Japanese housing firm Lib Work has completed the country’s first 3D-printed house made primarily from soil, a development that could reshape how homes are built and raise important questions about cost, practicality and sustainability.

Who Is Behind the Project?

Lib Work, based in Kumamoto Prefecture, is a housing developer known for pushing new ideas in construction. The company began experimenting with 3D printing earlier this year with its Model A prototype but has now unveiled the “Lib Earth House Model B”, a 1,000-square-foot property printed almost entirely from soil.

The project was developed in collaboration with engineers at Arup Japan, along with local design studios Ogawaa Design and Kyotani Architectural Design. Together they set out to prove that earth, a material used in traditional Japanese buildings for centuries, can be adapted to meet modern standards of strength, safety and comfort when combined with industrial-scale 3D printing.

Lib Work says this second prototype is five times stronger than its predecessor and complies with Japanese building codes, including earthquake resistance grade 3. That detail is significant in a country where seismic safety is a constant requirement for new housing.

How Does Soil Printing Work?

The process of building the Lib Earth House begins with laying a standard concrete foundation, after which a large 3D printer is installed on site. Instead of pumping a cement-based mix, the printer extrudes layers of soil blended with lime and natural plant fibres. These materials are deposited directly from digital design data, creating curved and organic wall shapes that would be difficult to achieve with traditional methods.

Once the walls are in place, a timber framework is erected inside them to complete the main structure, with interior finishing carried out using conventional techniques. The mix of earth and fibres creates a solid exterior wall that is structurally independent and, according to Lib Work, has a lower carbon footprint than reinforced concrete or even timber.

To address concerns about long-term durability, the company has built-in an in-wall condensation detection system to monitor moisture and prevent hidden deterioration. The house is also designed to operate off-grid, using rooftop solar panels and a Tesla Powerwall battery for energy storage.

Why Move Away From Concrete?

The construction industry is one of the world’s biggest sources of carbon emissions, and concrete production is a major reason why. Making cement, the key ingredient in concrete, requires heating limestone to very high temperatures in kilns powered largely by fossil fuels. According to MIT’s Climate Portal, a single new house can create between 15 and 100 tonnes of CO₂ during construction, much of it from cement.

Efforts are underway to develop lower-carbon cement alternatives, but progress is slow. By using soil, a resource that can be sourced locally and requires little processing, emissions can be drastically reduced. Lib Work estimates that a 100-square-metre home built with its earthen mixture cuts CO₂ emissions by about 50 per cent compared with concrete, and even slightly less than timber.

For Japan, where timber is widely used in construction, the idea of returning to earth as a material has cultural as well as environmental appeal. Soil naturally regulates humidity and insulates well, which makes it suited to the country’s hot and humid summers.

Costs and Practicalities

It should be noted here that building a 3D-printed home is not yet cheaper than conventional methods, but the process holds long-term promise. Printing reduces labour requirements, a critical factor in Japan where the construction workforce is ageing rapidly. Government data suggests the number of skilled craftsmen may fall to one-third of today’s level within 20 years. Automating large parts of the building process could help close that gap.

Lib Work has not disclosed final prices for the Model B but has said pre-orders will begin later this year, with sales starting in early 2026. The company aims to build 10,000 of these homes by 2040 and is preparing a nationwide franchise model to scale up production.

What Could This Mean for Sustainability?

If adopted more widely, soil-based 3D printing could help reduce the carbon impact of housing while also creating homes tailored to local conditions. Unlike global supply chains for cement, soil can often be sourced from the building site itself. That reduces transportation emissions and helps ensure materials match local climate needs.

The approach could also help speed up construction in areas hit by natural disasters. For example, after earthquakes, typhoons or floods, rebuilding quickly and cheaply is often a struggle. A mobile printer able to use locally available earth could, therefore, provide a faster alternative to conventional building methods, particularly in regions where materials are scarce.

A Growing Global Trend?

It seems that Japan is not alone in experimenting with 3D-printed housing. For example, in the United States, Texas-based ICON has built concrete-based printed homes and is working with NASA on using lunar regolith to print future structures on the Moon. In Europe, Italian start-up WASP has created experimental houses made from clay and natural fibres, while in Africa, 14Trees (a joint venture between Holcim and CDC Group) has constructed schools and homes in Malawi and Kenya using concrete printing.

However, what distinguishes Lib Work’s approach is its elimination of cement altogether. Most 3D-printed homes worldwide still rely on a cement-based mix, which limits their sustainability benefits. By demonstrating that soil can achieve the necessary structural strength and regulatory approval, Lib Work may set a precedent for others to follow.

Key Challenges and Criticisms

Despite the excitement, there are still hurdles. Soil-based structures face questions about long-term durability, especially in wetter climates. While Japan’s new design uses monitoring systems to address this, critics argue that maintenance costs could rise over time.

Another challenge is scalability. 3D-printing homes requires large, expensive machines and skilled operators. Although automation reduces labour, the upfront investment remains high. For developing countries where housing shortages are most severe, this technology may be difficult to afford without external support.

There are also questions about aesthetics and consumer acceptance. Many buyers may prefer traditional homes built from wood or brick, particularly in cultures where home ownership is tied closely to status and tradition. Convincing people to embrace soil-based homes may require not only engineering progress but also a cultural shift.

Where Next for Lib Work?

The company is already looking beyond individual houses. It has signalled plans to apply 3D printing to hotels, retail buildings and even overseas markets, starting with Indonesia. Lib Work is also partnering with technology firm Maket to integrate generative AI into design, moving toward what it calls “AI full auto build”, a system where homes are designed and printed with minimal human intervention.

For Lib Work, the project is not just about meeting demand for sustainable housing but also about redefining what a house can look like. By allowing complex shapes and organic curves, the technology breaks free from conventional “box” designs. As the company put it on its website, “This is not just a house, but a challenge to rethink the very way we live.”

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

The practical impact of this development is likely to depend on how well the technology can scale while keeping costs under control. If Lib Work succeeds in its ambition to mass-produce these homes, it could provide a blueprint for cutting carbon in an industry that has been notoriously slow to change. A cement-free process that is both structurally sound and officially approved by regulators represents an important shift in thinking. For governments under pressure to hit climate targets, it offers a tangible example of how housing can be reimagined without sacrificing safety or comfort.

For the wider construction sector, the move reinforces the idea that additive manufacturing may become a central tool in addressing labour shortages, resource constraints and the demand for speed. That will be watched closely not just in Japan but in Europe and North America, where housing costs and climate concerns are equally pressing. For UK businesses in particular, there is both a risk and an opportunity. Developers, contractors and suppliers may need to adapt quickly if soil-based printing or similar techniques gain traction, but they could also stand to benefit by taking early roles in materials research, machine development and specialist services to support such projects.

Equally important are the implications for communities. In areas struggling with affordable housing or recovering from disasters, on-site 3D printing with locally available soil could remove some of the bottlenecks of conventional building. However, acceptance will hinge on whether buyers are convinced that homes made from earth can be durable, attractive and worth their investment. Consumer perception, as much as engineering progress, will determine how far this technology can travel.

What emerges from the Lib Earth House is not just a technical trial but a signal of how far construction may change in the coming decades. Soil, long dismissed as an outdated material, has been reintroduced as part of a high-tech system that claims both sustainability and resilience. Whether it becomes a mainstream alternative or remains a niche experiment, the project has already shown that the housing sector is capable of genuine innovation, and that innovation will increasingly be measured not only in design but in carbon saved.

You can now connect your ChatGPT account directly to GMail and harness the power of deep-research and all the other bells-and-whistles to make your usage of GMail (and other Goole services such as you Google calendar etc) as productive as possible.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, It may be best to download it first]

Need a quick way to make team decisions without long chat threads? WhatsApp’s built-in Poll feature lets you gather votes instantly—no admin rights required.

How to:

– Open a WhatsApp group chat.
– Tap the paperclip icon (Android) or “+” icon (iPhone).
– Select ‘Poll’, type your question and up to 12 options, then hit Send.

What it’s for:

Perfect for choosing meeting times, prioritising actions, or gathering feedback—without endless back-and-forth messages.

Pro‑Tip: Turn on “Allow multiple answers” if you’re looking for broad input or want team members to vote on more than one option.

HM Revenue & Customs has confirmed it is using artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor the social media accounts of suspected tax cheats, in what it says is a targeted approach aimed at tackling fraud and reducing the UK’s tax gap.

Using Algorithms

The disclosure came after recent reports in The Telegraph revealed HMRC was using algorithms to flag suspicious activity online. In response, the tax authority confirmed that AI is already playing a role in its investigative work. Officials stressed the technology is only used in criminal investigations and is not applied to the everyday taxpayer. In a statement, HMRC said AI is being deployed to help staff spot inconsistencies between declared income and publicly available social media posts, while also cutting down the amount of time spent on manual administration.

Spend Less Time on Admin

“Greater use of AI will enable our staff to spend less time on admin and more time helping taxpayers, as well as better target fraud and evasion to bring in more money for public services,” HMRC said in a statement. Officials added that the approach does not replace human decision-making, pointing to what they describe as “robust safeguards and legal oversight” around the process.

Why AI Is Being Deployed

The move reflects HMRC’s broader challenge of narrowing the UK’s tax gap, which in 2022–23 was estimated at £51 billion, or about 4.8 per cent of total theoretical tax liabilities. Of this, around £5.5 billion was attributed to tax evasion. Reducing this shortfall has become a priority for the government, which has promised that more efficient enforcement will increase revenues without raising taxes on working households.

By applying AI tools to tasks previously carried out manually, HMRC, therefore hopes to process large volumes of open-source data more quickly and accurately. Social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook and TikTok are seen as sources of information because they often show details of people’s lifestyles that may not align with their declared income.

For example, cases have previously been reported where individuals claiming benefits on grounds of ill health were found posting publicly about participation in marathons, or where people declaring modest incomes shared photos of luxury cars and holidays. Until now, gathering such evidence relied heavily on human monitoring. AI allows patterns, anomalies and potential red flags to be detected across thousands of accounts in a fraction of the time.

Integration with Existing Systems

It’s hoped that this latest use of AI will complement HMRC’s wider analytical infrastructure, particularly its “Connect” system, introduced more than a decade ago. Connect draws together information from tax returns, banks, property records and other government databases to flag discrepancies between declared income and observed financial behaviour. Adding automated social media analysis into that mix gives investigators another channel through which to identify possible fraud.

Also To Provide Guidance To Taxpayers

It should be noted that the department has also been exploring AI for broader and less sinister purposes, such as helping taxpayers navigate the more than 100,000 pages of guidance on its website, and summarising customer service calls for advisers. However, it’s the use of social media monitoring that has generated the most public debate, not least because of its implications for privacy, accuracy and accountability.

Efficiency Gains and Cost-Cutting For HMRC

For HMRC itself, the adoption of AI in investigations is positioned as an efficiency gain rather than a cost-cutting measure. The government has already announced plans to recruit 5,500 new compliance staff, suggesting the technology will be used to augment rather than replace human expertise.

Tax specialists have noted that AI could help HMRC by pulling together information from multiple sources far more efficiently than manual checks. At the same time, they warn of potential pitfalls, including the risk of mistaken identity if the technology fails to distinguish between genuine accounts and those that are fake or hacked. Such concerns underline the importance of retaining human oversight in any decision-making process.

Focusing

From HMRC’s perspective, the argument is that automation allows investigators to focus their time where it is most valuable, i.e. complex cases that require judgment, rather than sifting through data for initial leads. The department also points to the potential to secure better returns on public spending, with AI-enabled enforcement expected to bring in billions of pounds in additional tax revenues over the coming years.

The Implications for Taxpayers

For law-abiding taxpayers, HMRC has been keen to stress that there is little to fear from AI social media monitoring. Officials say the tools are not used in routine tax collection or compliance checks, but only in serious criminal cases where there is already suspicion of wrongdoing.

The wider deployment of AI across HMRC’s operations could, in time, make interactions with the tax system simpler for the majority. For example, tools that help people understand complex rules, avoid errors in returns and access relevant guidance more quickly could reduce unintentional mistakes. Tax specialists point out that significant amounts of revenue are often lost through basic errors, and AI has the potential to reduce this by offering clearer digital assistance and more reliable support to taxpayers.

Surveillance Fears

At the same time, it has to be said that the disclosure that HMRC is scouring social media using AI may add to public concerns about surveillance and government access to personal data. Although the posts in question are publicly visible, many people may not anticipate that their online activity could form part of a criminal tax investigation.

Challenges

Not surprisingly, the announcement has not gone unchallenged. Privacy advocates and some parliamentarians have warned that reliance on AI risks producing false positives, where innocent individuals are wrongly flagged as suspicious. Concerns have also been raised that the system could amplify errors if it fails to distinguish between genuine accounts and those that are hacked, fake or misleading. Civil liberties group Big Brother Watch has previously cautioned that the spread of AI-driven surveillance represents a “frightening expansion” of state monitoring, and argued that without strict legal safeguards such tools risk undermining privacy and fairness in the justice system.

There is also a wider political backdrop. The UK government is under pressure over its broader AI strategy, with reports earlier this year suggesting the national AI institute faced internal turmoil and potential funding withdrawals. Against that context, the use of AI by HMRC has become part of a larger debate about how far public authorities should adopt emerging technologies, and how safeguards should be applied.

Some commentators have also drawn parallels with the Horizon IT scandal at the Post Office, in which faulty computer evidence led to wrongful prosecutions of sub-postmasters. Although HMRC emphasises that human decision-making remains central to its process, critics argue that overreliance on automated systems without adequate checks could carry significant risks.

The tax authority insists that its approach has been developed with those lessons in mind. AI is used to highlight possible leads, but human investigators must review the evidence before any action is taken. Officials have also stressed that all use of AI in this area is subject to legal oversight, ensuring compliance with UK data protection and criminal justice laws.

Wider International Context

It should be noted, however, that the UK is not alone in deploying AI to tackle tax evasion as other countries have already been using similar methods. HMRC has been sending so-called “nudge letters” to taxpayers after analysing international financial data shared under the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard, which tracks overseas income. This AI-assisted approach has contributed to a reported 22 per cent rise in admissions of foreign tax evasion in recent years.

The logic appears to be that as more financial data becomes digitised and globally shared, AI will become a necessary tool for connecting the dots. For HMRC, adding social media monitoring into that picture is seen as the next step in keeping pace with increasingly complex forms of tax fraud.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The real test will be whether HMRC can strike the balance between efficiency and fairness. The technology may promise to sharpen investigations, close the tax gap and support a more resilient tax base, but it also raises unresolved questions about how far government agencies should be able to probe into people’s digital lives. For taxpayers, reassurance that AI will not be used in routine compliance checks will be welcome, but concerns about transparency and proportionality are unlikely to fade quickly.

For UK businesses, the implications may be twofold. For example, firms could benefit from a more level playing field if AI enables HMRC to clamp down more effectively on undeclared income and fraudulent competition. However, there is a risk that legitimate companies could face greater scrutiny or reputational harm if mistakes occur in the interpretation of online data. The safeguards HMRC has promised will, therefore, be critical in maintaining trust.

Other stakeholders, from policymakers to civil liberties groups, will, no doubt, be watching closely. The government has positioned AI as a tool for improving public services and raising revenue without additional tax rises, yet its wider strategy for regulating AI remains unsettled. With memories of past technology failures still fresh, the rollout of these systems within HMRC will be an early indicator of how the state intends to manage the trade-offs between innovation, privacy and accountability in the years ahead.

The UK Government has announced the deployment of 10 new Live Facial Recognition (LFR) vans across seven police forces in England, saying the move will help officers track down suspects wanted for some of the most serious crimes.

What?

On 13 August, the Home Office confirmed that vans equipped with live facial recognition cameras will be shared between Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Bedfordshire, Surrey and Sussex (jointly), and Thames Valley and Hampshire (jointly). The rollout is part of the government’s wider “Plan for Change” in policing, which also includes neighbourhood policing guarantees and the recruitment of 13,000 more officers by 2029.

The new vans are expected to be deployed in the coming weeks. They will be coordinated nationally by the National Police Chiefs’ Council and South Wales Police, which has already led the way in using the technology. The government says each vehicle will be staffed with trained officers who verify every potential match generated by the software.

How Does the Technology Work?

Live facial recognition compares the faces of people passing by with those held on a police “watchlist”. These watchlists are drawn up for each deployment and include individuals wanted for offences such as sexual assault, violent crime, murder, and breaches of bail or court conditions.

The technology measures facial features such as the distance between a person’s eyes or the shape of the jawline, creating a digital signature that can then be matched against the watchlist. If a possible match is made, an officer on site reviews the image before deciding whether to stop the individual.

Why Is the Government Expanding It Now?

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the expansion reflects both the need to modernise policing and the results already seen in London and South Wales. “Facial recognition will be used in a targeted way to identify sex offenders or people wanted for the most serious crimes who the police have not been able to find,” she explained, adding that the rollout will be backed by a new legal framework and public consultation on safeguards.

Only Intelligence-Led Use

It’s worth noting here that the government says that officers will only use the technology in intelligence-led deployments, and that strict guidance from the College of Policing and the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice will apply. It insists the aim is not mass surveillance but a proportionate use of new tools to protect the public.

What Have Previous Trials Achieved?

The Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have been the two leading forces trialling LFR technology. According to the Met, 580 arrests were made in London over a 12-month period up to mid-2025, covering offences including rape, domestic abuse, robbery, and knife crime. Among those detained were 52 registered sex offenders who had breached their conditions.

South Wales Police has emphasised its record, reporting no false alerts since August 2019. Chief Superintendent Tim Morgan has argued the technology has been deployed ethically and lawfully, saying it has “never resulted in a wrongful arrest” in the force’s area. It has been used at large public gatherings such as football matches and concerts, where suspects for serious offences have been identified and detained.

However, these claims have not gone unchallenged. For example, earlier deployments in South Wales were the subject of a legal challenge brought by a Cardiff resident (Ed Bridges), who argued the technology was used unlawfully to scan him in public without consent. Although the Court of Appeal ruled in 2020 that South Wales Police’s use of LFR was unlawful on three grounds, including a lack of proper safeguards against arbitrary use, the force was later cleared to continue under revised guidance.

The Metropolitan Police has also faced criticism after individuals (including Londoner Shaun Thompson) were wrongly flagged by cameras during live deployments. Civil liberties groups say such errors highlight the risks of false positives, even if no wrongful arrests ultimately followed.

Examples of use include London deployments in violent crime hotspots and at high-profile events such as a Beyoncé concert, where police used the technology to search for individuals suspected of terrorism or child abuse offences. While supporters say these trials show the technology’s potential to locate dangerous offenders in crowded settings, opponents argue the risks to privacy and the possibility of misidentification remain significant.

The Case for Benefits

Proponents argue that live facial recognition allows officers to locate suspects more quickly than traditional policing methods. For example, Lindsey Chiswick, the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for facial recognition, said the new vans provide “an excellent opportunity for policing”, with every deployment being “targeted, intelligence-led, within a set geographical location and for a defined period of time”.

The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change has also supported its use, describing it as “a no-brainer” for catching violent offenders in crowded public places. They argue that those not on a watchlist will have their faces pixelated, with no data retained.

For police forces, the vans are expected to essentially act as a force multiplier, freeing up resources and providing a visible deterrent at a time when officers are under pressure to deal with rising violent crime and anti-social behaviour.

Criticism and Concerns

Civil liberties groups remain strongly opposed to the use of this technology. For example, Big Brother Watch described the rollout as “a significant expansion of the surveillance state” and has lodged a legal challenge against the Metropolitan Police’s use of the technology. Interim director Rebecca Vincent argued that police were treating the lack of a specific legal framework as “carte blanche” to expand the practice without democratic scrutiny.

Also, Baroness Chakrabarti, former director of Liberty, called the technology “incredibly intrusive” and warned that it posed risks to privacy, freedom of assembly, and the possibility of false matches. She welcomed the consultation but criticised the absence of legislation to date, saying the technology had so far been deployed “completely outside the law”.

Amnesty International UK has also criticised the move, describing LFR as “dangerous and discriminatory”. The group warns that even if algorithms are shown to be unbiased in laboratory tests, real-world deployments risk disproportionately targeting minority communities.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which regulates data protection, emphasised that facial recognition “does not operate in a legal vacuum” and must always be lawful, fair, and proportionate. The ICO is due to publish its findings on the use of the technology by South Wales and Gwent Police.

What Does Independent Testing Show?

To address bias concerns, the government commissioned the National Physical Laboratory to test the algorithms being used in the vans. The laboratory reported that at the settings used by police, the system was accurate and showed no bias by age, gender, or ethnicity.

Even so, critics argue that independent testing cannot address all the risks. The possibility of false positives, mission creep into less serious crimes, or erosion of trust in policing remain live debates.

Implications for Communities and Businesses

For the public, the presence of LFR vans is likely to be visible in town centres and at large public events. The Home Office has said that signage will make it clear when the technology is being used, and that data will only be retained for the period of the deployment.

Businesses in affected areas may see benefits if the vans deter shoplifting, robbery, or violent crime in retail and nightlife districts. However, there are concerns about potential impacts on footfall if people feel uncomfortable being scanned while shopping or socialising.

Neighbourhood organisations such as Neighbourhood Watch have broadly welcomed the balance between more officers and targeted technology. Chief Executive John Hayward-Cripps said the combination of “responsive policing that prioritises local relationships” with modern tools could help rebuild public trust.

For police officers themselves, the vans offer a new way to match intelligence with on-the-ground enforcement, but they also come with added responsibilities for transparency, proportionality, and accuracy.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The government’s decision to expand live facial recognition vans puts advanced surveillance tools directly into mainstream policing, but it also raises difficult questions about oversight. For police forces, the benefits are obvious, i.e., the vans make it easier to identify wanted suspects in crowded areas and allow officers to focus on other frontline duties. The record of arrests in London and South Wales shows the technology can be effective against serious offenders, yet the court rulings and cases of mistaken identification show why critics say it cannot be deployed without stronger safeguards.

For the public, the experience is likely to be mixed. For example, some will welcome the reassurance of extra tools against violent crime, while others will be uneasy at the idea of their faces being scanned in public. Public trust will hinge on whether officers use the vans in line with clear rules and whether those rules are seen to be independently enforced. Businesses in city centres may gain if the technology reduces theft, disorder and violence near shops and venues, although any perception of over-policing could also deter customers.

The government’s consultation on new legislation is, therefore, critical. Campaigners argue that police have been using LFR outside a proper legal framework for years, while ministers insist deployments will stay targeted and proportionate. The outcome will decide whether this expansion strengthens policing while protecting rights, or whether it fuels a deeper public backlash that undermines confidence across communities, businesses and other stakeholders.

Elon Musk’s Tesla has applied for a licence to supply electricity to British homes and businesses, a move that could see the US-based firm directly enter the UK’s highly regulated energy market from 2026.

What Has Tesla Done?

The application was formally submitted on 25 July by Tesla Energy Ventures Limited, a UK-registered company under the wider Tesla umbrella. Ofgem, the UK’s energy regulator, confirmed the licence request on its website and set a consultation period until 22 August for stakeholders to submit comments. In line with the Utilities Act 2000, Ofgem has only published the notice of application, limiting further detail. If approved, the licence would allow Tesla to operate as a retail electricity supplier across England, Scotland and Wales.

Extend Scope of Existing Licence

It should be noted here that Tesla already holds a generation licence in the UK (granted in 2020) which allows it to produce electricity. However, this latest move could extend its scope to selling power directly to households and businesses, in the same way as established suppliers such as British Gas, Octopus Energy and OVO.

Why Is Tesla Doing This?

Tesla’s decision comes at a time when the company is facing declining electric vehicle sales across Europe. UK registrations in July fell by almost 60 per cent compared to the previous year, while German sales dropped by 55 per cent. Across ten key European markets, Tesla’s sales were down by 45 per cent. Competition from rival EV manufacturers, particularly China’s BYD, has been a major factor in this slump.

Diversifying into energy supply, therefore, offers Tesla another route to growth, particularly given its sizeable existing footprint. More than 250,000 Tesla vehicles are on UK roads and tens of thousands of its Powerwall home battery systems have been installed. This customer base could provide a ready pool of households willing to adopt Tesla’s electricity supply, particularly if bundled with discounts for charging vehicles or exporting stored solar energy back to the grid.

Like In Texas

The company has already built up experience as an energy supplier in the United States. In Texas, Tesla Electric launched in 2022 as a retail provider offering households low-cost, 100 per cent renewable power. Customers do not need to own a Tesla product to join, though EV owners and Powerwall users are offered cheaper charging rates and the ability to sell surplus electricity back to the grid.

The Texas operation also supports the concept of a “virtual power plant”, where thousands of home batteries are linked together to provide grid stability. Tesla has suggested that similar models could eventually be deployed in other markets. In the UK, this would align with National Grid’s push for more flexible energy resources and time-of-use tariffs that encourage households to use power at off-peak times.

What Could This Mean for the UK Market?

If the licence is granted, Tesla would join a market that is both competitive and tightly controlled. The so-called “Big Six” suppliers, now expanded to include Octopus alongside British Gas, EDF, E.ON, OVO, ScottishPower and SSE, still dominate with more than 90 per cent of the domestic supply market. Smaller and newer entrants have struggled in recent years, especially during the energy crisis, which saw dozens of challenger firms collapse under pressure from soaring wholesale prices.

Some analysts have pointed out that Tesla is entering a highly regulated market where profit margins are already thin and most of the big suppliers have invested heavily in smart tariffs, making it difficult for new players to break through. However, others have highlighted how Tesla’s existing ecosystem could help it stand apart. For example, despite falling EV sales, Tesla still has a sizeable footprint in the UK, with more than 250,000 cars sold and thousands of Powerwall batteries installed. That existing customer base could give Tesla a natural advantage if it follows the same model as its Texas business, where households are offered cheaper charging and paid for feeding power back into the grid.

Potential Tariff Innovation

One area where Tesla may compete effectively is in smart tariffs for EV charging and home energy storage. Between 2020 and 2023, Tesla partnered with Octopus Energy on the Tesla Energy Plan, a smart import-export tariff that allowed customers with solar panels and Powerwalls to buy and sell electricity at the same rate. Although Tesla later withdrew from the partnership, Octopus continues to offer a similar tariff, demonstrating demand for such arrangements.

If Tesla can combine its EVs, batteries and potential supply licence into a single integrated offer, it could appeal strongly to existing customers. For example, discounted tariffs for charging Teslas overnight, coupled with payments for sending energy back to the grid from a Powerwall, would create a closed-loop system that few other suppliers could match.

Challenges

Despite the potential, the barriers are considerable. The UK retail electricity market is crowded, margins are slim, and switching rates are low compared with the period before the energy crisis. Many households are locked into dual-fuel contracts that combine gas and electricity, which may make a Tesla-only electricity offer less attractive.

There is also the question of public perception. Elon Musk’s increasingly political public profile has drawn strong criticism in Europe and the UK. Also, he has described Britain as a “police state” and criticised asylum and migration policies. His closeness to US President Donald Trump (although they have since fallen out) and his actions with DOGE in the US have further polarised opinion and appear to have caused huge damage to his personal brand (and his vehicle sales). In fact, some consumer groups have warned that Musk’s views could influence whether households are willing to sign up for Tesla-branded energy.

Tesla itself has remained quiet on its application. The notice submitted to Ofgem was signed by Andrew Payne, Tesla’s head of energy for Europe, the Middle East and Africa. No public statement has been issued by the company, which has said only that it continues to expand its energy services globally.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Tesla’s bid to supply electricity in the UK sets up a clear test of whether its brand strength and integrated technology can overcome the realities of a tightly controlled market. On paper, its combination of cars, home batteries and solar solutions could give it an edge in offering customers genuinely joined-up energy services. In practice, it faces the same pressures that have squeezed margins for existing suppliers, alongside the added complication of public sentiment about its founder.

For UK households, the offer of cheaper EV charging or the ability to trade surplus solar power back to the grid would be attractive, particularly at a time when energy bills remain under close scrutiny. For businesses, Tesla’s entry could bring new tariff models for fleets or for sites already investing in renewable generation and storage. If the model mirrors what has been developed in Texas, it may also open the door for companies to participate in virtual power plants that improve resilience and provide income streams from energy flexibility.

For the energy sector, the move signals that disruption could just as easily come from a technology giant as from a nimble start-up. Incumbent suppliers will be watching closely, both for the pricing strategy Tesla adopts and for the way it leverages its hardware base to win loyalty. Regulators, meanwhile, will have to balance innovation with consumer protection in a market that has already seen waves of supplier failures.

Tesla is attempting to diversify at a time when its automotive business is under pressure, and the UK market will be an early test of whether energy supply can deliver the growth it now seeks. If it succeeds, it could accelerate the shift towards more dynamic and decentralised energy systems. If it fails, it will underline how difficult it remains to challenge the dominance of established players in one of Europe’s most heavily regulated markets.