News
Installing Solar Panels through SolarCity
Shortly after placing my order for my Tesla Model S I started looking into installing a solar panel system at home as a way to offset the soon-to-be increased electricity bill. My research turned me to a SolarCity system which I ended up signing up with in April of 2014.
After a number of scoping, design, and utility company challenges the day finally came for installation.
Sizing the Job
While I had originally hoped for a much larger system, the system that was installed was still large by most people’s standards. The final design called for 70 panels, each capable of generating 255W for a total of 17.8 kW and an annual expected output of 18,611 kWh.
To put that into perspective, my Model S uses an average of 775 kWh (as measured through a digital submeter) or approximately 2,400 miles. That usage will climb a bit for the winter months, but I still intend to use about 9,300 kWh per year for my Model S which equates to 50% of my expected solar generation capacity.
What this means is that I’ll be driving my Model S on 100% solar generated energy and still have solar energy to spare to offset my normal electric costs.
Many installations are half this size or smaller due to a number of constraints. Because of the size of this job, SolarCity booked 2 days for the install and sent a crew of about 8 to do the work.
Scheduling
It was a bit nerve wracking waiting for the project to begin 8 months after my April sign up date. This put us smack dab in the middle of winter for a December 8th install in New England. We’ve had snow and ice storms along the way which made me more skeptical that the install would ever take place.
I’m happy to report that the entire SolarCity team in charge of the project arrived on the scheduled date. They were late due to leftover work at a different site, but they turned up despite the wet weather, 30 degree temperature and got right to work. It was immediately evident that this crew knew what they were doing and it was just another day on the job despite the magnitude of the install.
Solar Panel Installation
The first order of business was to tape off and secure the area from foot traffic. Anchors are attached to the roof which the crew secured their safety harnesses to.
Once the precautionary safety measures were in place, the crew began setting up dozens of anchor points across the roof surfaces later to be used as mounting points for the solar panels. That part took most of the first day.
By the end of the first day they had managed to install solar panels on the smaller of the 2 roof lines and had most of the anchors ready on the larger roof line.
Weather Proof Guarantee
A Noreaster hit right in the middle of the week so installation was postponed. To make matter worse, all of the heavy rain and cold weather ended up icing over the roof. I crawled into both attics below each roof to ensure that all of the nails and anchors on the roof didn’t create a leak and was relieved to find that everything was totally dry.
SolarCity guarantees a leak-free installation so it was great to be able to validate that even after torrential rains.
The crew returned on the third day despite the rain and proceeded to work a full day in extremely cold weather and light rain.
Uh oh, Design Challenges
Two different design issues were uncovered during the solar panel installation. The first of which was related to a misjudgment on the number of solar panels that would fit. Designers back at corporate had mapped out 70 panels for the roof, but one of the panels would not fit behind the chimney. The crew offered to stick it somewhere else, but we declined as it would have been asymmetrical anywhere else and the aesthetics would not have been good. So we ended up with a total of 69 panels and a slight decrease in target generation capacity.
The second issue was identified on the third day. While the entire install was on the front of the house (thanks to National Grid), they had a pipe running in the middle of the roof on the rear of the house which looked stupid and unnecessary.
I spoke to them about it and they cheerfully redesigned and relocated the entire pipe. In the rain. In 30 degree weather. On top of the house. The install team took our concerns seriously and took care of the problem.
The Final Touches
After lugging the panels up all day (each panel weighs about 45 pounds) and mounting them, they took the time to level each of them so they were completely flat.
At one point a single panel in the middle of the lot was a bit out of place (not perfect) so one of the guys had to slide down the wet, cold, glass on his knees (getting soaked in the process), 30 feet above ground with just a line to keep him safe just to adjust the angle slightly. Those installers are hard core!
Electric Connection
I was surprised that SolarCity needed no access to the house (other than for bathroom breaks) to do the job. The entire connection for my house was on the outside. They needed to cut the power for about 45 minutes to connect into the mains but otherwise there was very little disruption.
The size of the installation required 3 inverters which they placed on the side of the house.
Next Steps
The process leading up to the install (3 part series) was frustrating and error-prone between the reluctant power company and the mistakes made by the out-of-touch engineers back at SolarCity corporate. But SolarCity’s installation team was nothing but first class, all the way. They knew their stuff, were very safety conscious and worked through some harsh conditions to get the job done, and done well. They restored my confidence in the decision I made and I’m confident again that things are going to work out well.
Now that the system is installed and ready to go we need to have the inspections done. SolarCity coordinates it all, but there’s a building inspection, an electrical inspection and then an inspection by the power company. Once all passes (in about 3-4 weeks) we’re given the green light to flip the switches and start putting that free energy from the sun to good use.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
