
Solar Roof - runesoerensen
https://www.tesla.com/blog/solar-roof
======
blakesterz
Yikes. I just signed a contract for a new roof here last month, it's going to
cost about $12k. Just did the estimate for the Tesla Solar roof... $80,300, so
$87k if I want the battery too. I can barely afford the $12 right now, the $80
is just so far over it's not even close, even with how much I save over the
years in electricity.

That being said, I love these things, so hoping it gets cheaper in the coming
years.

~~~
atourgates
I don't really see the selling point, or value here.

Tesla's calculator estimates $40,500 for a roof that generates half our power
needs, and should provide $20,400 worth of energy over 30-years.

Add in a PowerWall and federal tax credit, and I'm still losing $15,400 over
30-years.

If I put that same $40,000 in an index fund that got the stock market's
historical 7% average, and waited 30 years, I'd have $308,000.

To put it in another perspective, the last estimates I got for a solar system
that covered 100% of our average power needs came in at $32,000 installed,
before the same $11K tax credit that Tesla includes in their calculations.

So, I could pay under $20,000 for a "traditional" solar system that covered
100% of our energy bills, or $40,000 for a Tesla solar roof that covered 50%
of our energy bills.

That's quite literally half the value, at twice the price.

If I put in a traditional solar system tomorrow, it would pay for itself in
year 9. If I put in a Tesla solar roof tomorrow, I'd still be out $15K at year
30.

~~~
pedrocr
>If I put that same $40,000 in an index fund that got the stock market's
historical 7% average, and waited 30 years, I'd have $308,000.

Are you doing the math all in present dollars? Because the return is 7% after
inflation but >10% before. So you'd have >500.000 in 2047 dollars. In this
case it's important to do that adjustment because you're doing an investment
upfront for payoffs over 30 years so the value of money adjustment is
extremely important. It should only make your case stronger though if you
haven't done that yet.

~~~
Reason077
Energy prices, and thus savings, are certain to increase over that 30 years
too. Quite likely at a rate exceeding inflation.

~~~
kcorbitt
Energy prices have been mostly flat relative to inflation for 40 years, and
there's a reasonably good chance that they will start dropping appreciably (at
least during peak daylight hours) as solar continues to make major inroads.

~~~
matt_wulfeck
That's true in a lot of places but not really in California, where there's a
lot of customers for solar. I don't need to go into the reasons why. It's
California.

~~~
jpatokal
Why so? California's climate is pretty optimal for solar generation and
there's a lot of desert waiting to be covered in solar panels.

Solar is not going to have a similar impact on (say) Ireland in the next 30
years.

~~~
kristofferR
More solar will likely result in higher grid energy prices, since people will
buy a lot less energy while the grid costs the same to maintain.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Solar can also reduce grid costs, by e.g. shaving the yearly peak power
demand, which is usually a summer afternoon so it's not clear cut.

Probably the bigger impact is bad incentives for the people building the grid,
who are often able to do what they like and get a guaranteed percentage return
on top, which pushes them to spend more than they need to. This has been
particularly pronounced in Australia I believe.

------
mrtron
Not sure why all the negative energy.

They are going after the portion of the market that would replace their roof
with a high end material, and are interested in solar.

If you are a home owner in this situation, you could consider investing into
your home. The roof will pay dividends over the next 30 years, and is
attractive and durable.

I think it will do extremely well. Perhaps the best opportunity is in new
construction. Imagine having 50k more baked into your mortgage, but having
your roof lower your ongoing energy costs! Great potential in that market,
could also optimize the roof designs for power generation.

~~~
solotronics
yeah there is little economic incentive for anyone outside of California will
to retrofit these onto an existing house. Take Texas for example a large house
in Dallas is $500k I used the provided calculator on the Tesla site and the
roof install will cost $211k! that is not justifiable on a house this
expensive.

~~~
goobynight
Right. Outside of dense, expensive cities, the %of house value goes up since
houses cost less AND the roof sizes also go up.

------
IvanK_net
I have always been a huge fan of a quick transition to sustainable energy
sources. There is just one little thing I don't understand.

Why they expect people to make electricity at their homes? You can buy a
little piece of land in a dessert, put solar panels there and distribute the
electricity to other places. And you don't have to climb on any roof during
the installation or the maintenance.

It is not profitable today in a free market to bake your own bread or to plant
your own vegetables. Because if it is done in a large scale by professionals,
it can be made much cheaper while keeping the good quality. So I don't
understand, how the home-made electricity could economically compete with the
professional energy farms of the future.

~~~
tlb
It's the right question to ask.

Home electricity costs around $0.15/kWh, while power plants sell electricity
to the grid for around $0.03/kWh. The difference pays for installing and
maintaining the grid and local distribution wires to your home. Depending
where you are (I live in a forest, where a tree falls on the power lines a few
times a year and they have to send out guys in a bucket truck to fix it) it's
expensive.

Because of net metering, home solar panels effectively get paid the home rate.
It's kind of unfair. If you have enough solar panels to zero out your home
bill, you're getting something valuable (reliable nighttime power) that cost
money (to install and maintain the wires) for nothing. But that's the system
we have.

Sometime before we hit 100% solar power, the system will have to change.

~~~
tomaskafka
My electric costs are 0.035 USD/kWh here in Europe (Czech Republic).

Wth is wrong with the USA? It seems like you're getting screwed over
everything. 10x electricity, 100x healthcare and education - is US market
really just a bunch of colluding monopolies?

~~~
def-
I couldn't quite believe your numbers, and couldn't find any confirmation for
them: [http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/images/4/4...](http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/images/4/4f/Half-yearly_electricity_and_gas_prices_%28EUR%29.png)

[http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php/...](http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php/Electricity_price_statistics)

~~~
tomaskafka
Hm, that seems unusually high, really wonder where these stats come from. Is
every eurostat statistic distorted like that?

Here's a chart of energy prices on a Prague energy exchange, currently it's
about 30 EUR/MWh = 0.032 USD/kWh. I pay a bit more than that (incl.
distribution) with a good tarif (low cost broker), but even conservative
people I know who don't renegotiate energy prices get about 0.06 USD/kWh incl.
all distribution fees.

That said, electric distribution network in our country is probably
underinvested. Is the premium you're paying in US based on distribution
network cost?

[http://www.tzb-info.cz/ceny-paliv-a-energii](http://www.tzb-info.cz/ceny-
paliv-a-energii)

~~~
dx034
Still seems low for retail. In Europe, the UK has very low costs with
~12-13€c/kwh, high cost countries such as Germany are more around 25-30c/kwh
(taxes and renewable energy charge).

------
SirLJ
Tesla acquired SolarCity in November in a deal worth $2.1 billion.

At the event, Musk said Tesla's roof would price competitively with normal
roofs and could even cost less.

"It's looking quite promising that a solar roof will actually cost less than a
normal roof before you even take the value of electricity into account," Musk
said at the event. "So the basic proposition would be: Would you like a roof
that looks better than a normal roof, lasts twice as long, costs less, and, by
the way, generates electricity? It's like, why would you get anything else?"

~~~
azeirah
I'm 21, thus I have no idea what roofs normally cost. I assume they're very
very heavily below ~80k? For a "regular" house, what would a roof cost? 4k?
10k? 500?

~~~
droithomme
My roof is 1600 sq ft. It had a metal roof on it, which is considered more
expensive than asphalt. It was 40 years old, which is the how long metal roofs
are expected to last. I replaced it myself for around $2000. Most of the cost
was $1600 for the metal roof. Then there was $400 in special nails and trim
parts and sealer. It would have cost a little more if it wasn't metal before
since I'd have to have added the spacers. Metal and asphalt replacement are
sort of DIY possible, but asphalt is dirty heavy work. Metal is less dirty and
dangerous, just remember to wear leather gloves. Also probably don't attempt
if one's roof has more than a couple gables etc. It's better if you've done it
before in any case. To have someone else replace the roof would have cost at
least twice as much. Could be three times as much in some parts of the
country.

If I were to have switched to slate or terra cotta or glass solar tiles I'd
have to tear down the roof and rebuild it because normal houses in the US are
not designed to hold that sort of weight, it requires a stronger roof
structure, and sometimes stronger walls to hold the heavier roof. Possibly the
rest of the structure would have to be reinforced as well. Doing this
correctly requires a consultation with a licensed structural engineer. That
sort of roof rebuild would cost from $20,000 - $50,000 depending on the scope
needed according to the engineer, and that's before adding the roofing
materials.

~~~
thatwebdude
+1 for adding in the cost to support the extra weight.

Many homes, even ones they're building now, are not designed to support
anything more than a few layers of standard asphalt shingles.

BTW, it's ridiculous that we're talking "down" to asphalt shingles now because
of this. Some of those come with 50+-year warranties now...

------
11thEarlOfMar
In modeling whether this makes sense, I looked at my annual electricity bill,
which comes in at about $1,800/year. That's not enough savings opportunity to
justify a ~$70,000 roof+batteries.

However, when I add 2 electric cars, the savings nearly triple [0]. Instead of
buying gasoline, I'll be paying for electricity.

At $5,400/year, spending $70,000 starts to make some sense.

On the other hand, if I put up ugly panels and still use the Tesla batteries,
aren't I going to save a lot more?

[0] 24,000 miles/year, 225 miles @ $10 per charge, vs. 25 mpg @$3/gal

EDIT: Corrected KWh charge... $10 is cost for one charge.

~~~
deegles
What's your goal though? If it's just to save money then it makes more sense
to drive a beater gasoline car.

If the goal is to help the environment, it's probably still better to buy a
beater gas car and buy carbon credits with the difference. Also there are tons
of other things you can do like downsizing, eating less meat, biking to work,
etc.

~~~
RodericDay
Tesla's entire offering is trickle-down environmentalism.

------
quizme2000
I think Elon got ripped off on his last shingle roof. The bar chart is nice
but off by at least 150%. I've had many roofing subcontractors as clients past
and present in Northern California. Based on an average of 870 roofs in 2016
for Single Family Residential homes in the bay area, Asphalt shingle roofs are
$3.12 per square foot for materials and labor. The highest was $5.75 psf and
the lowest $2.35 psf. Note that the SF bay area is considered one of the most
expensive in roofing market. Also note that Solar City has a poor reputation
in the industry for hard selling larger than needed residential solar systems.

~~~
greglindahl
The roof launch event was very clear that this is a product that competes
against premium roofs. Asphalt shingle roofs aren't premium roofs. As an
example, for high-end housing developments, many of them do not allow asphalt
shingle roofs.

If that's not your thing, great. Then this isn't the product for you.

~~~
Thrymr
The article specifically cites a source talking about asphalt shingle roofs:
"The price was calculated for a roof where 35 percent of the tiles are solar
(solar tiles cost more per square foot than non-solar tiles), in order to
generate $53,500 worth of electricity, which according to Consumer Reports
would make a solar roof more affordable than an asphalt shingle roof."

------
fernly
For a counterweight let me present this interview[0] with the CEO of "the
largest privately held solar contracting company in America", near the end of
which he says several disparaging things about Tesla's roof, including,

> When I saw the demo he did at Universal Studios... What I saw was a piece of
> glass that looked like it had a cell in it. The challenges he’s going to
> have is, how are you going to wire it? Every one of those shingles has to be
> wired.

> Roofs have valleys and they have hips and they have pipes. … How are you
> going to work around that? How are you going to cut that glass? Are you
> going to cut right through the cell?

The latter question is perhaps answered by the posted article, "Solar Roof
uses two types of tiles—solar and non-solar." So Petersen's question is moot,
the glass/solar tiles don't have to be cut to fit in a hip or around a flue,
that will be done to the non-solar tiles that look the same.

The question of wiring is open: imagine the grid of wires that have to underly
that roof, and getting them all put down without a break or a short, by big
guys with nail guns (if you've ever watched roofers at work -- it isn't a
precision operation).

Then Petersen goes on to say,

> So I would say for the record ... it’ll be cost-prohibitive. ... For $55,000
> I can give you a brand-new roof that will last forever — 50 years — and I
> can give you all the solar you can handle. ... (Musk’s) product is going to
> be north of $100,000.

The graph in the posted article does not directly address total up-front
installed cost, but rather tries to combine cost with some anticipated
lifetime energy return -- a procedure with a LOT of variables and assumptions.
I would like to see real numbers for a Tesla roof, $/sq.yd installed.

[0] [http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/04/from-summer-job-to-
sol...](http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/04/from-summer-job-to-solar-king/)

~~~
fernly
OK I just put my address into the calculator and I think the thing's bogus.
Without asking anything about my house size or my solar exposure, based solely
on my address, it gives me a hard figure ($53,100) for the roof cost and a
30-year energy income of $76,100.

I call bullshit. First, I do not believe they actually know the size of my
house or the orientation of the (numerous) roof pitches to the sun. Spoiler:
it's only 1300 sq feet and the longest roof ridge is oriented NW-SE, far from
optimal for exposure.

Then there are the three very large oak trees that shadow it from three sides.

Then there is the fact that my utility is a local one, not PG&E, and I doubt
they took the different rate structure into account. And if they did, how the
F do they know what Palo Alto utilities will charging in 10, 20 or 30 years?

They don't know. The whole calculator is a bogus fantasy toy.

~~~
Meegul
That's actually exactly the data they're getting from Google's project
Sunroof. I'm not sure how correct that data is, but I haven't seen many
complaints.

------
fpgaminer
I'm so absolutely excited for solar power. Tesla's Solar Roof, their PowerWall
batteries, electric cars. It's all just painting such a bright future.
Certainly Tesla has no monopoly on it, but they've made it sexy and are
pushing the bleeding edge forward. Props to them.

We recently signed a contract to do an installation on our house (with a local
contractor, not SolarCity). It can't happen soon enough! We'll have enough
panels and batteries to be 100% off-grid throughout the entire year, plus get
a good chunk of change back from the Net Metering every year. Pay off is only
8 years!

That installation is enough to cover our normal electric usage. Longer term I
want to replace our gas appliances with electric and replace the car with a
Tesla. Then we can double our solar installation to keep pace and BAM we will
be 100% clean energy and off-grid. All while saving a bucket of money.

The thought of running off grid in the middle of a Southern California suburb?
People might think me crazy, but guess what? At least we're doing our small
part to save the planet, and saving money doing it. So who's the crazy one?

~~~
mavhc
Going off grid means you need a lot more batteries, which need materials and
energy to make.

Switching from gas to electricity for heating is a bad idea if there's still
coal power stations in use, if you're not selling your excess power to the
grid, they're going to turn on that coal power plant again.

Sharing power is a much better idea than trying to store it in batteries,
unless those batteries are in a car

~~~
fpgaminer
> Switching from gas to electricity for heating is a bad idea if there's still
> coal power stations in use

You misunderstand. Our solar installation will be expanded to cover the
appliances. We'll be 100% off-grid.

> Going off grid means you need a lot more batteries

We only need 3 PowerWalls to cover all our needs (~1 for our needs now, 3 for
when we have electric appliances and a car). That's not "a lot more".

> Sharing power is a much better idea than trying to store it in batteries,
> unless those batteries are in a car

Huh? Why would sharing power be a better idea? Solar panels generate the
majority of their power in ~4 hour window. Energy storage is _mandatory_.

~~~
ch4ch4
Sharing power via net metering is better (for the environment) because there's
no conversion loss from charging a battery.

~~~
fpgaminer
Perhaps I'm not understanding the argument. My interpretation is that y'all
want me to dump all my excess power during the day into the grid, to power
other homes that don't have panels, instead of charging a battery. And that's
somehow better for environment.

But ... when night falls, and I'm not generating any more power, where am I
supposed to get power? Do I just live without power every night? And everyone
else does too? Cause the only alternative is to burn fossil fuels to power
everyone's homes during the night. Fossil fuels being perhaps the most
inefficient solar batteries available to us.

And yes, fossil fuels _are_ batteries. Solar batteries in fact. It's just that
they have an unimaginably terrible conversion loss, not to mention they're
highly destructive to the environment, and take millions of years to charge.
If they ever do recharge, which is unlikely, since our planet is not likely to
revisit the eras that gave rise to significant quantities of them again.

I think I'll stick with lithium cells with their "conversion loss" of 80%,
that take up a small portion of a wall in my house, and last for decades.

~~~
mavhc
My points are: 1. To go completely off grid, compared to 80% off, takes many
more batteries, and is therefore inefficient.

2\. Using those batteries a lot every night wears them out more.

3\. There are many alternatives to fossil fuels at night, wind, tidal, solar
salt heating, nuclear, biofuels. Whether it's better to share or store would
depend on many factors.

a) What power sources are used on your grid b) What the demand is at each
point in the day c) The transmission efficiency vs the battery conversion
efficiency d) The resource cost of the batteries

------
zensavona
I understand where these people who are saying it sucks and it's too expensive
are coming from. It is more expensive than normal solar panels.

BUT! How many wealthy people have beautiful houses that don't have solar
panels? Why do you think that is?

Tesla has this cool factor that didn't exist for environmentally friendly
things before. How many super rich people drove electric cars or hybrids
before? Now Teslas are one of the cool things to have.

They are absolutely targeting a different segment of the population, but I
think overall it's a very positive thing and it'll probably work.

------
SwellJoe
I'm super excited about all of the great stuff happening in solar recently,
but whenever I read about the economics of home solar, I'm also always
reminded of how stacked the deck is for wealthy people vs. poor folks. There's
a very large federal tax credit for solar investment. That's great...but,
people who can't afford their own home get no such credit, and there's no way
for them to get such a credit. That's a super common trait for lot of
incentives; they go to people who need them least. And, the people who are
getting these incentives, are also using a lot more power (bigger houses, more
power), and so even with solar, their huge houses may _still_ be contributing
more to emissions than the poor folks who aren't getting any tax breaks living
in apartments or rental properties.

I don't really have any answers on this, I just think it doesn't get talked
about enough.

~~~
mundo
This is tautological; the reason poor people don't get a lot of tax breaks is
because they don't pay a lot of taxes. The government does spend a lot of
money helping poor people, but not via tax credits.

~~~
catawbasam
It's not a tautology because tax credits aren't the only possibility for
providing incentives.

Imagine you worked for $10/hour, and somehow got put in charge of designing
the incentives. Do you think they would look like this? I don't.

~~~
mundo
The tautology is in only looking at the subset of spending that's done through
incentives, and then complaining that it disproportionately goes to people
buying expensive stuff. That's what incentive means in this context: incentive
to buy expensive stuff.

Anyway, you're coming at this all wrong. If I was in charge of designing this
program, my mandate would not be to help poor people or rich people, it would
be to increase solar power. How do you increase solar power? By paying for
part of it. Who benefits? Whoever's buying it. Who pays to install solar
power? Not poor people.

------
palakchokshi
2 self driving Teslas in the garage (making money when not used) $150,000

1 power wall battery pack $7,000

1 Solar Roof $80,000

Subtract

$15,000 in Federal tax credits for both cars

$5,000 in California tax credits for both cars

30% of 80,000 = $24,000 Solar Investment tax credit

$237,000 - $44,000

Grand Total $193,000

Calculate savings

$240 per month in gas

$100-$300 per month in electricity

$1000 - $2000 earned by the cars while not used by owner (10 years into the
future)

$1340 to $2540 per month

$193,000/1340 = 144 months = 12 years to recover costs

$193,000/2540 = 76 months = 6.33 years to recover costs

Take away the income from the cars

$193,000/540 = 357 months = 30 years to recover costs

If PGE gives you money for putting excess electricity into the grid then you
can recover costs faster.

~~~
semi-extrinsic
I don't understand "income from cars" \- do you mean as autonomous taxis?
Pretty sure you need to then take into account increased insurance,
maintenance costs as well as taxes on that income.

Also if this autonomous taxi thing becomes a highly profitable gig (as you
suggest), you'll quickly run into a big supply/demand problem. There's only a
finite number of people who need mid-day cab rides.

~~~
stupidhn
> _There 's only a finite number of people who need mid-day cab rides._

Yeah, it's a contradiction in the business model. Everyone will be able to
afford to own a Tesla because everyone will be able to make money from the
cars driving everyone around?

~~~
palakchokshi
There will still be a barrier to owning a Tesla due to the upfront cost of
buying one. The fact that it'll be able to pay itself off over time is
immaterial to the affordability of at time of purchase.

------
nsxwolf
Oh wow. So that's disappointing. I was under the impression it was about the
same cost as a new roof. I guess its _starting at_ that cost, if you want just
a tiny little bit of electricity.

~~~
loco5niner
To be fair, that is a pretty unlikely assumption.

edit - just found out Musk pretty much said that. Still....

~~~
nsxwolf
Yes, I was hoping he would come through when he said:

“Would you like a roof that looks better than a normal roof, lasts twice as
long, costs less, and, by the way, generates electricity? It's like, why would
you get anything else?”

I guess technically "generates electricity" is the part I got hung up on, it
only needs to generate 1 milliwatt hour to be true. But much of the statement
still isn't true - it's more expensive than a regular roof.

~~~
gwern
The logic here might be that payback in the form of $1 of generated
electricity is _better_ than a regular $1 payback via, say, tax credit,
because it comes with additional benefits like reduced carbon emissions (not
priced into utility bills) or more reliability / having electricity during
blackouts.

------
kartickv
Would it be possible to decouple the roof from the solar? In other words, I'd
buy this roof for the cost of a normal roof, and an investor would pay for the
cost of the solar panels, and they'd own the electricity that comes from it.
The panels would provide me a power backup (in the event of a power cut), for
which I'd pay at the same rate as I pay the grid.

This would be helpful for houseowners who want to be green, or want backup in
the event of a power cut (a regular event in India), but don't want to or
can't invest so much in a roof. They get power backup without making an
upfront investment.

Investors would benefit from getting a free site to install their panels on.

------
foxylad
Does anyone know how the electrical connection works?

It seems to me that this is critical. If connections fail in a really hostile
environment (high thermal range and moisture levels) then maintenance will
kill any savings.

But if they've solved this problem, (and perhaps have an efficient way to
replace tiles without removing the ones above _), then I 'd guess they will be
wildly successful.

_I once visited my brother who was having a new slate roof installed. While
inspecting it, he saw a cracked slate on the bottom row. He insisted it be
replaced, which meant removing an ever-increasing triangle of tiles above it,
until you reached the ridge. The contractor did not have a good day.

~~~
thatwebdude
If all are assumed to be powered, then I think an assumed failure rate is
acceptable to the warranty.

Are they going to have an interface that "reports" bad shingles on your roof?
Hell no!

But if you're roof is generating whatever the acceptable range is for the
area, then you're good.

------
Matt3o12_
Does anyone understand how the warranty works? From their solar panel page[0],
it says that there is a 30 year warranty for Power and Weatherization and a
lifetime warranty.

So, what does the lifetime cover? The only thing that can go wrong is that
either the power module fails or the tile is damaged due to weather, which is
both covered by the 30 year warranty.

Nevertheless, a 30 year warranty is still pretty impressive and even more so
if it covers normal wear and tear from weather.

[0]:
[https://www.tesla.com/solarroof?redirect=no](https://www.tesla.com/solarroof?redirect=no)

~~~
greglindahl
The tiles are proof against weather: if you saw the reveal video they dropped
a heavy object on a tile without damaging it. Given that, offering a warranty
against weather damage is basically free to Tesla, modulo manufacturing
defects.

~~~
vkou
And unless you live in a forest, or in tornado alley, having an anti-weather
warranty for your roof is worthless. Most roof problems are caused by mistakes
in installation, not because the tiles don't last as long as they are expected
to.

------
DLarsen
"...the glass itself will come with a warranty for the lifetime of your house,
or infinity, whichever comes first."

Cute.

------
Arcsech
I'm curious about the durability - I live Colorado Springs, which is typically
very sunny (good for solar), but can get pretty bad hailstorms. This means
that the average roof lifetime here is much shorter than elsewhere. If the
Tesla's roof tiles are actually significantly more durable than asphalt, it
could be more cost-effective here than elsewhere.

~~~
netinstructions
This is something they're specifically trying to address. Elon posted some
high speed footage of a "hail gun" shooting the Tesla tiles.

[https://www.instagram.com/p/BT7Gxsag27j/?taken-
by=elonmusk&h...](https://www.instagram.com/p/BT7Gxsag27j/?taken-
by=elonmusk&hl=en)

Sounds like a fun job to build and operate a "hail gun"

------
myrandomcomment
I need to replace my roof this year / next year. Cost ~15-20k for normal
roofing, up to 50k for metal. I want solar on top of that and backup power.
Just put my money down for this. Cost is under the 50k I was thinking about
just for the metal roof!

Time will tell when they come out and do the survey to see how correct it is
but I am excited.

------
qaq
To all upset about pricing there are products targeting different income
brackets. People in blah also can't understand how we spend half of their
monthly income on some organic blah drink. Just because it does not make sense
for your particular situation does not mean there is no market.

------
altano
"Your Solar Roof can generate $123,900 of energy over 30 years."

Why doesn't the calculator tell me the estimated kWh production instead of a
dollar figure that means nothing to me?

------
bootload
_" Solar Roof uses two types of tiles—solar and non-solar. Looking at the roof
from street level, the tiles look the same. Customers can select how many
solar tiles they need based on their home’s electricity consumption."_

Game changer for suburban housing. This will accelerate the decentralisation
of power generation making it less likely power failure will occur. Now for
housing regulations at state and municipal level to mandate solar tiles in
construction.

------
kristinafoley
The bigger problem with this is that they are being made at 2009 electrical
code specifications, and we're at 2017. Will they really be available anywhere
outside of California?

The calculator will not go over 50%. So then what? Still pay for their tiles
for the whole roof?

And what if 4 in the middle of my roof are bad? Or 10? or 4 this week and 10
next week? How many times do I have to have them out?

What about ALL the wires? Where do those all go? Each tile will have wires
needing to connect to an inverter and the Powerwall? Electricians are already
in high demand, how long will I have to wait for them to do this? Electricians
are EXPENSIVE, do I have to pay for each hour they are repairing this system??

Powerwalls have a 10 year warranty. There is no cost for replacement included
in their 30 year projections.

Is anyone believing this administration will continue the tax credit, on
solar??

Solar shingles have been done. Every company has already discontinued them.
CGI works in advertising, but doesn't work in reality.

------
beezle
A bit late on this, but have to wonder what fire departments think about this
roof/panel? How difficult will it be to vent a roof? Will the roof present an
electrical risk to firemen (even assuming there is a cut off below)

Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of municipalities have given too much
thought to widespread solar use and I wonder if this will fall afoul of
possible future regs.

~~~
thatwebdude
This is a very good point, unless they're assuming they're as easy to break as
tile; which I think is a bad assumption considering the plastics/glue used in
solar panels; When they break they barely shatter and most stand up to intense
hail storms just fine.

------
ed_balls
Apart from people buying these for status there is another market - Hawaii and
other remote places where prices are from 2x to 5x comparing to California.

~~~
thatwebdude
Interesting it to be considered a status symbol; 90% of people walking by will
think it's just a normal roof.

I can spend pennies for that (comparatively).

Now, if I had an array of panels on my normal roof; at least >90% of people
would know what they is and be "impressed". However impressed people get about
roofs, that is.

~~~
ed_balls
You can brag in front of friends and family - people you care about.

------
dustinmoorenet
With Space X internet on the horizon, I need to start designing my house in
the country, preferably with a small roof.

~~~
s3graham
Why a small roof?

~~~
krallja
Fewer shingles => lower cost.

~~~
thatwebdude
Fewer shingles => less solar power being generated by the solar roof you
bought to generate enough power.

------
dynofuz
The hail ball test is deceptive. The tesla tile is held with more support
since its horizontal. the max distance to any corner support is maybe 2-3
inches. the other natural tiles are vertical, and therefore have 4-5 inches to
the farthest supported corners. It may still work, but we cant tell from that
video.

~~~
fmihaila
> The hail ball test is deceptive.

In that case, Tesla is deceiving itself, since they offer unlimited warranty
for the roof.

------
accountyaccount
Looks like these roofs take about 30 years to pay for themselves?

------
awqrre
At my house, it would take more then 20 years to use up $53,500 worth of
electricity assuming that the panels would be able to generate all the
electricity that I need (and it probably would not be able to because my roof
is not in the perfect angle). I probably will have to stick to a conventional
roof.

~~~
thatwebdude
Good news! Conventional roofs are 100% compatible with conventional solar
panels.

------
brianbreslin
Any idea on whether or not this would improve your home's resale value? Also
it won't let you go a full 100% (max 70%) of your roof coverage. Do they fill
the rest with regular tiles?

The average person would have to finance this. So what's the true cost?

~~~
gervase
In many (most?) areas, solar systems are considered "overimprovements" from
the perspective of appraisals.

This generally means that any increase in home value (increasing appeal to the
buyer directly) won't translate to a higher loan amount from the bank (which
will only loan out the on-paper valuation), restricting the ability of the
buyer to actually pay the higher price they would otherwise be willing to pay.

This could change as solar systems proliferate, making them almost a
"standard" feature of most houses. It also wouldn't affect sales to cash-
paying investors, which in some markets are the main buyers, since they don't
need to qualify for loans anyway (and therefore can ignore appraisals).

Either way, I wouldn't bet on it increasing the home's value more than ~40% of
the cost, if that.

------
pfarnsworth
I am currently waiting to have my roof redone in the next couple of weeks It's
going to cost $20k. I went through the calculator and it said that my roof
would be about $30k after rebates, with no battery. That, to be honest, is
something I wish I had known before I signed the contract to get my roof done.
I don't, however, use much electricity. I use about $70/month max for my
entire house, so I would literally have to convert everything over to
electricity in order for this to be more worthwhile. But at this point,
there's no incentive for me to ever get the solar roof unfortunately, having
JUST dumped $20k into my shingle roof.

------
jorblumesea
While it's far better than other competitors, my asphalt roof was 7k, 30 year
warranty rated to 120mph winds. Still a long way to go on the pricing part.

Super happy this is even a thing, 10 years ago this would have seemed like
science fiction.

------
bikamonki
Sit down and dig this: in my country the State owns sunshine. Yep. They even
made sure it was included in the last Constitution. So, if this tech ever
becomes cheap enough for the masses, government will be ready to tax it.

------
gumby
FYI LCoE calculation on Si PV assume a reduction of at least 50% of generating
capacity within 20 years. This page just claims "30 years" which is outside
the expected lifetime of any cells on the market today.

------
OrthoMetaPara
This is the dumbest thing ever. If you live in a city or a suburb, you don't
need one of these things because you'll be connected to a grid that can give
you electricity that is far more efficiently generated. If you live in a rural
area with a lot of sun, then you can just put solar panels on the ground where
they're not a bitch to clean.

I'm not against using solar electricity because it can be made affordable but
this idea is equivalent to the backyard blast furnaces in Maoist China. It's a
waste of time and only useful for status signaling to your eco-chic friends.

~~~
sliken
Most grid power is not solar. So running local solar can save you money, cool
off your house (cool attic in the shade of the solar), and decrease your peak
load on the power grid which makes the grid more efficient.

Even in rural areas while cheaper to mount on the ground, you lose the savings
of a cooler house.

~~~
intrasight
That last sentence made no sense to me.

------
rurabe
Best part

"Tile warranty: Infinity, or the lifetime of your house, whichever comes
first"

~~~
pervycreeper
IOW, the lifetime of the house. Not sure what they're getting at.

~~~
rurabe
I think they are having a bit of math fun

------
mrfusion
how these shingles connect to each other? And how are they affixed to the
roof? You can't just nail them right?

~~~
euyyn
That's what baffles me about this whole thing. Unless your roof is rectangular
with homogeneous shadows, if you connect the shingles, say, in rows, you'll
have unbalanced voltages. Is the plan to have a microinverter per row of
shingles?

~~~
sliken
There's two types of tiles. I suspect they just use the same number or row and
then fill in any gaps with the non-solar tiles.

~~~
euyyn
That makes sense. It also lets you avoid areas with shadows, by using the non-
solar ones there.

------
puranjay
This is one of my pet peeves with HN.

People here often gang up on a product if it doesn't meet their specific
requirements or budget.

Could it simply be that you aren't the target market for this product?

Also, people comparing the cost of this roof with the cost of a conventional
roof are being a little ingenuous. This roof has ROOF + SOLAR.

You'll have to include cost of an equivalent solar system + roof if you want
to do a cost to cost comparison.

It's obviously not cheap, but if there are people - and there are plenty of
people - who can afford it, why knock it down?

~~~
DannyBee
"Also, people comparing the cost of this roof with the cost of a conventional
roof are being a little ingenuous."

Because that's precisely what elon did!

"“So the basic proposition will be: Would you like a roof that looks better
than a normal roof, lasts twice as long, costs less and—by the way—generates
electricity?” Musk said. “Why would you get anything else?” "

Note the "Costs less" part.

In case you wanted to argue about that: "Musk told the crowd that he had just
returned from a meeting with his new solar engineering team. Tesla’s new solar
roof product, he proclaimed, will actually cost less to manufacture and
install than a traditional roof—even before savings from the power bill. "

Note very specifically: "Cost less to manufacture and install than a
traditional roof - even before savings from the power bill".

------
ctdonath
People keep overlooking the objective value of not relying on "grid" power
sources. Power goes off, your system keeps going. Gasoline supply stops (I've
seen that a few times), you can just power your car at home. Your system
fails, grid is likely still up to cover.

Supply-and-demand takes a sharp turn when supply is actually limited and
can/does _run out_. At that point, having pre-paid for your own uninterrupted
off-grid supply is worth a whole lot more.

~~~
rhino369
I think people overvalue the value of being off the grid.

The average person isn't doing anything that critical at home, so they can
just deal with it. Diesel generators work for people with critical use cases.

Katrina is the only time in my lifetime where a major city / region was
without power and without gas deliveries for a long time.

~~~
ghaff
Where I live (Northeast), pretty much the only time where an extended power
outage is a serious problem is in the winter. And that's because of losing
heat. A Powerwall-like "UPS" that could handle some critical systems
(basically my furnace) automatically is interesting. But any solar panels are
likely to be under snow and ice.

Pretty much the only thing that's really a problem for me in a power outage is
losing heat because the furnace loses power and therefore potentially having
pipes freeze.

~~~
rhino369
How much heat would a powerwall even create? I suspect electric heat would
drain those suckers pretty fast.

Why doesn't the north east have gas heating?

~~~
ghaff
I have an oil furnace with forced hot water. Basically, just need to drive the
blower, maybe a pump, and some electronics. Not sure what the electrical draw
of my furnace is but it's not a huge amount.

You're right that, if you have electrical heat, a Powerwall would be pretty
useless.

------
MR4D
Tesla has an error somewhere. I checked their website calculator vs their
source of Google project sunroof, and Tesla thinks my roof is 5 times bigger,
with an electric bill nearly twice as high!

Doing some quick math, I can confirm that Google's number are reasonably close
on both, while Tesla's are just plain wrong.

The result is a Tesla roof that would cost roughly $170,000. Worse, that's
about half the value of my house!

I know - early days - but, wow, surprised by the estimate!

------
canterburry
Yeah, I feel the coverage of this has been very deceptive. We just got a quote
for our roof in SF (small house) and it was ~$20K with an upgraded
architectural tile, new spouts and gutters.

Tesla would charge me $67K for the roof alone based on roof size and our
energy use.

1\. "Unlimited warranty" doesn't actually mean unlimited warranty when your
roof starts leaking...just that the tile won't break.

2\. Why the heck should I pre-pay Tesla for unrealized savings to my future
energy use??

------
tankerdude
Hrmmm... I just signed a contract a few weeks ago with SunPower solar panels.
Over 40K for almost 8kWh of electricity. It's a hefty cost but it's ready now.

It's a nearly flush mount so I'm ok with it and it's still a traditional look
in the front where it's concrete tile that would last longer than I will live.

Lastly though, I wonder how they deal with valleys and different roof pitches.
It would look a little odd unless it is non functional.

------
woodandsteel
Interesting the house in the picture has a chimney and a highly slanted roof.
It looks like it is in the north with lots of snow and relatively little
sunlight

------
myroon5
I'm surprised they didn't team up more with Google's Project Sunroof or Zillow
or create their own version of those projects, so that you could just put in
your home address and get all the relevant details. Had to check Zillow to
find out my own square footage.

~~~
mechathor
They do use Google Sunroof -- your home may not fall under supported areas.

~~~
myroon5
Looks like you're correct. Supported area for Google Sunroof stops just a
couple blocks away from my house.

------
waynecochran
Google's solar saving estimator is pretty cool -- I punch in my house address
and it examines my roof line and notes how southernly each part of your roof
lies.

Unfortunately, it says my cost would go up $53 a month! No point in getting
solar if you live in Portland.

------
brianbreslin
Has anyone here looked into PACE financing
([https://ygreneworks.com/faqs/](https://ygreneworks.com/faqs/) ) for projects
like this? what is the interest rate or cost?

------
nextlevelshit
Has anybody information about the energy cost for production of one tile and
the time it takes to generate this energy by the solar cell.

Just the fact that it is a solar roof doesn't mean it is environmentally
friendly!

------
lostgame
I see a lot of these personal level-vs-global level discussions here but
ultimately not enough posts celebrating the fact that we're looking at both,
here, and looking at a potentially much better future because of it.

Go, Tesla.

------
yeukhon
> Installations will start in June, beginning with California

Would be interested in NYC.

So a couple questions for those already done this:

* any tax benefit / government subsidies I should be aware of?

* starting small, recommendation? pricing?

------
amelius
Why don't banks (or even Tesla for that matter) finance such roofs upfront? It
seems they can make money out of this.

~~~
vkou
Low repo value, unless you put your house up for collateral.

------
dharma1
UK availability?

~~~
twothamendment
Does the sun shine in the UK? Cheer up, one day it will...

~~~
vidarh
Not much, but enough that I see plenty of solar installations on nearby roofs,
and the financial incentives here are fairly good. I checked a "standard"
provider that provides regular or integrated panels [1] and their estimate for
my house is a tax free return on investment of 4.2% to 5.5% (integrated or
regular panels respectively) when factoring in feed in tariff and maintenance.

[1] [http://www.solarcentury.com/uk/](http://www.solarcentury.com/uk/)

------
batushka
I hope only rich people will be separated from their money and no loans will
be given for this.

------
dEnigma
"In doing our own research on the roofing industry, it became clear that
roofing costs vary widely, and that buying a roof is often a worse experience
than buying a car through a dealership."

Seems like someone just couldn't resist putting that little jab in there.

------
EGreg
I love their graph, with the solar roof being the only "negative-cost" roof.
Really drives the (sales) point home.

------
abc_lisper
Where is the finance option?

~~~
tropo
It's at your bank, same as always. It's called a home equity loan, or, for new
houses, a construction loan.

Tesla intends to provide this too. Don't expect a good rate if you feel a need
to have Tesla finance the roof. Banks at least have other banks to compete
with.

------
owenversteeg
Holy shit, these comments.

"My cars will make $24,000 per year" (in a comment justifying spending a
quarter million dollars on Tesla products)

"People don't understand how we can spend half their monthly income on one
organic drink" (in a completely unrelated comment)

"if I buy two Teslas my savings triple!" (another person justifying Tesla's
marketing with some creative math)

Sounds like something you'd hear from protesters mocking the 1% but no just
another day here on HN.

I've been here (in various incarnations) long enough to say this, so could we
try to be just a little bit more self aware? 24k/yr is nearly double the
minimum wage. A quarter million dollars is a truly immense amount of money.
And buying two cars is a dream for most of America, ignoring the fact that
those are two Teslas, which are roughly $70k cars (and no, you can't currently
buy any $35k Teslas no matter what Musk's Twitter says.)

~~~
darawk
Where are you seeing these comments?

EDIT: Found one:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14312426](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14312426)

It seems like he's just running some calculations. Your upset about this seems
pretty misplaced. Firstly, he didn't even say he would be buying Tesla cars -
just two electric cars. And secondly, he didn't actually claim he had the
resources to do any of this, just that he was calculating the ROI on doing it.
Which is a figure that i'm interested in, even though I can't afford to buy a
solar roof or two electric cars of any variety.

~~~
owenversteeg
Direct quotes:

"People in blah also can't understand how we spend half of their monthly
income on some organic blah drink.", qaq

"$2000 earned by the cars while not used by owner", palakchokshi (it's
clarified elsewhere in the comments that that's $2000 per month)

"when I add 2 electric cars, the savings nearly triple", 11thEarlOfMar (to be
fair, he seems to be almost free of the reality distortion field, but still
the idea of buying two $70k cars to _save_ money is ridiculous)

~~~
darawk
> "People in blah also can't understand how we spend half of their monthly
> income on some organic blah drink.", qaq

That's pretty clearly a true statement. Qaq isn't claiming he is in this
market. Just deriding the oft-expressed belief by people who are not in a
market that said market does not exist.

> "$2000 earned by the cars while not used by owner", palakchokshi (it's
> clarified elsewhere in the comments that that's $2000 per month)

He's just running calculations? I don't understand what the problem with this
is.

See my prior edit wrt the 3rd one.

~~~
rhino369
Running calculations on what? Tesla's aren't even self driving in the first
place. And there is no market for self driving uber cars yet. Who knows how
much you can make off them. And if it was really 2k a month, Telsa would
probably sell them straight to Uber instead of customers.

~~~
darawk
I'm not defending the quality of the calculations. Just pointing out that I
don't think there was anything tone-deaf about doing them.

------
gigatexal
The infinity warranty is a draw for me.

------
stratigos
People are thinking way too much about how much this saves them at a personal
level.

I think people should instead be thinking about how we can save the existence
of the entire species, and all other higher order forms of life on earth,
rather than focusing on their individual tax breaks, savings, or other trivial
concerns. Yes, your cash flow is rendered quite trivial if life on Earth ends.

Invest in the Life Economy, and turn your back on the Death Economy. The value
here is in the benefit to life, concern over state monopolized currencies
clearly facilitates an economy of death.

~~~
carleverett
I agree with the sentiment, but I have to correct your idea that global
warming is a species-ending problem.

The worst-case scenario of global warming (which might be inevitable given the
current CO2 levels) is a 216 foot rise in sea level [1]. This will cause mass
migration and be extremely expensive and unpleasant for society as a whole,
but poses little threat of ending humanity.

NASA's JPL did a great lecture a few months ago talking about the current
scientific consensus on the consequences of global warming - it's well worth
the watch:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJYs8L84L4s&t=3714s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJYs8L84L4s&t=3714s)

[1] [http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-
se...](http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-
melt-new-shoreline-maps/)

~~~
sliken
You are looking at a very small fraction of the problem. Yes higher water is
not an extinction level event.

But with increased CO2 there's also increasing acidification. So the plankton
dies, coral dies, mollusks die (their shells erode). The food web at sea
dies.... as does the food for a decent fraction of the planet. Acid rain
causes more damage, food production becomes tougher... especially on the
decreasing number of acres above flood level. Much of the most productive farm
land in the world would be inundated with acidic salty water.

~~~
FullMtlAlcoholc
Also, don't discount the rising level of violent conflicts that will ensue for
shrinking resources.

~~~
averagewall
Conflicts don't cause extinction. The winner survives.

~~~
FullMtlAlcoholc
Not necessarily. We all know of the theory of Mutually Assured Destruction.

As an analogy, think about what happens if a deadly infectious bacteria or
virus "wins" by infecting every human on earth. If there is no cure and no
human has an adaptation or mutation to stop it, by winning it has sowed the
seeds of its own destruction because there are no more hosts to infect.

It is easy to imagine several scenarios where an all out war for dwindling
resources can lead to extinction.

------
SirLJ
Way to expensive, as always, too much hype and then nothing...

