Energy
Tesla’s giant Moss Landing Megapack battery storage project: How is it doing now?
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.
Things, however, have not always been smooth sailing.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tesla just trademarked ‘MEGAPOD’ with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), its latest move in what seems to be a hint that the company is incredibly focused on its AI efforts and storage needs as compute increases.
The application carries serial number 99893717 and lists the applicant as Tesla, Inc., located at 1 Tesla Road, Austin, Texas 78725.
The filing remains in ‘live pending’ status, and it is a new application waiting for assignment to an examining attorney. It has not yet been published or registered.
Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD
Summary:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and… pic.twitter.com/3l85DsKadl— Robin (@xdNiBoR) June 19, 2026
According to the official goods and services description in the application, Tesla describes ‘MEGAPOD’ as:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and cooling systems, sold as a unit; self-contained modular computing hardware systems for artificial intelligence workloads; integrated computer hardware platforms for artificial intelligence computing, namely, enclosures containing computer hardware, power distribution hardware, and cooling hardware, sold as a unit; downloadable software for monitoring, managing, optimizing, and regulating modular artificial intelligence computing hardware systems.”
This description specifies complete, self-contained modular units that integrate servers and specialized AI processing hardware with networking components, power distribution, and cooling systems. It also includes associated downloadable software for oversight and optimization of these systems. The language emphasizes hardware sold “as a unit” and enclosures that combine the necessary elements for AI computing workloads.
Tesla has an established history of developing and commercializing modular hardware systems. Its Megapack product line, for example, consists of utility-scale battery energy storage systems designed as containerized units for grid applications. The MEGAPOD filing follows a similar pattern of protecting a name for modular, integrated hardware platforms, this time focused on artificial intelligence computing infrastructure.
This could be an early move, especially as Tesla did not have trademark rights to the word ‘Cybercab,’ the name of its self-driving, ride-hailing-focused vehicle.
Trademark applications of this type allow companies to secure priority rights to a name for defined categories of goods and services. The USPTO examines applications for compliance with legal requirements, including distinctiveness and absence of conflicts with prior marks. If the application proceeds successfully through examination, publication, and any opposition period, it could result in a federal trademark registration providing nationwide protection. This is what Tesla’s obvious intention is with ‘MEGAPOD.’
Public reports and analysis suggest MEGAPOD could represent modular, container-style AI computing pods designed for easy deployment. These would bundle servers, AI accelerators, power systems, and cooling into self-contained units suitable for distributed AI workloads. This approach aligns with Tesla’s announced AI compute strategy.
In March 2026, Elon Musk outlined plans for “Digital Optimus” (also referred to as Macrohard), a joint Tesla-xAI project for AI agents capable of handling complex digital tasks. The plans include running these agents on Tesla’s AI4 hardware in parked vehicles as well as dedicated compute units installed at Supercharger stations, which collectively offer substantial unused electrical capacity.
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
A modular hardware platform like the one described in the ‘MEGAPOD’ filing would support scalable, rapid deployment of such distributed compute resources. It could complement Tesla’s other AI infrastructure efforts, including the Dojo supercomputer used for training models and the development of AI systems for autonomous driving and robotics, by enabling edge or regional AI inference without reliance on traditional centralized data centers.
In a notable intersection of Big Tech powerhouses, Meta, led by Mark Zuckerberg, has partnered with Canadian energy infrastructure giant Enbridge on a significant renewable energy initiative that will rely on battery technology from Elon Musk’s Tesla.
The project, which was announced this week, marks another step in Meta’s aggressive push to power its expanding data center operations with clean energy, dispelling many of the complaints people have about them.
This new development is located near Cheyenne, Wyoming, and will feature a 365-megawatt (MW) solar farm paired with a 200 MW/1,600 megawatt-hour (MWh) battery energy storage system, also known as BESS. Tesla is providing the batteries for the project, valued at roughly $200 million.
The story was originally reported by Utility Dive.
This Wyoming project represents the first phase of Enbridge and Meta’s joint “Cowboy Project.” Once operational, it will deliver power to Meta’s regional data centers through Cheyenne Light, Fuel, and Power under Wyoming’s Large Power Contract Service tariff.
This tariff, originally developed in collaboration with Microsoft and Black Hills Energy, is designed specifically for large loads like data centers. It ensures that the renewable supply serves hyperscale customers without impacting retail electricity rates for other users.
The battery system will operate under a long-term tolling agreement, providing dispatchable capacity that enhances grid reliability. During periods of high demand, the utility can access the backup generation, addressing one of the key challenges of integrating large-scale renewables with the explosive growth of data center electricity demand driven by artificial intelligence.
This latest collaboration builds on prior joint efforts between Enbridge and Meta in Texas, including the 600 MW Clear Fork Solar, 152 MW Easter Wind, and 300 MW Cone Wind projects. Together with the Wyoming initiative, the companies have now partnered on roughly 1.6 gigawatts (GW) of combined solar, wind, and storage capacity.
The deal highlights the intensifying demand for reliable, low-carbon power from technology giants. Meta has committed to supporting its data center growth with renewable energy, joining peers like Microsoft and Google in seeking large-scale solutions. Enbridge’s Allen Capps described the project as “one of the larger utility-scale battery installations supporting U.S. data center operations and growth.”
The involvement of Tesla’s battery technology adds an intriguing layer, linking two of the world’s most prominent tech leaders—Zuckerberg and Musk—in the clean energy transition.
As data centers continue to drive unprecedented electricity load growth across the United States, projects like this one illustrate how hyperscalers are turning to strategic partnerships with traditional energy players and innovative storage solutions to meet both sustainability goals and reliability needs.
Elon Musk
Why SpaceX just made a $60 billion bet on AI coding ahead of historic IPO
SpaceX has secured an option to acquire Cursor AI for $60 billion ahead of its historic IPO.
SpaceX announced today it has struck a deal with AI coding startup Cursor, securing the option to acquire the company outright for $60 billion later this year, while committing $10 billion for joint development work in the interim. The announcement described the partnership as building “the world’s best coding and knowledge work AI,” and comes just days after Cursor was separately reported to be raising $2 billion at a valuation above $50 billion.
The move makes strategic sense given where each company currently stands. Cursor currently pays retail prices to Anthropic and OpenAI to the same companies competing directly against it with Claude Code and Codex. That means every dollar of revenue Cursor earns partially funds its own competition. With SpaceX bringing computational infrastructure to the Cursor platform, that could reduce Cursor’s dependence on OpenAI and Anthropic’s Claude AI as its providers. Access to SpaceX’s Colossus supercomputer, with compute equivalent to one million Nvidia H100 chips, gives Cursor the infrastructure to run and train its own models at a scale it could never afford independently. That one change restructures the entire unit economics of the business.
Elon Musk teases crazy outlook for xAI against its competitors
Cursor’s $2 billion in annualized revenue and enterprise reach across more than half of Fortune 500 companies gives SpaceX something its xAI subsidiary currently lacks, which is a proven, fast-growing software business with real enterprise distribution.
For Cursor, SpaceX’s $10 billion in joint development funding is transformational. Cursor raised $3.3 billion across all of 2025 to reach that $2 billion in revenue. A single $10 billion commitment from SpaceX, even as a development payment rather than an acquisition, dwarfs everything Cursor has raised in its entire existence. That capital accelerates product development, enterprise sales infrastructure, and proprietary model training simultaneously.
The timing is deliberate. SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC on April 1, 2026, targeting a June listing at a $1.75 trillion valuation, in what would be the largest public offering in history. The company is expected to begin its roadshow the week of June 8, with Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, and Morgan Stanley serving as underwriters. Adding Cursor to the portfolio before that roadshow gives IPO investors a concrete enterprise software revenue story to price in, alongside rockets and satellite internet.
The deal also addresses a weakness that became visible after February’s xAI merger. Several xAI co-founders departed following that acquisition, and SpaceX had already hired two Cursor engineers, signaling where its AI talent strategy was heading. Cursor, for its part, faces a pricing disadvantage competing against Anthropic’s Claude Code.
Whether SpaceX exercises the full acquisition option before its IPO or after remains the open question. Either way, this deal reshapes what investors will be buying into when SpaceX goes public.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Tesla’s strong Q2 deliveries: Four key drivers behind the surprise
