News
Tesla Model S Charging Costs in Australia
Tesla Motors seen as a key sponsor of Web Directions in Sydney, Australia.
More than 2 years after the it first went on sale in the US the Model S arrived in Australia in late December 2014. As an early owner of the Model S the car generates a lot of interest from friends, neighbours and the general public when you’re out and about. One of the most common questions is how much does it cost to run. We need a new language to describe this as litre’s per 100km doesn’t work and a “full tank” in a Model S is less than a normal tank in a modern petrol car. The answer I find people find easiest to understand is $11 for a full charge which lasts for around 500kms.
Compared to a petrol car this is great, current models will give you 500 – 1000kms from a tank but you’ll spend $50 to $100 to fill them up (at the current, and relatively cheap fuel prices).
Victorian Government’s initiative called for an expansive roll out of digital smart meters across residential and small businesses. Source: Energy Australia
To understand where the $11 comes from let’s dig into electricity pricing in Australia a little more. Historically homes have been configured with analog meters. All the power we use is charged at a flat rate day and night. Optionally an off peak circuit was often installed which was only connected to the hot water service. Available into two variants supply is remotely controlled by the electricity company for circa 6 or 12 hours per day.
More recently smart meters are being installed on new dwellings and with consumers that have added solar photovoltaics to their home. In certain states such as Victoria blanket rollouts of smart meters have been known to occur. Once installed electricity is charged on tariffs that vary across different times of the day for weekdays and weekends. Tariffs vary across networks but generally consist of a peak morning or late afternoon & evening period, shoulder during the remaining waking hours on weekdays and across the weekend and off peak for overnight.
Charging Costs and Meter Options in Australia
For both analog and smart meters the difference in tariffs between their maximum and minimum are material. From a low of circa $0.10/kWh on off peak to a high of $0.50/kWh in peak periods.
RELATED: EV Basics: What’s a killowat hour?
Analog Meter
- If you’re on an analog meter you can wire your charger to a standard circuit and charge at any time, or choose one of the two controlled load circuits to get cheaper power but with less control. Note that you can’t mix standard and controlled circuits so you’ll have to choose one or the other. Having the electric company control when to supply your electricity may not work for you if you plan on taking consistent high length trips in your Model S each day. Especially since you’ll likely require a nightly charge with a guarantee of no interruption.
Smart Meter
- If you’re on a smart meter, find out what time your off peak starts, configure your Tesla Model S to start charging at this time, plug in every night and you’ll almost certainly be charging on the cheapest power all the time. The off peak periods are long enough to get a full charge on a standard 32 Amp charger for all but the most depleted of batteries. On the rare occasion that you can’t complete your charge during the off peak period you’ll simply push the small remaining part into a shoulder or peak tariff.
A smart meter provides much greater flexibility, but the real cost of changing from an analog needs to take into consideration your whole home.
The average Australian home uses around 20kWh of electricity per day or and the average vehicle travels 270kms per week. In Model S terms this equates to 140 kWh per week on your home and 55-65 kWh per week to charge the car.
Obviously these figures vary enormously depending on your personal home and driving habits but car charging is likely to remain the smaller part.
What about charging from solar? Everyone that has solar has a smart meter and hence the ability to control the price they pay for the electricity which is used for charging their car. Households that installed solar early are on feed-in tariffs which pay them for all or just the excess power that they produce. In the majority of cases these rates are much higher than the cheapest power available over night. Those that aren’t on solar power are mostly being paid feed in tariffs which are only marginally lower than the price they pay for power over night.
ALSO SEE: One Telsa owner’s journey with installing photovoltaic cells through SolarCity
Most users will be better off using their solar in their home or selling it then buying cheap power overnight to charge their car. There are certainly users for whom it would be cheaper to charge from the power generated through their solar system, but the cost and complexity of making it work is unlikely to stack up. Some form of power router is needed that can take into account usage by other appliances in your home, the tariffs, the amount of charge your car needs each day and the potentially intermittent supply of sun on any given day.
LEARN MORE: How to reduce your electricity usage at home in Australia?
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
