Autonomous Power
for Remote
Telecom Towers
Many remote telecom towers still depend on diesel, fuel delivery, and recurring site logistics. VENDOR.Max is being developed as an autonomous power node designed to reduce that dependency and support continuous remote-site operation through a different infrastructure architecture.
WO2024209235 (PCT)
EP · CN · IN · USA
Diesel logistics have been the default
for remote towers for decades.
The cost is measurable. The dependency is structural.
For many operators, diesel and related logistics represent one of the most persistent off-grid site cost drivers. Industry reports on off-grid telecom infrastructure indicate this dependency can account for a substantial share of site-level OPEX — in some markets consistently above 30%. The challenge is not a lack of awareness. It is the absence of a proven alternative that meets the technical and operational threshold required for wider adoption.
Annual diesel OPEX per site
Fuel procurement, delivery logistics, and generator maintenance create a cost structure that compounds with every site added to the network. The line item grows with scale, not with usage efficiency.
Every delivery is an operational risk
Roads close. Supply chains break. Fuel runs short at the wrong moment. At a remote site with no backup, a missed delivery is not a logistics problem — it is a network uptime event that reaches your operations centre at 02:00.
Diesel at remote sites is a target
Fuel theft at unmanned remote tower sites is a documented and growing operational challenge across multiple markets. Every litre stored on-site is inventory that requires physical security, monitoring, and replacement logistics when compromised.
Some sites have no road
For truly remote nodes — mountain relays, island installations, sites reachable only by helicopter or seasonal track — diesel logistics are not merely expensive. They are structurally unreliable. This is where the dependency becomes an architectural risk, not a budget item.
An Autonomous Power Node
Designed to Reduce
Diesel Dependency at Remote Sites
VENDOR.Max is not a conventional generator substitute. It is a different infrastructure architecture designed to reduce or remove dependence on diesel fuel logistics, combustion-based generation, and recurring battery-cycle constraints at remote sites. VENDOR.Max is developed as an infrastructure-grade autonomous power node for telecom tower power systems where conventional supply chains create structural vulnerability.
A VENDOR.Max autonomous power node is an open electrodynamic engineering system operating in a nonlinear resonant regime, designed to deliver usable electrical power at 2.4–24 kW infrastructure scale without conventional diesel fuel logistics or combustion-based supply chains.
The system operates within classical electrodynamics as a controlled two-contour architecture — Active Core for regime formation and Linear Extraction for power output — validated at TRL 5–6 with over 1,000 cumulative operational hours, including a 532-hour continuous cycle.
The ionized gas medium functions as an interaction field, not as an energy source. External energy input is required for sustained operation.
Patent: WO2024209235 · ES2950176 (granted)This system is designed to be evaluated within the frameworks of nonlinear electrodynamics, open-system engineering behaviour, and discharge-based interaction regimes. VENDOR.Max is not a perpetual motion device and does not create energy from nothing. It is not a closed-loop system. It operates within classical thermodynamic constraints as a validated engineering architecture. External energy input is required for sustained operation. All performance figures on this page represent modeled or laboratory-validated estimates consistent with TRL 5–6 pre-commercial validation status. They do not constitute a commercial performance guarantee.
Rotate your device to view the architecture diagram
The architecture behind VENDOR.Max —
for engineers and technical evaluators.
The operating principles of VENDOR.Max draw on nonlinear electrodynamics, open-system thermodynamics, and controlled discharge-based regime architectures. For technical teams conducting due diligence, the following resources provide the full engineering context required for evaluation.
"Electrodynamic discharge systems at this power level create RF interference that suppresses cellular and backhaul signals within 150+ metres. This cannot be deployed at an active tower site."
RF compatibility is an architectural design requirement,
not an afterthought.
This constraint was identified and addressed during Active Core architecture development. The system's regime formation and Linear Extraction module are specifically engineered to contain electrodynamic activity within defined boundaries — preventing field propagation that would interfere with tower RF equipment or adjacent spectrum. The design intent is full co-location compatibility with active cellular infrastructure.
Independent RF compatibility verification is part of the CE certification pathway (target 2026–2028). Technical details of the containment architecture are evaluated during the pilot under NDA.
"Discharge-based systems degrade rapidly under continuous operation — thermal cycling, electrode erosion, and contamination reduce service life to months, not years. This is not viable for remote sites."
Discharge element longevity is an engineering design problem.
It has been solved.
Discharge element degradation was a primary engineering constraint from the earliest design stages. The discharge architecture used in VENDOR.Max is specifically selected and engineered for long-cycle endurance under continuous operation — accounting for thermal stress, erosion mechanisms, and contamination pathways.
The result: service intervals without discharge element replacement are designed to reach 5–6 years under normal operating conditions. Annual maintenance (the single scheduled service visit) covers broader system checks — not routine discharge element replacement. Over 1,000 cumulative operational hours in laboratory conditions support this design target.
The economic case for a fit review
starts with the baseline
your team already knows.
The table below uses conservative industry-referenced cost assumptions for off-grid telecom infrastructure. All figures are illustrative modeled estimates. Site-specific economics — actual fuel cost, delivery complexity, duty cycle, and existing infrastructure — are quantified during the fit review and pilot.
The cost differential compounds with fleet size. These are not projections — they are the arithmetic of your existing cost structure applied at scale.
One installation.
Target service interval: once per year.
Designed for continuous operation.
VENDOR.Max operates through controlled electrodynamic regime formation — using gas as an interaction medium (not as an energy source) within a stabilized two-contour architecture. External energy input is required for sustained operation.
The result at your infrastructure layer: a node designed to deliver continuous power output in the 2.4–24 kW range for 24/7 operation, with a target service interval of one visit per year for discharge block replacement. No combustion. No conventional fuel logistics. No recurring battery replacement dependency.
For sites with difficult access — no road, seasonal track, or helicopter-only — the reduction of recurring fuel delivery logistics is not a cost optimisation. It is an architectural shift in how the site operates.
VENDOR.Max is the infrastructure-grade autonomous power node in the VENDOR product architecture, designed specifically for telecom tower power systems and remote communications infrastructure at 2.4–24 kW scale.
Full VENDOR.Max product specificationAll specifications represent designed targets at TRL 5–6. Subject to certification milestones and external validation.
Every question your team will ask.
Answered before the meeting.
We built this page for your CTO, your Operations Director, and your CFO — because they will each have a different reason to hesitate. Here is what the evidence actually shows at TRL 5–6.
Additional questions not covered below?
Contact VENDOR directly"This sounds too good to be true."
+We understand why. The claim is structurally unusual in a market where every alternative has a visible constraint — solar needs sunlight, batteries need replacement, hydrogen needs delivery infrastructure. VENDOR.Max operates in a different engineering category, and different categories require evidence, not marketing.
Here is what currently exists: over 1,000 cumulative operational hours documented under controlled conditions, including a 532-hour continuous cycle. The full operational record is made available to pilot partners before any agreement is signed. Review it. Challenge it. Have your engineers assess it against your own criteria.
"New technology = new risks. Diesel is predictable."
+Diesel is predictable — predictably expensive, predictably dependent on supply chains, and predictably unavailable when logistics fail at critical moments. The operational risk you currently carry with diesel is not zero. It is familiar.
VENDOR.Max does not replace your existing infrastructure during the pilot. It is installed in parallel. Your diesel system remains in place as backup. If the node underperforms against jointly agreed KPIs, your operations continue unchanged. The pilot structure makes the downside bounded and the upside measurable.
"If this pilot does not perform, it reflects on me."
+This is the concern we have most carefully designed for. No pilot begins without a jointly agreed KPI matrix — uptime percentage, power output consistency, target service interval compliance — defined and documented before deployment.
Weekly reporting goes directly to your team. You see every number, every week. There are no surprises. A pilot that produces clear, documented data — positive or negative — is not a failure. It is engineering due diligence, and it produces a technical record your organisation owns regardless of outcome.
"Our board will not approve an unfamiliar technology."
+Board approval processes require documentation, precedent framing, and risk structure. We provide all three before you enter the first internal meeting.
Patent coverage spans 6 jurisdictions — including a granted patent (ES2950176) and PCT coverage (WO2024209235) across 37 countries. This is a verified intellectual property portfolio, not an undocumented prototype.
The pilot approval pack — included as standard for all pilot partners — contains the technical passport, a two-page patent summary, an ROI model calibrated to your infrastructure profile, and a KPI framework template. Your board receives a structured document. Not a request for faith.
"We do not have internal bandwidth to manage a pilot."
+The pilot is managed entirely by VENDOR. Installation requires 1–2 days on-site. Monitoring, documentation, KPI tracking, and weekly reporting are handled by our engineering team throughout the cycle.
From your organisation: one contact engineer and site access. That is the complete internal resource requirement. Your team does not manage this pilot. They receive structured reports from it.
"There is no independent verification yet."
+Correct — and we state this explicitly throughout this page. VENDOR.Max is at TRL 5–6. Independent verification through DNV or TÜV is planned for Q2–Q3 2026. We do not claim certification that does not yet exist.
What the current validation stage creates for founding pilot partners: you receive verification results before public publication. Operators who validate performance data on their own infrastructure — under their own standards — hold a material advantage in procurement conversations, regulatory dialogue, and supplier evaluation when the market catches up.
"Show me a telecom operator that has already deployed this."
+There is not one yet. That is precisely the market position this pilot is designed to establish.
Industry reports on off-grid telecom infrastructure document diesel and logistics as a persistent cost driver across a large global fleet of remote sites. The operational pain is confirmed at industry scale. The validated alternative is at the pilot stage.
Operators who verify the economics on their own infrastructure — under their own internal standards — become the reference case for every operator who asks this question in the future. The first mover in this category does not simply save on OPEX. They set the benchmark their entire sector will reference.
Four stages. One contact person.
Full documentation regardless of outcome.
The pilot is structured to produce a verifiable result at every stage — including a complete technical record suitable for internal audit, procurement evaluation, and regulatory filing, regardless of whether performance targets are met.
Entry and KPI Alignment
Up to 2 weeks · no site visitJoint definition of KPI matrix, success criteria, and measurement methodology. VENDOR delivers the technical passport and board approval pack. Your contact engineer is introduced to the monitoring interface. All metrics are documented and agreed in writing before any equipment moves.
Installation
1–2 days on-siteVENDOR team deploys the node in parallel with your existing infrastructure. Diesel system remains fully operational. The node enters monitored operation immediately after installation.
Operational Cycle
6–8 months · weekly reportsThe node operates under the agreed KPI framework. VENDOR delivers weekly performance reports directly to your contact engineer. A direct technical line to VENDOR engineering is maintained throughout. No additional site visits are required unless an anomaly is detected — and you are notified before any action is taken.
Verification and Decision
30-day reporting windowFull technical report delivered against pre-agreed KPIs. Modeled ROI calculated from actual operational data. Optional: joint technical verification protocol conducted on your organisation's own R&D infrastructure. Joint decision on next phase — scale, further validation, or close.
What pilot partners receive —
beyond operational performance data.
The initial telecom pilot cohort is intentionally capped at 3 operators. This is an operational constraint: each pilot requires direct engineering support from VENDOR to maintain data integrity for the DNV/TÜV verification process. The following benefits apply to all operators in the founding cohort.
Benefit 01
Board Approval Pack
Complete internal approval documentation — technical passport, two-page patent summary, ROI model calibrated to your infrastructure profile, and a KPI matrix template. Everything needed to obtain internal sign-off, structured for your procurement process.
Benefit 02
Co-Verification on Your R&D Infrastructure
Operators with R&D laboratory capabilities may conduct technical verification using their own infrastructure and internal standards. The result: a joint technical protocol bearing your organisation's verification methodology — produced under your standards, on your terms, with your equipment and your team as co-signatories.
Benefit 03
Direct Engineering Line
Direct access to VENDOR technical leadership for the full duration of the pilot. Your CTO's technical question is answered by VENDOR's technical director — not routed through a support queue. Response commitment: one working day, throughout the operational cycle.
Founding cohort is capped at 3 operators. Each concurrent pilot requires direct engineering support from VENDOR to maintain data quality for DNV/TÜV verification. Co-verification on operator R&D infrastructure is available to founding cohort operators only.
Pilot Guarantee
Two Documented Commitments
If KPIs are not reached — VENDOR covers the next cycle.
If agreed KPIs are not reached by the end of the operational cycle, VENDOR covers the full cost of the next operational validation cycle. You do not pay twice for one unresolved question.
The downside is bounded. The question gets answered.
You receive a complete technical report. Always.
Regardless of performance outcome, you receive a complete technical report suitable for internal audit, regulatory filing, and supplier evaluation. Every pilot produces verifiable documentation. A negative result is an engineering answer — and it belongs to your organisation.
Every outcome is a documented outcome.
Capped at 3 operators.
Operational constraint, not marketing.
VENDOR is limiting the initial telecom founding pilot cohort to 3 operators. Each concurrent pilot requires direct engineering support from the VENDOR team to maintain the data quality required for the DNV/TÜV verification process. More than 3 simultaneous pilots would compromise the integrity of the verification dataset for all participants.
Founding cohort operators retain the option to conduct joint technical verification on their own R&D infrastructure. After the founding cohort is closed, verification proceeds on external infrastructure under standard conditions only. This option is structurally unavailable to later entrants.
Not yet ready to begin a pilot? Organisations may submit a non-binding founding access reservation request. Reservation requests are prioritised ahead of general commercial availability and remain subject to validation milestones, certification progress, and production-readiness terms.
Technical and operational questions —
answered with engineering precision.
Why is diesel so expensive for remote telecom towers?
+What is VENDOR.Max and how does it differ from a diesel system?
+What does TRL 5–6 mean for our procurement process?
+Does the system require external power input?
+How are the 1,000+ operational hours validated?
+What happens if the pilot does not reach agreed KPIs?
+What certifications does VENDOR.Max currently hold?
+What are the economics at network scale — not just one site?
+Is a founding access reservation available before the pilot?
+
The diesel dependency at your remote sites
does not resolve on its own.
The founding telecom cohort is capped at 3 operators. The pilot is fully managed by VENDOR. The technical documentation is yours regardless of what the data shows.