Connect with us
Tesla Cybertruck unveiled in Los Angeles, Nov. 21, 2019 (Photo: Arash Malek) Tesla Cybertruck unveiled in Los Angeles, Nov. 21, 2019 (Photo: Arash Malek)

News

Tesla’s Elon Musk shuts the door on Gigafactory Texas talk, but for how long?

Tesla Cybertruck unveiled in Los Angeles, Nov. 21, 2019 (Photo: Arash Malek)

Published

on

George Strait once said that all of his exes live in Texas, and maybe Elon Musk doesn’t want his new electric vehicle facility to be infiltrated by the country music legend’s past lovers.

Just kidding.

While we all patiently wait for Tesla’s CEO to announce the location of its next vehicle production plant, I was pretty sure that Texas had been confirmed as the spot. After seeing some reports, I dug a little deeper and found that the State of Texas had some records, including purchase price agreements, on a plot of land just outside of Austin.

However, when I reported the news, Elon responded and told us at Teslarati that the company had the option to buy the land, but they had not secured a purchase agreement and exercised its right to purchase the property.

I have to admit, I was pretty shocked. I have been following the situation closely for months, and it is pretty evident that Texas certainly has the most advantages. Not to mention, Elon definitely seems to be leaning toward it. He’s been talking about Texas since January, and we’ve already talked about the distinct advantages the state holds over any other location.

However, Musk wasn’t done there. He then added that Tesla was looking at several locations. I’m assuming Tulsa, Oklahoma, is also in the mix considering that has been a location that is very open to taking its oil roots and trading them in for a new electrified infrastructure that will create a string of sustainable transportation production lines in the state.

Advertisement
-

However, it is really evident that Tesla might be having some second thoughts on the Lone Star State…or are they?

First, let’s consider the details of the land plot in question in Texas. It’s 2,100 acres, its $5.2 million bucks, and its really perfect for what Tesla has wanted. We know that the new factory is set to be the biggest one yet because both Zachary Kirkhorn and Elon said they are going to start calling the factories “Tera” instead of “Giga.”

To put the size of the land into perspective, Fremont sits on 370 acres, Giga Shanghai on 210 acres, and Giga Berlin on 740 acres. This means the prospective Texas land plot is nearly three times as big as Giga Berlin, which is the factory that will produce Tesla cars for all of Europe, and it is all going to be used to create the Cybertruck and the Model Y.

We know the demand for the Cybertruck is enormous. The pre-order number is not officially public knowledge. Still, there is some indication that Tesla is getting near three-quarters of a million reservations for the truck and its tough, robust exterior.


This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future. 

A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.

Advertisement
-

Subscribe for free.


We know that Tesla wants to build the plant in the middle of the country. That could mean anything, from North Dakota to Texas literally, and it could go slightly West to Colorado, and slightly East to Missouri. That’s what is confusing.

Now that there are apparently “several locations” in the mix, the real question is: Why is the Texas deal taking so long? Is Tesla looking to negotiate an even lower price? I decided to dig a little more.

According to Texas A&M University’s “Texas Rural Land Prices” page, where the college has the price of land from Q4 1971 up until Q1 2020, the most recent cost of an acre of property in the state is $2,986. The prospective plot of land where Tesla could build its next factory is 2,100 acres. So the value of the property, according to these statistics, is $6,270,600. According to the application that Tesla and the State of Texas have, the land price that was agreed upon is $5,298,275, giving the company a nearly $1 million discount. It is about a 16% discount according to my handy, dandy calculator.

Texas has also announced its intentions to give the automaker a sweet incentive package to the tune of $68 million, according to reports. That’s a lot of scratch, and it could certainly help with the purchase price, the labor costs of constructing the building, and more.

It is just tough to say why the deal is taking a while. The Cybertruck’s Dual and Tri-Motor variants are going to be produced at the tail-end of 2021, and with Tesla’s track record with the Model Y in the US and the Model 3 in China, they’ll be built well before then. That would give Tesla, if the company started construction in July, 18 months to complete the Cybertruck portion of the factory. Fremont could handle Model Y production until the new factory’s Phase 2 is completed.

Advertisement
-

I am personally excited to see where the factory ends up, and I really, genuinely think that Texas is where the factory will end up.

Where do you think the factory will be when its all said and done? And why do you think Tesla is kind of dragging its feet through the purchase process?

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on

Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.

Published

on

By

Concept rendering of SpaceX Starship landing on the moon via Grok

Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.

On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”

Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”

The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.

Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.

Advertisement
-

How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.

Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.

Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas

Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk stands in profile against a clear blue sky, with a bright overhead sun shining above a vast landscape of Tesla solar panels stretching to the horizon, and a smaller Texas flag flying on a pole to his right.

Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.

The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.

The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.

Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing

Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.

Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.

The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla is building its own maps to fix Navigation issues

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.

On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.

Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:

“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”

He continued:

“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”

Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.

“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”

Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much

Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.

Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.

Quotes via Motley Fool

Continue Reading