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

Tesla's "solar roof" Event - Hosted at Universal Studios

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Nice code writing there: "15 lbs dead + 245 live" - I guess Placer Cty officials got a smoking great deal on I-beams made out of a fine Indestructium+Unobtanium alloy that they then sell to contractors, cuz there ain't no 15 lbs. of real material that can hold up itself plus 245 of live. No how no way.

I'll put it another way then put it to bed. In order to get 245lbs. of water on a square foot of your roof means you have 47 inches of rain equivalent on that square foot. Typically we figure 1 inch rain is equivalent to 13" snow; that can vary from 4" for super-packed snow (think on a road surface after many vehicles have driven on it); super-fluffy uncompacted Wasatch snow can be as much as 50 inches per inch of water.

Fun stuff - for years I was an Apaid NWS Weather Reporter at the Paxson Station. Had to read and report the data nine times every day, starting at 0545. They finally automated the station three years ago, meaning I lost the job but stopped losing my hair!
Somehow the engineers in this town are used to it and deal with it. I know it's absurd... but don't get me started on the building code and inspectors here. I've just been through a year dealing with them and their sometimes absurd requirements. (They decided that all new construction must have fire sprinklers... of course, this meant a new oversize water line and a monthly charge for "standby water" in addition to the $12,000 for the sprinkler system. We also have "HERS" requirements which necessitated a "HERS" consultant and about 50 pages of home efficiency documentation... lights, insulation, ventilation, windows, etc.)
I did get my final approval a few months ago and have sworn off building permits forever.

Anyway, here are some of my solar panels (and it's snowing today).


snapshot.cgi
 
Somehow the engineers in this town are used to it and deal with it. I know it's absurd... but don't get me started on the building code and inspectors here. I've just been through a year dealing with them and their sometimes absurd requirements. (They decided that all new construction must have fire sprinklers... of course, this meant a new oversize water line and a monthly charge for "standby water" in addition to the $12,000 for the sprinkler system. We also have "HERS" requirements which necessitated a "HERS" consultant and about 50 pages of home efficiency documentation... lights, insulation, ventilation, windows, etc.)
I did get my final approval a few months ago and have sworn off building permits forever.

Anyway, here are some of my solar panels (and it's snowing today).


snapshot.cgi
Its snowing TODAY?

Really? wow
 
.

Cons:
2) Solar panel density. The fantastic aesthetics of the panels noticeably impacts panel density. And based on what I've read, they will still need the same set backs as traditional rooftop solar, so they lose a potential advantage there I thought they would have. I was hoping you might be able to get more solar on your roof with these as compared to traditional rooftop solar, but now I think it will actually be less.
.

With Elon's recent tweet that they can be walked on like standard tiles, I wonder if that will still be the case...
 
For those who already have them....is there an automatic switch that comes with a Powerwall that allows it to power your home when the commercial power goes out?
Yes there is such a switch but it is a separate piece of equipment (I have such a switch in my garage). No it is not part of the Powerwall 1.0 product. Whether it will be an integral part of the Powerwall 2.0 product or not I cannot say.

Garlan, I am glad you are so interested in a Powerwall. But you are repeatedly posting asking for more details about it and no one on TMC can answer your questions other than to point you to the Powerwall page on the Tesla website. That is all we know right now. When Tesla releases more information than we will have more answers. No one here knows when Tesla will release more information or when Powerwall 2.0 will begin shipping.

It is similar to the Model 3 reveal of some very basic information and then the almost complete lack of more details for 7 months and counting now. I realize you are following the Model 3 closely so you know what I mean. It is typical of Elon to make a new product announcement, provide some basic information, extol the virtues of the product, and then we all wait an unpredictable length of time for more information. That approach can be aggravating to some people. Other people just wait, patiently...
 
Yes there is such a switch but it is a separate piece of equipment (I have such a switch in my garage). No it is not part of the Powerwall 1.0 product. Whether it will be an integral part of the Powerwall 2.0 product or not I cannot say.

Garlan, I am glad you are so interested in a Powerwall. But you are repeatedly posting asking for more details about it and no one on TMC can answer your questions other than to point you to the Powerwall page on the Tesla website. That is all we know right now. When Tesla releases more information than we will have more answers. No one here knows when Tesla will release more information or when Powerwall 2.0 will begin shipping.

It is similar to the Model 3 reveal of some very basic information and then the almost complete lack of more details for 7 months and counting now. I realize you are following the Model 3 closely so you know what I mean. It is typical of Elon to make a new product announcement, provide some basic information, extol the virtues of the product, and then we all wait an unpredictable length of time for more information. That approach can be aggravating to some people. Other people just wait, patiently...
Thanks for the quick reply.

I was hoping that someone such as yourself would answer and you did. Thanks.

I suppose I wasn't specific enough. I was actually asking the question in terms either Powerwall 1 or 2. My mistake.
 
(They decided that all new construction must have fire sprinklers... of course, this meant a new oversize water line and a monthly charge for "standby water" in addition to the $12,000 for the sprinkler system

My house is now 10 years old. I mind paying for the fire sprinklers, although their is no attractive way to cover them. Most of my covers have fallen down.

But I do hate the monthly charge of $50 initially now $100 a MONTH for these sprinklers on my water bill.

Last year I called my local water district to complain as I've spent 12x10x50 = $6000 plus to the water company for nothing. Their first response that it was for the piping to the house, but their system is right at the road. They told me my only recourse was to contact the Public Utilities Commission, which I did. I complained this was in violation with usury laws as I'm paying for their piping for about 1 foot for 10 years. The California PUC said "oh we need to bill people to make up the deficit due to the drought.".

I'm paying now $1200 every year to the water company for NOTHING. If there is a wildfire my house is more resistant than 95% of my neighbors and if my sprinklers turn on, everything will be charred to the ground.

California PUC is inequitable. I'm doing the right thing for a wildfire, and there is no justification for this fee.

Sorry for the rant, I'm not really one to rant but this is just nuts.
 
No One Saw Tesla’s Solar Roof Coming
Except for the part at the end where they said PowerWall 1 + Solar hadn't caught on yet (which is because Tesla isn't making PowerWall in volume for US consumers yet), I found this article to be well written and pretty complete.

---

Not in response to Jeffk and his funny joke. But to the AC-DC convo in general

I would like to know how AC is more dangerous than D.C. OHMS law doesn't care if it's AC or DC.

AC solar is much safer than DC.

AC is 120v to ground, 120/1000ohms is .12 amps. Ouch, with the exception of extreme conditions most people will be ok. See table below.

DC residential can be 600v to ground (Commercial 1000v to ground), 600/1000ohms is .6 amps. This is in the respiratory arrest, death range.

SolarEdge normalizes at 350vdc. This is above the let go range.
In safety classes, we're always taught DC is more dangerous than AC, because AC will allow you to let go faster, whereas DC will tend to hold on to you, due to the nerve reaction differences between the two. (The AC crosses 0 (and reverses), allowing your nerves to react, and even have a sort of neural buzz effect alerting you, and even have a nerve twitch effect, if I recall and interpret correctly, unlike DC.)

---

Based on my current understanding, here are the pros and cons right now:

Pros:
[...]

Cons:
2) Solar panel density. The fantastic aesthetics of the panels noticeably impacts panel density. And based on what I've read, they will still need the same set backs as traditional rooftop solar, so they lose a potential advantage there I thought they would have. I was hoping you might be able to get more solar on your roof with these as compared to traditional rooftop solar, but now I think it will actually be less.
Yes, but I'd like to see the price worked out to increase coverage. Most solar panels are oriented in optimum roof planes (as much as possible), but with solar shingles, I would like to know the cost-benefit analysis of placing additional solar shingles on less optimal roofs to make up for the decreased density.

Also, in version X of this product, they might be able to get the solar cell manufacturer to match the cell size to the shingle reveal. In version <X of this, they could even slowly get there, like adjusting the cell shape (to accommodate two rectangular cells next to each other filling more area), and/or adjust the shingle shape.

Also, due to their advanced holographic(? -- sorry, I didn't research this to see if this is close to what they're doing) type lensing possibilities, they might even be able to concentrate light from the whole shingle (even the clay-lookalikes) into the energy collecting cell. Using this type of technology, they could even change the cost-benefit analysis on the cell design itself, trading in more focused light collection for other manufacturing, material, energy, resiliency, etc. benefits. Just a wild hope in me hopes this is the path to getting >40% efficiency cells in place, since the current higher efficiency cells tend to want more focused light.

So, definitely the density is a con in the beginning, but this path has a lot of potential beautiful pro's coming out of it, not the least of which would be greater energy collection, if they get that far. (I'm not sure if Tesla is inventive enough to take those paths, though; we'll see --- 3M & Panasonic are great partners, but this type of research takes management commitment, too.)
 
Last edited:
In safety classes, we're always taught DC is more dangerous than AC, because AC will allow you to let go faster, whereas DC will tend to hold on to you, due to the nerve reaction differences between the two. (The AC crosses 0 (and reverses), allowing your nerves to react, and even have a sort of neural buzz effect alerting you, and even have a nerve twitch effect, if I recall and interpret correctly, unlike DC.)
A lower current is needed to cause death with AC than with DC. You around need five times current for DC to kill.
 
A lower current is needed to cause death with AC than with DC. You around need five times current for DC to kill.
That's fresh information to me. But, the currents required in both cases are relatively small, and very present on all the currently sold roof solar panels I've seen, whether DC or AC. Plus, the likelihood of the conduction path being in good conduction state is better in the elements (when you're installing on a roof, your hands or gloves could be soaked from rain, sweat, hydration requirements, dew, etc., and allow more deadly levels of electricity through you). The levels involved are such that a DC current that grabs you is potentially more dangerous than an AC current that buzzes you off, even if the electricity itself might have crossed a different effectiveness line level in the lab. As much as I loathe the anti-environmental lobbying efforts of the fire code people, they have a real point about electrical safety on roofs. Personally, I'd rather some sort of fire shutoff system for the top 3 feet so that we may continue to use that area of roof, and in fact, from what I recall, the current model code does allow for that, in that it allows for methods to keep it safe; solar panel and solar roof (Tesla Solar) providers need to step up and implement such solutions.
 
My house is now 10 years old. I mind paying for the fire sprinklers, although their is no attractive way to cover them. Most of my covers have fallen down.

But I do hate the monthly charge of $50 initially now $100 a MONTH for these sprinklers on my water bill.

Last year I called my local water district to complain as I've spent 12x10x50 = $6000 plus to the water company for nothing. Their first response that it was for the piping to the house, but their system is right at the road. They told me my only recourse was to contact the Public Utilities Commission, which I did. I complained this was in violation with usury laws as I'm paying for their piping for about 1 foot for 10 years. The California PUC said "oh we need to bill people to make up the deficit due to the drought.".

I'm paying now $1200 every year to the water company for NOTHING. If there is a wildfire my house is more resistant than 95% of my neighbors and if my sprinklers turn on, everything will be charred to the ground.

California PUC is inequitable. I'm doing the right thing for a wildfire, and there is no justification for this fee.

Sorry for the rant, I'm not really one to rant but this is just nuts.

They are requiring sprinkler systems on what exactly? And what do you mean by "covers"? How and why would you cover a sprinkler head and have it still operate properly?

I'm curious about the monthly charge as it sounds like an abuse of power.
 
They are requiring sprinkler systems on what exactly? And what do you mean by "covers"? How and why would you cover a sprinkler head and have it still operate properly?

I'm curious about the monthly charge as it sounds like an abuse of power.
I think he was referring to emergency fire sprinklers and their covers (escutcheons) that are located in the ceiling. The sprinklers pop out when activated.

 
  • Like
Reactions: JeffK
They are requiring sprinkler systems on what exactly? And what do you mean by "covers"? How and why would you cover a sprinkler head and have it still operate properly?

I'm curious about the monthly charge as it sounds like an abuse of power.

The monthly charge is an abuse of power. At $50 for 10 years, I was "okay" with it. This year it went to $100 a month. So every year forever I have to pay $1200 because my house is safer. Should be the reverse, I should get a discount.

The covers are like that in the video. BUT after talking to multiple contractors they are all pretty darn lame no matter what. They routinely fall down. I only have one still up on the ceiling and have given up with having them covered at all. The first to go was the one that was hanging over the Tesla. Most of them fell down on their own over time. Perhaps it is because this is earthquake country. They aren't hideous without the covers. I tried to take a photo but its too dark as it is still early here and they are really high up.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: liuping and u00mem9
How does the 3' setback work with these panels? How are they wired and where are the wires? Many others have tried this type of system and failed. There are so many questions at this point.

A Note to Elon Musk and the Brothers Rive on the Lure of Integrated Solar Roofs and BIPV
Thanks for posting that! This is exactly what I have been asking myself and the Internet since the launch: How does this integrate with the roof and home? This, more than price, is key to this solution's future. We need to hit up Elon on Twitter...
 
Thanks for posting that! This is exactly what I have been asking myself and the Internet since the launch: How does this integrate with the roof and home? This, more than price, is key to this solution's future. We need to hit up Elon on Twitter...

Since the tiles were reportedly not connected at the show, I don't think anyone including Musk has the answers at the moment.

Gosh, I wonder why they would hold a launch event before some of these basic questions (cost, output, interconnection) are known?