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

SolarCity (SCTY)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
umm, this may have been discussed, but using PVWatts from NREL, a 8kW PV array @ 39.9 degrees north (Washington DC area) would make ~12,000+ kWh/yr. 20kWh/day/december, 40kWh/day/July. there is your baseload in mid-atlantic states. A powerwall(s) or 3, 7 - 21kWh worth would do fairly well. So SCTY with powerwall to me is a very good concept PVWatts Calculator
That's really nice. I was not aware of that tool. Too round this out, one can use gas for heating, so that electricity consumption is close to 20kWh/day in December. 21 kWh of Powerwall gives coverage for a day. I would still feel a little more comfortable with a 1 kW generator. Cost system

$24000 8kW PV, Inverter, Inatallation
$ 6500 21kWh Powerwall, Installation net ITC
$ 1500 1kW Generator, Installation
--------------
$32000 Total

$1982.52 Annual payment on 30 year loan @ 5% interest
12000 Annual kWh
16.52 c/kWh LCOE excluding fuel
25 c/kWh fuel $3/gal / 12 kWh/gal

This is pretty good, but I've introduced some financial sleight of hand. The batteries and generator are not expected to last 30 years. Depending on use the batteries may last 10 to 15 year, but when they are replaced they will cost much less. Moreover I would expect more batteries and PV to be added as prices fall to reduce the consumption of fuel. These increments may actually reduce the average cost per kWh over time, and replacement components may be thought of as a natural escalator. Also the 25 c/kWh is a pretty good motivator to persue energy efficiency projects over time.

I think 16.5 c/kWh plus fuel is pretty fair. It's not too far above residential rates in many places the US. Thus, we can see tenuous the situation is for the utilities. The batteries and generator is only 25% of the cost of the system. Without them, we are looking at a $1487/yr or 12.3 c/kWh. This is pretty good if you have a decent feed in tariff. But if is a utility ditches net metering or adds extra fixed costs then going of grid adds just $496/year plus $200 - $500 /year in fuel. So if the utility is trying to push $1000 of cost per year back onto this customer, they go off grid. A customer with an 8kW PV system is not going to tollerate a $85/month utility bill. A customer with PV + battery is not going to tollerate a $50/month utility bill. Add to this the sense of being penalized and disrespected by the utility, and it is not hard for frustration to trigger defection.

The barrier to defection will only decrease as utilities raise rates and solar and battery costs continue to decline. It is also worth noting that in this set up the utility has considerable oil price risk. Suppose at $3/gal one's fuel cost going off grid is say $600 per year. This cost is part of the barrier to defection. But if the fuel price drops to $2/gal, your barrier just got $200/yr smaller. This may just be enough to reach one's tipping point. So the longer view is that within ten year the barrier to defection vanishes, but along that path a single year or two with a severe down tick in oil or uptick in utility bills will turn the tide. A key matketing strategy for SolarCity may be to pounce on any particular utility rate increases and to educate customers about how to integrate batteries and generators into their PV systems. Investors may want to know how oil price declines may have an adverse impact on utilities while strengthening rooftop solar. Currently the market wants to devalue solar as oil fall, but if gasoline, diesel or natural gas comes down hard enough to liberate residential ratepayers from the grid, then onsite solar would be a huge beneficiary. It is not as if the utilities can pass along enough fuel saving to residential ratepayers to induce them to stay. The problem for utilities is too much fixed cost in the grid that they expect to recover from ratepayers. I think we are still a few years off from this. Powerwalls need to become widely available and come down 20% or so. This development would coincide with more downward pressure on oil prices, specifically coming from a growing EV fleet and batteries offsetting power generated from oil.

So three years out or thereabouts, we could see oil fall below $25/barrel ushering in massive grid defection. This is just one possible scenario. But know that in part of Australia, utilities have added fixed charges to residential plans in order to try to stem the tide of rooftop solar. These fixed charges are quite regressive against ratepayers who consume less power. For example, a resident that consumes only 7000 kWh/yr may wind up paying 0.72AUD/kWh or 0.52USD/kWh. This is well below the cost of home generators. So it is ironic that in an attempt to suppress rooftop solar these utilities have created a rate plan that leaves them highly exposed to low oil prices. This creates an alternative path to yet more solar: get a generator, go off grid, install PV to offset fuel consumption, install batteries to offset even more fuel, iterate until practically no fuel is required. Get out the popcorn, this should be fun to watch.
 
one small quibble here. Some may grid defect, cut the cord, most will probably 'load defect' stay connected. microgrids, some ad hoc, some planned will spring up. during superstorm sandy princeton had an 11megawatt microgrid for 3.5 days. FDA at whiteoak, maryland has a microgrid that goes online apparently a lot and keeps them up. Microgrids and Secure Power Supply discusses microgrids. SCTY and powerwalls and similar will be integral
 
one small quibble here. Some may grid defect, cut the cord, most will probably 'load defect' stay connected. microgrids, some ad hoc, some planned will spring up. during superstorm sandy princeton had an 11megawatt microgrid for 3.5 days. FDA at whiteoak, maryland has a microgrid that goes online apparently a lot and keeps them up. Microgrids and Secure Power Supply discusses microgrids. SCTY and powerwalls and similar will be integral

Just to be clear, I am not suggest that people shoulw or will go off grid in large numbers. I do see it as a policy failure that is suboptimal for everyone. For me, the point of working out grid defection scenarios is that these represent a termnal point and logical outcome of business as usual. The current utility business model cannot survive past the grid defection scenario. So we need to know how far we are from the cliff and hope Thelma and Louise will not punch it. Utility investors especially need to understand how tenuous BAU is. In my view utility assets are already substantially over valued. They simply will not be able to recover all fixed costs plus a profit. Under a grid defection scenario, most utility assets from distribution and transmission to remote (so called “centralized“) generation become stranded assets. It is not the case, however, that thess assets have no value; they simply have value that is far less than current utility valuations would suggest. I do see this as the next great asset bubble. One way or another utilities will be reorganized. What would cause some utilities to pull a Thelma and Louise? Such a player may be counting on a government bailout. They will reach a point where no rate plan can recover fixed costs without incurring mass defections. So their next move is to impose fixed rates on all residents regardless of whether one is connected or not. This is being contemplated in Australia right now. This sort of solution is little more than allowing the utilities to impose a tax on all people, and this would be a highly regressive tax at that. Politically this is very ugly. The next step is government bailout wherein taxpayers absorb the losses and allow utilities to reorganize. This is essentially a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to utility bondholders and possibly utility shareholders too depending on how generous politicians care to be. So why would someone hold shares in a utility headed down this path? Dividend investors are on autopilot. The longer the defection scenario can be forestalled, the more cash is collected in dividends. Without fat dividends, the dividend investors would flee and few other kinds of investor would care to jump in. Dividend investors love BAU. They are the Louise giving the nod to Thelma just to keep driving. Other utilities will come to their senses and chart a new course. These are the ones that understand the importance of being flexible and agile and meeting customers on their own terms. So how do you induce a homeowner with solar and storage to stay on the grid? Simple, you trade power with them. In trading, both parties are able to realize market based returns on investments while driving down costs for everyone. This is the move to microgrids and micromarkets.
 
End of quarter time. Has been stuck between $47 and $51 for entire quarter. Short interest at record highs even though Solar City has been beating expectations. There will be s big move in the coming weeks.

Bear Argument : Solar City has no way of knowing what its panels will be worth in 20 years, will never make money, and will ultimately go bankrupt. Elon is in denial or lying about SolarCity. Also, Net Metering and incentives could disappear, which would create more problems for Solar City.

Bull Argument : The Bears don't understand Solar City's business model. The Bears also don't understand that traditions utilities use very expensive outdated machinery, that fails a lot more frequently than Solar Systems, and costs a lot more to service or replace. Elon Musk knows what he is doing. Elon's financial situation guarantees Solar City will never run into cash problems. Net Metering won't disappear. Incentives are almost guaranteed to get renewed in some form and possibly increase. Incentives for Oil and gasoline are likely to be significantly reduced and possibly disappear altogether.

Here is a good article that provides a lot of useful details :
Aging US Power Grid Blacks Out More Than Any Other Developed Nation
 
Last edited:
Net Metering won't disappear. Incentives are almost guaranteed to get renewed in some form and possibly increase. Incentives for Oil and gasoline are likely to be significantly reduced and possibly disappear altogether.

These are HUGE factors! And they are generally deeply underestimated by the bears who have a very hard time believing that change they evidently see going on in front of them - the death of fossil fuel and the birth of renewability - and especially they lack the ability to envision what will come in the future, as this changes continues AND picks up the pace.
 
I get the feeling some (or all?) of the Tesla battery integration on the utility side will go through SolarCity. Am I mistaken?

I vaguely remember JB Straubel saying in that Stanford storage presentation that Tesla will directly work with utilities.

So which way is it?
 
I get the feeling some (or all?) of the Tesla battery integration on the utility side will go through SolarCity. Am I mistaken?

I vaguely remember JB Straubel saying in that Stanford storage presentation that Tesla will directly work with utilities.

So which way is it?

SolarCity does not have an exclusive with Tesla, and they are not particularly well positioned to do battery projects for utilities. However, they do want to aggregate Powerpacks in homes to provide services to utilities.

They do have a deal with Kaua'i Utility to provide a dispatchable solar facility with 17 MW PV plus 52 MWh storage. This facility will store all its solar power for dispatch after sundown. The project has a 20 year PPA @ 14.5 c/kWh. This is a first, and it is very promising. Such a facility could be build just about anywhere and compete directly with gas of oil peaking plants. Gas peakers have levelized costs starting at 18 c/kWh. So if SolarCity wants to play in this market, I think they can compete.

We'll have to wait and see what sort of ambition SolarCity has in the utility space.
 
SolarCity does not have an exclusive with Tesla, and they are not particularly well positioned to do battery projects for utilities. However, they do want to aggregate Powerpacks in homes to provide services to utilities.

They do have a deal with Kaua'i Utility to provide a dispatchable solar facility with 17 MW PV plus 52 MWh storage. This facility will store all its solar power for dispatch after sundown. The project has a 20 year PPA @ 14.5 c/kWh. This is a first, and it is very promising. Such a facility could be build just about anywhere and compete directly with gas of oil peaking plants. Gas peakers have levelized costs starting at 18 c/kWh. So if SolarCity wants to play in this market, I think they can compete.

We'll have to wait and see what sort of ambition SolarCity has in the utility space.

Thanks jhm.

On a separate note, I found their PowerHub product (in slide 12) to very impressive. Battery+Panels combined into one. Less than 2-hour assembly time is amazing. If price is competitive, which I suspect is, they will sell in thousands in developing world.
 
TECHNOLOGY: Net metering vs. storage creates clash between some allies -- Wednesday, September 23, 2015 -- www.eenews.net

Very good article. Author seems to overplay the gentian between net metering and storage. It's important, nevertheless, to understand how fixed rate plans with net energy metering fail to create any economic incentive for adding storage to a solar system. I am coming around to the view that we need time varying pricing plans, such as setting retail rates at a multiple of spot market rates within optional retail rate plans so as to capture the greatest economic value of batteries, solar and smart devices. Such a plan would in fact compensate a battery owner for providing energy storage to the whole grid. This in turn reduces the cost of stabilizing the grid and enables it to harness increasingly more renewable energy.
 
Yesterday evening Stifel initiated coverage of SCTY with a Buy rating and a price target of $64.

For whatever reason market has decided to completely ignore any analyst research with respect to SCTY. The average price-target now stands at $78, with a range of $50 to $105. Meaning SCTY is trading lower than the most pessimistic analyst projection.

This is unfortunate. Especially given the uniqueness of the business model/financials, one would think that analyst reports are even more useful.

SCTY management has been doing its best to explain out how the business works and how the cash flow works. But people keep reverting back to the traditional financial models, which simply don't apply to SCTY.

I don't know when this market will properly grasp SCTY strength and it's potential. Worst case, we may have to wait many years where growth slows to a point, where recurring-revenues aggregate up to defeat and gain over sg&a, and ultimately the company starts showing profitability in a traditional sense. How far away that is, is anybody's guess. My sense is that it is at least several years away.
 
TECHNOLOGY: Net metering vs. storage creates clash between some allies -- Wednesday, September 23, 2015 -- www.eenews.net

Very good article. Author seems to overplay the gentian between net metering and storage. It's important, nevertheless, to understand how fixed rate plans with net energy metering fail to create any economic incentive for adding storage to a solar system. I am coming around to the view that we need time varying pricing plans, such as setting retail rates at a multiple of spot market rates within optional retail rate plans so as to capture the greatest economic value of batteries, solar and smart devices. Such a plan would in fact compensate a battery owner for providing energy storage to the whole grid. This in turn reduces the cost of stabilizing the grid and enables it to harness increasingly more renewable energy.

Thanks for the article.
 
Low oil prices => low demand relative to supply => cheap energy => harder for solar to compete.
Although as we know, not much oil becomes electricity. But it seems many investment decision makers bunch stocks together into branches, like Energy, and coupled with the general downturn as well as German (and other) car makers' troubles these last few days, maybe they simply have to sell off something. Solars have been looked at sideways, so they are among the first to go.

Just my uneducated guesses ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.