News
SolarCity poised for rapid growth as residential solar installations soar
The recent merger of Tesla and SolarCity introduces a new era in residential solar energy generation. With the demand for solar energy in the U.S. rising each year, benefits to both our environment and the nation’s economy increase. The trend toward residential solar installations does require efficient planning and execution of public policies. It also calls for analysis of the status of residential solar in order to move toward an enhanced solar integration across the U.S.
What does residential solar look like today in the U.S.?
Residential solar today is primarily a coastal phenomenon, although more than half of the states have enough residential solar to power at least a few thousand homes. Yet, in the third quarter of 2016, the U.S. surpassed all previous quarterly solar photovoltaic (PV) installation records: 4,143 megawatts (MW), or a rate of one megawatt (MW) every 32 minutes. That pace is even faster today, as the fourth quarter will surpass this past quarter’s historic total, according to the Solar Energies Industry Association (SEIA).
“The solar market now enjoys an economically-winning hand that pays off both financially and environmentally, and American taxpayers have noticed,” Tom Kimbis, SEIA’s interim president, said of the recent rise in residential solar. “With a 90 percent favorability rating and 209,000 plus jobs, the U.S. solar industry has proven that when you combine smart policies with smart 21st century technology, consumers and businesses both benefit.”
Here are the top five U.S. states with residential solar rooftops in September, 2016:
- California: 3,258 MW
- Arizona: 539 MW
- New York: 444 MW
- New Jersey: 386 MW
- Massachusetts: 361 MW
These levels are considered ample to power a significant number of homes in their regions.
What’s the potential for other states to increase residential solar in the near future?
In order to power more than a few thousand homes and to become a major energy source across America, solar saturation must become deeper across existing states and more widespread among states that currently provide limited residential solar. Rooftops provide a large expanse of untapped area for solar energy generation, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). What’s needed to reduce costs and losses often associated with transmission and distribution of electricity? Onsite distributed generation, such as that which is available from SolarCity and others. Yet, to create a paradigm in which onsite distributed generation can become a reality, different and sometimes dissonant potentials must be addressed.
Technical potential considers multiple factors in a given region, such as resource availability and quality, technical system performance, and the physical availability of a suitable area for development. In other words, it measures how much of the total resource can actually be captured. It is often the only area of focus when residential solar is discussed.
However, in order for solar to reduce pollution, help homeowners to lower utility bills and gain more energy independence, technical aspects of the larger solar equation must work in sync with resource, economic and market potential.
- Resource potential is the entire amount of energy in a particular form for the region;
- Economic potential is possible generation quantity that results as a positive return on the
investment of constructing the systems; and, - Market potential estimates the quantity of energy expected to be generated from the deployment of a technology into the market. It considers factors such as policies, competition with other technologies, and rate of adoption.
A study from the NREL indicates that, taking into account these four types of potential, there are broad regional trends in both the suitability and electric-generation possibilities of rooftops. Although only 26% of the total rooftop area on small buildings is suitable for PV deployment, the sheer number of buildings in this class gives small buildings the greatest technical potential.
What factors contribute to successful onsite distributed solar generation?
Small building rooftops could accommodate 731 GW of PV capacity and generate 926 TWh of PV energy annually, according to NREL, which represents approximately 65% of the total technical potential of rooftop PV. Think about how much energy could be generated by rooftop solar panels in each state if they were installed on all suitable roofs. Of course, the amount of suitable roof area, which takes into account factors such as shading, roof tilt, roof position, and roof size, must be included in any potential residential solar project planning.
The folks at SolarCity truly believe that, in every state, home rooftop solar could be a major energy resource. With research data backing their conclusions, they feel that U.S. total home solar capacity could increase 100 times over, and each state could meet 10-45% of its electricity needs from residential solar alone.
Add in roofs of medium and large buildings, and the solar integration number rises to 40 percent of all the electric demand in the continental U.S. By comparison, all rooftop solar today combined provides less than 0.5 percent of the nation’s electricity.
The potential for home rooftop solar to become a major energy source is enormous — in every state. And SolarCity argues that, the sooner that homes across the country become a part of that future, the more years they’ll have to enjoy its benefits.
Sources: Solar Energy Industries Association, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, SolarCity
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
