
Tesla’s new Solar Roof costs less than a new roof plus solar panels - prostoalex
https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/25/teslas-new-solar-roof-costs-less-than-a-new-roof-plus-solar-panels-aims-for-install-rate-of-1k-per-week/
======
dx87
I wonder where they're getting their average price from, because I've never
heard of a new roof and solar panel installation being that expensive.

EDIT: They're comparing it to concrete roof tiles, which a quick search say
that they last for ~50 years, twice as long as the warranty for the Tesla
solar roof.

[https://www.tesla.com/solarroof/design](https://www.tesla.com/solarroof/design)

~~~
IshKebab
Warranty is different from how long something will last.

~~~
cowsandmilk
So, should we expect the Tesla roof, which has historically had so many issues
that they’ve done very few installations, to suddenly be able to last 50
years?

~~~
gibolt
What issues? They did very few installations of previous iterations because
they took a long time to install, thus were expensive. Doesn't mean there were
any quality issues

~~~
what_ever
[https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-solar-panel-fires-
beco...](https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-solar-panel-fires-become-
nightmare-some-homeowners-2019-10)

~~~
rcMgD2BwE72F
The author of this article, Linette Lopez, is a personal friend of Jim Chanos,
the biggest TSLA short as far as we know. She publicly recognized this
friendship and she does not care whether it makes her biased against the
company. It's up to you to trust her reporting regarding these accidents and
how representative her coverage is. Note that she only seeks _negative_
feedback about Tesla products, she discard positive and neutral ones. That's
her filter, an interesting one.

------
dmckeon
> And we’re actually going to have […] ‘installathons,’ ” Musk said, which
> will pit two teams against each other to see who can roof one of two
> similar-sized/designed roofs faster. Musk reiterated later that there’s
> “quite a bit of R&D just in the installation process itself.”

Not a short seller, but that sounds a lot like: “We don’t yet know how to do
this well, but in the meantime we are going to optimize for speed.” This may
look good to investors, but homeowners might cringe. Did Musk learn nothing
from the pre-Titan installs? Somebody get him a copy of _The Mythical Man-
Month_. This quote alone took me from possible early-adopter to wanting to
wait 3 to 5 years until they decide to optimize installation for correctness
and lowered risk of ignition.

~~~
ianai
He prioritizes speed apparently at the cost of anything else. I wonder why he
feels such urgency?

I mean yeah he finally got a profit out of Tesla last quarter. But there’s
really no tolerance for hiccups in a roof install.

~~~
s_y_n_t_a_x
Isn't speed a very important factor when addressing climate change?

I thought replacing ICE engines and developing more in renewable energy would
be accepted.

~~~
carlivar
Musk rejects Kanban and Toyota Production System. Chaotic pressure is only one
type of production speed.

~~~
jayd16
Hmm interesting. Is there an article that goes over Musk's internal production
style or why he rejects the ones you've listed?

~~~
carlivar
[https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/19/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-
extreme-...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/19/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-extreme-
micro-manager.html)

------
wil421
> Tesla’s Solar Roof website now includes a pricing estimator, which lists
> $42,500 as the total price for the average 2,000 square-foot home, with 10kW
> solar panels. It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax
> incentive. You can also enter your address and get an updated estimate that
> takes into account local costs and incentives, and add on any Powerwalls
> (with three as the default for a 2,000 square-foot roof).

$42k does not sound like the solar roof is cheaper than a traditional roof.
What kind of roof are they comparing it to? A mini-mansion with terra-cotta
shingles or asphalt shingles?

A quick google search and home advisor suggests it’s about half the price.

~~~
mikorym
I wonder if they should just skip comparing it with a normal roof or normal
roof + solar.

A Model 3 is way more expensive than the average ICE sedan; people buy it
anyway.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
They do similar TCO comparisons with their cars.

They estimate fuel savings and include tax incentives etc.

In both cases they're making a case that the upfront cost is less than it
appears if the running costs are lower.

~~~
mikorym
To what extent is their claim true?

------
Quequau
I have a friend in America who has a fairly large PV set up on part of his
property. Listening to the all the obstacles he's had to overcome and all the
surprising limitations he's saddled with, I can't help but suspect that the
power company in his area that he's selling the power to would rather that
these sorts of installations simply not exist.

Coupling that with the fact that off-peak pricing isn't the norm in a lot of
markets, I have to wonder if trying to implement smaller build outs is really
worth the effort or expense... though I'll be the first to say that I've not
researched it thoroughly.

~~~
mepiethree
The profit model for utility companies is to build new power plants, power
lines, and substations, and charge their rate payers for that build ("rate
base" it). Then they get a cut of their expense as profit. If too many people
build solar, the utility can't build new infrastructure and charge everyone
for it. And, they now have to manage balancing solar production with
electricity usage, which means hiring new analysts which can't be rate based.

So, of course they are hostile to it. Personal, distributed solar cuts their
profits and increases their costs. But, because their profit is based on
charging customers for building new electric infrastructure, it lowers the
costs for _all_ of their customers when a group of people preempt that by
installing solar on their homes.

It is good for everyone when rich people buy solar; the air gets cleaner, and
electricity becomes cheaper. So some states, like California, compel them to
facilitate solar via tax credits and other regulations.

~~~
macspoofing
> If too many people build solar, the utility can't build new infrastructure
> and charge everyone for it.

Right. Because solar does not play well with existing infrastructure but solar
needs the grid to be even close to viable. It needs it because it is a diffuse
intermittent power source, where the peak power generation does not actually
match peak power use. Solar overproduction cannot be saved for later either,
meaning that you have another infrastructure challenge of dealing with
overproduction when you don't need it.

In general, solar only really works if it is paired with a a traditional power
generator that can ramp up quickly (when there is no solar output) and ramp
down quickly (when solar output is high). The only power generators that can
do that are ones that burn fossil fuels. That's why natural gas companies are
a BIG lobby group for solar. That's why Germany is signing massive, multi-
decade deals to ship Russian gas, as they expand their wind and solar
infrastructure.

If you care about getting rid of carbon emissions, solar is a disaster. Not to
mention energy use in building panels and the number of rare earth materials
each one needs, the problems with recycling them, and their land-use
requirements and the environmental impact of that.

>It is good for everyone when rich people buy solar

No. Just no.

~~~
mepiethree
> solar needs the grid to be even close to viable

This was true 20 years ago and will be laughable 20 years from now.

> The only power generators that can do that are ones that burn fossil fuels.

Fossil fuel generators do NOT ramp up and down quickly. BTM and FTM battery
storage solutions ramp up and down faster and are rapidly becoming cheaper and
more environmentally friendly alternatives.

> energy use in building panels and the number of rare earth materials each
> one needs, the problems with recycling them, and their land-use requirements
> and the environmental impact of that.

Every one of these supposed drawbacks of solar also apply to generating power
with fossil fuel.

Fracking causes earthquakes in Oklahoma and wastelands in southeast New
Mexico. Mountaintop removal for coal has probably permanently destroyed parts
of PA, WV, VA, and KY. I won't argue that the issues you bring up aren't bad,
they just lack context. In my view, human addiction to electricity is bad in
all forms, but fossil fuels are clearly worse.

~~~
macspoofing
>This was true 20 years ago and will be laughable 20 years from now.

Will the sun start shining at night in 20 years?

>Fossil fuel generators do NOT ramp up and down quickly.

Natural gas ramps as quickly as it can. But let's assume that's true, that's
not a point against me, it's a point against solar because then it means that
solar is completely unworkable.

>Every one of these supposed drawbacks of solar also apply to generating power
with fossil fuel.

No. Because we know we can power an economy with fossil fuels, and do it in
any weather, day or night.

>Fracking causes earthquakes in Oklahoma and wastelands in southeast New
Mexico.

Yes. Natural gas isn't great.

>In my view, human addiction to electricity is bad in all forms, but fossil
fuels are clearly worse.

Right. That's why we need to get off fossil fuels. But you can't do that with
solar or wind.

Here's what works: Nuclear, Hydro, Geothermal - that's basically it and the
latter two need particular geography to be viable.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> Natural gas ramps as quickly as it can. But let's assume that's true, that's
> not a point against me, it's a point against solar because then it means
> that solar is completely unworkable.

You're thinking about this wrong. If you want 100% generation from solar then
you need a ton of storage, period. But who says it has to be 100% solar or 0?

Take a look at the daily electricity demand curve. Lower at night, higher
during the day. The (large) difference between the nighttime demand and the
daytime demand? That's what you use solar for. Even if batteries are
completely off the table, solar is still useful for that. And in that case
your natural gas plants only have to run for a couple of hours between sunset
and bedtime instead of all day long.

We don't know if storage technologies are ever going to be cost effective
enough to use 100% solar day and night. They're not right now, but they're
also declining in price. If they get there, well, that's the end of the
matter. If not, you use nuclear at night, supplement it with solar during the
day and, in the long term, suffer the high cost of batteries for a couple
hours around dusk, which is still a whole lot cheaper than needing enough of
them to get you through the whole night.

But you have a significant amount of solar in every case. And it can also take
on close to 100% of the new load from charging electric vehicles simply by
charging them while the sun is out.

~~~
macspoofing
>And in that case your natural gas plants only have to run for a couple of
hours between sunset and bedtime instead of all day long.

Right. So we agree, solar cannot remove carbon emissions. And I thought the
entire point is to remove fossil fuels entirely from energy generation, not
just reduce it.

>you use nuclear at night

It doesn't work like that. Nuclear can take days to ramp up and ramp down.
Solar does not play well with nuclear.

That's one problem.

A more major issue is...if you're using nuclear, why the heck do you even need
solar? This is the energy mix of my home province[1] - we're essentially
fossil fuel-free because our energy mix is nuclear and hydro. There is no
point in increasing investment in solar and wind. But we're doing it, not
because it's good for reducing carbon emission, but because it's a fad.

[1] [http://live.gridwatch.ca/home-page.html](http://live.gridwatch.ca/home-
page.html)

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> So we agree, solar cannot remove carbon emissions.

Except for all the carbon emissions it does remove while the sun is shining
and you didn't have to run that natural gas plant for 14 hours instead of 2.

> It doesn't work like that. Nuclear can take days to ramp up and ramp down.
> Solar does not play well with nuclear.

You don't ramp it up and down at all. You have 100GW of demand at night and
200GW during the day, so you have 100GW of nuclear and 100GW of solar. Nuclear
generates 100GW night and day and the solar generates an additional 100GW
during the day.

> A more major issue is...if you're using nuclear, why the heck do you even
> need solar?

Because it's cheaper during the day and there is more demand during the day.

------
bluedino
_which lists $42,500 as the total price for the average 2,000 square-foot
home, with 10kW solar panels. It also lists $33,950 as the price after an
$8,550 federal tax incentive._

I had a roof put on my 1600sq ft ranch and it was only $8,000

~~~
daviddavis
Does your roof generate electricity though? A solar roof is a roof + solar
panels.

~~~
dx87
It's not going to cost 34k to install solar panels on his roof. Tesla's claim
seems disengenous at best.

~~~
eloff
It's comparing apples and oranges. Presumably the OP is not using premium
concrete (terracotta) tiles on his roof. Tesla is cheaper than a premium roof
with solar panels and the details of said comparison are laid out on their
site.

~~~
dx87
The comparison on Tesla's site still looks misleading.

"comparable price of a typical roof + solar panels"

Having premium concrete shingles isn't a "typical roof". They also use small
greyed out text to say they are comparing it to concrete shingles, but use big
black text for the higher price, and hide the fact that the Solar Roof is only
cheaper because of tax breaks behind a "See More" button.

------
rjkennedy98
> It also lists $33,950 as the price after an $8,550 federal tax incentive.

There is something absolutely astonishing about the fact that in America the
way we have go about being eco-friendly is to give huge tax breaks to rich
people to buy solar panels and electric vehicles. To think with all that money
we could build better infrastructure and denser housing. Really boggles the
mind.

~~~
hokkos
Incentiving rich people to buy expansive tech (and still at lost for the
riches) help the technologies to ride the cost curve and bring it to the
masses.

~~~
buboard
that can't be true as rich people are by definition a small minority. why not
just give the subsidies directly to the companies

~~~
rootsudo
I would also say that Rich people pave the way for adaption.

For example, look at prices of flights. Before there was no "first class"
everything was first class, now there are cabin options.

While that example is a service, more proliferation of service == wider
adaption == increased scale of economies == eventually prices come down for
everyone.

~~~
buboard
That would be true if solar roofs were some novel technology that the rich
would adopt first, and then the rest. This is a remix of existing technology,
much like the iphone. The rich don't have roofs, they have domes or yachts.
The poor don't own roofs. This is directed at the middle class squarely and
only. To the extent that richer people adopt this, it's mostly for signaling
reasons and not because it affords them some luxury they didn't have (like
flights did).

Your analogy is more appropriate for space tourism.

~~~
DFHippie
> it's mostly for signaling reasons

This presumes rich people never have good motives and any appearance of
morality or civic-mindedness they might show is a self-aggrandizing sham. This
seems unlikely.

------
bArray
I think a major challenge that is yet to be addressed is the fact that solar
panels lose their efficiency over time [1] [2]. Seems like you're looking at
80% of rated efficiency after 20 years - and I'm unsure this includes
failures.

In the UK a 50+ year old roof is very common - most people expect a house to
outlast them without anything but minor repairs. If I were building a house I
would want something where it's primary power source can be repaired without
larger than necessary costs.

[1] [https://energyinformative.org/lifespan-solar-
panels/](https://energyinformative.org/lifespan-solar-panels/)

[2]
[https://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticle...](https://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticles/ArticleID/7475/What-
Is-the-Lifespan-of-a-Solar-Panel.aspx)

~~~
Someone1234
UK roofs are made and ceramic and slate. US roofs are made of asphalt. Mostly
because asphalt is inexpensive (particularly due to economies of scale/lack of
them on ceramic). Ceramic lasts a lifetime, asphalt can be taken out by one
bad hail storm.

UK homes are made of brick. US homes are made of fiberboard and inexpensive
woods. There's a reason why UK homes have lasted over one hundred years, and
most US homes won't last 50. It is a consumer culture applied to homes.
They're designed to be replaced completely.

~~~
twistedpair
> most US homes won't last 50

That's wild a claim. I live in a 115 year old US house made of "inexpensive"
wood and it's doing just fine, like the rest of the neighborhood.

~~~
surewhynat
New builds have lower life expectancies. Thing about your fridge from the 40s,
compressor built to last. How long has your stuff been lasting recently?

~~~
arethuza
A tip someone told me here in the UK is that if you are buying an inexpensive
property try and get one that was built and owned by social housing operators
- they actually have _much_ higher construction standards and will have been
maintained properly.

------
gameswithgo
This claim came up a couple years ago, and it is only true when considering
very expensive/fancy roof types. It isn't at all true compared to normal
shingles.

------
ChuckMcM
I am glad to see they are making progress here. This roof looks like it has a
much better chance of being acceptable to various home owner associations
(HOAs) than putting panels up on a "regular" roof.

------
zaroth
The interesting parts of the call yesterday for me were talking about the
challenges they have with v2, although we didn’t really get to hear much about
_how_ those issues were addressed.

First, that basically everyone was pulled off working on Energy to deal with
Model 3 issues because they were do or die for the company. Now with Model 3
under control those resources were put back into Energy - solar, roof, and
storage.

Second, there was not a fundamental manufacturing issue with the solar glass
roof, but rather it was a product which fundamentally was not _worth_ scaling
until the economics made sense.

The economic driver Tesla is targeting is that anyone getting a new premium
roof with solar would pay less for the solar glass roof than to get the new
premium roof and then add panels separately. For someone with an existing
premium roof with significant life remaining, the solar glass roof may still
be something you choose, but it’s not literally going to be cheaper.

The major issue with v2 was what they call “edge conditions”. It is funny that
this sounds like software guys talking about roofs, not probably the way that
roofing guys would talk about it. But they are talking about anywhere that two
planes meet on a roof where tiles need to create a waterproof barrier.
Flashing, ice & water shield, etc. With their v2 product this required
essentially custom fabrication in the field - what Elon called an _artisanal_
roof, like building the airplane out on the runway. This required several days
(even weeks) of work on-site to fabricate and install the product, and so they
were never going to try to scale that.

Version 3 is supposed to address the fundamental issues with edge conditions.
I didn't catch a lot of detail on the call of exactly what they did to address
this, but the end result is that they do not expect to have to do any custom
fabrication on-site, and they are targeting a process where a largish crew can
compete an average roof install in 8 hours, ultimately they want the tiles to
go down as fast as asphalt (which is quite fast if you’ve ever watched it).

Lastly, they talked about reducing the number of sub-assemblies in the tiles
by 50%, and the expected difficulty in ramping up production. Elon tried to be
very clear that predicting the exactly volume output on the steep part of the
S-curve is basically impossible, but they want to be producing enough for
1,000 roofs per week, and manufacturing is already under way for V3.

They will be running install-athon competitions internally in Tesla on test
roofs that they have to test different methods, and they also want to invite
3rd party contractors to compete as well. Their intent is to have both Tesla
internal as well as 3rd party certified installers installing the glass roof.
They will leverage their existing presence in 25 states where they do Solar
today, and ultimately want the product available across 50 states.

If I was able to ask a question on the call I would have asked about
winterization. I want to know that they’ve tested their solution against ice &
snow, and particularly that it won’t ice dam during a New England winter.

Financially, I wonder how the margins compare to Model 3. ASP is in the same
ballpark, so ramping up to 1,000 installs a week would be total revenue just
barely on the same order of magnitude as Model 3 revenue, which was a serious
reality check for me. Elon said on the Q3 call that they think Energy will be
as big or bigger than EVs overall and that he thinks people are significantly
undervaluing their generation and storage LOBs.

~~~
bob_theslob646
>If I was able to ask a question on the call I would have asked about
winterizarion. I want to know that they’ve tested their solution against ice &
snow, and particularly that it won’t ice dam during a New England winter.

This is the magic question that I hope gets answered.

------
ZeroGravitas
I quite like this product and think it'll be a big thing.

I do wonder about a comparison to what I've seen recently, which is standard
roofs with solar built in almost like skylights. Just big panels at the same
level as the tiles, not placed on top in a retrofit.

Seems like it's a good compromise (as long as you can get panels that blend
with the tiles, and that generate enough that you don't need the whole roof
covered).

~~~
navigatesol
> _I quite like this product and think it 'll be a big thing._

Do you like it more than when they released it 3 years ago, but never
installed any? Can someone point me to the V1 and V2 installations?

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Yeah, I did actually. Similar to electric cars or open source it's possible to
spot the potential of an idea when it's still in its infancy and not really
ready for prime time in every circumstance.

Roofs that generate make a lot of sense and many jurisdictions will mandate
some kind of net zero build for new houses. I think there's a lot of room at
the top of the market for this kind of product and it will just be standard at
some point in the future.

How much of that market Tesla gets and keeps is a harder question, but
combining roofing with solar is too obviously sensible to fail I think.

------
Corrado
One of the things I've always wondered about Tesla's Solar Roof is how is it
to walk on? Do you have to be extra careful because it's glass? Is it more
slippery?

I get up on my roof several times a year (inspections, etc.) and know how to
move around on a traditional asphalt shingle roof. Will I slide off or damage
the roof while putting up Christmas lights?

------
Rapzid
Super scary if it's flashed wrong or damaged.. What if it starts leaking
and/or needs repair. How much is THAT gonna cost and are the wait times
shorter than for repairing a Tesla?!

------
quaquaqua1
EEVBlog would like to have a word with you-- are these systems efficient?
There are concerns about cleaning, repair, and angle of insolation compared to
traditional panels.

~~~
meristem
And a history of difficult customer service

------
gumby
This looks like any other BIPV roof product -- what makes it different? More
importantly: how do they plan to avoid the problems that have plagued BIPV for
decades?

~~~
gibolt
I'm not familiar with the existing issues, but likely thorough testing and
quick scale. I'd expect tile durability and cable corrosion to be the main
issues, which seem solveable.

~~~
gumby
They don’t seem to have addressed the two worst problems. One is interconnect
— which drives the cost of installation and of maintenance too. The second is
the bonding of the tile to the roof. Typically panels are mounted away from a
surface so there is cooling airflow behind them. These are flush on the roof
so heat up which is not only as for your house but dramatically reduces
efficiency AND lifetime — which will be much shorter than the life of the
tiles themselves.

I haven’t seen any mention that this product brings anything new to the table
and I’m sure they would have trumpeted it if so. Basically 2012’s BIPV roof
solution AFAICT.

------
tomrod
I live in tornado valley. How do these hold up to hail?

~~~
jcims
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imoSl2Y8LPU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imoSl2Y8LPU)

Hard to say. Just liked the eye candy.

------
woodandsteel
This is very good news. It's going to lead to a great many new solar
installations that otherwise would not have happened, including in new home
construction. And if we are lucky there will be other companies that will
develop similar products that are good enough to compete with Tesla.

------
stevehawk
Does anyone know the situation for putting these tiles on one side of the roof
but not the other? I live in northern Indiana and would gladly put these on my
southern facing roof, but my northern roof is particularly complex (a lot of
joints/edges) and obviously not really ever going to get any sun.

~~~
mepiethree
You can do that with normal solar panels, or with these

I recommend using project sunroof to see if doing so would make you money.
They analyze your roof size and tilt, trees around your property, etc. For
free.

[https://www.google.com/get/sunroof](https://www.google.com/get/sunroof)

~~~
iamtheworstdev
Damn, neat site but they haven't done houses in my neck of the woods.

------
admerox
2 questions: \- If you opt-out of the powerwalls can the system switch to the
regular grid when needed? \- Can you sell energy back to the regular grid in
case you produce more than you need?

~~~
mepiethree
Yes you can switch to the regular grid and yes you can sell back your power in
most states ("net metering"), though that often just manifests as a credit for
your night time electricity usage.

38 states, DC, and Puerto Rico allow this.
[https://www.seia.org/initiatives/net-
metering](https://www.seia.org/initiatives/net-metering)

------
mikelyons
Replaced my roof this year. Small roof where roofs last for about 1/2 their
typical rating. $5000 for 20 year asphalt shingles.

With Tesla I would add: $20,000 for panels and powerwall.

------
s_Hogg
Wonder what build quality is like with this. Is Tesla starting to get this
kind of product issue sorted?

~~~
tgtweak
Apparently the build quality issues (roofs shorting, catching on fire) were
traditional panels, and not manufacturer by themselves.

------
nunchuckninja
>federal tax incentive

They are still around?

~~~
MichaelApproved
Yes but starting next year they start to decrease every year.

------
tictok4
* after a rebate from OPM.

------
marcrosoft
In what world is $42k the cost of a new roof?

------
lousken
I would never install solar panels on my roof, if it catches on fire,
firefighters will let the whole house burn.

------
executive
Then it catches on fire and burns down your house.

------
sabujp
no it doesn't, I just got a quote for solar, 4.KW ~$7k. A new roof would cost
about $10k

------
SeaDude
Back of napkin math is:

\- 100ft.2 of solar panels (Qty: 5, off the shelf, ~3’ x ~5’ panels) = ~1kW of
AC electricity (post-inverter, in low-sun Seattle)

\- At the roof, this represents 10 wires and ~8 roof penetrations (racking
lags through flashing into rafters)

AKA: simple setup, proven implementation

Questions:

\- How many wires (points of failure) are in 100ft.2 of solar shingles?

\- How many roof penetrations?

\- How many roofer-electricians do you know?

\- Why can we not just embrace existing panel technology and put them
everywhere, yesterday?

Rant:

\- We don’t need boutique renewable energy, we need ubiquitous RE.

\- Elon, get your priorities straight. In the three years you’ve been trying
to figure out the perfect solar status symbol, you could have installed
megawatts of photovoltaics.

~~~
cptskippy
> Elon, get your priorities straight. In the three years you’ve been trying to
> figure out the perfect solar status symbol, you could have installed
> megawatts of photovoltaics.

They already do regular solar installs and so do a ton of other competitors.
This is a boutique product for people who care about aesthetics and are
willing to pay a premium for it.

