You’re beginning to catch on…
Another pet peeve of mine. The English word hybrid means an entity that combines characteristics of two or more other entities. In this case, the traditional understanding was always an inverter that can tie with the grid (like a PV-inverter) as well as serve as a backup supply.
The first time I started to see the “other” definition, was when suddenly Axpert’s were marketed as Hybrids. The reasoning was that they include a solar charger, so they combine characteristics of an inverter with a solar charger. Pffft. It was a marketing trick to get the lesser inverter on the same page as the proper hybrid.
Yeah, that appears to be the golden threat running through the whole thing. The regulations are deathly afraid those PV modules might end up pushing into the grid through whatever conversion interface is used (which is the more common mode elsewhere in the world), so the regulations appears to be written from that viewpoint. A hybrid inverter with no PV attached (that can nevertheless island and feed into the grid)… no problem. Attach PV to it… problem. A passive UPS with a solar charger. Use it as a UPS, no problem. Attach PV modules… problem.
As long as your PV modules (or the conversion interface between them and the grid) is disconnected while you are attached to the grid, you are compliant.
Remember, the PV module(s) are the G in EG. Not the inverter. The inverter is just the conversion interface.
I think UPSes really should be held to a higher standard, even without PV attached. That is what I think is wrong with this picture.