
Walmart sues Tesla over fires at stores fitted with its solar panels - helloer
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-walmart-tesla-solar-lawsuit/walmart-sues-tesla-over-fires-at-stores-fitted-with-its-solar-panels-idUSKCN1VA26B
======
sarcher
A Journal of Light Construction editor had a fire in his SolarCity panel set-
up as well, and had a hard time getting it sorted out.

[https://www.jlconline.com/how-to/electrical/solar-panel-
fire...](https://www.jlconline.com/how-to/electrical/solar-panel-fire_o)

and here's a follow-up: [https://www.jlconline.com/how-to/electrical/solar-
panel-fire...](https://www.jlconline.com/how-to/electrical/solar-panel-fire-
update_o)

~~~
ocschwar
Didn't Solar City rely on local installation firms?

~~~
rblatz
Sounds like they aren’t vetting them enough, training them enough, or the
panels are just hard to install properly.

~~~
londons_explore
I love the fact they blame an animal nest...

That animal must have been sitting on its eggs, and carelessly smoking a cigar
I guess!

No... The cause will have been overheating of the 'optimizer' (MPPT tracker
which outputs a fixed voltage) when it failed to a high impedance state,
probably due to water incursion. The fire will have happened on a sunny day,
because it's the energy from the other panels which starts the fire.

Tesla really should have made more parts of the system non-flammable. Then the
story would simply be that this guy's system stopped working (or even 1 panel
out of 16 stopped working, so output was slightly reduced)

------
nominated1
A friend of mine is a union electrician with 15 years in the trade. He’s
helped install dozens of solar farms across Northern California. One thing I
found interesting/unnerving was that apparently the spacing tolerances between
panels is quite low. He said it’s their biggest concern when it comes to
fires.

So, maintenance seems like a must. Especially on rooftops or structures that
will naturally “settle” over time. If I had to guess, these tolerances weren’t
properly maintained or the buildings/roofs themselves weren’t solid enough to
begin with.

If anyone can shed more light on this (pun intended)…

~~~
heimatau
sarcher's example of JLC. It does look like a faulty optimizer, which is a DC
electronic for each panel.

As for Walmart, it's a lot to unpack.

> dozens showing hazardous problems such as loose wiring and “hot spots” on
> panels, according to court papers filed in New York State Supreme Court.

Loose wiring? A lot of setups are mostly plug and go. If they had to splice
one wire, it's only a minute process to do and if they used their eyes for a
few seconds (I'm describing the literal process of splicing a panel wire. I'm
not demeaning the work. It's minutes. 3 max, if you brought the parts on the
roof.) As for the other connections a solar installation may need, the time it
takes it one minute for all connections on the roof. For the 244 panel setup
of Walmart, 30 minutes tops (20.3 minutes to be closer to realistic because
there might be 21 j-boxes, each connecting 12 panels to the main array).

Hot Spots? I have no idea about that one. It's too vague.

At a different location, this is what Walmart said: >One of the fires happened
months after the system was de-energized, Walmart said.

I don't understand this one at all. Tesla/SolarCity must be using very cheap
electronics because this shouldn't happen. Each panel's optimizer should be
equipped for the situation when they aren't producing usable power.

Source: I worked in residential solar for about 6 months and as an electrician
for two years. I'm not a bona fide source but I'm better than most because
I've paid attention to everything that was taught to me. Plus I'm looking into
starting my own Solar company.

~~~
londons_explore
The optimizer consists of MOSFETs, an inductor, and a microcontroller. The
circuit is pretty similar to a BLDC motor controller.

The circuit relies 100% on the microcontroller outputting the right signals,
otherwise a mosfet gets stuck on (causing overcurrent, and burning out).
Little boxes like that are hard to waterproof and make resistant to repeated
temperature fluctuations. My guess is some water went in and shorted some
control signals, or repeated temperature changes caused a solder joint to
crack. That caused the MOSFETs not to get the right control input, so they got
really hot and caught fire.

It's just as likely to happen on a de-energised panel too - the optimizer is
still connected, and the sun is still shining.

~~~
heimatau
> The circuit relies 100% on the microcontroller outputting the right signals

I'm not an E.E. but does that apply for DC optimizers? Older optimizers had no
AC conversions in them.

> Little boxes like that are hard to waterproof and make resistant to repeated
> temperature fluctuations.

Hmm. I never checked to see if the warranty for the optimizers are 20 years.
The panels are but I'd be surprised to see the optimizers be less than 20.
Most, non-cheap, optimizers do have insulation to prevent moisture from
getting in.

> It's just as likely to happen on a de-energised panel too - the optimizer is
> still connected, and the sun is still shining.

Based on your description, that makes it a possibility. Why aren't the
optimizers equipped with some type of regulator to prevent output in
situations like this?

~~~
rasz
DC optimizers seem to be DC to DC converters, you rarely do those with MCU in
professional setting, there are dedicated chips for it. Googling pictures of
PCBs there are a ton of products with Aluminum electrolytic capacitors, those
are rated at up to 10K hours at 105C, thats probably less than 5 years of sun
divided by days whole thing gets cooked on the roof. Still that would merely
lead to product failing to output power, MLCC and tantalum capacitors are the
real problem, those love to short HARD under mechanical stresses, and temp
cycling is a perfect environment to induce it.

mlcc fire [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2rvAoO-
MIA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2rvAoO-MIA) , causes
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgKY5QWehME](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgKY5QWehME)

------
new_realist
From Reddit:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/SolarCity/comments/9ikm8g/solarcity...](https://www.reddit.com/r/SolarCity/comments/9ikm8g/solarcity_shutdown_my_system_apparently_a/eeknsvh/?context=3)

"whistleblower123456 1 point · 7 months ago If you want the truth here it is.
Tesla has installed millions of defective amphenol connectors all over the
u.s. These connectors are catching fire and burning down homes and businesses.
They are hiding it with something called project titan where they are hiring
thousands of people just to replace connectors. The problem is that they are
testing it with infrared cameras to see if the connector heats up and only
then replacing it. These connectors are defective meaning just because it
passes one day it does not mean it wont fail the next even after testing.
Tesla refuses to replace all of these connectors betting on insurance to cover
any fires and only looking at homes when their monitoring platform reports arc
faults. This is why they are dismantling the solar division with layoffs.
Right now if you have tesla installed on your roof you may have a ticking time
bomb ready to kill you in your sleep. If you have it on your business same
thing. Don't believe me, google walmart fires. If you have tesla stock better
prepare to sell it because when this gets out it is going to crash. They need
to do the right thing and shut off all systems with these connectors and
replace them with mc4. They wont because it would cost them hundreds of
millions to do and hundreds of thousands of dollars on lost production. Do the
right thing Tesla."

~~~
farah7
Sounds like a short seller.

------
AndrewBissell
Buried in the lawsuit is some entertaining commentary on Tesla's SolarCity
acquisition:

"On information and belief, when Tesla purchased SolarCity to bail out the
flailing company (whose executives included two of Tesla CEO Elon Musk's first
cousins), Tesla failed to correct SolarCity's chaotic installation processes
or to adopt adequate maintenance protocols, which would have been particularly
important in light of the improper installation practices."

...

"On information and belief, SolarCity's business model was ultimately a bust."

------
markrote
The Walton Family also happens to own much of First Solar, a competing
provider of photovoltaic cells.

~~~
reitzensteinm
So are you saying they staged seven fires, or that after 7 of 240
installations caught fire they only sued because of their conflicting
interests?

Tesla installed 29 MW of solar last quarter, compared to a peak of 253 MW at
Solar City before the acquisition. First Solar, which isn't an apples to
apples competitor since it specializes in utility scale, is on track to
produce 1375 MW per quarter of panels this year.

Tesla's solar business is dead. They might turn it around with the solar roof
product, but if that succeeds it will make Tesla Energy _even less_ of a
competitor to First Solar, since it has zero relevance to utility scale solar.

Even if Walmart had evil intent, why give Solar City the PR boost of hundreds
of installations in the hope that they'll fail and they can later sue?

It's easy to make a nice conspiratorial quip, but there's _nothing_ of
substance here. Jumping at every shadow just numbs you for when you really
should be angry.

~~~
csteubs
Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. The original comment merely
points out an interesting note in that both parties have their own interest in
solar. You make so many specific counter-claims to a simple sentence that it
seems like you're responding to the wrong comment.

~~~
reitzensteinm
If I misinterpreted the parent, I'm genuinely happy to delete my post and
apologize. But I don't think I did.

~~~
woofyman
I interpreted the post the same way.

------
thinkcomp
The actual lawsuit: [https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/40v40ia2y/supreme-
court-of...](https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/40v40ia2y/supreme-court-of-the-
state-of-new-york-new-york-county/walmart-inc-fka-walmart-stores-inc-v-tesla-
energy-operations-inc-fka-solarcity-cor/)

------
omfg
Wasn’t this work done during the SolarCity years?

~~~
Clent
I found that interesting as well. The article is trying to link solar panel
failures to Tesla vehicle failures. They were not born from the same company
nor process.

It seems whatever generated the story was looking for some segue into how the
price is down.

The stock price was affected by the market's new knowledge. They both contain
words for fire but are otherwise independent and distant events in Tesla's
history.

A more likely scenario is these liabilities that Tesla acquired a couple of
years ago had otherwise gone unnoticed. They have now been noticed and the
market will risk the outcome of Walmart and all of these other Solar City
contracts.

The potential risk of these contracts is what is weighing on Telsa's stock
price, not a handful of vehicle fires.

~~~
gcbw3
My friends at SolarCity never had to work 70h in a week before Tesla acquired
them (nor work weekends installing solar panels on Musk mansion in L.A.)

So it might very well be the result of the same company and processes.

~~~
nothrabannosir
Honestly with all the Tesla shorts trolling HN, an unsubstantiated comment
like this from a fresh account is very suspicious. Can you post from an
account with more comment history?

~~~
dang
This comment breaks the site guidelines. Would you mind reviewing them?
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
NetBeck
>totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket losses, Walmart
said in the lawsuit.

This amount is immaterial for each party involved.

~~~
kryogen1c
I wonder if theres any danger of walmart being declared a vexatious litigant,
since this amount is clearly nonsense. If their concern is damage from public
opinion, aren't they required to quantify the damages? I don't think the court
appreciates being used only as a tool for public opinion.

As is probably obvious to those with any legal knowledge, IANAL

~~~
egdod
That's not what a vexatious litigant is. Hundreds of thousands of dollars is a
real loss.

~~~
kryogen1c
Is it? Wal-Mart's revenue is 500billion. 500 thosand is .0001%. If you make
200k, thats like suing someone over 20 bucks

~~~
egdod
Totally, like why does Wal-Mart even bother selling items that cost less than
a million dollars?

~~~
kryogen1c
This lawsuit could drag on for years and cost a significant portion of the
amount being sued over because the value is so small. Hardly an equivalence.

~~~
egdod
Tons of lawsuits are brought for under 100k. This argument applies to all of
them. The fact that Wal-Mart is a big company doesn't change anything.

~~~
MertsA
Especially Walmart, which routinely prosecutes shoplifters even over trivial
amounts to curb theft.

------
daferna
Should've used microinverters, but then again, the technology wasn't mature
yet at the time SolarCity was still independent.

------
sxates
Anyone know details about how the solar panels resulted in fires?

~~~
the-pigeon
These specific cases, no. But I used to work for a company that made solar
components and fires were our biggest fear.

The most likely issue is incorrect design or installation due to the
complications of DC power. This article goes into details
[https://iffmag.mdmpublishing.com/solar-panels-and-the-dc-
dan...](https://iffmag.mdmpublishing.com/solar-panels-and-the-dc-danger-zone-
reducing-risk-factors-part-2/)

Simply put DC power with enough current to power a home is much more dangerous
than AC. And solar power isn't converted to AC until it gets to the inverter.

Meaning all the wiring and everything in the solar system has a ton of current
going through it on a sunny day. If the system was designed incorrectly or
installed incorrectly then there isn't going to be enough copper for that
current to go through at some point and it's going to heat up and start a
fire.

You can also have components fail and all that. But given they are blaming
Solar City I'd bet on it being improper installation or inadequate design of
the system for the load.

~~~
taneq
Not a solar installer, but who uses thin enough DC wiring that the current
rating is an issue? Every solar installation I’ve seen uses way oversized DC
wiring (4-6mm^2 for 10-20A closed-circuit current) to minimise losses. You
could literally just short the wiring at the inverter and it’d never overheat.

Most fire hazard comes from connectors burning out from what I’ve seen.

~~~
Scipio_Afri
Well its a lot of things, you could bend the wire beyond its specs for bending
radius and in a way that would damage its ability to carry current. You could
install it in a way that puts the cables too close together so they then
transfer heat to each other and overload the thermal rating of the insulation,
thus causing a failure there. You could damage the insulation on the cables
leading to water ingress. Proper to code installations which provide plenty of
margin to prevent fires are defined mostly by the NFPA 70 (National Fire
Protection Act) National Electric Code

You could install the cable in a way the the heating and cooling of the cable,
over time, causes it to move or shift (kind of like a snake, generally in the
direction of gravity where its on a slant or hanging down) and then cause
tension on connectors that wasn't there before, if you didn't properly secure
the cables or design with that in mind. This one was an actual issue I know
about having happened on some wind turbines.

If you have a really incompetent contractor, maybe they used the aluminum
conductors instead of the copper conductors in some places (the former is far
cheaper, but has less bending radius and carries less current).

There is a lot to get wrong, most of which I had no idea about until I had to
think about it and know the problems in that domain of engineering. Even then,
I only did that for a short time so I'm sure there is plenty I don't know.

Most of the issues I heard about though weren't engineering issues, it was
poorly trained contractors who had no idea what they were doing. They used
contractors especially in the Wind Industry, because of the cyclical nature of
the building of power plants. Wind had a tax credit that use to not be a
partisan issue, then it became one and congress couldn't get its act together
which caused the sudden stop of ordering of wind turbines several times. Then
there is the lack of unions in many parts of the country, and unions generally
keep their workers sharp by keeping them employed even in down turns by evenly
spreading out mandatory furloughs. They also go through rigorous
apprenticeships and trainings.

------
jmb12686
And yet, somehow TSLA is only down 1.6% in after market hour trading today
(this news broke after mkt close). TSLA, appears to have irrationally
exuberant investors.

A (nearly) irrelevant comparison; WMT, a profitable enterprise, is down 1.53%
at mkt close today, didn't experience any negative news today, and a core
aspect of their business model doesn't explode into flames.

~~~
jaimex2
Probably because they dont make Solar panels anymore and the panels in
question are well out of warranty.

~~~
jmb12686
Ok, let's exclude solar panels. WMT's business model doesn't include extreme
capacity Li-ion chemical bombs traveling at highway speeds.

To be fair, I admire and hope one day to afford a Tesla. But the risks are
clear. High capacity Li-ion batteries have high risks and incident rates of
explosion.

~~~
breser
You do realize that all vehicles have risks of fire or explosion. In order to
make a vehicle with sufficient energy density to be usable for transportation
you have to take those risks.

While it's true that Tesla has had a relatively small number of vehicle fires
with the Model S and X. To date there has not been a single fire with a Model
3. Even with the Model S and X fires they were far rarer than ICE vehicle
fires. It's just that nobody bothers reporting on ICE vehicle fires because
they happen all the time. The relative rarity of the Tesla fires is what made
them news not a high incident rate.

~~~
new_realist
Model 3 fire and subsequent explosions: [https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-
model-3-fire-explosion-mosco...](https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-fire-
explosion-moscow-what-we-know-so-far/)

Based on anecdotal evidence, Teslas seem more prone both to spontaneous
combustion and fires from minor accidents than comparable luxury cars of
similar age (that is, relatively new). The latter is why the NHSTA made them
retrofit a titanium shield to the underbody early in the Model S lifecycle.

------
harikb
It is the pigeons I tell you! You can still see them right there in the
photos!

------
carolina_33
It’s okay, Elon has moved on. Now let’s install his 100% trusty brain probes.
What could go wrong?

------
PHGamer
just wait till those high capacity batteries start going. we are going to see
some interesting things.

Though in this case, i wonder how much is walmart and how much is tesla.
knowing both telsa over-promised and walmart probably refused to pay for
maintenance.

~~~
protomyth
_“This is a breach of contract action arising from years of gross negligence
and failure to live up to industry standards by Tesla with respect to solar
panels that Tesla designed, installed, and promised to operate and maintain
safely on the roofs of hundreds of Walmart stores,”_

Tesla seems to be the operator and maintainer. I would expect a contract has
maintenance as a flat fee per year if it is anything like other contracts of
this type.

~~~
metalliqaz
As alleged by Walmart.

Failure due to rushed, shoddy work is definitely Tesla's M.O., but Walmart is
also not exactly the most credible source, given their history.

~~~
protomyth
It would be incredibly stupid to lie in court documents about Tesla "promised
to operate and maintain" since the that is pretty easy to disprove.

~~~
zaroth
Not at all. “On information and belief” is an extremely low standard.

The standard for Tesla getting damages for accusations which don’t ultimately
pan out... that’s pretty high.

------
djanogo
I assume Walmart order of Tesla trucks might also be in jeopardy considering
they decided to go to court over these fires?

~~~
AndrewBissell
Probably in jeopardy because the trucks don't exist, and Tesla's capex is
below its depreciation so they're unlikely to build out the plant necessary to
manufacture them anytime soon.

------
navigatesol
So many apologists on this site its hilarious. I guess Walmart is against
climate change!

[https://twitter.com/sama/status/1130913917864034304?s=19](https://twitter.com/sama/status/1130913917864034304?s=19)

At won't point will you hear something that makes you doubt this company?
Anything?

~~~
oneepic
If you think _everyone_ or even most people commenting on this site are pro-
Tesla, I think you're not really reading HN. Either way, the Tesla debates I
see are a whole lot like people debating over petty bs like celebrity news, so
I usually stay out of them.

~~~
navigatesol
> _If you think everyone or even most people commenting on this site are pro-
> Tesla_

The "influencers" are, and if you don't think so you aren't paying attention.
Look what they say on Twitter. I posted a link in another comment, but
miraculously it disappeared.

It happened with Theranos too. People of "high reputation" on this very site
claimed everything was "FUD", that if you were against the company it was
because you didn't want to see a young woman succeed in Silicon Valley. Then
it turned out to be a fraud. And yet these people are still reputable here,
after ridiculous commentary. It says a lot about the community, unfortunately.

------
alfor
Another Tesla bashing article by mainstream media, move along.

100s of thousand of damage, that's pocket change for Walmart and Tesla.

Model X and S burst into flame !!! Tesla stock is down 1%, Be Afraid ! Don't
buy Tesla !!!

Tesla spend zero on advertising, their main source of revenue. They are also
disrupting big oil and the auto industry, plenty of enemies to go around.

~~~
o_p
Teslas bursting into flames is a real risk though.

~~~
c0nfused
EVs burn frequently on the internet.

Compared to the fema estimate of 171,500 highway car fires per year.

[https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v19i2.pdf](https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v19i2.pdf)

Tesla has contributed 14 total since 2013. I know of at least 2 other cases by
others have been reported

[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/22/tesla-
inv...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/22/tesla-investigates-
video-of-model-s-car-exploding)

~~~
o_p
Its 171k fires in 2 years not per year. You need the total Teslas vs ICE cars
in the road to compare those figures. Even then not sure if its a good
comparision because Tesla is on the luxury side, it should be compared with
ICE cars in the same price range, not any chinese car with little safety.

Common sense tells me that a big,unstable ion lithium battery at high speeds
is not a good idea, gasoline is much less reactive than people think.

~~~
dwaltrip
There are 4 orders of magnitude between 14 and 171,000. I could be wrong, but
I don't think those adjustments will cross that divide.

~~~
zimpenfish
From
[https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/VehicleSafetyReport](https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/VehicleSafetyReport)

"From 2012 – 2018, there has been approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for
every 170 million miles traveled. By comparison, data from the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation shows that
in the United States there is a vehicle fire for every 19 million miles
traveled."

(No indication whether the NFPA/DOT numbers include the Tesla fires, though,
or how many of those are arson - in the UK, arson accounts for about 65% of
vehicle fires which you can't really blame on the ICE. If the US is the same,
that'd increase the 19M miles to ~54M miles per fire - still looks good for
Tesla tho', especially when you consider that the ICE has 100 years of safety
development compared to, what, 10 for the Teslas?)

~~~
dwaltrip
Thanks for digging that up and sharing. Looks like Tesla's are safer than your
average ICE when it comes to vehicle fires, but not by multiple orders of
magnitude. Although, as you say, that gap may widen as they have more years to
invest in safety.

------
outworlder
> Tesla is also facing a federal field investigation by the U.S. National
> Transportation Safety Board after several Model X and Model S owners across
> the globe said their cars burst into flames

 _yawn_

Are other automakers suffering the same investigations?

[https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=812639](https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=812639)

> Each year, from 2014 to 2016, an estimated 171,500 highway vehicle fires
> occurred in the United States, resulting in an annual average of 345 deaths
> > Approximately one in eight fires responded to by fire departments across
> the nation is a highway vehicle fire.

Car fires are nothing new. The media coverage for EVs is not proportional.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _The media coverage for EVs is not proportional_

Do we have EV car fire frequencies for comparison with ICE engines? Without
denominators saying “all cats burn” is overly reductive.

~~~
outworlder
> Do we have EV car fire frequencies for comparison with ICE engines? Without
> denominators saying “all cats burn” is overly reductive.

Fine. And yet, is Reuters reporting those? In fact, why is Reuters even
talking about cars?

Tesla fires feature very prominently in the news whenever they happen. When
was the last time anyone here saw news of ICE fires? I only ever see those in
local news, and only if they caused other incidents (like fatalities or
traffic jams).

~~~
briandear
ICE cars aren’t catching on fire due to design defects, generally. They don’t
spontaneously combust. There is almost always a causal factor unrelated to the
actual car. Tesla’s could conceivably catch fire sitting in your driveway.

~~~
alasdair_
> Tesla’s could conceivably catch fire sitting in your driveway.

My mother had to drag me out of an ICE car when I was three because it caught
fire in our driveway, so I'm not sure you're comparing equivalent things.

