A Tesla Megapack is powering a large housing factory completely off-grid in Patterson, California, with energy from a large array of on-site, PVGraf solar panels. The factory isn’t connected to the local power grid, and this is the first time a Tesla Megapack has been deployed and running completely off-grid. The system has been operating without any issues since November.
S2A Modular, a tech company that manufactures modular homes, tiny houses, and more that run on direct-current (DC) power, owns the Tesla Megapack, and its president and cofounder, John Rowland, granted Teslarati an exclusive interview. The company is also in the business of addressing housing for the homeless as well as making luxury homes and single-family homes.
John Rowland, S2A Modular’s president, and cofounder, granted Teslarati an exclusive interview. He shared with Teslarati that the company has 35 facilities, with five currently under construction and Tesla Megapacks on order. The first one in Patterson, California, is completely off the grid, and John has been working with Tesla to monitor its progress.
The delivery and installation of the Tesla Megapack, John explained, was “very smooth.” All of the infrastructure was in place, and it only took a couple of days to install the battery.
John told Teslarati that the reason why he went with Tesla is that he is a huge fan of both Tesla and Elon Musk. Initially, he had planned to buy the Tesla PowerPacks but by the time the factory came to fruition, Tesla Megapacks were available. As a homebuilder, he wanted to build homes that run on batteries. John said that engineered and built the second off-grid Tesla-powered home in North America.
“When I built that home, I decided I wanted to scale and build homes that were meant to run on batteries because this is how that house was engineered and built. It was the lowest voltage, lowest amperage home on the planet.”
John realized that in order to scale, he would need a factory and wanted to take the same approach that he has taken to engineering and building the homes and “engineer and build a factory that was made to run off-grid.
The hundred thousand-square-foot factory has no gas, or propane, only graphene solar panels, and a Tesla Megapack. “And no connection to the electrical grid.”
John pointed out that he has had a good relationship with Tesla since 2015, and once the Megapacks were available, he ordered one for each of the facilities.
“We’ve got the first one in Patterson, California, and it’s been up and running a little over a month now. And it’s running like a champ. The whole factory’s powered off-grid, and it’s a huge success, so we’re looking to carry it over to our next facilities.”
John and his team and Tesla are monitoring the battery three times a day since it is completely off-grid. At first, there was a little hesitation on Tesla’s part for installing a completely off-grid Megapack, but John was able to win them over, and things are going smoothly.
“This is the first time that a Megapack was programmed to run off-grid. They’re set to take a trickle charge from the grid 24/7, and it took some convincing to get Tesla to allow us to do it this way. At first, they said, ‘you’re a couple of years ahead of us,’ but they finally agreed to allow us to do it, and now they’re using it as beta. They’re monitoring it just like we are.”
“One of Tesla’s head engineers that we work with told us that when we powered it up, it would take four days for our solar to charge the battery fully. We did it in seven and a half hours.”
John explained that the solar panels his company uses are made with specially manufactured graphene solar panels. “They’re the only company in the world using graphene, and they have 20 worldwide patents on it. At S2A, we paid and file our own UL( Underwriter Labs) to have our own UL-rated panel produced.”
When asked about feedback, John explained that he talks to Tesla’s engineers regularly and provides updates on the battery’s performance.
“It’s quite to our surprise It’s a 1.4-megawatt battery, and we’re able to keep it about 90% even with all of our equipment running. It’s really working better than our expectations.”
One thing John wasn’t expecting was the surplus of energy. He actually plans to connect the Megapack to the grid next year so that he can discharge the excess power and help take some of the burdens away from the local grid.
“Our inverters are shutting off every day because we’re producing more power than we can use. Our factory is actually net-positive, and we will start contributing back to the grid next year.”
“We’ve got the battery set right now–when it reaches 97% capacity, the inverter shuts down and stops producing power. We’ve been monitoring it three times a day, and it’s been shutting off every day. Even with the factory running at full speed, we still produce excess energy.”
John added that he also purchased the Tesla Semi and plans to use them to deliver homes to customers.
Disclosure: Johnna is a $TSLA shareholder and believes in Tesla’s mission.
Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.
Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
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
