News
My journey with a SolarCity System: Snow, Net Metering
After 9 months of planning, waiting and negotiating, my SolarCity system installation was finally completed in December of 2014. Following the install, the only steps that remained were to implement updates required for net metering and to finalize the electrical and building inspections.
The electrical inspection went quickly, but the building inspection was a pain. The local building inspector wasn’t very responsive and scheduled inspections shortly after large snow storms, but then refused to do the inspection due to “snow covering the panels”.
While we waited for the inspections, which finally took place in March of 2015, National Grid installed a new Net Meter. Net meters are capable of monitoring the amount of power being sent back into the grid. The meter swap is quick work, but be forewarned that it requires power to be cut from your home during the swap.
Weathering the Storm
We had a brutal Winter here in the Northeast and this was my first year with panels. So I had concerns about the impact of the heavy snow being on top of the panels, and also how one goes about cleaning off the snow. I asked SolarCity about proper handling and they told me not to worry about it:
“We understand your concern with the snow and the load that it would cause. Please be advised that when your system was built, our engineers took into consideration, your roof structure as well as the amount of weight that it would be able to hold. We also have the system approved by the City for load bearings.The City and our engineers did take into consideration, the amount of largest amount of snow that your roof can withstand before we installed. I understand that there was a mass message out to all the people in the area advising them to make sure that they clear the roof. We advised that you allow the snow to melt/slide down on its own., If you are hiring someone to come out to clear the roof. Make sure that they be careful and they only sweep the panels.”
I patiently waited for the snow to slide off the panels and sure enough it did, and with no issues. The snow slides off the black, wet glass-like surface of the solar panels. You definitely don’t want to be anywhere below the roofline when the snow decides to let go!
Early Issues – Broken Gear
Once National Grid completed the net metering install, I was finally approved to turn on the system. The first step involves turning a big dial (on each inverter) from off to on. I have three inverters which means three dials to flip on.
I turned each of them on. Two lit green almost immediately while the remaining inverted displayed a red fault light. There were no instructions on what to do in this scenario; no manuals and no guidance, so my only option was to call for help.
Getting help from SolarCity on the issue at had was a frustrating experience. SolarCity has a lot to learn when it comes to customer service. I spoke to several customer support managers as I continued to escalate my issue.
Finally, after five weeks of follow ups and many phone calls, I got the broken inverter fixed.
Tip:
SolarCity doesn’t bother to tell you this, but what I discovered was a little black button in the middle of the inverter. It’s hard to see but if you press the button you’ll be able to cycle through messages on the digital display, one of which is a fault code. Providing SolarCity with a fault code is much more useful than just letting them know that a red light is blinking.
Early Issues – Snow Fall
As mentioned earlier, snow doesn’t stick to the panels for long, but it does manage to build up before it lets go. Imagine 3 feet of heavy snow mixed with ice over your entire roof all letting go at the same time. It’s not a slow drip. It’s an avalanche.
The end result is dead flowers, dead bushes, and broken branches on vegetation immediately below the roof. As much as it’s common sense that snow will eventually melt from a roof and slide down, I wish SolarCity would have warned us that snow tends to slide from solar panels at a much quicker rate. I would have done something to fortify those flowers and bushes. After all, landscaping is not cheap.
There’s an accident waiting to happen so I think it’s in SolarCity’s best interest to pre-warn people of this, especially newbies to the world of solar panels.
Summary
Eleven months after starting the project, my SolarCity system finally went live (partially) on February 23, 2015. And on April 1, 2015, the third inverter was fixed allowing the system to work in its full capacity.
The image to the right is showing the day when the transformer on my street blew up and the entire street lost power for several hours. I added 33% more power from my large system going back into the network while using very little (Winter time) the same day the transformer blew. But then again, it was also April 1. Nobody made a fuss — National Grid replaced the transformer and all has been stable since. My best guess as to why that happened? Perhaps the transformer was already near its thresholds and my solar installation was the one to tip it over?
I’ll be writing about system monitoring, cost savings and billing errors in upcoming posts. The story isn’t over yet.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
