Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Neurio vs. Tesla

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I have had a Neurio energy monitoring system in place for 5 years that monitors my PV system and house energy use. It has worked great and the Neurio monthly calculated electricity bill is pretty accurate compared to my utility company bill. Now that I have Powerwalls in place, I am able to compare the Tesla app energy usage to the Neurio app energy usage. I realize that Tesla also uses Neurio for its app but to differentiate between the two systems I will refer to them as Neurio (legacy system ) and Tesla (new Powerwall monitoring using the Tesla app). For people that also have a Neurio monitoring system in place, and plan to get Powerwalls, this is what I have noticed:

1. When solar energy is going directly into the battery as shown in the Tesla app, this energy is being counted at energy usage in the Neurio app. So for example, if the solar is producing 2 kWs going into the PWs, and the house is using 3 kWs from the grid, Neurio reports 5 kWs being used. Neurio has no category for stored energy such as a Powerwall. This at first didn’t seem accurate to me, until I noticed how Neurio counts energy flowing FROM the PWs to the house. It doesn’t count it at all. During the Peak Period PWs provide all of the house electricity. Neurio reports zero usage. I think in theory this is OK but please comment if you think this is not right.

2. I noticed that when solar and PWs are removed from the equation, that Neurio and Tesla report different measurements of the energy flow. For example, my EVs were charging after midnight and I observed the Tesla app reporting grid to house use of 11.9 kWs. I then checked Neurio and it showed 13.2 kWs. I don’t know why this would be the case. I looked at the Tesla and Neurio CTs installed inside the electrical panel and they are side by side on the same wires. By the way, the Tesla CTs are thinner than the Neurio CTs so it is easy to differentiate them.

3. I also compared the daily summary of kWhs between the two apps. The Neurio reported kWh usage is about 10 to 13 percent higher than what is reported in the Tesla app. This is consistent with what I mentioned in 2 above.

4. Solar production measurements between the two systems for the day is within 1 percent.

I understand that there is a loss of energy when it flows to/from the Powerwalls and am wondering where that loss would be captured? I am using Time Based Control Cost Savings and have only configured Peak (5 hours) and Off Peak (19 hours) with no Shoulder period.

If anyone has any ideas of why the two systems would be off by 10-13 percent, please comment.
 
I have had a Neurio energy monitoring system in place for 5 years that monitors my PV system and house energy use. It has worked great and the Neurio monthly calculated electricity bill is pretty accurate compared to my utility company bill. Now that I have Powerwalls in place, I am able to compare the Tesla app energy usage to the Neurio app energy usage. I realize that Tesla also uses Neurio for its app but to differentiate between the two systems I will refer to them as Neurio (legacy system ) and Tesla (new Powerwall monitoring using the Tesla app). For people that also have a Neurio monitoring system in place, and plan to get Powerwalls, this is what I have noticed:

1. When solar energy is going directly into the battery as shown in the Tesla app, this energy is being counted at energy usage in the Neurio app. So for example, if the solar is producing 2 kWs going into the PWs, and the house is using 3 kWs from the grid, Neurio reports 5 kWs being used. Neurio has no category for stored energy such as a Powerwall. This at first didn’t seem accurate to me, until I noticed how Neurio counts energy flowing FROM the PWs to the house. It doesn’t count it at all. During the Peak Period PWs provide all of the house electricity. Neurio reports zero usage. I think in theory this is OK but please comment if you think this is not right.

2. I noticed that when solar and PWs are removed from the equation, that Neurio and Tesla report different measurements of the energy flow. For example, my EVs were charging after midnight and I observed the Tesla app reporting grid to house use of 11.9 kWs. I then checked Neurio and it showed 13.2 kWs. I don’t know why this would be the case. I looked at the Tesla and Neurio CTs installed inside the electrical panel and they are side by side on the same wires. By the way, the Tesla CTs are thinner than the Neurio CTs so it is easy to differentiate them.

3. I also compared the daily summary of kWhs between the two apps. The Neurio reported kWh usage is about 10 to 13 percent higher than what is reported in the Tesla app. This is consistent with what I mentioned in 2 above.

4. Solar production measurements between the two systems for the day is within 1 percent.

I understand that there is a loss of energy when it flows to/from the Powerwalls and am wondering where that loss would be captured? I am using Time Based Control Cost Savings and have only configured Peak (5 hours) and Off Peak (19 hours) with no Shoulder period.

If anyone has any ideas of why the two systems would be off by 10-13 percent, please comment.
I have the same setup.

1) Technically, the Neurio is accurate as a "site" CT because it's exactly what the utility company sees.
When charging it's a load in the system, which counts against solar.
When discharging, it's a generator that's zeroing system load just like solar. Its source of energy is not counted as a "system" drain.

2) This must be a difference in the placement of the CTs where one is measuring load the other doesn't see. The one with the CTs placed closest to the utility line source is the more accurate one.
 
I was wondering if there was someone else had both systems like I have. I checked the Neurio support website to see if it had an explanation of how Neurio works with Powerwalls but I couldn’t find any mention of Powerwalls.

Regarding the CT placement. I looked inside the main panel and see both the Neurio and Tesla CTs stacked on top of each other with the wire going through all of the CTs. They are all touching. Does that affect the accuracy (i.e. should they be separated)?

I have the same setup.

1) Technically, the Neurio is accurate as a "site" CT because it's exactly what the utility company sees.
When charging it's a load in the system, which counts against solar.
When discharging, it's a generator that's zeroing system load just like solar. Its source of energy is not counted as a "system" drain.

2) This must be a difference in the placement of the CTs where one is measuring load the other doesn't see. The one with the CTs placed closest to the utility line source is the more accurate one.
 
I was wondering if there was someone else had both systems like I have. I checked the Neurio support website to see if it had an explanation of how Neurio works with Powerwalls but I couldn’t find any mention of Powerwalls.

Regarding the CT placement. I looked inside the main panel and see both the Neurio and Tesla CTs stacked on top of each other with the wire going through all of the CTs. They are all touching. Does that affect the accuracy (i.e. should they be separated)?
I would try to separate them with a plastic spacer to see if the results are any different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulmo
I was wondering if there was someone else had both systems like I have. I checked the Neurio support website to see if it had an explanation of how Neurio works with Powerwalls but I couldn’t find any mention of Powerwalls.

Regarding the CT placement. I looked inside the main panel and see both the Neurio and Tesla CTs stacked on top of each other with the wire going through all of the CTs. They are all touching. Does that affect the accuracy (i.e. should they be separated)?
If they're CTs for the same lines, and the CTs are both facing the same direction (as per the label and labeling), then EM wise, they shouldn't interfere with each other since the dominating EMF is from the line's current, not the CT's current. Tough spacers wouldn't hurt.
 
Thanks. Neurio Tech Support is now involved. I sent them photos of the CT placement and am waiting to hear what their opinion is.

If they're CTs for the same lines, and the CTs are both facing the same direction (as per the label and labeling), then EM wise, they shouldn't interfere with each other since the dominating EMF is from the line's current, not the CT's current. Tough spacers wouldn't hurt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NuShrike