
Commercial Solar - lelf
https://www.tesla.com/bigsolar
======
_edo
This is the sort of thing I've come to expect from Elon Musk, the plan that
once you see it you think "oh...yeah. Of course." Tacking the removal fees to
the end of contract is a little iffy to me, but overall, what. a. move.

This gives consumers who want a way to get into solar a low-cost, low-risk
entry point where they'll probably break even, do a little better, or at least
be somewhere in that neighborhood month to month. There is a $1,500 removal
fee (which could be done for private contractors for less) but that's also
kind of peanuts for anybody who's looked into solar and realized the massive
up-front investment. I know that's why my house doesn't have solar.

For Tesla this gives them them the ability to ramp up production, have a huge
testing base, and start lowering costs while raising quality. If costs get low
enough and quality high enough they could push solar technology to the point
that it makes sense for the average consumer to purchase off the shelf. Short
of that they're getting a whole bunch of solar panels out there.

Talk about a win-win, this is amazing.

edit: I just woke up and kind of jumped the gun here, didn't even realize I
was looking at the 'commercial solar' page.....but it's too late to delete
this comment. I do think it's a really cool business model and it's also
really cool that SunRun has been doing it, too.

~~~
chairmanwow
Sunrun has been doing this for a while.

[1] [https://www.sunrun.com/solar-plans-and-services/monthly-
sola...](https://www.sunrun.com/solar-plans-and-services/monthly-solar-lease)

~~~
m463
Unfortunately, they don't show any numbers at all.

I think that makes it a lot less compelling.

What folks want to see is: my power company charges x/kwh, what is each plan
per kwh?

------
MertsA
[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-23/amazon-
jo...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-23/amazon-joins-
walmart-in-saying-tesla-solar-panels-caught-fire)

Multiple large companies have abandoned Tesla's commercial solar installations
because of the fire risk they seem to present.

~~~
Robotbeat
Aren't some of these installations from quite a while ago, i.e. the Solar City
days?

~~~
dragontamer
Has management changed significantly from Solar City days?

Its "reasonable" to make a mistake. The problem wasn't the fires per se, but
the management of the fires.

[https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-project-titan-
replace-...](https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-project-titan-replace-bad-
solar-panel-parts-2019-8)

Solar City did NOT issue a recall or a notice to their customers. So if Tesla
makes another screwup, they will likely keep it secret.

This is a company which operates in the shadows. If they make a mistake,
they'll keep it quiet. Compared to a "typical" company who will issue a public
recall notice and inform customers.

Solar City was run by Musk's cousin, and is now owned by Musk himself under
the Tesla company. The general management chain has not changed.

~~~
Robotbeat
That is not accurate. Tesla regularly issues recalls (some of which can be
fixed in the field) proactively, and a "typical" company may try to keep a
problem quiet or wait until forced to by safety bodies. I mean for goodness
sake, look at the behavior of "typical" German carmakers with the dieselgate
scandal (which continues). Against that backdrop, Tesla is a model of upright
behavior.

I realize that not everything Elon Musk does is rainbows and unicorns, but
there's some serious animus against Tesla in the comments here that is not
borne out by objective facts (although plenty of cherry picking is, of course,
possible to exaggerate problems that are not uncommon across these
industries).

~~~
dragontamer
I'm talking about the SolarCity case, as well as Walmart's allegations against
Tesla.

SolarCity knew that their solar panels were catching on fire. There was NO
recall issued in the past years. Period.

Another note: Walmart's dealing with SolarCity (AND Tesla, post-purchase) is
horrifying.

[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/)

> Moreover, Tesla's wire management practices were negligent and inconsistent
> with prudent industry practices. Loose and hanging wires were present at
> multiple Walmart locations, resulting in abraded and exposed wires,
> decreased insulation, and a phenomenon known as arcing that substantially
> increases the risk of fire by causing electricity to travel through an
> unintended path. Tesla also failed to "ground" its systems properly,
> violating basic practices for the installation and operation of electrical
> systems in a way that increased the risk of electrical fire.

\-------

I don't care how cheap you make your system! The fact of the matter is,
SolarCity / Tesla's reputation is in tatters because of this fire incident,
and Tesla management has done NOTHING to reassure its customers that they've
got the fires under control.

~~~
Robotbeat
Looking at legal briefings from only one side in one court case is not going
to leave you with a realistic, objective look at the situation. It is the
starting point in a negotiation, and is by definition one-sided. It's an
example of the kind of cherry picking I was referring to.

Using hyperbolic language in comments may be an effective rhetorical tool, but
it reduces the credibility of your argument.

The objective fact is that Tesla and Walmart are working together to solve
these problems as it's literally in everyone's interest to solve them.

~~~
dragontamer
> The objective fact is that Tesla and Walmart are working together to solve
> these problems as it's literally in everyone's interest to solve them.

Not really. Walmart is well past that point. Walmart is literally suing Tesla
over what Walmart perceives as gross incompetence on this issue.

> Looking at legal briefings from only one side in one court case is not going
> to leave you with a realistic, objective look at the situation.

In general, no. But in practice, Walmart has a very strong reputation in the
business world. Walmart is well known to be an upstanding business that gives
lots of leeway to its contractors. In fact, its pretty rare for Walmart to sue
contractors, despite the fact that Walmart is a huge business with probably
thousands of contractors working with them.

Furthermore, the Legal Briefing Walmart has prepared is unusually well-
researched. The briefing makes clear that Walmart went to extraordinary
lengths to help Tesla in this case:

> Walmart nevertheless worked closely with Tesla to explore a potential path
> toward re-energization of the systems. Walmart discussed with Tesla in
> detail the concerns it had about the conditions it discovered at the sites,
> and Walmart's consultants helped educate Tesla's personnel on how to conduct
> solar system inspections properly, including the types of conditions that
> can contribute to the risk of fire, how to use equipment and tools properly
> to look for and correct such conditions, and how to follow site safety and
> inspection protocols.

Walmart gave Tesla over a year to correct the defects and to raise the quality
of the inspections. And yet fire-after-fire continued to break out at Walmart
stores across the country.

This wasn't some sort of one-off crazy event. And all the evidence has been
documented already. Sure, these court documents show Walmart's perspective on
the matter, but they're not allowed to lie or slander in these court
documents.

Walmart started to move and investigate after the 3rd fire. A total of seven
fires took place before Walmart sued (and even after Tesla allegedly de-
energized systems). This is a systemic issue.

------
AtlasLion
Relevant:

[https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124625_tesla-offers-
ne...](https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124625_tesla-offers-new-solar-
rental-program)

------
micheljansen
Note that this only works if you set region to US ("Available only in
California"). If you select another region, you get a completely different
page.

~~~
benj111
By default I'm getting a buy or subscribe to solar, with Tesla commercial
solar branding and a note saying its only available in California.

I am not US based.

I assume that's what I'm supposed to be seeing?

~~~
bmj
I was able to switch to Residential, and that showed an option for my home
state.

------
black6
This is contentless. What is it--an ad for Tesla?

~~~
dymk
Agreed, this is literally just a checkout page, it doesn’t describe what this
is or why I’d buy it even. Why is this upvoted?

~~~
trickstra
Somebody above said:

> Note that this only works if you set region to US ("Available only in
> California"). If you select another region, you get a completely different
> page.

~~~
dymk
I am in the US and it’s an entirely devoid of content page. It just tells me
how much an installation would cost. What is it? Why would I use it? Is this a
new Tesla offering?

It’s not even a product page.

~~~
Robotbeat
User AtlasLion provided a link to an article describing the product launch
here: [https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124625_tesla-offers-
ne...](https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124625_tesla-offers-new-solar-
rental-program)

~~~
dymk
This would be a much better OP link than the one that was submitted. Thanks!

------
klunger
It says "Pay for what you generate" Do they mean "Get paid for what you
generate"? Or am I missing something really fundamental here?

~~~
SamBam
It's confusing on this sparse page, but no, you do _pay_ for what you
generate. It's a version of a rent-your-roof system.

If you choose to "subscribe," you are committing to paying Tesla 10-13¢ for
every kWh you generate. You are then (if you're in a state with net metering)
selling it to the state for a profit.

In CA, the average cost of electricity is apparently about 16¢/kWh. So you're
making a profit of 3-6¢/kWh.

The incentive to you is that it's free to install, and has no commitment apart
from a fee of $1500 if you want to remove the system. The incentive to Tesla
is that they are selling electricity to the state for full price, minus
3-6¢/kWh to you for renting your roof.

~~~
Already__Taken
Are you buying into a network to buy power all the time at that rate? Or is it
still when your specific solar installation is making power that you may buy
it at that rate?

~~~
SamBam
You're buying power from the utility company, at whatever rate they set, and
at the same time you are selling your power to them, at whatever rate they
set. They can be thought of as two separate transactions.

(You buying power can be thought of as a sunk cost, as this isn't changing it
at all (unless you are also storing power), so it can be removed from the
question.)

At the same time that you are selling power to the utility company, you are
_also_ paying Tesla 10-13¢ for every kWh you generate.

If you are able to sell at a higher rate than that, you keep the extra.

------
dev_dull
> _Estimated return of 8% to 12% per year. Higher if utility prices increase_

The PPA kWh price is quite attractive, especially if you figure in year-over-
year constant increase in places like CA (who do you think is _actually_
paying those PG&E settlements?). What they don’t take into account is your
~$10 a month charge to be hooked into the grid.

~~~
Robotbeat
I think that $10/month charge is pretty small for these commercial
installations (although the grid charge may be higher).

------
gandalfian
Is a dollar a watt cheap for commercial sized solar? Five years ago 50kw in a
field was about 75,000 dollars in the UK. I assumed prices had come down since
then for commercial quantities. Isn't first solar down to 30c a watt or
something for the panels?

~~~
jartelt
Commercial solar is more expensive than solar in a field or utility scale
solar. The lowest costs for solar you see quoted in the press will always be
for large-scale utility solar installations that are ground mounted.

Anytime you put the solar panels on a rooftop, the price goes up. That said,
putting an installation on a commercial property with a large, flat roof
allows for lower prices when compared to residential rooftop solar.

------
traverseda
Here in canada it just redirects me to a pre-order for residential solar. Does
somebody want to archive.is this for people outside of the US?

