News
How Elon Musk and Obama both argue for cleantech despite political uncertainty
In spite of tremendous obstacles, Elon Musk has changed the way the world thinks about energy usage. He has defied odds with his rocket company SpaceX despite having to face-off against government-funded competition. He has pushed Tesla’s direct sales model even when hit with major lobbying blockades from the Big Three car manufacturers in Detroit. Musk’s Master Plan Part Deux outlined a vision for the future of sustainability and its necessity for the planet. It’s an argument that many pundits have rejected as too costly, complicated, or just plain crazy.
On Monday, President Barack Obama wrote in the journal Science that a national policy to embrace renewable energy over a continued focus on fossil fuel production makes economic sense. President-elect Trump has decried calls for the U.S. to transition to alternative fuels.
Both Musk and Obama speak to energy policies that would change the way people heat their homes, commute to work, and depend on big utilities for energy provision. In his first Master Plan, Musk offered offered a pathway in which a low volume, expensive car would create a profit that would eventually be directed to create an affordable, high volume car. That first plan also emphasized the importance of solar power provision. He reiterated in Master Plan Deux that “we must at some point achieve a sustainable energy economy or we will run out of fossil fuels to burn and civilization will collapse.” Increasing atmospheric and oceanic carbon levels threatens life on the planet, and Musk has said all along that the faster we achieve sustainability, the better.
Obama noted in the Science article that many businesses have come to the independent conclusion that reducing emissions is good for the environment and for profitability. He noted that millions of U.S. citizens already are employed in jobs related to energy-efficient technologies, adding that the cost of renewable energy has continued to decline, partly because of government incentives but primarily due to market forces. “Although our understanding of the impacts of climate change is increasingly and disturbingly clear,” Obama states, “there is still debate about the proper course for U.S. policy.” Obama goes on to say that the United States is showing that greenhouse gas mitigation “need not conflict with economic growth. Rather, it can boost efficiency, productivity, and innovation.”
Musk’s successful and sustainable business practices correlate with President Obama’s conclusions. Tesla’s commercial Powerpack system, alongside solar company SolarCity, combines integrated energy generation and storage. Tesla production goals include improved factory efficiency 5X to 10X by 2022, which will, in turn, make Tesla’s vehicles more affordable. With radar, sonar, and advanced AI, Tesla’s Autopilot may end up 10X safer than human drivers. Tesla’s vision for the future is not limited to cars, as Musk wants to reinvent all kinds of vehicles such as massive electric 18-wheelers, which would dramatically reduce cargo shipping costs and could have revolutionary economic and environmental implications.
These types of alternative fuel innovations are just what Obama has outlined in his Science article. “The business case for clean energy is growing, and the trend toward a cleaner power sector can be sustained regardless of near-term federal policies,” he writes, adding, “I believe the trend toward clean energy is irreversible.”
“There is always tension between the visionary and the day-to-day, but that’s what causes things to happen as you figure out how the world is going to be,” offers Ian Wright, whose startup, Tesla, has propelled Musk toward uber success. “It’s really hard to imagine how Elon does it all. He’s human like everyone else. It hasn’t been smart to bet against him.”
Related News
- Musk joins Trump’s advisory council, along with Uber and PepsiCo CEOs
- How will Tesla perform in Mr. Trump’s America?
- The Tesla Blockade Coming from Legacy Automakers and Trump
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
