Powershare for Powerwalls update due soon

[Coolhandz]

With more and more manufacturers adding V2H capabilities into their vehicles as well as multiple competitors in the home battery storage market, I don't see Tesla letting this go. The Cybertruck was designed with the capabilities to offer this and it is only a matter of regulatory approval and a software update. With recent turnover of energy specific employees, a major push on FSD/Robotaxi, and Optimus, they are likely facing a bit of a talent shortage in this specific area. However, Tesla has continued to show a very strong commitment to their energy products. With V2L coming to some Model Y variants, it will only be a matter of time until V2H becomes more prevalent. I imagine once it is enabled on the Cybertruck with Powerwall setups, then we will start to see them add the feature to new vehicles coming off the line. This will be a huge incentive for customers to buy, especially in rural areas or areas where the power grid is not reliable/stable.

Sponsored

 

[PungoteagueDave]

was the failure due to the lithinum ion battery or the power share unit and chager?
do you have solar or is this just a backup, i am finding with the solar home, tesla is just not there yet

It is installed with solar and a Gateway 3. As far as I know, not a battery issue. One of my three solar strings wasn’t producing and there were error messages indicating a short on the roof. Diagnostics resulted in establishing it was a failed Powerwall. I don’t know the details beyond that and the fact that I am withholding final payment for the system until it operates properly.

I previously had a Ford/Sunrun bidirectional system installed at my Florida home and it was never operational despite valiant efforts, visits from engineers flying in from Dearborn and New Jersey. It was eventually removed after determining there was too much neighborhood WiFi interference that made it impossible for the truck’s Bluetooth module to initiate the handshake with the charger and wall inverter. It was a very expensive lesson for Ford and Sunrun. I was made whole except for the time investment.

The problem with all of these guys, whether Tesla, Ford or GM, is that they are promising technology that they THINK they can deliver, but it’s not yet fully developed and the software isn’t even in beta when announced. So they end up learning as they go, and in the case of Ford, found themselves in a dead end alley with no way to get out or otherwise solve the problem.

If this was easy Tesla would already have it working. I hope they aren’t in a similar dead end technology situation, which is a separate consideration from the business decision about whether the bidirectional CT charging market makes sense to pursue further, or even complete now.

If the total potential market bidirectional CT charging is 10,000 installations according to my estimate above, instead of hundreds of thousands with over 1 million CTs sold after a few years, the bidirectional charging promise was clearly a mistake and further effort likely a fool’s errand. Where to cut their losses is the question. If we consider the fact that this isn’t a one-time software development solution - they will need support people and further software development and versions - where is the ongoing revenue model? It’s not like FSD, which has a robust permanent revenue stream. After installation of bidirectional charging, we pay nothing further. This whole thing depended on a much larger ongoing sales take rate on the CT and the follow-on bidirectional charging demand that simply will never happen.

 

[TyPope]

If we consider the fact that this isn’t a one-time software development solution - they will need support people and further software development and versions - where is the ongoing revenue model? It’s not like FSD, which has a robust permanent revenue stream. After installation of bidirectional charging, we pay nothing further. This whole thing depended on a much larger ongoing sales take rate on the CT and the follow-on bidirectional charging demand that simply will never happen.

Bi-directional charging works for me. I don't have solar though. FSD is a one-time cost though I suppose you are talking about the monthly people.

I think you are missing the fact that once bi-directional charging is a thing, it'll draw people to Tesla. If other manufacturers are doing it and Tesla is not, it'll draw people away from Tesla. Either way, Tesla can't / won't fall to the wayside here.

 

[HaulingAss]

I just reached out to see if mine were impacted. I can't imagine that's a huge percentage of installed powerwalls.

Recall impacted only Powerwall 2 with imported NMC cells. Current versions (Powerwall 3) uses LFP exclusively and has not been recalled.

 

[Poporbit]

it's ironic but my Cybertruck works perfectly to power the house during blackouts. It works via the Tesla Gateway instead of a Powerwall. I chose not to backup the house with a Powerwall as the ROI was not sufficient to justify its purchase.

It took 5+ months to resolve issues with the Gateway installation and firmware set up before the house backup function worked properly so that was not a simple exercise. Its apparent the teams are minimally staffed and not permanently assigned to a task at Tesla. This is not optimal and needs to be corrected.

P.S. The truck is the equivalent of 8-10 Powerwalls and I do enjoy driving it.

 

[HaulingAss]

If you set it up like this, you should get Powershare if Powerwall runs out of energy:
Meter -> PWGW -> PSGW3V -> backed up loads and UWC
No coordination between the two though.

We recently bought a new house with good solar potential. I'm thinking I want one Powerwall and the Cybertruck as storage. I want them to be able to charge from solar during an outage. Do you know the anticipated setup for use with the announced software upgrade enabling this? Can I install it now in a manner that the software update will enable charging during an outage?

 

[Coolhandz]

We recently bought a new house with good solar potential. I'm thinking I want one Powerwall and the Cybertruck as storage. I want them to be able to charge from solar during an outage. Do you know the anticipated setup for use with the announced software upgrade enabling this? Can I install it now in a manner that the software update will enable charging during an outage?

If you go with Tesla solar, they will install the solar and the powerwall 3. I would specify that you want the cabling done through the roof/attic. You also need a gen 3 wall connector (or the Universal wall connector) installed as well. You would also tell them that you want the charger as part of the whole home back up. That should be it. Once you have permission to export (PTO), then you have the option to charge on solar. Once the update is pushed for powershare, then you should be good to go. Your setup is the same as what i went with. One powerwall 3, solar, and 2 chargers. They also install a gateway, but this V3 (not 3V which is only for Poweshare and CT) which allows the system to 'island' itself from the grid. That way when the power goes out, the home can power itself without feeding power back to the grid.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Bi-directional charging works for me. I don't have solar though. FSD is a one-time cost though I suppose you are talking about the monthly people.

I think you are missing the fact that once bi-directional charging is a thing, it'll draw people to Tesla. If other manufacturers are doing it and Tesla is not, it'll draw people away from Tesla. Either way, Tesla can't / won't fall to the wayside here.

To Tesla, FSD isn’t a one time cost to the purchaser. It is an ongoing revenue stream, from both added FSD vehicle sales and from monthly subscriptions. I have one vehicle with lifetime FSD and another with the monthly deal. Tesla sells hundreds of thousands of non-CT models every quarter. All of those are an immediate or potential FSD revenue source. Tesla sells fewer than 3,000 CTs every quarter. Bidirectional charging is a small market. About 15% of U.S. households own any form of electric backup. Bidirectional charging is a small subset of that market, which is dominated by small generators that sell for under $1k. Grid reliability is high and multi-day power loss is increasingly rare.

I’ve been very involved with bidirectional charging technology for a long time. I have a 55kwh propane generator at our oyster farm, which has 43 kWh of solar, and have invested in battery backup at other properties, including a new powerwall system that is integrated with solar and two wall chargers, with a gateway to accommodate the CT’s potential bidirectional charging capability. So far, nothing makes me optimistic that Tesla either has the software pending around the corner, or have solved the hurdles that caused it to be delayed.

Existing non-CT Teslas do not have the architecture required for bidirectional charging. Some other auto manufacturers are adding this functionality and I expect that Tesla will do so. That MAY create some incremental demand for EVs but isn’t relevant to whether Tesla should or can get the CT’s bidirectional issues solved. In any case, what’s being done for the CT isn’t applicable to whatever they come up with for future models or revisions to existing models that would add the functionality. Tesla has announced that the CT electrical architecture was a one-time thing in hindsight.

Therefore, the question remains whether completing the bidirectional charging effort is worth doing for a universe of certainly under 15k potential CT users. As I learned in the Ford Lightning bidirectional charging debacle, there are no industry standards at this point. This means that all of us who have invested in CT bidirectional charging have also limited our alternatives for such use to the CT. We are literally locked in to either keeping our trucks indefinitely or replacing them with a newer CT version, assuming Tesla even keeps the CT line going at such low volumes.

It’s all about resource allocation and ROI. There is no ROI on further bidirectional charging development for the CT, just as there is no positive ROI on the initial Tesla investment in the CT engineering and marketing effort, even assuming that some part of the work might provide a benefit to future non-CT models with such functionality. Tesla has a lot bigger fish to fry than meeting an old commitment to a tiny subset of its customers. I believe that follow-through on that commitment is important, partly for selfish reasons, but also understand the cold hard realities in the CT’s dismal sales numbers.

 

[pricedm]

To Tesla, FSD isn’t a one time cost to the purchaser. It is an ongoing revenue stream, from both added FSD vehicle sales...

Exactly! I purchased a 2023 Model Y because I was able to transfer FSD from my 2018 Model 3. And again in June 2025, I purchased another Model Y and again transferred FSD.

FSD transfer is the incentive lots of us have used to upgrade to a newer Tesla. I hope to do it again in a few years when HW5+ is shipping.

 

[Coolhandz]

It is installed with solar and a Gateway 3. As far as I know, not a battery issue. One of my three solar strings wasn’t producing and there were error messages indicating a short on the roof. Diagnostics resulted in establishing it was a failed Powerwall. I don’t know the details beyond that and the fact that I am withholding final payment for the system until it operates properly.

I previously had a Ford/Sunrun bidirectional system installed at my Florida home and it was never operational despite valiant efforts, visits from engineers flying in from Dearborn and New Jersey. It was eventually removed after determining there was too much neighborhood WiFi interference that made it impossible for the truck’s Bluetooth module to initiate the handshake with the charger and wall inverter. It was a very expensive lesson for Ford and Sunrun. I was made whole except for the time investment.

The problem with all of these guys, whether Tesla, Ford or GM, is that they are promising technology that they THINK they can deliver, but it’s not yet fully developed and the software isn’t even in beta when announced. So they end up learning as they go, and in the case of Ford, found themselves in a dead end alley with no way to get out or otherwise solve the problem.

If this was easy Tesla would already have it working. I hope they aren’t in a similar dead end technology situation, which is a separate consideration from the business decision about whether the bidirectional CT charging market makes sense to pursue further, or even complete now.

If the total potential market bidirectional CT charging is 10,000 installations according to my estimate above, instead of hundreds of thousands with over 1 million CTs sold after a few years, the bidirectional charging promise was clearly a mistake and further effort likely a fool’s errand. Where to cut their losses is the question. If we consider the fact that this isn’t a one-time software development solution - they will need support people and further software development and versions - where is the ongoing revenue model? It’s not like FSD, which has a robust permanent revenue stream. After installation of bidirectional charging, we pay nothing further. This whole thing depended on a much larger ongoing sales take rate on the CT and the follow-on bidirectional charging demand that simply will never happen.

I think you have some good arguments, but Tesla's energy division is crushing it. They have routinely seen increased year over year energy deployments and post higher margins on sales in this division. The goal of sustainability and reliability will invariably mean that their vehicles will need to incorporate V2H at some point. The software needed to make this happen is just one step in that process. The software will have to pass regulatory requirements but once enabled for CT, it would not be as big of a leap to enable it for other vehicles in their lineup. I think it is a little short-sighted to think that only the CT could or will be the only vehicle that has the capability to provide V2H. I don't think comparing the failure of Ford to how Tesla operates is a fair comparison at all. Tesla has had a lot going on in other areas and this was just pushed to the side for now while they work on what they feel are more pressing matters.

 

[HaulingAss]

I don't think comparing the failure of Ford to how Tesla operates is a fair comparison at all. Tesla has had a lot going on in other areas and this was just pushed to the side for now while they work on what they feel are more pressing matters.

Exactly! The reason Tesla is able to make a profit while their competitors fail year after year to do so is because Tesla prioritizes efficiency, and part of that efficiency is allocating their software engineers where they can do the most good, at any given time.

I have full confidence their lateness is not a giving up, it's merely a delay.

 

[TyPope]

To Tesla, FSD isn’t a one time cost to the purchaser. It is an ongoing revenue stream, from both added FSD vehicle sales and from monthly subscriptions. I have one vehicle with lifetime FSD and another with the monthly deal. Tesla sells hundreds of thousands of non-CT models every quarter. All of those are an immediate or potential FSD revenue source. Tesla sells fewer than 3,000 CTs every quarter. Bidirectional charging is a small market. About 15% of U.S. households own any form of electric backup. Bidirectional charging is a small subset of that market, which is dominated by small generators that sell for under $1k. Grid reliability is high and multi-day power loss is increasingly rare.

I’ve been very involved with bidirectional charging technology for a long time. I have a 55kwh propane generator at our oyster farm, which has 43 kWh of solar, and have invested in battery backup at other properties, including a new powerwall system that is integrated with solar and two wall chargers, with a gateway to accommodate the CT’s potential bidirectional charging capability. So far, nothing makes me optimistic that Tesla either has the software pending around the corner, or have solved the hurdles that caused it to be delayed.

Existing non-CT Teslas do not have the architecture required for bidirectional charging. Some other auto manufacturers are adding this functionality and I expect that Tesla will do so. That MAY create some incremental demand for EVs but isn’t relevant to whether Tesla should or can get the CT’s bidirectional issues solved. In any case, what’s being done for the CT isn’t applicable to whatever they come up with for future models or revisions to existing models that would add the functionality. Tesla has announced that the CT electrical architecture was a one-time thing in hindsight.

Therefore, the question remains whether completing the bidirectional charging effort is worth doing for a universe of certainly under 15k potential CT users. As I learned in the Ford Lightning bidirectional charging debacle, there are no industry standards at this point. This means that all of us who have invested in CT bidirectional charging have also limited our alternatives for such use to the CT. We are literally locked in to either keeping our trucks indefinitely or replacing them with a newer CT version, assuming Tesla even keeps the CT line going at such low volumes.

It’s all about resource allocation and ROI. There is no ROI on further bidirectional charging development for the CT, just as there is no positive ROI on the initial Tesla investment in the CT engineering and marketing effort, even assuming that some part of the work might provide a benefit to future non-CT models with such functionality. Tesla has a lot bigger fish to fry than meeting an old commitment to a tiny subset of its customers. I believe that follow-through on that commitment is important, partly for selfish reasons, but also understand the cold hard realities in the CT’s dismal sales numbers.

You have more experience than me in this by far. I will point out that my wife was never a fan of the CT until we installed the PowerShare. We lose power for an hour or two way more often than I would think is reasonable. Anyway, now she says that we can't get rid of my truck because it makes a good backup power supply. (even if it isn't 'whole house') She asked me if Tesla was planning on making the Model Y bidirectional anytime soon because "you aren't always home".

In my case, as isolated as it may be, bi-directional charging would be the ONLY reason she would let go of her beloved blue Y, Sapphire.

 

[koolio]

Powershare Power wall recall over 10,000 units are being recalled, Units installed from 2000-late 2022, Tesla will replace the power wall free of charge.
Lithium Ion Cells going dead

hopefully this won't effect my set up going forward

I believe this was for Powerwall 2s...? My Powerwall 3 was installed Febraury 2024 and pretty sure my PW3 was manufactured in December 2022.

 

[Mikec3399]

I believe this was for Powerwall 2s...? My Powerwall 3 was installed Febraury 2024 and pretty sure my PW3 was manufactured in December 2022.

I believe you are correct

 

[CybertruckRN1127]

No they date "LATER IN 2025" on the site/page still. Nothing about Q3.

Annoying as was soon in 2024, then in 2025, now later in 2025. Been waiting 1.5+ years.

Thanks. I came here checking to see why I still don’t have PowerShare with my PW2.

Could you link the site so I can check next year when I still don’t have?

Sponsored