Connect with us

Energy

Tesla and Walmart address lawsuit in joint statement

(Credit: Solar Energy Industries Association)

Published

on

After a wake of headlines quick to paint Tesla Energy as an irresponsible solar power company proliferated, it appears there’s more to the story of Walmart’s lawsuit against the all-electric car maker, particularly with regard to Tesla’s attempts to resolve the issues involved. A joint statement released this morning indicates the two parties will be working together to resolve their legal disputes amicably; however, after further review of the parties’ case history and Walmart’s conduct throughout, their statement seems to merely reiterate a problem that has been unresolved since the start of the two companies’ problems with one another.

Walmart and Tesla Joint Statement

“Walmart and Tesla look forward to addressing all issues and re-energizing Tesla solar installations at Walmart stores, once all parties are certain that all concerns have been addressed.

Tesla’s solar installations currently occupy 248 Walmart locations across the United States, and seven have been the subject of roof fires: One each in 2012, 2016, and 2017; three between March and May of 2018; and one in November 2018. Walmart’s lawsuit involving these instances claims serious negligence and makes damning assertions against Tesla, as to be expected by the plaintiff any lawsuit. Their claims against Tesla include, among many things, that millions of damages have resulted from the fires, that their private inspections of the solar systems reveal widespread negligence and shoddy installations, and that Tesla has refused to provide them with a final ‘root cause’ of the fires.

Seven fires are certainly a cause for concern, and Walmart is justified in some of its remediation requests from Tesla as a result: All of the systems were de-energized while inspections were ongoing, for one, and Tesla agreed to pay for the damages resulting from the fires. From Tesla’s own inspections, there were definitely issues with whichever employees – Tesla’s directly or contractors – were in charge of the installations and maintenance which, unfortunately, did not receive the attention they needed until after major events occurred.

Advertisement

 

However, what’s been left out of the discussion about Walmart’s lawsuit is the role Tesla played throughout the two companies’ ongoing efforts to resolve the issues and Walmart’s lack of willingness to cooperate even after agreeing to certain remediations. Exhibit 249 of the suit, containing a letter from Tesla’s legal counselors to their Walmart counterparts written on July 29, 2019, indicate that even after both Tesla’s and Walmart’s independent inspections of several sites determined their safety and suitability for re-energizing, Walmart still would not agree to return them to service. Instead, Walmart demanded that all of their solar agreements be amended to make Tesla liable for issues that could, for example, be the fault of Walmart’s own negligence or misconduct. If Tesla did not agree to the ‘take it or leave it’ agreement, Walmart would prevent Tesla from re-energizing any of the systems in their previously signed contracts.

Further written in Tesla’s letter was the detailed recount of how ongoing negotiations were continuously stalled by Walmart, how further inspections continued alongside Walmart’s independent inspectors, and how dozens of sites were approved for re-energizing, all without Walmart budging on its position that Tesla accept its terms ‘or else.’ At one point, Tesla wasn’t able to review Walmart’s inspector’s reviews because the company had stopped paying their salary and thus both the inspector and Walmart were ‘unable to release them’ to Tesla. As a final note, although not the final conclusion made in Tesla’s letter, was that at no point did Walmart ask Tesla for a ‘root cause’ of the original fires which prompted the entire issue to begin with. Further, Walmart’s inspectors had provided their final conclusions, though they were not shared with Tesla.

Advertisement

Here are two quotes from the letter expressing Tesla’s frustration with the process:

“My client has had enough. Walmart cannot negotiate (and renegotiate) a protocol for inspection; then try to impose new, extra-contractual conditions on the exercise of Tesla’s contractual rights; then invite negotiation over those improper, unreasonable conditions; and then refuse to negotiate. Walmart has unfortunately wasted time and diverted resources while undermining the goodwill that Tesla had sought to preserve throughout this process.” (p. 8)

“We also disagree with Walmart’s contention that its consultants have ‘confirm[ed] Tesla’s systemic, widespread breaches and negligence.’ The parties’ Agreements anticipate that the systems will require periodic maintenance and repair in a manner that is entirely customary within the solar power industry. The fact that some sites in fact need maintenance and repair – especially sites that have been idle for a year now – is neither surprising nor a breach of any Agreement. The fact that thorough, comprehensive inspections have identified areas for improvement and opportunities for error correction is equally unsurprising. Tesla welcomes the chance to improve its processes, tools, and monitoring, but that too is not evidence of any breach.” (pp. 11-12)

From reviewing both the lawsuit and Tesla’s letter addressing it, it seems that at the core of Walmart’s litigation is the desire to a) break its financial ties with Tesla, which included paying Tesla for the power its solar systems generated; b) recover the damages the fires caused to Walmart’s stores, which Tesla already agreed to; and c) force Tesla to remove all of its solar installations rather than allow for previously agreed to repairs and stringent inspections involving private consultants of Walmart’s choosing.

There are certainly instances where Tesla needed to take action in these cases, and it appears they have and are continually willing to do so under very stringent and expensive conditions. It is hard, though, to see where Walmart’s reaction isn’t overblown considering the risks of anything involving electrical installations or in industry in general. Tesla’s letter cited ten instances of Walmart fires that were completely unrelated to their solar installations to make this point.

Advertisement

Whatever Walmart’s intentions, there is a message forming for any future would-be solar power companies wanting to do business with the enterprise in the future: Beware. If the opportunity to renege on an agreement comes up, no matter how willing the other party is to cooperate, Walmart money and power will decide the new terms no matter what.

Read Tesla’s notice of breach of contract to Walmart below.

Walmart Inc v Tesla Energy … by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

Advertisement

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Energy

Tesla inks multi-billion-dollar deal with LG Energy Solution to avoid tariff pressure

Tesla has reportedly secured a sizable partnership with LGES for LFP cells, and there’s an extra positive out of it.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has reportedly inked a multi-billion-dollar deal with LG Energy Solution in an effort to avoid tariff pressure and domesticate more of its supply chain.

Reuters is reporting that Tesla and LGES, a South Korean battery supplier of the automaker, signed a $4.3 billion deal for energy storage system batteries. The cells are going to be manufactured by LGES at its U.S. factory located in Michigan, the report indicates. The batteries will be the lithium iron phosphate, or LFP, chemistry.

Tesla delivers 384,000 vehicles in Q2 2025, deploys 9.6 GWh in energy storage

It is a move Tesla is making to avoid buying cells and parts from overseas as the Trump White House continues to use tariffs to prioritize domestic manufacturing.

LGES announced earlier today that it had signed a $4.3 billion contract to supply LFP cells over three years to a company, but it did not identify the customer, nor did the company state whether the batteries would be used in automotive or energy storage applications.

Advertisement

The deal is advantageous for both companies. Tesla is going to alleviate its reliance on battery cells that are built out of the country, so it’s going to be able to take some financial pressure off itself.

For LGES, the company has reported that it has experienced slowed demand for its cells in terms of automotive applications. It planned to offset this demand lag with more projects involving the cells in energy storage projects. This has been helped by the need for these systems at data centers used for AI.

During the Q1 Earnings Call, Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja confirmed that the company’s energy division had been impacted by the need to source cells from China-based suppliers. He went on to say that the company would work on “securing additional supply chain from non-China-based suppliers.”

It seems as if Tesla has managed to secure some of this needed domestic supply chain.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Energy

Tesla Shanghai Megafactory produces 1,000th Megapack for export to Europe

The Shanghai Megafactory was able to hit this milestone less than six months after it started producing the Megapack. 

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Asia/X

Tesla Energy has announced a fresh milestone for its newest Megapack factory. As per the electric vehicle maker, the Shanghai Megafactory has successfully produced its 1,000th Megapack battery. 

The facility was able to hit this milestone less than six months after it started producing the grid-scale battery system. 

New Tesla Megapack Milestone

As per Tesla Asia in a post on its official accounts on social media platform X, the 1,000th Megapack unit that was produced at the Shanghai Megafactory would be exported to Europe. As noted in a CNEV Post report, Tesla’s energy products are currently deployed in over 65 countries and regions globally. This allows Tesla Energy to compete in energy markets that are both emerging and mature.

To commemorate the 1,000th Megapack produced at the Shanghai Megafactory, the Tesla China team posted with the grid-scale battery with celebratory balloons that spelled “Megapack 1000.” The milestone was celebrated by Tesla enthusiasts on social media, especially since the Shanghai Megafactory only started its operations earlier this year.

Quick Megafactory Ramp

The Shanghai Megafactory, similar to Tesla’s other key facilities in China, was constructed quickly. The facility started its construction on May 23, 2024, and it was hailed as Tesla’s first entry storage project outside the United States. Less than a year later, on February 11, 2025, the Shanghai Megafactory officially started producing Megapack batteries. And by March 21, 2025, Tesla China noted that it had shipped the first batch of Megapack batteries from the Shanghai plant to foreign markets.

Advertisement

While the Shanghai Megafactory is still not at the same level of output as Tesla’s Lathrop Megafactory, which produces about 10,000 Megapacks per year, its ramp seems to be quite steady and quick. It would then not be surprising if Tesla China announces the Shanghai Megafactory’s 2,000th Megapack milestone in the coming months.

Continue Reading

Energy

Tesla launches first Virtual Power Plant in UK – get paid to use solar

Tesla has launched its first-ever Virtual Power Plant program in the United Kingdom.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Energy | X

Tesla has launched its first-ever Virtual Power Plant program in the United Kingdom. This feature enables users of solar panels and energy storage systems to sell their excess energy back to the grid.

Tesla is utilizing Octopus Energy, a British renewable energy company that operates in multiple markets, including the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and the United States, as the provider for the VPP launch in the region.

The company states that those who enroll in the program can earn up to £300 per month.

Tesla has operated several VPP programs worldwide, most notably in California, Texas, Connecticut, and the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico. This is not the first time Tesla has operated a VPP outside the United States, as there are programs in Australia, Japan, and New Zealand.

This is its first in the UK:

Tesla is not the only company that is working with Octopus Energy in the UK for the VPP, as it joins SolarEdge, GivEnergy, and Enphase as other companies that utilize the Octopus platform for their project operations.

It has been six years since Tesla launched its first VPP, as it started its first in Australia back in 2019. In 2024, Tesla paid out over $10 million to those participating in the program.

Tesla VPP program in California hits new capacity milestone

Participating in the VPP program that Tesla offers not only provides enrolled individuals with the opportunity to earn money, but it also contributes to grid stabilization by supporting local energy grids.

Continue Reading

Trending