Connect with us
cybertruck-megapack-1 cybertruck-megapack-1

News

Tesla FSD is the answer to concerns about EVs’ possible “added” road risks

Credit: Nattanan Sirivadhanabhakdi/Facebook

Published

on

A recent article from Slate has brought up a rather interesting concern about electric vehicles and their wide adoption. Since electric cars tend to be a lot heavier than their combustion-powered counterparts, there is a nonzero chance that they could actually be more dangerous to pedestrians in the event of a crash. Tesla FSD could be the answer to these concerns. 

There is an uncomfortable truth in the United States, and that is the fact that road fatalities are climbing. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), for one, noted that American road deaths soared during Q1 2022, rising 7% to 9,560 fatalities, the highest quarterly toll since 2002. The numbers are sobering, as they suggest that compared to pedestrians in countries like France and Canada, Americans are more than twice as likely to die in a crash. 

There are quite a few factors behind these disturbing statistics, but one of them is believed to be the prevalence of overly large and heavy vehicles like full-size trucks and SUVs. While trucks are generally designed for work, full-sized pickups are now widely used by casual drivers to the point where some pickups barely see a day of legitimate work. SUVs are also all the rage. But while these vehicles could be quite safe for those inside them, they are a nightmare for the pedestrians that they might hit in the event of an accident. 

As noted by Slate, one study actually found that the shift to SUVs over the past couple of decades ended up leading to over 1,000 more pedestrian deaths. Now, it should be noted that these large vehicles are already overly heavy with an internal combustion engine. When they are powered by a giant battery pack and equipped with electric motors, they become even heavier and a whole lot faster. The over-9,000-pound Hummer EV is the poster child of this, as the behemoth is capable of hitting highway speeds in about 3.3 seconds. 

But inasmuch as these concerns are valid, heavy electric vehicles are only really just as dangerous as their drivers and safety features. Tesla has been making overly-heavy and ridiculously-fast sedans and crossovers for many years, yet its vehicles constantly rank among the safest on the road. This is due in no small part to the company’s active and passive safety features, which are standard on every Tesla that gets built at each of the company’s vehicle factories, both in the United States and abroad. 

Advertisement

And coupled with Tesla’s FSD software, the risks for heavy electric vehicles are likely even less. Behind all the drama and smear campaigns targeted toward the advanced driver-assist system, after all, FSD is an incredibly cautious system that takes pedestrian safety as a top priority. Tests of Tesla FSD Beta releases have shown this time and time again — the system always keeps people around the car as safe as possible. 

The use of systems like FSD Beta would likely be more widespread as the adoption of electric vehicles becomes more prevalent. Teslas would likely continue to be among the safest vehicles on the road, despite the company likely producing one of the heaviest vehicles on the market in the Tesla Semi. Fortunately, Tesla does seem to be open to the idea of having its software, like Autopilot, licensed to other automakers. This means that Tesla’s stellar safety systems could be rolled out to more vehicles, including those beyond the reach of the company’s products. 

This, however, would require other automakers to admit that Tesla’s Autopilot and FSD are industry-leading solutions for pedestrian safety. Such an admission takes a lot of humility, and thus, is easier said than done. But the longer other automakers wait to roll out systems that are comparable to FSD or at least Autopilot, the longer pedestrians are exposed to an increasing number of electric vehicles that could indeed be too heavy and too fast in an accident. 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk slams Bloomberg’s shocking xAI cash burn claims

Musk stated that “Bloomberg is talking nonsense.”

Published

on

Credit: xAI/X

Elon Musk has forcefully rejected Bloomberg News’ claims that his artificial intelligence startup, xAI, is hemorrhaging $1 billion monthly. 

In a post on X, Musk stated that “Bloomberg is talking nonsense.” He also acknowledged an X user’s comment that people “really have no idea what’s at stake” with AI.

Bloomberg‘s Allegations and Musk’s Rebuttal

The Bloomberg News report painted a dire picture of xAI’s finances. Citing people reportedly familiar with the matter, the news outlet claimed that xAI burns $1 billion a month as costs for building advanced AI models outpaced the company’s limited revenues. 

Bloomberg alleged that xAI is planning to spend over half of a proposed $9.3 billion fundraising haul in three months, with a projected $13 billion loss in 2025. The report also claimed that of the $14 billion that xAI has raised since 2023, only $4 billion remained by Q1 2025. Even this amount, the news outlet alleged, will be nearly depleted in Q2.

xAI did not comment on Bloomberg‘s claims, though Elon Musk shared his thoughts on the matter on social media platform X. In response to an X user who quoted the publication’s article, Musk noted that “Bloomberg is talking nonsense.” Musk, however, did not provide further details as to why the publication’s report was fallacious.

Advertisement

xAI’s Bright Horizon

Despite Bloomberg‘s claims, even the publication noted that xAI’s prospects are promising. The company, now merged with X, aims to leverage the platform’s vast data archives for model training, which could reduce costs compared to rivals like OpenAI. Tapping into X also allows xAI to access real-time information from users across the globe. 

xAI’s valuation reportedly soared to $80 billion by Q1 2025, up from $51 billion in 2024. The AI startup has attracted heavyweight investors such as Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia Capital, and VY Capital so far, and optimistic projections point to profitability possibly being attained by 2027. This would be quite a feat for xAI as OpenAI, the AI startup’s biggest rival, is still looking at 2029 as the year it could become cash flow positive.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

xAI supercomputer faces lawsuit over air pollution concerns

NAACP & environmental groups are suing Elon Musk’s xAI over turbine emissions at its Colossus supercomputer site.

Published

on

xAI-supercomputer-memphis-environment-pushback
(Credit: xAI)

The xAI supercomputer, Colossus, faces a potential lawsuit from the NAACP and the Southern Environmental Law Center over pollution concerns tied to its gas-powered turbines. The facility has sparked debate over its environmental impact versus economic benefits.

The xAI data center has been operational since last year. The company used pollution-emitting turbines without an air permit, citing a 364-day exemption. Southern Environmental Law Center attorney Patrick Anderson disputed xAI’s exemption, stating: “there is no such exemption for turbines — and that regardless, it has now been more than 364 days.”

The groups issued a 60-day notice of intent to sue under the Clean Air Act, challenging xAI’s permit application under review by the Shelby County Health Department.

According to AP, critics argue the turbines emit smog, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and formaldehyde, worsening health risks in an area with cancer rates four times the national average.

Advertisement

“The permit itself says emissions from the site ‘will be an area source for hazardous air pollutants,’” the Southern Environmental Law Center noted, alleging Clean Air Act violations.

Opponents claim xAI installed up to 35 turbines—exceeding the 15 requested—without community oversight, straining Memphis’s power grid.

xAI responded: “The temporary power generation units are operating in compliance with all applicable laws.”

The company highlighted its economic contributions, including billions in investments, millions in taxes, and hundreds of jobs. At an April community meeting, xAI’s Brent Mayo underscored that the “tax revenue will support vital programs like public safety, health, human services, education, firefighters, police, parks, and so much more.” He projected that xAI would generate over $100 million in tax revenue by next year. The company is also investing $35 million in a power substation and $80 million in a water recycling plant.

Additionally, xAI is transitioning to sustainable power, particularly Tesla Megapacks. It is actively working on demobilizing the gas turbines.

Advertisement

“The temporary natural gas turbines that were being used to power the [xAI’s] Phase I GPUs prior to grid connection are now being demobilized and will be removed from the site over the next two months,” shared the Greater Memphis Chamber. xAI brought Tesla Megapack batteries and a 150-megawatt substation online earlier this year.

Despite xAI’s expansion to a second 1-million-square-foot site, the lawsuit threat underscores tensions between innovation and environmental justice.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla CEO Elon Musk hits back at drug use claims, calls publications ‘hypocrites’

Elon Musk showed a clean drug test, dispelling any rumors of drug use that came from unfounded reports from two large media outlets.

Published

on

Credit: Elon Musk

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has responded to a report from the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, as both publications claimed he was abusing drugs while being involved with President Trump on both the campaign trail and while he was active within the administration after the election.

A bombshell report from the New York Times, published in late May, stated that Musk was regularly using things like ketamine, ecstasy, and psychedelic mushrooms, and also stimulants like Adderall, during his time within the Trump administration.

The reports cited inside sources who claimed the Tesla and SpaceX frontman was using substances during his time with the government.

However, Musk published the results of a recent drug test performed at Fastest Labs of South Austin. They showed ‘Negative’ results across the board:

Musk was not done there.

He went on to say the New York Times “lies as easy as breathing. It’s normal for them.” He also said both the Times and Wall Street Journal reporters should also publish their own drug test results, stating, “They won’t, because those hypocrites are guilty as sin.”

Musk said years ago that he received ketamine prescriptions from doctors to treat depression. He said he had it “years ago and said so on X, so this is not even news.” He also said that ketamine “helps for getting out of dark mental holes, but haven’t taken it since then.”

Tesla fans and Musk enthusiasts have joked for days now that, if Musk were to be on drugs, other CEOs should also do them, considering his persistence on work-related projects, long hours, and commitment to his job.

Musk has now proven that there has been no drug use with this test, and it seems as if the reports could have some sort of legal impact, although he has not said he will take any action.

Continue Reading

Trending