News
Tesla partners up to expand Virtual Power Plant program in Texas
More Tesla Powerwall customers are coming to the distributed battery program in South-Central Texas.
Tesla is a part of a new energy partnership in Texas set to help expand the company’s Virtual Power Plant (VPP) program in the state, as announced by one energy provider this week.
In a press release on Monday, the Guadalupe Valley Electric Cooperative (GVEC) announced a partnership with Tesla and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) to participate in a utility-scale VPP pilot program. Dubbed the Aggregated Distributed Energy Resource (ADER), the pilot will utilize Tesla’s Powerwall home battery systems to create a distributed “battery” across owners, in order to help stabilize the grid and provide backup power in times of peak demand.
GVEC says the early ADER program has already registered around 17 MW of generation from Tesla’s Powerwall customers, and the utility provider’s Board President Gary Birdwell highlights how important the subject of energy storage is in today’s climate.
Tesla Energy’s Powerwall home battery is super underrated, and it has so much potential in areas that are typically affected by power outages.
Storm Watch alone will save lives.🌩️🏡🔋pic.twitter.com/9uVGTUXQol
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 18, 2025
“Consumer generated energy is quickly becoming an important resource for the Texas wholesale electricity market,” Birdwell said in a statement. “Cooperation between GVEC and Tesla, two prominent market participants, uniting to utilize their strengths for the common goal of building stability and resiliency of the grid is a strategic move.”
Through Tesla’s VPP programs, such as this one, Powerwall owners can essentially sell generated and stored electricity back to the grid when demand is high or the grid is facing outages. GVEC does this through what it calls the Peak-Time Payback (PTP) program, offering mutual support for customers and ERCOT grid operators.
The group describes itself as a cooperative group providing electricity and electrician services, solar and energy storage, internet, air conditioning and heating to over 130,000 customers in South-Central Texas across Cuero, Gonzales, La Vernia, Schertz and Seguin. GVEC says it officially became a certified Tesla battery installer in the region in 2019, adding that Powerwall installations have continued to increase in the years since.
“Tesla has been a major player in the ADER pilot program since its inception. They are a highly visible company with the capabilities and expertise to meet the robust participation requirements,” says Darren Schauer, GVEC General Manager and CEO. “As an additional benefit, GVEC has the ability to offer ancillary services directly onto the market. This means GVEC Powerwall members can now support the needs of the Texas grid while also creating a new revenue stream to reinforce the long-term financial strength of their member-owned cooperative.”
READ MORE ON TESLA’S VIRTUAL POWER PLANTS: Tesla invites LADWP customers to join its Virtual Power Plant
As of Q3 2024, Tesla said it had over 100,000 Powerwalls participating in its VPP programs globally, and the company also started rolling out its next-gen Powerwall 3 in markets around the world throughout last year. Along with Texas, Tesla currently has U.S. VPP programs being run or piloted in Northern and Southern California, Massachusetts, Puerto Rico and elsewhere, not to mention those in other multiple countries.
In November, Tesla’s team at Gigafactory Nevada also celebrated building over 1,000 Powerwall units in a single day. Months earlier in August, Giga Nevada crews reached a milestone of building 500 Powerwalls in one shift, as the company continues to ramp up production of the home-scale batteries.
Meanwhile, Tesla Energy’s portfolio is also backed by the Megapack grid-scale batteries, which have also been deployed worldwide. The company currently produces Megapacks at a factory in Lathrop, California, where it has been ramping production since launching in 2022, as well as a new facility in Shanghai, China, which went online last month. Tesla has also alluded to plans for a third “Megafactory,” which is reportedly being built in Texas.
Tesla ad shows EV and Powerwall customer saved 94% on electricity bill
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
