Connect with us

News

SolarCity Struggles: What Tesla? (Part 1)

Published

on

Tesla-Motors-Solar-City-Panels

SolarCity reference from TeslaMotors.com

Shortly after ordering my Tesla Model S I contacted SolarCity, as referred through TeslaMotors.com, with the premise that I would be getting solar panels installed on my property. I wrote about the positive sales process that I experienced and wanted to round out the rest of the story through a multi-part series.

Background

Tesla-Motors-Solar-City

Reference from TeslaMotors.com – ‘charging’ page

I live on a horse farm in Massachusetts. We have one address, but two electric meters for accounting purposes. So, when I signed up for SolarCity I actually signed up twice – once for each meter.

We receive two plans with separate systems sized for the needs of each meter. The initial house plan was for a system to generate 24,000 kWh/year while the system for the farm would generate 21,000 kWh/year.

That’s where we left off with the sales process before moving onto the design process. That’s when things started to go sideways.

“What Tesla?”

Despite the fact that I signed up through the Tesla Motors site and mentioned several times I was getting a Tesla Model S, the additional energy usage was not considered in any of the planning. I was naïve at the time and hadn’t thought about how much the Tesla would actually affect my energy usage, and if you thought the SolarCity folks would be well-versed in this, they weren’t.

SolarCity knew little about what the Tesla Model S would consume in power.

When you initially sign up with SolarCity they collect all sorts of data from you. They collect a years worth of prior electricity bills; they perform a thorough site survey; they take 360 degree pictures from your roof, and they do a home energy assessment. In my case this was done twice since I had two meters across the properties. The design process sounds impressive but it was flawed.

The home energy assessment is generic and not very tailored to your exact situation. They provide generic advice about getting more efficient appliances and energy efficient bulbs and electronic devices, which to me was pure common sense. SolarCity’s break-even analysis was based off of those generic recommendations which, to me, made no sense. They also missed the fact I was getting a Tesla in all of the planning. My electricity usage was already high to begin with, and now with a Tesla Model S that would be seeing at least 30k miles a year, the Tesla would be a significant factor in my future energy use. It turned out that I needed about 30% more solar capacity to cover the Tesla.

Advertisement

After pointing this out to them and going through another round of engineering design rework, we ended up with a plan for a 37,000 kWh/year system for the house.

Commitment

Before I dive into the struggles that were encountered throughout the process, it’s important to note that my proposed system costs upwards of $170,000 distributed over 20 years, but with no upfront costs. One of the sales folks said the proposed combined system would be the largest residential system in New England.

All of this should have tipped me off to the troubles that would follow. But I figured with Elon Musk backing SolarCity and the company’s perception as the fastest growing full-service solar company, I was in good hands since they knew what they were doing. I was wrong.

More on SolarCity’s execution challenges in the part 2 of this series.

Advertisement

"Rob's passion is technology and gadgets. An engineer by profession and an executive and founder at several high tech startups Rob has a unique view on technology and some strong opinions. When he's not writing about Tesla

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

SpaceX secures win as US labor board drops oversight case

The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX scored a legal victory after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided to dismiss a case which accused the company of terminating engineers who were involved in an open letter against founder Elon Musk. 

The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX. The update was initially shared by Bloomberg News, which cited a letter about the matter it reportedly reviewed.

In a letter to the former employees’ lawyers, the labor board stated that the affected employees were under the jurisdiction of the National Mediation Board (NMB), not the NLRB. As a result, the labor board stated that it was dismissing the case.

As per Danielle Pierce, a regional director of the agency, “the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction over the Employer and, therefore, I am dismissing your charge.”

Advertisement

The NMB typically oversees airlines and railroads. The NLRB, on the other hand, covers most private-sector employers, as well as manufacturers such as Boeing. 

The former SpaceX engineers have argued that the private space company did not belong under the NMB’s jurisdiction because SpaceX only offers services to “hand-picked customers.” 

In an opinion, however, the NMB stated that SpaceX was under its jurisdiction because “space transport includes air travel” to get to outer space. The mediation board also noted that anyone can contact SpaceX to secure its services.

SpaceX had previously challenged the NLRB’s authority in court, arguing that the agency’s structure was unconstitutional. Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB general counsel under former United States President Joe Biden, rejected SpaceX’s claims. Following Abruzzo’s termination under the Trump administration, however, SpaceX asked the labor board to reconsider its arguments. 

Advertisement

SpaceX is not the only company that has challenged the constitutionality of the NLRB. Since SpaceX filed its legal challenge against the agency in 2024, other high-profile companies have followed suit. These include Amazon, which has filed similar cases that are now pending.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla accuses IG Metall member of secretly recording Giga Berlin meeting

The union has denied the electric vehicle maker’s allegations.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Manufacturing/X

Police seized the computer of an IG Metall member at Tesla Giga Berlin on Tuesday amid allegations that a works council meeting was secretly recorded. 

The union has denied the electric vehicle maker’s allegations.

In a post on X, Gigafactory Berlin plant manager André Thierig stated that an external union representative from IG Metall attended a works council meeting and allegedly recorded the session. Thierig described the event as “truly beyond words.”

“What has happened today at Giga Berlin is truly beyond words! An external union representative from IG Metall attended a works council meeting. For unknown reasons he recorded the internal meeting and was caught in action! We obviously called police and filed a criminal complaint!” Thierig wrote in his post on X.

Advertisement

Police later confirmed to local news outlet rbb24 that officers did seize a computer belonging to an IG Metall member at the Giga Berlin site on Tuesday afternoon. Tesla stated that employees had contacted authorities after discovering the alleged recording.

IG Metall denied Tesla’s accusations, arguing that its representative did not record the meeting. The union alleged that Tesla’s claim was simply a tactic ahead of upcoming works council elections.

The next works council election at Giga Berlin is scheduled for March 2 to 4, 2026. The facility’s management had confirmed the dates to local news outlets. The official announcement marks the start of the election process and campaign period.

Approximately 11,000 employees are eligible to participate in the vote.

Advertisement

The previous works council election at the plant took place in 2024, and it was triggered by a notable increase in workforce size. Under German labor law, regular works council elections must be held every four years between March 1 and May 31.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s xAI plants flag in Bellevue AI hotspot

The lease places xAI’s new office in one of the region’s fastest-growing tech hubs.

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI has leased a full floor at Lincoln Square South in downtown Bellevue, WA, as per city permit filings. 

The lease places xAI’s new office in one of the region’s fastest-growing tech hubs.

Public records indicate that xAI leased roughly 24,800 square feet in Lincoln Square South. The location was previously occupied by video game company Epic Games. Lincoln Square South is part of the Bellevue Collection, which is owned by Kemper Development Co.

The lease was first referenced in January by commercial real estate firm Broderick Group, which noted that an unnamed tenant had secured the space, as stated in a report from the Puget Sound Business Journal. Later filings identified xAI as the occupant for the space.

Advertisement

xAI has not publicly commented on the lease.

xAI hinted at plans to open an office in the Seattle area back in September, when the startup posted job openings with salaries ranging from $180,000 to $440,000. At the time, the company had narrowed its location search to cities on the Eastside but had not finalized a lease.

xAI’s Bellevue expansion comes as Musk continues consolidating his businesses. Last week, SpaceX acquired xAI in a deal that valued the artificial intelligence startup at $250 billion. SpaceX itself is now valued at roughly $1.25 trillion and is expected to pursue an initial public offering (IPO) later this year.

Musk already has a significant presence in the region through SpaceX, which employs about 2,000 workers locally. That initiative, however, is focused largely on Starlink satellite development.

Advertisement

Bellevue has increasingly become a center for artificial intelligence companies. OpenAI has expanded its local office footprint to nearly 300,000 square feet. Data infrastructure firms such as Crusoe and CoreWeave have also established offices downtown.

Continue Reading