations (Arctic, desert, wilderness)
- Off-grid eco-resorts
- Emergency shelters
- Mobile labs and field stations
Modeled Economics (6 kW off-grid cabin):
Baseline (Diesel):
- Generator (8 kW): $8K
- Fuel (4,000 hrs/year): $6K/year
- Maintenance: $2K/year
- 10-year total: $8K + $80K = $88K
Baseline (Solar+Battery):
- Solar array (8 kW): $20K
- Battery bank (20 kWh): $15K
- Balance of system: $10K
- Battery replacement (year 7): $18K
- 10-year total: $63K
Target (VENDOR.Max 6 kW):
- System: $25K
- Installation: $5K
- Annual maintenance: $500
- 10-year total: $35K
Projected Savings: $53K vs diesel (60%), $28K vs solar (44%)
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Modeled economics assume residential load profile (4,000 hrs/year avg) and temperate climate for solar comparison.
Development Status:
- TRL 5-6 (laboratory validation)
- Prototype specifications defined for 6 kW residential configuration
- Off-grid pilot partner identification Q1 2026
- Target: First residential installation Q4 2026
Telecom & Connectivity — Remote Towers, Edge Computing, Backup Power
Industry Challenge:
Telecom infrastructure in remote locations creates massive operational burdens. Industry data shows:
- Remote tower sites: $20K-40K annual OPEX (fuel, maintenance, security)
- Diesel theft: 20-40% fuel losses in vulnerable regions (Global Telecom Infrastructure Report 2024)
- Generator maintenance: Every 500-1,000 hours, requiring technician site visits
- Grid unreliability: 5-15% downtime in weak-grid regions
For operators with 500+ remote sites, annual operational costs exceed $10M, with significant revenue losses from service interruptions.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Diesel Generators: Theft, maintenance burden, logistics complexity, QoS penalties from downtime
- Battery Backup: 3-5 year replacement cycle, limited duration, thermal management
- Grid Extension: $50K-200K per km, prohibitive for truly remote sites
- Solar Hybrid: Weather-dependent, requires battery storage, complex management
VENDOR.Max Technical Approach:
Solid-state power nodes (2.4-12 kW) designed for telecom infrastructure. No consumables to steal, no scheduled maintenance, continuous operation. Target: 99%+ uptime with remote monitoring only (subject to certification and field validation).
Target Use Cases:
- Remote 5G tower sites (3-12 kW loads)
- Edge computing nodes (distributed AI/processing)
- Base station backup power (grid-tied with automatic failover)
- Emergency communications (disaster response connectivity)
- Satellite ground stations
Modeled Economics (12 kW remote tower site):
Baseline (Diesel):
- Generator (15 kW): $10K
- Annual fuel: $12K
- Theft losses (30%): $3.6K
- Maintenance: $6K
- Security: $4K
- 10-year total: $10K + $256K = $266K
Target (VENDOR.Max 12 kW):
- System: $40K
- Installation: $8K
- Annual maintenance: $1K
- 10-year total: $58K
Projected Savings: $208K per site (78% reduction)
For 500-site network: $104M over 10 years
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Economic modeling based on industry-reported diesel theft rates and maintenance schedules. Actual savings subject to site-specific conditions and validation.
Development Status:
- Core architecture validated (1000+ lab hours)
- Pilot discussions with Nordic and Southeast Asian telecom operators
- Target: First tower pilot Q2 2027
- Commercial availability: 2028+ (pending certification)
Infrastructure Nodes — Roads, Tunnels, Water Systems, Public Facilities
Industry Challenge:
Public infrastructure requires power in locations where grid connection is expensive or unreliable:
- Highway systems (lighting, signage, sensors)
- Tunnel ventilation and emergency systems
- Water/wastewater monitoring stations
- Public facilities (restrooms, shelters, info kiosks)
Grid extension costs ($50K-200K per km) often exceed project budgets. Diesel generators create ongoing OPEX, maintenance burden, and emissions concerns.
Municipal infrastructure departments report 15-25% of operational budgets consumed by remote site power costs (Urban Infrastructure Association 2024).
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Grid Extension: Prohibitive CAPEX for distributed nodes
- Diesel: Ongoing fuel, maintenance, theft risk, emissions
- Solar: Weather-dependent, requires battery storage, winter limitations
- Battery Alone: Limited duration, frequent replacement, environmental waste
VENDOR.Max Technical Approach:
Distributed power nodes (2.4-6 kW) for infrastructure applications. No grid connection required, no fuel logistics, minimal maintenance. Target: Municipal-scale deployment with 20-year asset life.
Target Use Cases:
- Highway lighting and signage (LED systems, variable message signs)
- Tunnel safety systems (ventilation, emergency lighting, communications)
- Water/wastewater monitoring (remote pumping stations, quality sensors)
- Public facility power (parks, rest areas, transit shelters)
- Traffic management (smart intersections, adaptive signals)
Modeled Economics (3 kW infrastructure node):
Baseline (Diesel):
- Generator (5 kW): $6K
- Annual fuel: $4K
- Maintenance: $2K
- 10-year total: $66K
Baseline (Solar+Battery):
- Solar (5 kW): $12K
- Battery (10 kWh): $8K
- Installation: $5K
- Battery replacement (year 7): $10K
- 10-year total: $35K
Target (VENDOR.Max 3 kW):
- System: $15K
- Installation: $4K
- Annual maintenance: $500
- 10-year total: $24K
Projected Savings: $42K vs diesel (64%), $11K vs solar (31%)
For 100-node network: $1.1M-4.2M savings
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Solar comparison assumes temperate climate with adequate sunlight. Diesel comparison assumes accessible fuel delivery.
Development Status:
- Municipal pilot partner discussions underway
- Target infrastructure use cases: Traffic, water, public facilities
- First pilot deployment: Q3 2027
Mobility & Transport — Small Charging, Depots, Autonomous Equipment
Industry Challenge:
Electrification of transport creates distributed charging needs:
- EV charging in areas without grid access
- Electric fleet depots (buses, trucks, delivery vehicles)
- Autonomous equipment charging (drones, robots, AGVs)
- Remote charging stations (parks, trails, rural routes)
Current solutions require grid extension (expensive) or diesel generators (defeats environmental purpose). Battery storage alone provides limited capacity and requires frequent recharging.
Transportation electrification market: $800B projected by 2030, with distributed charging representing 15-20% of infrastructure needs.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Grid Extension: $50K-200K per km for remote charging points
- Diesel Generators: Emissions contradict EV environmental value
- Battery Storage: Limited capacity, requires grid recharge, replacement cycle
- Solar Charging: Weather-dependent, low power density, nighttime limitations
VENDOR.Max Technical Approach:
Distributed charging nodes (6-24 kW) for transport electrification. No grid dependency, continuous availability, weather-independent operation. Target: Rural and remote charging infrastructure.
Target Use Cases:
- Rural EV charging (trails, parks, remote routes)
- Electric bus/truck depots (overnight charging)
- Drone charging stations (delivery, inspection, agriculture)
- Autonomous vehicle support (robots, AGVs, specialty vehicles)
- Emergency vehicle charging (remote disaster response)
Modeled Economics (12 kW charging station):
Baseline (Grid Extension 5 km):
- Grid connection: $250K-1M
- Annual utility: $5K
- 10-year total: $300K-1.05M
Baseline (Diesel Generator):
- Generator (15 kW): $10K
- Annual fuel: $8K
- Maintenance: $3K
- 10-year total: $120K
Target (VENDOR.Max 12 kW):
- System: $40K
- Installation: $8K
- Annual maintenance: $1K
- 10-year total: $58K
Projected Savings: $242K-992K vs grid, $62K vs diesel
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Grid extension economics highly variable based on distance and terrain. Charging station modeled for light-duty vehicles (12 kW continuous).
Development Status:
- Architecture intended for DC charging applications (integration and validation pending)
- Fleet operator discussions planned Q2 2026
- Target: Fleet pilot Q1 2027
Emergency & Public Safety — Disaster Relief, Field Hospitals, Command Centers
Industry Challenge:
Emergency response operations require rapid power deployment in crisis conditions:
- Natural disasters (hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, wildfires)
- Field hospitals and medical facilities
- Command and coordination centers
- Emergency communications infrastructure
Traditional power solutions fail in disaster scenarios:
- Grid: Often destroyed or unavailable
- Diesel: Fuel supply disrupted, logistics breakdown, storage risks
- Solar: Weather-dependent (storms = no generation)
- Batteries: Limited duration, recharge requires grid/generator
U.S. military data (2007-2010 Afghanistan) showed 1 casualty per 24 fuel convoys in contested regions, with fuel logistics representing 80% of supply chain exposure.
Why Current Solutions Fail:
- Diesel Dependency: Fuel supply chain vulnerable during disasters
- Duration Uncertainty: Unknown crisis length creates fuel anxiety
- Logistics Complexity: One more critical resource to manage
- Personnel Risk: Fuel handling, generator operation, convoy exposure
VENDOR.Max Technical Approach:
Field-deployable power nodes (12-24 kW) designed for emergency response. No fuel logistics, indefinite duration, weather-independent operation. Target: Helicopter/truck portable, operational within hours.
Target Use Cases:
- Disaster response command stations
- Field hospitals and temporary medical facilities
- Emergency communications infrastructure
- Relief operations centers and distribution hubs
- Search and rescue base camps
- Military forward operating bases (FOBs)
Modeled Economics (24 kW field hospital):
Baseline (Diesel):
- Generator (30 kW): $15K
- Fuel (30 days operation): $12K
- Transport/setup: $5K
- Total (30-day deployment): $32K
Target (VENDOR.Max 24 kW):
- System (portable cluster): $80K
- Transport (one-time): $10K
- Operation (30 days): $0
- Total (30-day deployment): $90K first deployment
- Subsequent deployments: $0 fuel costs
Value Proposition:
- First deployment: Higher CAPEX, but zero fuel logistics
- Subsequent uses: Reusable asset, no recurring costs
- Duration: Designed for long-duration operation without consumables (not fuel-limited)
- Personnel: No fuel handling risks
Strategic Value (Non-Economic):
For Disaster Response:
- Logistics simplification (no fuel supply chain)
- Duration certainty (operates as long as crisis lasts)
- Personnel safety (no fuel handling/transport)
- Rapid deployment (no fuel infrastructure setup)
For Military Applications:
- Convoy risk elimination (fuel logistics exposure)
- Tactical advantage (reduced operational signature)
- Persistent presence (multi-year FOB autonomy)
- Force protection (casualty risk reduction)
Note: These models are illustrative based on industry data, not VENDOR field performance. Economic comparison assumes diesel availability, which is often disrupted in disaster scenarios. VENDOR value increases significantly when fuel logistics compromised.
Development Status:
- Portable configuration specifications defined
- Government/defense pilot discussions planned
- Target: Emergency response demonstration Q4 2026
- Defense pilot: 2027 (pending security clearances)
VENDOR.Max Applications
Five target markets for kilowatt-scale autonomous power nodes
Off-Grid Housing
Cabins, remote facilities, research stations, eco-resorts
Telecom Towers
Remote 5G sites, edge computing, backup power, satellite ground stations
Infrastructure Nodes
Highway lighting, tunnel systems, water stations, public facilities
EV Charging
Rural charging, fleet depots, drone stations, autonomous vehicle support
Emergency Response
Disaster relief, field hospitals, command centers, search & rescue
ThreeTarget Scenarios (Detailed)
These scenarios illustrate how VENDOR technology would address specific real-world challenges in demanding environments. Each represents a target deployment once field validation is complete.
Scenario 1: Arctic Telecom Tower (Northern Canada)
Industry Context
Northern telecom operators face extreme deployment challenges. Sites located 200+ km from nearest roads are accessible only by helicopter or seasonal ice roads (3 months annually). Industry reports indicate:- Diesel delivery: $400-600K annually per site (helicopter transport)
- Generator maintenance: $20K+ per visit (technician travel + parts)
- Service reliability: 85-90% (weather, logistics, equipment failures)
Technical Requirements
- Power: 12 kW continuous (5G equipment, edge computing, environmental systems)
- Environment: -40°C to +50°C operation required
- Access: Minimal service visits (annual at most)
- Reliability: 99%+ uptime (regulatory QoS requirements)
Current Approach (Diesel)
Annual Costs:- Fuel delivery (6 helicopter trips): $48K
- Maintenance visits (4 per year): $20K
- Parts and consumables: $8K
- Security monitoring: $6K
Operational Issues
- 3-month logistics window (ice road season)
- Weather-dependent helicopter access
- Generator failure in winter = potential weeks offline
- Environmental risk (diesel spills in Arctic ecosystem)
VENDOR.Max Target Solution
Configuration: 12 kW solid-state cluster (modular redundancy for critical infrastructure)
Deployment Plan:
- One-time helicopter installation
- No fuel storage infrastructure
- Remote monitoring via satellite link
- Service visits: Annual inspection only (optional)
Target Economics
CAPEX:
- VENDOR.Max 12 kW system: $45K
- Helicopter installation: $12K
- Remote monitoring: $3K
Total CAPEX: $60K
Annual OPEX:
- Fuel: $0
- Scheduled maintenance: $1K (remote diagnostics)
- Annual inspection: $3K (optional)
Total Annual OPEX: $4K
10-Year Total: $60K + $40K = $100K
Projected Savings: $970K over 10 years (91% reduction)
Payback Period: <12 months
Additional Benefits
- Environmental: Zero diesel spills, minimal ecological footprint
- Reliability: Target 99%+ uptime (subject to certification and field validation, no refueling interruptions)
- Predictability: No fuel price volatility, fixed lifecycle costs
- Regulatory: Meets Arctic environmental standards
Development Timeline
- Q4 2025: Environmental chamber testing (-40°C validation)
- Q2 2026: Telecom pilot partner selection
- Q4 2026: First Arctic site preparation
- Q2 2027: Initial deployment and monitoring
- Q4 2027: Performance validation and expansion discussion
Note: Scenario based on industry-reported costs and operational challenges. Economics modeled based on existing industry benchmarks. Actual performance subject to field validation in Arctic conditions.
Scenario 2: Smart City Sensor Network (Singapore)
Industry Context
Modern cities deploy thousands of environmental, traffic, and infrastructure sensors. Singapore’s Smart Nation initiative includes 15,000+ sensors across urban infrastructure. Current challenges:
- Battery replacement: 40% of sensors annually (2.5-year avg life)
- Annual cost: $1.5M-2M (batteries + labor + logistics)
- Data gaps: Sensors sleep to conserve power, miss critical events
- Environmental waste: 6,000 batteries disposed annually
Source: Singapore Smart City Development Report 2024
Technical Requirements
- Power: 3.3-5V DC per sensor (low-power IoT devices)
- Environment: Outdoor tropical conditions (high humidity, heat, UV)
- Lifespan: 15-20 years target (vs 2-5 year battery baseline)
- Data: Always-on sensing (no sleep cycles)
Current Approach (Battery-Powered)
Initial Deployment:
- 15,000 sensors @ $100 each: $1.5M
- Installation labor: $2M
Total Initial: $3.5M
Annual Costs:
- Battery replacement (6,000 sensors/year): $480K
- Labor (replacement technicians): $750K
- Logistics (scheduling, dispatch, access): $300K
- Battery disposal: $50K
Total Annual OPEX: $1.58M
10-Year Total: $3.5M + $15.8M = $19.3M
Operational Issues
- 115 service calls per week (reactive maintenance)
- Data gaps during sleep cycles
- Unpredictable failure patterns
- Environmental disposal burden
VENDOR.Zero Target Solution
Configuration: 15,000 sensors with integrated VENDOR.Zero modules (3.3-5V DC)
Deployment Plan:
- Phased replacement during normal maintenance cycles
- VENDOR modules integrated at sensor manufacturing
- Remote monitoring infrastructure (city-wide network)
- No scheduled battery replacements
Target Economics
CAPEX:
- 15,000 sensors + VENDOR.Zero modules @ $150 each: $2.25M
- Installation (same as baseline): $2M
Total CAPEX: $4.25M
Annual OPEX:
- Battery replacement: $0
- Maintenance (remote monitoring + occasional sensor failures): $150K
Total Annual OPEX: $150K
10-Year Total: $4.25M + $1.5M = $5.75M
Projected Savings: $13.55M over 10 years (70% reduction)
Payback Period: ~3 years
Additional Benefits
- Environmental: 60,000 batteries eliminated over 10 years
- Data quality: Always-on sensing, no sleep cycles, continuous AI/edge processing
- Operations: Service calls reduced by 95% (115/week → <5/week)
- Reliability: Predictable maintenance, no reactive emergencies
Development Timeline
- Q1 2026: IoT integration specifications finalized
- Q3 2026: Pilot deployment (100-500 sensors)
- Q1 2027: Performance validation and expansion approval
- Q3 2027: City-wide rollout (phased over 12-18 months)
Note: Economics modeled based on existing industry benchmarks, assuming outdoor tropical conditions and 15-year VENDOR operational life vs 2.5-year battery baseline. Actual performance subject to field validation.
Scenario 3: Defense Border Station (Middle East Desert)
Industry Context
Military border monitoring stations in remote/contested regions face critical logistics challenges. Historical U.S. military data (Afghanistan 2007-2010) documented:
- 1 casualty per 24 fuel convoys (IED attacks, ambushes)
- Fuel logistics: 80% of supply chain exposure
- 3,000+ convoys annually across theater
Modern border stations require 12-18 kW continuous power for:
- Surveillance systems (radar, cameras, sensors)
- Communications infrastructure
- Personnel facilities (climate control, life support)
- Emergency response equipment
Source: U.S. Army Logistics Analysis 2011
Technical Requirements
- Power: 18 kW continuous (mission-critical 24/7 operation)
- Environment: Desert conditions (50°C day, -5°C night)
- Autonomy: Multi-year operation without resupply
- Security: Minimal operational signature (acoustic, thermal, logistics pattern)
Current Approach (Diesel)
Logistics:
- Weekly fuel convoy (52 per year)
- Convoy security: 4-6 personnel, armored vehicles
- Convoy cost: $10K per trip (fuel + security + vehicle depreciation)
Annual Convoy Cost: $520K
Additional Costs:
- Generator maintenance: $15K/year
- Fuel storage infrastructure: $5K/year (security, monitoring)
- Personnel exposure: 52 convoy risk events annually
Total Annual Cost: $540K
10-Year Total: $150K (CAPEX) + $5.4M = $5.55M
Operational Issues
- Predictable logistics pattern (adversary intelligence)
- Acoustic signature (85 dB, detectable 500+ meters)
- Thermal signature (IR-visible exhaust from aerial surveillance)
- Fuel storage vulnerability (high-value sabotage target)
- Personnel casualty risk (convoy attacks)
VENDOR.Max Target Solution
Configuration: 18 kW solid-state cluster (N+1 redundancy for mission-critical operations)
Deployment Plan:
- One-time secure installation (heavy-lift helicopter during stable period)
- No fuel storage infrastructure
- Remote monitoring via secure satellite link
- Multi-year autonomous operation
Target Economics
CAPEX:
- VENDOR.Max 18 kW cluster: $65K
- Secure installation (one-time): $15K
- Remote monitoring: $5K
Total CAPEX: $85K
Annual OPEX:
- Fuel convoys: $0
- Maintenance (remote diagnostics only): $2K
Total Annual OPEX: $2K
10-Year Total: $85K + $20K = $105K
Projected Savings: $5.45M over 10 years (98% reduction)
Payback Period: <2 months
Strategic Value (Non-Economic)
Casualty Risk Reduction:
- 52 convoys/year eliminated = 520 convoys over 10 years
- Regional casualty rate: ~1 per 100 convoys
- Eliminating convoys could avoid multiple risk events over lifecycle (illustrative modeling based on 2007–2010 Afghanistan data)
Tactical Advantages:
- Zero Logistics Signature: No predictable convoy pattern for adversary intelligence
- Minimal Acoustic Signature: Solid-state operation vs 85 dB diesel generator
- Reduced Thermal Signature: No combustion exhaust for IR detection
- No Fuel Storage: Eliminates high-value sabotage target
Operational Benefits:
- Multi-year autonomy (no resupply timeline)
- Forward positioning unconstrained by logistics
- Extended mission duration capability
- Persistent presence in denied areas
Development Timeline
- Q1 2026: Security clearance process initiated
- Q3 2026: Classified defense briefing
- Q2 2027: Field trial site selection (secure facility)
- Q4 2027: Pilot deployment and monitoring
- 2028: Performance validation and acquisition discussion
Note: Scenario based on declassified U.S. military logistics data. Economics modeled using existing benchmarks. Actual deployment subject to security clearances and field validation.
Three Target Scenarios
Real-world deployment examples in demanding environments
Arctic Telecom Tower
12 kW remote 5G site, -40°C to +50°C
- Helicopter-accessible only sites
- Zero diesel spills in Arctic ecosystem
- 99%+ uptime target (no refueling gaps)
- Payback period: <12 months
Smart City Network
15,000 sensors, tropical outdoor conditions
- 60,000 batteries eliminated over 10 years
- Service calls reduced 95% (115/week → <5/week)
- Always-on sensing (no sleep cycles)
- Payback period: ~3 years
Border Station
18 kW defense installation, 50°C desert
- 520 fuel convoys eliminated (10 years)
- Zero logistics signature (no predictable pattern)
- Minimal acoustic/thermal signature
- Payback period: <2 months
Strategic Advantages of Solid-State Power Architecture
Across all applications described above, VENDOR’s solid-state architecture delivers five fundamental advantages. These are inherent architectural properties, not performance claims:
1.Supply Chain Immunity
What It Means
- No fuel imports (no OPEC/geopolitics dependency)
- No battery supply chains (no lithium, cobalt, rare earths)
- No consumables (no filters, oils, replacement parts)
- No foreign dependencies (all components European/Allied sourced)
Why It Matters
Post-2022 energy crisis demonstrated that supply chain dependency = strategic vulnerability. Technologies requiring continuous imports create operational exposure to:
- Sanctions and embargoes
- Resource scarcity and price volatility
- Geopolitical conflicts
- Logistics disruption
VENDOR architecture eliminates these dependencies. Once installed, systems are intended to operate independently of global supply chains.
Target Applications Most Affected
- Defense and government (national security implications)
- Critical infrastructure (strategic sovereignty)
- Remote operations (logistics constraints)
2. Predictable Economics
What It Means
- Known CAPEX (one-time installation cost)
- Minimal OPEX (remote monitoring only)
- No fuel price volatility
- No surprise maintenance costs
- No replacement cycles
Why It Matters
Traditional energy solutions create unpredictable lifecycle costs:
- Diesel: Fuel price volatility (OPEC, geopolitics, taxation)
- Batteries: Replacement cycle uncertainty (degradation varies)
- Solar: Weather variability, grid backup costs
- Maintenance: Unpredictable failure patterns
VENDOR target economics: Fixed CAPEX + predictable minimal OPEX = accurate 20-year TCO modeling.
Target Applications Most Affected
- Commercial/industrial (CFO budget certainty)
- Municipal infrastructure (long-term capital planning)
- Telecom (predictable site operating costs)
3. Environmental Responsibility
What It Means
- Zero emissions (no combustion, no exhaust)
- Zero battery waste (no electrochemical disposal)
- Minimal footprint (compact, silent, low-signature)
- Long lifespan (15-20 years, not 2-5)
Why It Matters
Regulatory pressure and ESG requirements increasingly mandate:
- Carbon neutrality goals (corporate and national)
- Battery Regulation EU 2023/1542 (lifecycle responsibility)
- Environmental compliance (Arctic, protected areas, urban)
- Circular economy principles (durability over disposability)
VENDOR architecture aligns with regulatory trajectory. No combustion, no batteries to dispose, infrastructure-grade lifespan.
Target Applications Most Affected
- Smart cities (ESG mandates)
- Protected environments (Arctic, wilderness, marine)
- Corporate infrastructure (sustainability commitments)
4. Operational Simplicity
What It Means
- Install-and-forget (no scheduled maintenance)
- No training required (autonomous operation)
- Remote monitoring (no field technicians)
- Plug-and-play deployment
Why It Matters
Complex systems create operational burden:
- Diesel: Training, fuel handling, safety protocols, maintenance schedules
- Batteries: Thermal management, degradation monitoring, replacement logistics
- Solar: Weather forecasting, grid integration, backup coordination
VENDOR target: Deploy once, monitor remotely, service only when actual failure occurs (not preventively).
Target Applications Most Affected
- Remote operations (limited access, high service costs)
- Large-scale deployments (thousands of units)
- Critical infrastructure (uptime requirements)
5. Long-Term Durability (Design Target)
What It Means
- 15-20 year operational lifespan (design target)
- Solid-state architecture (no moving parts to wear)
- No degradation (no battery capacity fade, no engine wear)
- Infrastructure-grade reliability
Why It Matters
Short-lived systems create:
- Replacement cycle costs (batteries every 3-5 years)
- Premature obsolescence (sensors limited by battery life)
- Asset depreciation (diesel generators 5-10 year life)
- Environmental waste (frequent disposal)
VENDOR design target: 20-year service life matching infrastructure depreciation schedules.
Target Applications Most Affected
- Municipal infrastructure (long capital planning cycles)
- IoT sensor networks (install-and-forget requirement)
- Off-grid facilities (access difficulty, high replacement costs)
Note: Lifespan targets based on solid-state architecture analysis and accelerated lab testing. Actual field lifespan subject to environmental validation and certification.
Why These Applications Are Shown Before TRL 7
All application scenarios on this page represent the strategic roadmap, not current deployments.
This is standard for deep-tech energy systems: the applications become commercially deployable only when:
TRL 7: field prototypes validated in operational environments
Certification (CE/UL): safety and compliance confirmed
TRL 8–9: systems proven through real-world mission operations
At TRL 5–6, VENDOR has validated the core physics and architecture in the laboratory.
Applications shown here reflect where the technology will create value once field validation is complete — not performance claims today.
This ensures full transparency for investors, partners, and regulators.
Five Fundamental Advantages
Inherent architectural properties of solid-state energy generation
Supply Chain Immunity
Zero dependency on global supply chains once installed
Predictable Economics
Accurate 20-year TCO modeling without volatility
Environmental Responsibility
15-20 year lifespan, no battery disposal
Operational Simplicity
Remote monitoring, no scheduled maintenance
Long-Term Durability
Solid-state design, no moving parts to wear
Technical Roadmap: TRL 5-6 to Commercialization
Transparency is critical for investor confidence and pilot partner planning.
Current Status: TRL 5-6 (Laboratory Validation Complete)
What This Means
VENDOR technology has completed laboratory-scale validation:
- 1000+ hours of laboratory-level continuous operation data (bench testing under controlled conditions)
- Core physics principles validated (impulse-discharge regime)
- Load response characteristics measured (startup, steady-state, transient)
- Temperature performance tested (-20°C to +50°C lab conditions)
- Modular scalability demonstrated (parallel operation of multiple units)
- Patent protection secured (PCT WO2024209235, Spanish patent granted)
What This Does NOT Mean
- Field-deployed prototypes (no real-world installations yet)
- Environmental validation (Arctic, desert, tropical conditions not field-tested)
- Certification complete (CE/UL process begins after Seed round)
- Commercial product availability (applications described = target roadmap)
- Customer deployments (scenarios = modeled, not operational)
Immediate Next Steps: Laboratory Rebuild (Q4 2025 → Q3 2026)
Current Situation
VENDOR operated from temporary laboratory facilities through 2024. To advance from TRL 5-6 to TRL 7, dedicated laboratory infrastructure is required.
Rebuild Objectives
- Permanent testing facility with calibrated instrumentation
- Environmental chambers (-40°C to +60°C, humidity, vibration)
- Load banks for full-power testing (24 kW configurations)
- Emissions/acoustic measurement equipment
- Accelerated lifetime testing rigs
- Safety compliance infrastructure (ventilation, monitoring, fire suppression)
Timeline
- Q4 2025: Facility selection and design
- Q1 2026: Construction and equipment installation
- Q2 2026: Calibration and commissioning
- Q3 2026: Validation testing resumed
Funding Requirement: Seed Round (targeting Q1 2026)
TRL 7 Milestone: Field Pilots (2026-2027)
Definition
TRL 7 = „System prototype demonstration in operational environment“
Plan
Once laboratory infrastructure is operational (Q3 2026), VENDOR will begin transitioning to field pilots:
Phase 1: Controlled Field Tests (Q3–Q4 2026)
- Friendly environments (accessible, monitored, non-critical)
- Partner facilities with technical supervision
- Applications: Off-grid housing, building sensors, accessible telecom sites
- Objective: Validate environmental performance, identify field-specific issues
Phase 2: Operational Pilots (2027)
- Real-world conditions (remote, harsh, critical infrastructure)
- Paying pilot partners (subsidized pricing, performance guarantees)
- Applications: Telecom, defense, smart city, emergency response
- Objective: Validate economics, reliability, maintenance requirements
Phase 3: Pilot Validation (Late 2027)
- Data collection and analysis (12+ months operational data)
- Independent validation (DNV, TÜV, or equivalent)
- Customer testimonials and case studies
- Certification preparation
Expected Outcome: TRL 7 complete by Q4 2027, commercial readiness 2028
TRL 8-9: Certification & Commercial Scale (2028+)
TRL 8
„System complete and qualified“ = Certification achieved
Certification Roadmap
- CE marking (European market access)
- UL certification (North American commercial/industrial)
- Military specifications (defense applications, if pursued)
- Telecom standards (ETSI, 3GPP for network equipment)
Timeline: 12–18 months from pilot data (assuming successful validation)
TRL 9
„System proven through successful mission operations“ = Customer deployments
Expected: 2028–2029 for initial commercial deployments, scaling 2029+
What This Means for Applications Described Above
All Applications on This Page
All applications on this page represent strategic targets based on:
- Technical analysis (architecture suitable for use case)
- Industry research (pain points, economics, market size)
- Laboratory validation (core physics confirmed)
- Regulatory assessment (certification pathways identified)
What They Do NOT Represent
- Proven deployments (no customer installations yet)
- Guaranteed performance (field validation pending)
- Commercial availability (TRL 7-9 required first)
- Committed timelines (subject to funding, validation, certification)
Honest Assessment
If you are evaluating VENDOR for:
- Investment: You’re betting on TRL 5-6 → TRL 7-9 transition (2026-2028)
- Pilot Partnership: Earliest meaningful pilots = Q3 2026 (lab rebuild complete)
- Commercial Deployment: Realistic timeline = 2028+ (certification required)
- Strategic Partnership: Now is the time to engage (shape product roadmap)
For Investors (Seed Round Active)
Early Access to Category-Creating Technology
VENDOR is raising a Seed round (Q4 2025 – Q1 2026) to fund laboratory rebuild and TRL 6→7 transition.
Investment Thesis
- Validated physics (1000+ hours lab data)
- Large addressable markets ($50B+ IoT, $800B+ infrastructure)
- Defensible IP (PCT patent, trade secrets)
- Experienced team (deeptech, energy, commercialization)
- Clear path to revenue (pilot programs 2027, commercial 2028+)
Risks
- Technology risk (TRL 5-6, field validation pending)
- Certification uncertainty (12–18 month process, outcomes not guaranteed)
- Market adoption (novel technology, education required)
- Competition (incumbents, alternative approaches)
Next Steps
- Request confidential investment overview
- Access data room (qualified investors only)
- Schedule technical diligence call
- Review financial projections and use of funds
For Pilot Partners (Telecom, Defense, Smart City, Infrastructure)
Shape Product Development, Get Early Access
VENDOR is seeking pilot partners for 2026–2027 field trials. Ideal partners:
- Face significant energy challenges (diesel costs, battery replacement, grid unreliability)
- Have accessible test sites (monitored, non-critical initially)
- Can provide technical feedback (performance data, operational insights)
- Seek strategic advantage (early adopter positioning, sustainability goals)
What We Offer
- Subsidized pilot pricing (below commercial rates)
- Co-development influence (shape product to your needs)
- Performance guarantees (agreed success criteria)
- Technical support (monitoring, troubleshooting, optimization)
What We Need
- Real-world deployment environment
- Performance data access (power, uptime, environmental)
- Feedback on operational issues
- Testimonials and case studies (if successful)
Timeline
- Q4 2025 – Q1 2026: Pilot partner selection
- Q3 2026: First deployments (controlled environments)
- 2027: Operational pilots (real-world conditions)
For Strategic Partners (OEM, System Integrators, Distributors)
Integrate Breakthrough Technology into Your Product Lines
VENDOR is open to strategic partnerships:
- OEM integration (sensors, equipment, systems incorporating VENDOR power)
- System integration (package VENDOR with complementary technologies)
- Distribution agreements (regional/vertical market access)
- Co-development (customize VENDOR for specific applications)
Ideal Partners
- IoT device manufacturers (sensor companies, building automation)
- Telecom equipment providers (base station, edge computing)
- Infrastructure systems integrators (smart city, public safety)
- Emergency response equipment suppliers
Timeline
- Technical discussions: Now (architecture, integration requirements)
- Pilot integration: 2026 (when lab rebuild complete)
- Commercial partnerships: 2028+ (post-certification)
For Media & Analysts (Press, Industry Research)
Honest, Transparent Technology Story
VENDOR is available for:
- Technical briefings (architecture, validation status)
- Industry analysis (market positioning, competitive landscape)
- Trend discussions (energy sovereignty, supply chain immunity)
- Founder interviews (vision, roadmap, challenges)
Press Kit Includes
- Company backgrounder
- Technology overview (accessible language)
- Application scenarios
- High-resolution images and diagrams
- Founder bio and contact information
