Musk: Solar Shingles Will Cost Less Than A Dumb Roof

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Elon Musk is now saying that those tempered glass solar shingles he announced earlier this month will actually cost less to manufacture and install than a traditional roof. And, at least according to Musk, that's even before factoring in the savings from the power bill.

Make no mistake: The new shingles will still be a premium product, at least when they first roll out. The terra cotta and slate roofs Tesla mimicked are among the most expensive roofing materials on the market—costing as much as 20 times more than cheap asphalt shingles. Much of the cost savings Musk is anticipating comes from shipping the materials. Traditional roofing materials are brittle, heavy, and bulky. Shipping costs are high, as is the quantity lost to breakage. The new tempered-glass roof tiles, engineered in Tesla’s new automotive and solar glass division, weigh as little as a fifth of current products and are considerably easier to ship, Musk said.
 
He must think we are dumb as a roof to buy that, as builders in Houston at least are sourcing their roofing materials from Houston... its not shipping far. Not to mention how much quicker and easier it is to have a few guys with a nail gun just wap-wap-wap-wap nail those suckers in no time, versus actually properly installing a solar roof solution with all that wiring.
 
Another way they'll be "cheaper" is due to government subsidies, which we all pay. So, they might be cheaper at the time of purchase, but in the long run they're going to be more expensive.
 
If these are available at even a slight cost over regular shingles, I would buy them in a heartbeat.

Currently I am thinking about getting a metal roof once I get my roof redone.

Shingles are easy and cheap to replace, but the durability is absolutely horrible. At this point, there are quite a few patches on my roof where I have replaced shingles.

And when you need to just replace 1 or 2, the suckers are so brittle that a bunch more usually break or tear that are around the ones that need to be replaced.

The glue/tar that comes on them is trash and doesn't bind properly and even if it does, it will not bond properly to old shingles. And when high winds come and unbond them, they will not rebond like the shingle companies say they do.

Because of that, I have use roofing patch tar to reglue a bunch of the shingles back down.

It is a nightmare trying to keep a shingled roof in good shape.
 
Musk, you are supposed to lie about something plausible, not something implausible.

this is in-credible.
 
I wouldn't say shipping can be considered a manufacturing cost.
 
It's cheaper... AFTER the savings you get after X amount of time on your return on investment. That's business fine print talk. Up front cost will be astronomical.

Regardless of his "bonus" comment.
 
Ducman69 said:
He must think we are dumb as a roof to buy that, as builders in Houston at least are sourcing their roofing materials from Houston... its not shipping far. Not to mention how much quicker and easier it is to have a few guys with a nail gun just wap-wap-wap-wap nail those suckers in no time, versus actually properly installing a solar roof solution with all that wiring.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he is talking about the highest end terracotta and slate roofing, not asphalt roofing, which I still think is BS, and if he is taking about asphalt roofing, no way in hell.

marcoi said:
let me know when he buys and sells this


Click to expand...


These things are a joke. First, glass is an ungodly poor surface to drive on, traction vs asphalt is just laughable, and this is under ideal conditions, not wet or snow, the video where it says it has been tested for traction? Yeah, do some research, the dude who came up with the idea drove his tractor over them and said it worked fine...Yep, that's all the "traction" testing they have ever had done. The same goes for durability, glass is soft and will wear very fast, it will also crack easy, and once it wears it gets smoother and even less traction. This does not account for the poor optics and reduced optics over time and then getting dirty. The melting snow? Are you shitting me? The guy who came up with the idea has NO idea about actual power or PV efficacy. The power required just to melt ice is almost the same as the power required to boil water from room temperature. The part about them shoveling "recycled glass"? Yeah, doesn't happen, no recycled glass is used, it has even more poor properties than what they are claiming to use.

These people are so disconnected from reality and how infrastructure is built it is sad. If you want solar everything, why not build a cheaper awning over the road? It does not need to support traffic weight and abuse, it has clear sun access without cars or other things on top, it will not have to deal with the dirt, oil rubber deposits etc etc over time reducing optics even more and keeps snow and rain off the road all together. The government and a number of other people gave grant money to this company and after reviewing the tech ALL dropped it, there are many in depth reports floating around from them about this tech all going into great detail of how it does not work and how there are so many better options.

This does not even get into costs, maintenance, etc.

 
cyclone3d said:
If these are available at even a slight cost over regular shingles, I would buy them in a heartbeat.

Currently I am thinking about getting a metal roof once I get my roof redone.
Shingles are easy and cheap to replace, but the durability is absolutely horrible. At this point, there are quite a few patches on my roof where I have replaced shingles.
And when you need to just replace 1 or 2, the suckers are so brittle that a bunch more usually break or tear that are around the ones that need to be replaced.
The glue/tar that comes on them is trash and doesn't bind properly and even if it does, it will not bond properly to old shingles. And when high winds come and unbond them, they will not rebond like the shingle companies say they do.
It is a nightmare trying to keep a shingled roof in good shape.
Click to expand...

You need better shingles. I replaced my wood roof 18 years ago with high end 40 year asphalt shingles, and it still good, haven't replaced anything. I live in Sunny California, so I doubt they will last 40 years, but I'm half way there and they look like they should be good for at least another 10 years.

Also, he's not saying these will be cheaper then asphalt shingles, he is says they will be cheaper than premium tiles. When I replaced my roof 18 years ago, a tile roof would have cost me more than double what the 40 year asphalt roof cost me. Figured it would be cheaper to replace the asphalt roof every 25 years than to install a tile roof that "might" last 50 years.

One interesting point in the announcement is they these solar shingles are significantly lighter than the tiles. When replacing a roof you need to consider the weight of the roof. Part of the added costs if I had installed a tile roof, is that they would have had to double up the rafters to support the added weight. Also, since I'm in earthquake country, the added roof weight tends to cause more damage to the house when it's shaking. If these tiles are really that light, then that would be an added benefit.

Question is, how strong are they?
In order to paint my house, I need to be able to walk on part on the roof. I can't see walking on glass tiles and not breaking them.
 
Reminds me of printers being free or cheaper than ink. The roof will be cheap, than the cost starts to go up. Wiring, battery backups, inverters, etc. I'm all for it. Would just like a realistic cost breakdown for a total install. My new shingles were cheap. Its the labour and profit margin that cost. How much of the total will be proprietary as apple has proven is very profitable.
 
Even during the Press Showing, Musk said "Compared to traditional solar, you would be better off if you installed these on new roof installations, otherwise traditional solar would be cheaper."

Well the return on investment on solar alone (not the roof) is ~6 years if you pay 100% up front with no financing and get a rebate from your state and fed. (This assumes net effectively pay $14,400 after rebates and fed tax credits and a $200/month electric bill average.) So I call shenanigans.
 
Ducman69 said:
He must think we are dumb as a roof to buy that, as builders in Houston at least are sourcing their roofing materials from Houston... its not shipping far. Not to mention how much quicker and easier it is to have a few guys with a nail gun just wap-wap-wap-wap nail those suckers in no time, versus actually properly installing a solar roof solution with all that wiring.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, your saying those shingles are also manufactured in Houston and there is no significant shipping added to get them to Houston distributors?

*edited *shingles
 
nutzo said:
Question is, how strong are they?
In order to paint my house, I need to be able to walk on part on the roof. I can't see walking on glass tiles and not breaking them.
Click to expand...

They appear to be very sturdy based on the reveal a while back. I've linked the video where they drop kettle bells on the different tiles.
 
I guess tile roofs are common place in Silicon Valley. Might explain other statements that come out of that place.

(not in touch with reality)
 
so are these proprietary? I think id rather have an normal roof with easily replaceable standard solar panels.
 
It could be cheaper than regular roof + regular solar instalment. Or it might be cheaper than very high end roofing, but it probably won't be any cheaper than any roofing the people outside the 1% can afford.
But I'm not writing it off out of hand. It's not even on the same level as those fucking stupid solar freaking roadways idiots.

This could actually work. What I'm interested in, is the actual power output of the tiles in numbers. Wiring seems simpler than regular panels since all the shingles interconnect.

There are two things that make me skeptical one is if the connection between the shingles will be good enough and won't corrode over time, making the whole roof loose efficiency due to bad interconnect without any additional wiring.

The other thing is heat. Regular solar panels are lifted off the roof to allow air to circulate under them, to provide some cooling, because solar panels loose efficiency also if they overheat. And the shingles get very very hot on a summer day, and between the shingles and the roof insulation the air won't flow, it will be close to boiling temps there.

I expect to see a huge disconnect between the theoretical power output and the actual installed output of the roof.

I expect if you want reliable 3KW power from these you must install at least 9KW worth of shingles to be able to produce 3KW even with ideal conditions. And it must be distributed evenly between east and west side because if you only install them on the east side you'll have power in the morning but almost nothing in the afternoon.

But all that said I still think it looks much better than regular panels, and it could make having solar panels cool instead of being just "green".
 
Last edited:
I'm skeptical, but optimistic.

Just like how a Tesla doesn't actually save you any money in gas here in Massachusetts (because we have some of the most expensive power in the country) I'm guessing this assessment may include a lot of assumptions that may or may not pan out.

That being said, if they can make solar roof panels cheap enough, it would have a huge positive impact on adoption, energy dependence and greenhouse emissions.

Time will tell.

I don't own a home, so I'm not in a position to install anything like this, but if I even am, I'll definitely research it and then make a decision.
 
What I would worry about is durability in adverse weather. Having your entire roof shatter in a hail storm would be financially devastating and having thousands of sheets of glass flying around in a tornado would be scary as fuck.
 
cyclone3d said:
If these are available at even a slight cost over regular shingles, I would buy them in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

They aren't. Not even in Elon's fever dreams. He's saying that in terms of buying a box of these to install vs buying rigid slate or terracotta shingles, these should be price competitive. They are like 5x the cost per square vs. asphalt, and labor is 2-3x to install them vs asphalt. Compared to steel, I would guess that slate is about 2x. When I looked into roof costs, it was hard to find numbers on steel roofs as nobody around me did them and provided even ballpark pricing.
 
Ducman69 said:
He must think we are dumb as a roof to buy that, as builders in Houston at least are sourcing their roofing materials from Houston... its not shipping far. Not to mention how much quicker and easier it is to have a few guys with a nail gun just wap-wap-wap-wap nail those suckers in no time, versus actually properly installing a solar roof solution with all that wiring.
Click to expand...

Not saying it'd be quicker, but I'm just going to assume that the shingles are prewired and installation makes the connection. You probably just need to lay down a base strip on the edge for connection to the battery/inverter. I can imagine each shingle has a positive and negative plate that mechanically/friction connects with the previous/next. I've seen similar setups in other applications for speeding up installation times and getting it to be just a place, secure, place, secure, place, secure process.
 
nutzo said:
You need better shingles. I replaced my wood roof 18 years ago with high end 40 year asphalt shingles, and it still good, haven't replaced anything. I live in Sunny California, so I doubt they will last 40 years, but I'm half way there and they look like they should be good for at least another 10 years.

Also, he's not saying these will be cheaper then asphalt shingles, he is says they will be cheaper than premium tiles. When I replaced my roof 18 years ago, a tile roof would have cost me more than double what the 40 year asphalt roof cost me. Figured it would be cheaper to replace the asphalt roof every 25 years than to install a tile roof that "might" last 50 years.

One interesting point in the announcement is they these solar shingles are significantly lighter than the tiles. When replacing a roof you need to consider the weight of the roof. Part of the added costs if I had installed a tile roof, is that they would have had to double up the rafters to support the added weight. Also, since I'm in earthquake country, the added roof weight tends to cause more damage to the house when it's shaking. If these tiles are really that light, then that would be an added benefit.

Question is, how strong are they?
In order to paint my house, I need to be able to walk on part on the roof. I can't see walking on glass tiles and not breaking them.
Click to expand...

The parts I have been replacing have been with higher quality shingles. The majority of the roof itself is about 12 years old now and from the amount of rain, hail, and strong winds (tornado alley) we get, a lot of the roof has almost been completely wiped of the grit on the shingles. The next hail storm we have I am going to put in an insurance claim to get the whole thing replaced as it is to the point of not being worth it to repair.

The last few big storms we have had, the gutters and ground have just had massive amounts of shingle grit get in/on them.

We have roofing people stop by on a fairly regular basis saying that our roof is in horrible condition. But since we just recently switched insurance companies (Allstate sucks for roof coverage.. and was able to get cheaper insurance through work), I have to wait until we have another damaging storm to put in a claim.

Shingles do not hold up to even small hail. I don't care how "good quality" they are.

The roofing companies out here make a killing because they always have a good amount of work to do because almost everybody has shingle roofs.
 
Draax said:
I find it hilarious that on a site dedicated to technology .... so many posters are against new technologies, especially anything "green".
Click to expand...
Says who? We said it was awesome, myself included, in the first thread about it.

But when someone starts piling on the bullshit over six feet high, at some point you have to say, "Elon, dude... stop". There is absolutely no chance these are cost competitive with an installed asphalt roof because of shipping costs. Like I said in the other thread though, if I were loaded, this is hands down what I'd install on my roof if it comes close to living up to the hype.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
Even during the Press Showing, Musk said "Compared to traditional solar, you would be better off if you installed these on new roof installations, otherwise traditional solar would be cheaper."

Well the return on investment on solar alone (not the roof) is ~6 years if you pay 100% up front with no financing and get a rebate from your state and fed. (This assumes net effectively pay $14,400 after rebates and fed tax credits and a $200/month electric bill average.) So I call shenanigans.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, and that is on the lower side price wise. In the USA we have REALLY cheap electric that makes it hard to get ROI out of solar, unless in a higher priced area or hard to get access area.
 
BlueFireIce said:
Pretty sure he is talking about the highest end terracotta and slate roofing, not asphalt roofing, which I still think is BS, and if he is taking about asphalt roofing, no way in hell.



These things are a joke. First, glass is an ungodly poor surface to drive on, traction vs asphalt is just laughable, and this is under ideal conditions, not wet or snow, the video where it says it has been tested for traction? Yeah, do some research, the dude who came up with the idea drove his tractor over them and said it worked fine...Yep, that's all the "traction" testing they have ever had done. The same goes for durability, glass is soft and will wear very fast, it will also crack easy, and once it wears it gets smoother and even less traction. This does not account for the poor optics and reduced optics over time and then getting dirty. The melting snow? Are you shitting me? The guy who came up with the idea has NO idea about actual power or PV efficacy. The power required just to melt ice is almost the same as the power required to boil water from room temperature. The part about them shoveling "recycled glass"? Yeah, doesn't happen, no recycled glass is used, it has even more poor properties than what they are claiming to use.

These people are so disconnected from reality and how infrastructure is built it is sad. If you want solar everything, why not build a cheaper awning over the road? It does not need to support traffic weight and abuse, it has clear sun access without cars or other things on top, it will not have to deal with the dirt, oil rubber deposits etc etc over time reducing optics even more and keeps snow and rain off the road all together. The government and a number of other people gave grant money to this company and after reviewing the tech ALL dropped it, there are many in depth reports floating around from them about this tech all going into great detail of how it does not work and how there are so many better options.

This does not even get into costs, maintenance, etc.

Click to expand...


If they want to harvest power from blacktop.. which is laughable in and of itself, the best way would be to use the heat that the blacktop absorbs.

And the reason the temps are higher in many populated areas is because of all the blacktop absorbing the heat and then radiating it for hours after the sun goes down.

Same goes for dark colored roofing, vehicles, and whatever else is painted dark colors.

If you want lower temps in populated areas, all you have to do is make everything light colored. Bye bye blacktop, hello cement.

Reflect the UV rays instead of absorbing them and you are going to be much better off in naturally hot places.

And if you live in a super cold area, do the exact opposite.

Very simple science and fairly easy to implement.
 
Draax said:
I find it hilarious that on a site dedicated to technology .... so many posters are against new technologies, especially anything "green".
Click to expand...

See quote below.

Ducman69 said:
Says who? We said it was awesome, myself included, in the first thread about it.

But when someone starts piling on the bullshit over six feet high, at some point you have to say, "Elon, dude... stop". There is absolutely no chance these are cost competitive with an installed asphalt roof because of shipping costs. Like I said in the other thread though, if I were loaded, this is hands down what I'd install on my roof if it comes close to living up to the hype.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Just because we call out BS when we see it doesn't mean we are against it, it means we understand the process and like to keep our feet in reality. Pretty sure all of us here if offered this roof for free we would be little giddy girls saying yes please. But just like with EV's, there is ALOT of BS floating around and being said about them, it doesn't mean we don't want it to work or don't look forward to the day we have the tech to make it as it should be, only that we don't buy into marketing hype.
 
I wonder how well the SolarCity shingles can handle hail, and yes, hail storms will damage a typical roof.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
Even during the Press Showing, Musk said "Compared to traditional solar, you would be better off if you installed these on new roof installations, otherwise traditional solar would be cheaper."

Well the return on investment on solar alone (not the roof) is ~6 years if you pay 100% up front with no financing and get a rebate from your state and fed. (This assumes net effectively pay $14,400 after rebates and fed tax credits and a $200/month electric bill average.) So I call shenanigans.
Click to expand...

Except if you where it invest that $14,400 instead (even with a low return rate of 5%), the return is more like 9+ years, and that's also assuming you average $200/month on you electric bill.

Even here in Southern California, with one of the highest electric rates in the country, my average bill this year on a 2500 sqft house is less that $150/month, so I would be looking at a payback closer to 14+ years. Not worth it.
 
nutzo said:
Except if you where it invest that $14,400 instead (even with a low return rate of 5%), the return is more like 9+ years, and that's also assuming you average $200/month on you electric bill.

Even here in Southern California, with one of the highest electric rates in the country, my average bill this year on a 2500 sqft house is less that $150/month, so I would be looking at a payback closer to 14+ years. Not worth it.
Click to expand...

I think it probably pays off the best of you are in one of those deep south states where people blast their central AC 24/7 and use a lot more KWH at the same time as having more sun for the panels.

The irony is that in many of these areas were it makes the most sense, people seem to be the most opposed and consider a y alternative energy to be a four letter word :p
 
Ducman69 said:
He must think we are dumb as a roof to buy that, as builders in Houston at least are sourcing their roofing materials from Houston... its not shipping far. Not to mention how much quicker and easier it is to have a few guys with a nail gun just wap-wap-wap-wap nail those suckers in no time, versus actually properly installing a solar roof solution with all that wiring.
Click to expand...

Maybe but, I can see all that wiring turning into nothing more than a track that you "whack whack whack" for each row of solar shingles, and all you do is start at the bottom and "plug the shingles in". If the solar shingles have a seal along the bottom edges they will work just as good as contemporary ones at keeping the roof from leaking. A Solar shingle panel could be essentially the same length as a standard shingle sheet and maybe not much heavier depending on construction materials. At the end of each of the tracks would be another end track that has connection points at just the right spots so all you really do is put down the end tracks, connect and nail down the long runner tracks, plug in the shingle sheets.

It's possible.
 
We will make electricity so cheap that only the rich will burn candles.
 
M76 said:
It could be cheaper than regular roof + regular solar instalment. Or it might be cheaper than very high end roofing, but it probably won't be any cheaper than any roofing the people outside the 1% can afford.
But I'm not writing it off out of hand. It's not even on the same level as those fucking stupid solar freaking roadways idiots.

This could actually work. What I'm interested in, is the actual power output of the tiles in numbers. Wiring seems simpler than regular panels since all the shingles interconnect.

There are two things that make me skeptical one is if the connection between the shingles will be good enough and won't corrode over time, making the whole roof loose efficiency due to bad interconnect without any additional wiring.

The other thing is heat. Regular solar panels are lifted off the roof to allow air to circulate under them, to provide some cooling, because solar panels loose efficiency also if they overheat. And the shingles get very very hot on a summer day, and between the shingles and the roof insulation the air won't flow, it will be close to boiling temps there.

I expect to see a huge disconnect between the theoretical power output and the actual installed output of the roof.

I expect if you want reliable 3KW power from these you must install at least 9KW worth of shingles to be able to produce 3KW even with ideal conditions. And it must be distributed evenly between east and west side because if you only install them on the east side you'll have power in the morning but almost nothing in the afternoon.

But all that said I still think it looks much better than regular panels, and it could make having solar panels cool instead of being just "green".
Click to expand...

They summed up my thoughts pretty much perfectly. I'm very skeptical about the claims made and really wonder about the actual cost. That being said I am going to need a new roof soon. I'd love to get something like this if it is anywhere near what they are claiming.
 
I haven't chimed in here since this morning, but here we go.

This isn't new. Dow came up/bought the idea in 2005. Guess what.. Dow effing Chemical couldn't keep them alive. http://client.dow.com/dowpowerhouse

My company is a Certainteed premier installer, I can get you Apollo II's http://www.certainteed.com/solar/products/apollo-ii/

Shingles come 29 per bundle, 3 bundles per SQ (100 sqft.) Just to give you an idea of what that will cover, a standard 4/12 pitched roof on a 2 car garage is around 5 SQ. 15 bundles, 435 shingles. (Not including starters, ridge, etc.)

A good, lifetime warranty shingle with a peel and stick underlayment, will cost you about $300 a SQ installed here.

Want a tile roof? We do those as well, $550 per SQ installed.

How about metal? There are MANY kinds, 5V, standing seam, what finish, etc, but a damn fine standing seam roof, $750 SQ installed.


Want a photovoltaic roof? Well, as long as your roof is the perfect pitch, faces the correct directions, the decking and trussing can support it, codes will allow it, they start at $5000 per SQ installed.
 
It still amazes me how people who live in overly sunny areas think that solar panels will somehow be just as beneficial people in underly sunny areas as they will be to them. Some of us only average 90 days of sunlight per year if you know what I mean. Not to mention having said panels buried in snow for up to half of the year.
 
Would install these tomorrow if I was building a house, that being said I doubt the cost claims. Will see how it bares out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top