Connect with us

Energy

Tesla’s giant Moss Landing Megapack battery storage project: How is it doing now?

(Credit: EKMMetering/YouTube)

Published

on

Tesla’s Megapack farm in Moss Landing, California, has gone through quite a journey since the project was approved by the California Public Utilities Commission back in 2018. Comprised of 256 Megapacks, the 182.5 MW / 730 MWh installation would be capable of powering an estimated 136,500 homes for several hours during periods of high demand. The system is also upgradeable, with Tesla’s contract with PG&E suggesting that the battery could be ramped to 1.1 GWh in the future. 

Similar to Tesla’s other high-profile energy projects, the Moss Landing Megapack farm, also known as the Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage Facility, would enhance the grid’s reliability by addressing capacity deficiencies due to increased local energy demand. It would also participate in the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) markets, providing both energy and ancillary services. 

A Quick Background

It should be noted that the Megapack-powered Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage Facility is only one of four battery projects that were proposed by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). Among the four, three are owned and operated by a third party — only the Tesla-powered Elkhorn Battery is owned and operated by PG&E itself. As explained by Paul Doherty, a PG&E spokesperson, the utility has two underlying contracts with Tesla regarding the facility — an Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) agreement to build the battery farm, and a Long-Term Performance and Maintenance Agreement (LTPMA) that requires the EV maker to provide regular maintenance to the system for over 20 years. 

The Tesla-powered Elkhorn Battery is not the largest battery among the four systems proposed by PG&E. That honor goes to the Vistra Energy Storage Facility, which features a 300 MW / 1,200 MWh Phase 1 and a 100 MW / 400 MWh Phase 2 system. Unlike the Tesla Megapack farm, which was built on a 4.5-acre plot of land in Moss Landing, the Vistra Energy Storage Facility was built into what was previously a gas-fired power plant. Utilizing over several thousand TR1300 battery racks supplied by LG Energy Solution, Vistra’s big battery was a symbol of the change happening in California’s energy sector. 

Advertisement

Things, however, have not always been smooth sailing. 

Vistra’s Moss Landing Battery (seen in the left side of the photo) is a neighbor to the Tesla Megapack-powered Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage Facility. (Credit: Vistra)

Challenges Over the Years

Being a project involving Tesla, it was no surprise that entities emerged to oppose the Elkhorn Battery project. After the Tesla-powered battery storage project was opened to public submissions about its potential environmental impacts, the California Unions for Reliable Energy took it upon themselves to stop the initiative. The union argued that Monterey County failed to meet the standards of the California Environmental Quality Act since the county should have looked further into the possibility of Tesla’s batteries overheating and exploding. The group also warned that the Tesla batteries could potentially harm the purity of the groundwater at the Moss Landing area. 

These efforts proved to be in vain, however, as on February 2020, the Monterey County Planning Commission decided to approve the Tesla Megapack-powered Elkhorn Battery unanimously. Construction was set for late March, and expectations were high that it would take about one and a half years to complete. However, another speed bump for the project came in the form of the Covid-19 pandemic, which caused progress in the project to be delayed. Construction ultimately began in July 2020, and by early 2021, drone flyovers of the site showed that the Megapack installations were going smoothly. 

PG&E spokesperson Doherty has informed Teslarati that as of writing, all the Tesla Megapacks have been successfully installed. The system is “currently undergoing final testing and certification, and is anticipated to be operational before Summer 2022,” pending the results of its final tests. Granted, this represents a delay from the facility’s initial targets, but PG&E’s apparent intent on being extra cautious is understandable. 

An unexpected challenge for the batteries at Moss Landing came sometime last year, and while it did not involve the Tesla Megapack-powered Elkhorn Battery, it did result in energy storage projects being placed under a microscope. In early September 2021, a number of battery modules from the Phase 1 area of the Vistra Energy Storage Facility overheated, triggering the facility’s sprinkler systems. Local fire crews were sent to the site, and Vistra decided to shut down the Phase 1 zone until an investigation was completed. At this time, the Vistra Battery’s 100 MW / 400 MWh Phase 2 was just completed, so that part of the facility remained operational.

Advertisement

Unfortunately, the Vistra Battery’s Phase 2 area got involved in another overheating incident in February 2022. Similar to the incident in September 2021, the batteries in the Vistra facility’s Phase 2 area triggered a fire alarm. The local fire department attended to the facility once more, where they found roughly ten battery racks that were melted. This incident, which happened within five months since the September 2021 issue, caused the reactivation efforts for the Phase 1 area to be paused and Phase 2 to be shut down. This meant that the Vistra battery, at least until investigations are completed for both incidents, will likely remain offline

The Tesla Megapack farm in Moss Landing under construction. (Credit: EKMMetering/YouTube)

PG&E’s Tesla Megapack Management System

What is rather interesting about the Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage Facility is the fact that while it features Tesla’s flagship battery storage units, the Megapack batteries themselves would not be managed by software from the electric vehicle maker. Instead of Tesla’s Autobidder platform, PG&E has opted to utilize “Fluence’s AI-powered Trading Platform to provide optimization and market bidding services,” confirmed Doherty. 

Tesla’s Autobidder platform has been successfully operating at the Hornsdale Power Reserve (HPR) in South Australia, where it has effectively added competition to drive down energy prices in the area. But inasmuch as Autobidder is designed to work seamlessly with products like the Megapack, Fluence’s Trading Platform is pretty powerful and capable on its own. Seyed Madaeni, the chief digital officer of Fluence, expressed his optimism for the company’s AI-powered solution and its use in the Tesla-powered Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage Facility. 

“PG&E was one of the first utilities to appreciate the need for a sophisticated AI-enabled bidding technology to optimize its energy storage assets. This technology-agnostic software provides PG&E with a single tool that can optimize not only the Moss Landing project, but potentially entire portfolios of generation and storage resources to enhance affordability of resources. We are excited to work with PG&E to use advanced technology to improve the efficiency and reliability of the CAISO market and lower costs for California consumers,” Madaeni said

Future Expansions

While the Moss Landing batteries have faced their own fair share of challenges, PG&E remains extremely optimistic about energy storage as a whole. Depending on the success of the Tesla Megapack-powered Elkhorn Battery, the system could be expanded even further to 1.1 GWh. All signs seem to be pointing to this scenario, especially considering the state’s intense focus on sustainability. Interestingly enough, Tesla’s Megapacks courted some controversy themselves last year when one unit in the Victoria Big Battery in Australia caught fire during tests. The incident ultimately damaged two Megapack units, and it incited a lot of skepticism over the potential dangers of battery storage technology. 

Advertisement

If PG&E’s massive Tesla Megapack farm could prove itself as reliable as the now-iconic Powerpack-powered Hornsdale Power Reserve in South Australia, then the project could potentially accelerate the adoption of battery storage systems in the near future. PG&E definitely seems to be confident about the potential of battery storage solutions, with the utility moving forward with Vistra on plans to expand the Vistra Battery even further. 

Vistra spokesperson Meranda Cohn has stated that the incidents from September 2021 and February 2022 would not impact the companies’ push to move forward with its battery project. PG&E spokesperson Doherty was on the same page, telling the Monterey County Weekly that he has “full confidence” in the project and that an analysis of the incidents in September 2021 and February 222 revealed that the batteries were actually not at fault. The PG&E spokesperson further noted that the utility is committed to “advancing the field of fire safety at battery storage facilities,” which could be highlighted by the fact that it was awarded for its fire safety work at its Tesla-powered Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage Facility. 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations

Tesla’s new Supercharger for Business calculator reveals an eye-opening all-in cost and location-based ROI projections.

Published

on

By

tesla v4 supercharger

Tesla has launched an online calculator for its Supercharger for Business program, giving property owners their first transparent look at what it really costs to install Superchargers on site and what kind of return they can expect.

The program itself launched in September 2025, allowing businesses to purchase and operate Supercharger hardware on their own property while Tesla handles installation, maintenance, software, and 24/7 driver support. As Teslarati reported at launch, hosts also get their logo placed on the chargers and their location integrated into Tesla’s in-car navigation, meaning drivers are actively routed there. The stalls are open to all EVs, not just Teslas.


The new online calculator, announced by Tesla on Wednesday with the note that “simplicity and transparency” have been a problem in the industry, lets any business enter a U.S. address and get a real cost and revenue model. A standard 8-stall V4 Supercharger site runs approximately $500,000 in hardware and $55,000 per post for installation, bringing an all-in price just shy of $1 million. Tesla charges a flat $0.10 per kWh fee to cover software, billing, and network operations. Businesses set their own retail price and keep the margin above that fee.

Tesla expands its branded ‘For Business’ Superchargers

 

Taking a look at Tesla’s Supercharger for Business online calculator, we can see that ROI is not uniform, and the gap between a strong location and a poor one can stretch the breakeven point by several years.

The biggest driver is foot traffic and how long people stay. A busy rest station, hotel, or outlet mall brings in repeat visitors who need to charge while they’re already stopped, pushing utilization numbers higher and shortening payback time.

Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator

Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator

Local electricity rates matter just as much on the cost side. Markets like California carry some of the highest commercial electricity rates in the country, which eats into the margin between what a host pays per kWh and what they charge drivers. At the same time, dense urban areas with high EV adoption tend to support higher retail charging prices, which can offset that cost if demand is strong enough. Weather also plays a role. Cold climates reduce battery efficiency and increase charging frequency, but they can also suppress utilization in winter months if drivers avoid stopping in exposed outdoor locations. Suburban and rural sites face a different problem: lower baseline EV traffic, which means a site with cheaper power and lower operating costs can still take longer to pay back simply because the stalls sit idle more often. Tesla’s calculator uses real fleet data to pre-fill utilization estimates by ZIP code, so businesses can run their specific address against these variables rather than relying on averages.

The program has seen real adoption. Wawa, already the largest host of Tesla Superchargers with over 2,100 stalls across 223 locations, opened its first fully owned and branded site in Alachua, Florida earlier this year. Francis Energy of Oklahoma and the city of Alpharetta, Georgia have also deployed branded stations through the program, as Teslarati covered in January.

Tesla now exceeds 80,000 Supercharger stalls worldwide, and the calculator makes the economic case for accelerating that number through private investment rather than company-owned sites alone.

Continue Reading

Energy

Tesla’s newest “Folding V4 Superchargers” are key to its most aggressive expansion yet

Tesla’s folding V4 Supercharger ships 33% more per truck, cuts deployment time and cost significantly.

Published

on

By

Tesla V4 Supercharger installation ramping in Europe

Tesla is rolling out a folding V4 Supercharger design, an engineering change that allows 33% more units to fit on a single delivery truck, cuts deployment time in half, and reduces overall installation cost by roughly 20%.

The folding mechanism addresses one of the least glamorous but most consequential bottlenecks in charging infrastructure: getting hardware from factory floor to job site efficiently. By collapsing the form factor for transit and unfolding into an operational configuration on arrival, the new design dramatically reduces the logistics overhead that has historically slowed Supercharger rollouts, particularly at large or remote sites where multiple units are needed simultaneously.

The timing aligns with a broader acceleration in Tesla’s network strategy. In March 2026, Tesla’s Gigafactory New York produced its final V3 Supercharger cabinet after more than seven years and 15,000 units, pivoting entirely to V4 cabinet production. The V4 cabinet itself is already a generational leap, delivering up to 500 kW per stall for passenger vehicles and up to 1.2 MW for the Tesla Semi, while supporting twice the stalls per cabinet at three times the power density of its predecessor. The folding transport innovation layers logistical efficiency on top of that technical foundation.

Tesla launches first ‘true’ East Coast V4 Supercharger: here’s what that means

Tesla Charging’s Director Max de Zegher, commenting on the V4 cabinet when it launched, captured the operational philosophy behind these changes: “Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.” The design philosophy has always been about maximizing real-world throughput, not just peak specs, and the folding transport upgrade extends that thinking into the supply chain itself.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla’s $2.9 billion bet: Why Elon Musk is turning to China to build America’s solar future

Tesla looks to bring solar manufacturing to the US, with latest $2.9 billion bet to acquire Chinese solar equipment.

Published

on

By

Tesla is reportedly in talks to purchase $2.9 billion worth of solar manufacturing equipment from a group of Chinese suppliers, including Suzhou Maxwell Technologies, which is the world’s largest producer of screen-printing equipment used in solar cell production. According to Reuters sources, the equipment is expected to be delivered before autumn and shipped to Texas, where Tesla plans to anchor its next phase of domestic solar production.

The move is a direct extension of a vision Elon Musk has been building for months. At the World Economic Forum in Davos this past January, Musk announced that both Tesla and SpaceX were independently working to establish 100 gigawatts of annual solar manufacturing capacity inside the United States. Days later, on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call, he made the ambition concrete: “We’re going to work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.”

Job postings on Tesla’s website reflect that same target, with language explicitly calling for 100 GW of “solar manufacturing from raw materials on American soil before the end of 2028.”

Tesla job description for Staff Manufacturing Development Engineer, Solar Manufacturing

Tesla job listing for Staff Manufacturing Development Engineer, Solar Manufacturing

The urgency behind the latest solar manufacturing target is rooted in a set of rapidly emerging pressures related to AI and Tesla’s own energy business. U.S. power consumption hit its second consecutive record high in 2025 and is projected to climb further through 2026 and 2027, driven largely by the explosion in AI data centers and the broader electrification of transportation. Tesla’s own energy division, which produces the Megapack utility-scale battery storage system, has been growing rapidly, and solar supply is a critical companion component for the business to scale. Musk has argued that solar is not just a clean energy option but the only one that makes economic sense at the scale AI infrastructure demands.

Tesla lands in Texas for latest Megapack production facility

Ironically, the path to domestic solar independence currently runs through China. Sort of.

Despite Tesla’s stated push to localize its supply chain, mirrored recently by the company’s plan for a $4.3 billion LFP battery manufacturing partnership with LG Energy Solution in Michigan, Tesla still relies on China-based suppliers to keep its cost structure intact.

The $2.9 billion equipment deal underscores a tension Musk himself acknowledged at Davos: “Unfortunately, in the U.S. the tariff barriers for solar are extremely high and that makes the economics of deploying solar artificially high, because China makes almost all the solar.” Building the factory in America requires buying the machinery from the country Tesla is trying to reduce its dependence on.

Tesla named by U.S. Gov. in $4.3B battery deal for American-made cells

The regulatory pathway adds another layer of complexity. Suzhou Maxwell has been seeking export approval from China’s commerce ministry, and it remains unclear how quickly that clearance will come. Still, the market has already reacted, with shares in the Chinese firms reportedly involved in the talks surged more than 7% following the Reuters report that broke the story.

Whether Tesla can hit its 2028 target of 100GW of solar manufacturing remains an open question. Though that scale may seem staggering, especially in such a short timeframe, we know that Musk has a documented history of “always pulling it off” in the face of ambitious deadlines that may slip. But, rest assured – it’ll get done.

Continue Reading