Lifestyle
Powering your Tesla and Home through SolarCity’s Solar Panel System
Solar power can get you some solar gains to reduce your electricity bill without costing you anything while helping to save the planet.
Solar Gains
Even with crazy electricity prices in Massachusetts, driving a Tesla is 38% of the cost of driving a gas-powered vehicle. But unlike oil and gasoline, you can generate your own power through renewable solar energy.
After ordering my Tesla Model S I started looking into solar panels for my home. I only looked at a single provider, SolarCity, for a couple of reasons. First, SolarCity is dominating the solar residential market with over 19% in market share. Second, it’s associated with Elon Musk and without him I wouldn’t even have the Tesla. I didn’t know much about SolarCity’s business model or approach – I simply filled out a contact form online and took it from there.
SolarCity Consultation & On-Site Evaluation
The process starts with a qualification call with a Solar City sales person to. They ask whether you own your home, what your electric usage is like, if you have a condo association and a few other random questions. They pull up your home address through Google maps and verify whether your location qualifies for their solar program. Here in Massachusetts only 1 in 7 (14%) of homes qualify for solar. Disqualification happens for reasons such as not having enough space on the roof for the panels, too much tree coverage or wrong facing roof lines.
The next step is to arrange an on-site visit of your property which for me lasted just over 2 hours. The SolarCity representative asked about our preference in solar panel placement (i.e. not on the front of the house for aesthetic reasons) and with that they were able to suggest areas of the roof where the solar panels would be most optimal. They pulled up a Google maps image of the home and produced a rendering of the home with the proposed solar cell placements. A custom report was generated that outlines the solar panel dimensions, numbers of solar cells to be installed, estimated production time and distribution of sunlight onto the solar panels while factoring in the direction of sunlight. It was quite an impressive report.
SolarCity analyzed my actual electricity usage history and was able to calculate the annual kWh consumed along with the cost for that energy. They use historical weather data in your city/state and look for weather patterns over the last several years, in order to estimate how much real coverage you will get from the solar panels.
Based on SolarCity’s evaluation, their proposed solution would cover 88% of my electricity needs and cut my average monthly bill of $377 to $45. When the green line is above the yellow, you’re essentially producing more solar derived electricity than you need, and as a result you have to accumulate credits within your account. This big drop in monthly electricity cost is the “bait” portion of the sales pitch. Lots of focus is placed on the amount of energy that can be recouped, but this doesn’t all come for free.
The SolarCity system designed for our house costs about $144k in total. With green credits in place (going to SolarCity), the cost ends up to be approximately $68k.
They don’t give you $68k of hardware for free — SolarCity’s business model is pretty simple:
“Take dollars going to power companies and divert most of it to SolarCity while giving the homeowner enough incentive to do so.”
SolarCity provides you with free hardware and then charges you a rate based on the amount of solar power used. The amount of solar energy placed back into the grid offsets your electricity usage and bill, but can never exceed (at least in Massachusetts) the bill to the point where you are paid for generating energy. In other words, you’ll want to design a system that provides as close to 100% coverage of your electric bill as possible without going under or over. Going under means you’re paying the higher price per kWh through your standard electricity provider while going over means that you’re paying for excess generation of power while not being able to use it.
Reducing Electricity Bills with Solar Energy
SolarCity does not want to sell you a system. They want to enter into a long term (20 year) agreement with you that requires you to buy power from the solar panels they place into your home. They provide a few options to do this:
- Pay a medium rate for the generated power, but with no increase year over year.
- Pay a lower rate for the generated power, but with a 2.9% increase year over year.
- Pay nothing for generated power, but with a big up front pre-payment at the lowest rate.
All their rates start lower than your current electricity rate. Lets look at how a 2,500 kWh / month usage breaks down:
- With Electricity provider: 2,500 kWh x 16.7¢/kWh = $417.50
- With SolarCity: 2,500 kWh x 88% x 14.8¢/kWh + 2,500 kWh x 12% x 16.7¢/kWh = $373.60
The 88% offset number can vary when you get to the actual implementation, but the rep said the estimates are usually conservative.
Choosing option #1 would give an immediate 10.5% savings which is far from the 88% savings they claim to give. The utility company was receiving $417.50 for my energy usage, but with the proposed SolarCity system, the utility company’s cut would diminish to $48 while SolarCity would receive $325.60. SolarCity and the homeowner wins; the power company loses revenue, but gets relief on the grid and even more relief during the hotter months when the grid is the most strained.
Electric companies are hiking rates year over year. The rep quoted an average annual rate hike of 4.8% in Massachusetts, but taking a deeper look at a historical rate chart for my area, I saw an annual increase of 5.7% since 2008. Assuming this same growth pattern over the next 10 years, SolarCity’s solar panel system should provide a 40% savings in energy costs in the later years.
The choice in SolarCity plans really depends on how long you expect to stay in your house. If you’re only staying for a few more years, go with the one with the lowest rate and no upfront payment. If this is the last house you’ll own and you can afford to, then pre-pay for the system. Otherwise (like me), go in the middle. The break-even point between plan 1 and plan 2 is 8 years.
SolarCity’s Solar Panel System in the Long Run
My system has an estimated production of 23,830 kWh per year with a fixed cost to me at 14.8¢/kWh. Total payout to SolarCity for use of the solar energy will be $70,536.80 over 20 years. Since the cost of the solar panel system costs them around $68K after credits, you’re essentially paying for the whole system over the 20 years, but at the end you don’t own it.
There are a few options that can be had after the 20 year mark:
- Renew for some additional 5 year periods with different numbers/rates.
- Upgrade system to something newer with different numbers/rates.
- Have them take it all away and put the house back to pre-solar state (this is totally free to do).
There are a few other things to note:
- They guarantee your entire roof from leaks for the first year after install.
- The entire system is insured, maintained, owned by them — anything breaks and they fix it for free (labor + parts).
- They’re incentivized to make it work, and work well, because they get paid on energy production and usage. That’s an expensive set of gear (almost $150K in our case) and something you don’t have to worry about.
- The agreements etc are fully transferable to a new home buyer.
- They have applications to monitor power generation through your mobile and desktop devices.
How does SolarCity make money? I don’t know their whole business model but there are a few things you can infer:
- I don’t buy the quoted costs of the gear and it seems others, like Forbes, don’t either. Perhaps the retail price for the solar set up would be $144K, but as the largest solar installer in the US, SolarCity undoubtedly is getting some huge price breaks.
- The power companies are mandated to produce a certain amount of green energy and when they can’t there are fines to be had. Similar to how Tesla sells their earned green credits back to the power companies. I’ve seen estimates that for every Tesla sold, 5 green credits are created worth a total of $35,000 that other auto companies buy from Tesla. So not only do they generate $100k in revenue from the car, they receive an additional $35k through the green credits.
From the outside it’s really hard to tell what SolarCity’s long term business strategy will be. To me, it’s simple. I have some high value equipment on my roof offsetting real electric rates and a contract for a fixed price over the long term with no real downside. I’ll let them worry about their business and I’ll just worry about my house.
I started down this path because of the Tesla. I’ve averaged 90 miles a day over the last 6 months in my ICE car. Using Tesla’s calculator that’s equivalent to 29.7 kWh/day or 10,841 kWh/year of energy that I’ll be using (about $1,800 worth if I get it straight from the power company). Still a big savings over $6,000/year in gas and even more when combined with solar. The $1,800 goes to about $1,600 this year ($200 savings), and 10 years from now I’m saving 50% over what I’d normally be paying to my utility company.
Going solar for me was pretty much a no-brainer. Gas prices are going up and so are electricity prices. Solar provides cleaner power at less cost with no upfront fees and no upkeep that I’m responsible for, and it will help offset the additional cost of electricity from my new Tesla and make it even more cost effective over time.
RELATED: SolarCity Struggles: My Three Part Series on the Journey Taken with SolarCity
Elon Musk
The FCC just said ‘No’ to SpaceX for now
SpaceX is fighting the FCC for spectrum that could put satellites inside every smartphone.
SpaceX was dealt a new setback on April 23, 2006 by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) after the U.S. government agency dismissed the company’s petition to access a Mobile Satellite Service spectrum that would allow direct-to-device (D2D) capabilities.
The FCC regulates communications by radio, television, wire, and cable, which also includes regulating D2D technology that lets your existing smartphone connect directly to a satellite orbiting Earth, the same way it would connect to a cell tower.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX has been building toward this through its Starlink Mobile service, formerly called Direct-to-Cell, in partnership with T-Mobile. The service officially launched on July 23, 2025, starting with messaging and expanding to broadband data in October of that year.
T-Mobile Starlink Pricing Announced – Early Adopters Get Exclusive Discount
It’s worth noting that SpaceX is not alone in this race. AT&T and Verizon have their own satellite texting deals with AST SpaceMobile, while Verizon separately offers free satellite texting through Skylo on newer phones.
The regulatory foundation for all of this dates to March 14, 2024, when the FCC adopted the world’s first framework for what it called Supplemental Coverage from Space, allowing satellite operators to lease spectrum from terrestrial carriers and fill gaps in their coverage. On November 26, 2024, the FCC granted SpaceX the first-ever authorization under that framework, approving its partnership with T-Mobile to provide service in specific frequency bands. SpaceX then went further, completing a roughly $17 billion acquisition of wireless spectrum from EchoStar, which gave it the ability to negotiate with global carriers more independently.
Starlink’s EchoStar spectrum deal could bring 5G coverage anywhere
This recent ruling by the FCC blocked SpaceX from going further, protecting incumbent spectrum holders like Globalstar and Iridium. But the market momentum is already in motion. As Teslarati reported, SpaceX is targeting peak speeds of 150 Mbps per user for its next generation Direct-to-Cell service, compared to roughly 4 Mbps today, which would bring satellite connectivity close to standard carrier performance.
With a reported IPO targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation on the horizon, each spectrum fight, carrier deal, and regulatory win or loss now carries weight beyond just connectivity. SpaceX is quietly becoming the infrastructure layer underneath the phones of millions of people, and the FCC’s next move will help determine how much further that reach extends.
FCC Satellite Rule Makings can be found here.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk talks Tesla Roadster’s future
Elon Musk confirmed the Roadster as Tesla’s last manually driven car, with a debut coming soon.
During Tesla’s Q1 2026 earnings call on April 22, Elon Musk made a brief but notable comment about the long-awaited next generation Roadster while describing Tesla’s future vehicle lineup. “Long term, the only manually driven car will be the new Tesla Roadster,” he said. “Speaking of which, we may be able to debut that in a month or so. It requires a lot of testing and validation before we can actually have a demo and not have something go wrong with the demo.”
That single statement is the entire Roadster update from yesterday’s call, and while it represents another timeline shift, it comes as no surprise with Tesla heads-down-at-work on the mass rollout of its Robotaxi service across US cities, and the industrial scale production of the humanoid Optimus.
The fact that Musk specifically framed the Roadster as the last manually driven Tesla is significant on its own. As the rest of the lineup moves toward full autonomy, the Roadster becomes something rare in the Tesla-sphere by keeping the driver in control. Driving enthusiasts who buy a $200,000 supercar are not doing so to be passengers. They want the physical connection to the road, the feel of acceleration under their own input, and the experience of controlling something with that level of performance. FSD, however capable it becomes, removes that entirely. The Roadster signals that Tesla understands this distinction and is building a car specifically for the people who consider driving itself the point.
Tesla isn’t joking about building Optimus at an industrial scale: Here we go
The specs for the Roadster Musk has teased over the years are genuinely unlike anything in production. The base model targets 0 to 60 mph in 1.9 seconds, a top speed above 250 mph, and up to 620 miles of range from a 200 kWh battery. The optional SpaceX package takes it further, rumored to add roughly ten cold gas thrusters operating at 10,000 psi, borrowed directly from Falcon 9 rocket technology. With thrusters, Musk has claimed 0 to 60 mph in as little as 1.1 seconds. In a 2021 Joe Rogan interview he went further, stating “I want it to hover. We got to figure out how to make it hover without killing people.” Tesla filed a patent for ground effect technology in August 2025, suggesting the hover concept has not been abandoned. The starting price remains $200,000, with the Founders Series requiring a $250,000 full deposit. Some reservation holders placed those deposits in 2017 and are approaching a full decade of waiting.
With production now targeted for 2027 or 2028 at the earliest, the Roadster remains Tesla’s most audacious promise and its longest-running delay. But if what Musk is testing lives up to even half of what he has described, the demo alone should be worth waiting for.
Elon Musk says the Tesla Roadster unveiling could be done “maybe in a month or so.”
He said it should be an extraordinary unveiling event. pic.twitter.com/6V9P7zmvEm
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 22, 2026
Elon Musk
Tesla isn’t joking about building Optimus at an industrial scale: Here we go
Tesla’s Optimus factory in Texas targets 10 million robots yearly, with 5.2 million square feet under construction.
Tesla’s Q1 2026 Update Letter, released today, confirms that first generation Optimus production lines are now well underway at its Fremont, California factory, with a pilot line targeting one million robots per year to start. Of bigger note is a shared aerial image of a large piece of land adjacent to Gigafactory Texas, that Tesla has prominently labeled “Optimus factory site preparation.”
Permit documents show Tesla is seeking to add over 5.2 million square feet of new building space to the Giga Texas North Campus by the end of 2026, at an estimated construction investment of $5 billion to $10 billion. The longer term production target for that facility is 10 million Optimus units per year. Giga Texas already sits on 2,500 acres with over 10 million square feet of existing factory floor, and the North Campus expansion is being built to support multiple projects, including the dedicated Optimus factory, the Terafab chip fabrication facility (a joint Tesla/SpaceX/xAI venture), a Cybercab test track, road infrastructure, and supporting facilities.
Credit: TESLA
Texas makes strategic sense beyond the existing infrastructure. The state’s tax structure, lower labor costs relative to California, and the proximity to Tesla’s AI training cluster Cortex 1 and 2, both located at Giga Texas and now totaling over 230,000 H100 equivalent GPUs, means the Optimus software stack and the factory producing the hardware will share the same campus. Tesla’s Q1 report also confirmed completion of the AI5 chip tape out in April, the inference processor designed specifically to power Optimus units in the field.
As Teslarati reported, the Texas facility is intended to house Optimus V4 production at full scale. Musk told the World Economic Forum in January that Tesla plans to sell Optimus to the public by end of 2027 at a price between $20,000 and $30,000, stating, “I think everyone on earth is going to have one and want one.” He has previously pegged long term demand for general purpose humanoid robots at over 20 billion units globally, citing both consumer and industrial use cases.
Tesla gives HW3 owners another massive update
SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk
