News
Solar Power Monitoring and Billing through SolarCity
After experiencing some growing pains with my SolarCity installation, I’m happy to say that I’ve been up and running since February 23rd of 2015 and ready to share my experiences with how the system is monitored and billed.
Savings
The savings on your electricity bill begin immediately after installation of your SolarCity system, and affects both the supply and delivery portions of your bill.
Savings can be pretty dramatic depending on the size of the system and, obviously, how much sunshine your region experiences. The following utility bill is a great example of how I was able to reduce my energy dependence from the grid by over 90%.
However, despite the reduction in energy needs from my utility company, the cost is not directly proportional to the amount of energy used. Here’s why.
Billing
Having such a drastic reduction in kWh needed from the grid actually comes with a price. Almost everyone who signs up with SolarCity opts-in to a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) which means you pay nothing upfront (for the gear, install etc.), but you pay SolarCity for every kWh their system generates. That rate can be variable or fixed. I pay a fixed rate of $0.1420 per kWh generated for 20 years. That may sound high to you but considering my local electricity rate is $0.2470, I’m saving 43% per kWh.
It takes SolarCity some time to get up and running with their billing system. For me it took them 3 months to send me the first bill and because of that I received a hefty bill (thankfully late winter months) for all 3 months in one shot. After that, the bills arrive monthly (note that SolarCity requires EFT/Autopay to be set up).
The bills are simple and only state the amount of kWh generated, the rate you pay, and the total amount owed.
SolarCity collects data generated through their system via a standard internet connection, which they also use for billing purposes. On the first (large/3 month) bill I received, I noticed a difference of 10% (additional cost for me) between the billed amount and the amount the system had reported being generated so I naturally brought this to their attention. The customer service folks that I spoke with weren’t of much help and just told me to read each the meters at the beginning and end of each month if I truly want an accurate reading of how things get billed. So, that’s what I did.
Since inception I’ve saved $320 (over roughly 3 months) or about 42% off what I would have paid National Grid. And the system cost me nothing to install (I actually got a $1,000 Tesla-owner check from them).
They also have an estimated cost savings on the front page when you log in but it’s totally incorrect:
The mistake they made here is that they’re assuming your electricity rate doesn’t change over time. My electricity rate rose significantly after I signed up for SolarCity and because of that I’m getting a larger savings than what they’re reporting.
Monitoring
Monitoring happens online through MySolarCity.com. The interface is geared more towards new referrals than for actual owners of their system. The section I use most often is the Power Guide.
Power Guide gives an hour by hour break out of your energy generation along with the weather pattern for that day (ie. how much daylight, cloud coverage …). Hovering over each colored bar will show you the energy generated per inverter. The data can be downloaded in a CSV format and then imported into Numbers or Excel for your own post processing.
If you have multiple inverters, the CSV data for the day is a bit of a pain to analyze since it also includes the energy generated every 15 minutes per inverter.
Power Guide also includes a summary for the year.
The platform also provides a view of your energy generation as it happens in real-time which updates continuously.
Having this features allows you to watch the sun rise and set as viewed through the perspective of your panels which is kind of fun.
It’s not totally accurate as I’ll see data from certain days which look completely off.
API – Not
I’ve set up automated tweets for detection of Tesla Superchargers in real-time and decided to the same by sharing my SolarCity data through my home-grown program that fetches the data from Power Guide and then tweeting it.
It would be really nice if SolarCity decided to create a simple REST API that would allow owners to fetch their data.
Summary
SolarCity makes a lot of sense when it comes to cost savings and they’re able to provide this with no upfront cost to the owner. One needs to analyze the effective savings based on the cost incurred when generating energy through the SolarCity system versus your electricity cost, and then decide if the savings is worth the hassle. I’d recommend filling out their contact form and sign up for a consultation to get started.
The billing and monitoring side of SolarCity could definitely use some improvement, and hopefully this will improve over time as the business continues to grow.
I hope this post and series has been helpful. Let me know if you have any questions or thoughts in the comments below.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
