A new study shows that only 26% of U.S. households are familiar with EVs but this is about to change. In the recent study by Parks Associates, it was noted that as Tesla became a household name, purchase intention for EVs has gone up 6%.
I wrote about this here, and Teslarati was invited to attend to the virtual session where Chris White, the senior analyst who conducted the study, led a virtual presentation.
According to the study,
“Only 26% of US broadband households report high familiarity with electric vehicles but that’s about to change. These sessions address the coming surge of EVs on the market, the potentially explosive EV growth in adoption, and the implications for consumers, the grid, and needed infrastructure.”
Electric Vehicles: A New Era for Consumers
During the virtual session, Chris White explained some of the findings of the study. Some of these include current EV owner demographics, EV owner interest in clean energy, EV owners’ high-tech affinity, lack of knowledge of EV features, and how other issues such as the chip shortage are affecting both EV and non-EV markets.
The report was based on data from Q4 2021.
Understanding Current EV Owners
Current EV owners are young affluent and have dual incomes. Many are from a multifamily environment and use their EVs for work and school.
They use their vehicles regularly. It’s important to highlight since EVs have the image of a rare or exotic car that doesn’t have enough range. This is changing.
As the EV market continues to grow, the demographics of the current EV owners will most likely change. For now, there’s a 16% high intention of purchasing EVs among non-owners. Previous that was 10%.
That number didn’t include the current EV owners who either want to add a new EV or replace an old one.
EV Owners 3x likely to use renewable energy
Chris White’s research showed that EV buyers are three times more likely to live in solar communities or have an interest in renewable energy powering their homes. They are also 2.5 to 5 times more willing to pay more for renewable energy.
The research shows that EV owners care about their carbon footprint and the impact on the environment.
EV owners are much more likely to own a security system or a smart home device than non-EV owners, according to the research
They xcare about technology and have a higher affinity for tech than non-EV owners.
Lack of familiarity with EV features.
One of the key points in the study shows that although EVs are more popular today, there is a lack of familiarity with their features.
Chris pointed out that 18% of the consumers polled indicated familiarity with EV features. That isn’t a lot.
Features that many aren’t familiar with include EV charging at home minimizing cost when automatically charging during off-peak hours, auto insurance savings for EV owners, second-life EV batteries reused as a power source in disaster areas, and available tax incentives.
Second-life EV batteries are expected to reach over $34 billion by 2027 according to Research and Markets. You can read more about this here.
EV Features that could persuade non-owners to buy an EV
The study included the top features that could persuade non-EV owners to switch to electricity. The number one feature was for an EV to run 400 miles or longer on a single charge.
During the session, Chris pointed out that this is still rare and that most EVs are in the 200-300 mile range.
Other features included widespread charging stations and electricity plans that make owning an EV more affordable than owning an ICE vehicle. These are coming and soon people will see for themselves that EVs meet the criteria they are looking for.
Purchase Inhibitors.
The number one purchase inhibitor that non-EV owners are concerned about are the cost of an EV and charging.
The research showed that 51% of the consumers who participated in the study cited charging-related issues.
Another issue was the lack of trust in the design of EVs,
Issues that impact both EV and non-EV purchases
We often see issues such as the semiconductor chip shortage and critical minerals for EV batteries impacting the EV market. However, something that impacts both markets includes the chip shortage, Putin invading Ukraine, and the national gas prices being on the rise.
The latter can create pain at the pump which is something that encourages people to make the switch to EVs. Last month, I wrote about Dobson who purchased a Tesla due to several factors but especially high gas prices.
EVs will be everywhere soon.
The research also revealed that soon, EVs will be everywhere.
Chris spoke about the Amazon and Rivian partnership, Walmart’s purchase of Canoo EVs, Revel’s fleet of Tesla taxis in New York, and the contract between NASA and Canoo.
And this is just on the commercial side. Other automakers are producing and marketing their own EVs to compete with Tesla.
Disclaimer: Johnna is long Tesla.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
