Connect with us

Energy

Tesla’s Powerpack battery farm starts killing fossil fuel backup plants in Australia

Published

on

Since going online last year, Tesla’s Powerpack farm in South Australia has established a reputation for being a quick, clean, and efficient backup to the region’s beleaguered energy grid. As the big battery continues to prove its critics wrong, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has announced that it would no longer be needing the services of several fossil fuel-powered plants, which supported the grid prior to the arrival of the Tesla Powerpack Farm. 

AEMO’s recent initiative closes the page on a three-year-old requirement for 35 MW of Frequency Control Ancillary Services (FCAS) to be provided in South Australia during instances when the state’s grid is at risk of separating from the national grid, ensuring that the state’s grid could operate safely and securely by itself. In an announcement on Thursday, the AEMO acknowledged that the energy landscape in the region has changed during the past year. 

“The operation of SA has changed significantly over the past 12 months. Synchronous unit requirements (for SA system strength) and the installation of the Hornsdale battery have ensured regulation FCAS is more readily available post-islanding of SA. Hence this requirement is no longer considered necessary,” AEMO noted.

Prior to the installation of the Tesla Powerpack farm, the local providers of FCAS turned the South Australian energy grid into a booming business. The providers, which utilize fossil fuel-powered plants, kept the price of FCAS in the state extremely high, rising nearly 100-fold to the market cap of $14,000/MWh. At one point, the cost of South Australia’s FCAS rose to around $6 million a day, and considering the strain on the region’s energy grid; the state ended up paying more than $100 million in 2016 and 2017.

Advertisement

The Tesla big battery, officially named as the Hornsdale Power Reserve, disrupted the market when it went online. With the Powerpack farm present, gas generators were unable to dictate the price of backup energy services. The battery farm also proved that it was quicker, more flexible, more accurate, and even more cost-effective than fossil fuel-powered plants.

The Powerpack farm’s capabilities were put to the test in late August, after twin lightning strikes resulted in the failure of two major transmission lines linking Queensland and New South Wales. The results of the lightning strikes were notable — the South Australia and Queensland grids were separated and there were widespread power losses in NSW, Tasmania, and Victoria. In South Australia, there was no loss of power, and no failure of generators due to the fast response of the Tesla Powerpack farm.

The feats of the Horsndale Power Reserve has triggered an energy movement in Australia, becoming the frontliner in AEMO’s contingencies against major faults and disturbances to the grid. New battery-based projects are currently underway in several other areas, such as Dalrymple North in South Australia, at the Ganawarra solar farm, and a Ballarat network junction in Victoria. In a statement to Renew Economy, Christian Schaefer, AEMO’s head of system capability, noted that the region’s move away from fossil fuel-powered backup plants is a step in the right direction.

“This is a good news story. The work that our engineers in the AEMO team have done shows that we can continue to operate South Australia in a stable and secure manner. Hornsdale has had a significant impact on the South Australia system, and we have got new batteries coming online with Victoria and South Australia. That is really positive. It shows that all parts of the industry  — networks, generators, the renewable sector, battery providers and regulators — are getting behind this and showing an interest in what has been done,” he said.

Tesla Energy does not make as many headlines as the company’s electric car business, but the business is in a constant process of growth. In a recent statement, billionaire investor Ron Baron noted that he expects Tesla’s electric car and energy business to be equally worth $500 billion each by 2030. Tesla CTO JB Straubel, for his part, has previously teased that Tesla Energy is indeed going after backup peaker plants.

Advertisement

“I think what we’ll see is we won’t build many new peaker plants, if any. Already what we’re seeing happening is the number of new ones being commissioned is drastically lower, and batteries are already outcompeting natural gas peaker plants,” Straubel said.

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 just trademarked MEGAPOD: here’s what it is

Published

on

tesla showroom
(Credit: Tesla)

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.

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.”

Advertisement

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.’

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Energy

Zuckerberg’s Meta taps Musk’s Tesla for massive clean energy project

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading