August 20, 2026: Base refreshes pricing, product mix stays split

Today is August 20, 2026, and the main change for Base Power is still incremental, not transformative.

The company’s public surface moved again on pricing and product framing. Base’s general energy page now shows 14.3 cents per kilowatt-hour for Base Energy under a utility selector, with a 36 month plan and an 8 cent per kilowatt-hour plus delivery-fees framing.

At the same time, the Oncor page still lists 13.9 cents per kilowatt-hour for bundled battery plans, 14.2 cents per kilowatt-hour for energy only, and repeats the 30,000 plus homes powered claim.

That is worth pausing on because the cents-per-kilowatt-hour number is not always a pure energy price. In plain language, the number can bundle energy plus delivery fees, so two offers that look close on a page may still differ in what is included. Base’s pages use that structure to compare products with one headline number, while still varying by utility territory and battery attachment. That makes the public pricing surface useful, but also easy to misread if you assume one line item means one universal offer.

On product structure, Base’s help center still says it offers 25 kilowatt-hour, 39.2 kilowatt-hour, and 50 kilowatt-hour battery systems, and that the 39.2 kilowatt-hour single-ground-mounted battery remains in limited beta in select areas.

That matters because it means the product line has not collapsed into one simple configuration. The public docs still show a mix of sizes, and the newest ground-mounted option is still being introduced cautiously. That is a company claim, not independent proof of broad deployment. It is also a reminder that a pricing refresh does not answer the hardware question by itself. If anything, the coexistence of several public descriptions suggests Base is still testing how it wants to present the offer to customers in different places.

Base Core also now says it is currently available in Texas and Illinois, and that Base Core is in production at Base Factory 1 in Austin. That is also a company claim, but it is the clearest current statement of how Base is describing its manufacturing footprint.

The strongest non-company breadcrumb in today’s review is still the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation record. The current TDLR entry remains a 216,060 square foot Met Center Building 3 finish-out for manufacturing and warehouse uses, with status still Review Complete. That is a confirmed permit record, but not proof of occupancy, production, or throughput.

That distinction matters because permits and finish-out filings can show intent and planning, but they do not tell you whether a factory is actually operating at scale. So the public evidence still stops short of confirming output from Base Factory 1, even though the company says production is underway. The same caution applies to the broader manufacturing story: a permit trail is not the same thing as an operating factory, and a finished shell is not the same thing as a commissioned line.

On the market side, ERCOT’s Aggregate Distributed Energy Resource pilot page still says that a party registering an ADER with ERCOT must also register with the PUCT in Project 54311.

That remains important because it is part of the paper trail a battery fleet would need before it could appear as dispatchable market capacity. But in this pass, I still found no Base-specific ERCOT public notice, and that leaves the main operating question unresolved: has Base crossed from product rollout and manufacturing claims into public evidence of market registration or dispatch?

A couple of other threads remain open. Ashby still shows open Austin roles like Utility Partnerships, Finance and Analytics, Driver, and Growth, but open roles are not hires.

And the product mix itself is still unresolved at the installed fleet level. Current docs show 25, 39.2, and 50 kilowatt-hour language, but I still do not have public installation records that split the mix, or any proof of one battery versus two battery deployments.

So the scorecard for August 20 is simple. Base’s pricing and product pages are active, the help center still signals multiple hardware configurations, the factory permit trail is still only a permit trail, and the ERCOT paper trail still does not name Base in public notices. That combination leaves us with movement on presentation, but not yet on the clearest operational proof points that would settle the bigger questions.

What to watch next: first, any PUCT or ERCOT record naming Base resources, qualified megawatts, telemetry validation, or dispatched services. Second, any city inspection, certificate of occupancy, electrical final, or commissioning record tied to Base facilities. Third, any contract, install, or warranty document that confirms how the 25, 39.2, and 50 kilowatt-hour systems are actually being deployed in the field.