News
The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site takes shape ahead of Dec 18 tunnel opening
The Boring Company continues to make progress on the garage elevator prototype in its Prairie Avenue work site, located roughly at the halfway point of the tunneling startup’s 2-mile test tunnel in Hawthorne, CA. As the days trickle down towards the test tunnel’s unveiling on December 18, The Boring Co. appears to be digging deep in order to ensure that its projects in the area are making good progress.
On the site of the tunneling startup’s garage-elevator prototype, work continued despite last week’s rains. Teslarati photographer Pauline Acalin was in the area last Thursday, and she was able to snap some pictures of workers near the site. Returning to the elevator’s location this Monday, it was evident that work progressed, as evidenced by the disappearance of a massive structure previously set up beside the garage-elevator’s pit.
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/06/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- A structure believed to be an elevator shaft was built beside the opening of the Prairie Ave. garage-elevator site. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- A structure believed to be an elevator shaft was built beside the opening of the Prairie Ave. garage-elevator site. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/10/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
A massive structure believed to be an elevator shaft is believed to have been installed in the garage-elevator as of 12/10/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
Images taken near the end of November showed a massive structure being set up by The Boring Company beside the pit where it extracted the segments of Godot, its first tunnel boring machine. While the Boring Company did not identify or confirm the purpose of the structure, its size and height suggested that it was a shaft for the underground elevator being built on the site, where vehicles will be lifted out from the test tunnel.
Considering that the elevator shaft was nowhere to be seen as of Monday, it appears safe to assume that the structure has already been installed in the elevator itself. This bodes well for the project, as the structure is a key component to the Boring Company’s plans in the area. The garage-elevator, after all, is a bit different from the tunneling startup’s other projects, such the Hawthorne tunnel or the Dugout Loop, in the way that it would not be opened to the public even when it gets completed.
Instead, the structure would be used strictly for testing purposes only, with vehicles being moved from the test tunnel into the elevator, before being lifted onto the street. In a statement to Mercury News last September, Boring Company representative Jane Labanowski described the garage-elevator as an “important part of the longer-term vision the company is trying to build.” If the garage-elevator works as intended, it is not difficult to imagine The Boring Company rolling out the concept to its future stations, particularly those located near or even within residential areas.
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/06/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/06/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/06/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/06/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/06/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/10/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
-
- The Boring Company’s garage-elevator site as of 12/10/2018. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
Work continues on the site of The Boring Company’s garage-elevator concept. (Credit: Pauline Acalin)
Similar to The Boring Company’s other projects, the vehicles that would be transported from the SpaceX headquarters to the elevator will be traveling through the startup’s electric skates. These skates use Hyperloop technology, and are expected to facilitate high-speed transportation from the tunnels to the garage-elevator.
The Boring Company initially announced that it would hold an opening party for its Hawthorne test tunnel on December 10, with test rides in the system being offered to the public for free the following day. In a recent announcement, though, Elon Musk stated that the test tunnel’s opening event is being moved to December 18 instead. Musk did not give a specific reason behind the delay, though considering the work still being done on some Boring Company projects like the Prairie Avenue elevator, there is a good chance that the tunneling startup is opting to refine some of its projects further before unveiling them to the public.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
