Connect with us
Elon_Musk_Colorado_2022 Elon_Musk_Colorado_2022

News

Elon Musk’s Taiwan peace proposal praised by Beijing, condemned by Taiwan

U.S. AIR FORCE ACADEMY, Colo. -- Tesla Inc. Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk speaks with Lt. Gen. Richard Clark, Superintendent of the U.S. Air Force Academy, during the Ira C. Eaker Distinguished Speaker Presentation in the Academy's Arnold Hall on April 7, 2022 in Colorado Springs, Colo. (U.S. Air Force photo by Trevor cokley)

Published

on

Elon Musk may have caught the ire of many by suggesting a controversial way for the Russia-Ukraine War to end, but in a recent interview, the Tesla CEO also shared some of his thoughts on a potential peace plan between China and Taiwan. The plan was met with widely opposite reactions from the Chinese and Taiwanese governments. 

Tesla and its China operations play a massive role in the electric vehicle maker’s overall operations, with Gigafactory Shanghai providing about half of the company’s global output last year. In September, Tesla China posted record sales of 83,125 vehicles, up 8% from the previous month and up 48.44% year over year, as per data from the China Passenger Car Association (CPCA). 

The Recommendation

During an interview with the Financial Times, Musk was asked about his thoughts on China and the risk to Gigafactory Shanghai amidst the tensions surrounding Beijing and Taiwan. According to the publication, Musk noted that the conflict in Taiwan is inevitable, but his companies would definitely not be the only ones suffering the consequences. Musk then proposed a solution for the conflict. 

“My recommendation… would be to figure out a special administrative zone for Taiwan that is reasonably palatable, probably won’t make everyone happy. And it’s possible, and I think probably, in fact, that they could have an arrangement that’s more lenient than Hong Kong,” Musk said. 

Advertisement

China’s Praise

Musk’s recommendation won praise in Beijing, with China’s ambassador to the US, Qin Gang, thanking the CEO for his remarks. The ambassador also noted in a tweet that Musk’s proposal was “the best approach to realizing national reunification.” 

“I would like to thank Elon Musk for his call for peace across the Taiwan Strait and his idea about establishing a special administrative zone for Taiwan. Actually, Peaceful reunification and One Country, Two Systems are our basic principles for resolving the Taiwan question and the best approach to realizing national reunification. 

“Provided that China’s sovereignty, security and development interests are guaranteed, after reunification Taiwan will enjoy a high degree of autonomy as a special administrative region, and a vast space for development. 

“The rights and interests of the people in Taiwan will be fully protected, and both sides of the Taiwan Strait will share the glory of national rejuvenation. Peaceful reunification of China is also conducive to peace and development in the Asia-Pacific and the wider world,” the ambassador wrote on Twitter

Advertisement

Taiwan’s Criticism

Inasmuch as Musk’s comments were appreciated by China, they were widely criticized in Taiwan. So notable were the criticisms of Musk’s suggestions that they actually united Taiwan’s divisive political environment. Taiwan’s de facto ambassador to the US, Hsiao Bi-khim, for one, noted that Taiwan’s “freedom and democracy are not for sale.” “Any lasting proposal for our future must be determined peacefully, free from coercion, and respectful of the democratic wishes of the people of Taiwan,” she said. 

Former Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou also condemned Musk’s proposal. “Elon Musk’s opinion means ‘one country two systems.’ I cannot accept this,” the former president said. 

Even opposing candidates from the upcoming Taipei mayoral race were united in rejecting Musk’s ideas. Chen Shih-chung of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), stated that the Tesla CEO’s comments were “ill-informed and belittling and could affect our national security.” He also called on Musk to do better. 

“Elon Musk has brought about revolutionary change through Tesla and SpaceX, even aiding Ukraine against the Russian dictatorship through Starlink. I’m calling on Elon to hold himself to the same democratic values regarding Taiwan,” he said. 

Advertisement

Chiang Wan-an, Chen’s opponent from the Kuomintang party, accused Musk of being “hungry for the Chinese market.” He also argued that Musk is “trading with the devil” due to his business with China. 

The Conflict

The tensions between China and Taiwan stem largely from the former’s claims that the latter is a province. Taiwan, on the other hand, has maintained that it is an independent nation. China has hinted that it could annex Taiwan by force so that it could be “unified” with the mainland. However, a growing majority of Taiwanese citizens reject the idea of being unified with China, with some even supporting the idea of outright independence. 

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

Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators

A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.

Published

on

By

A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.

The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.

Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:

Tesla Semi Spec Long Range Standard Range
Battery Capacity 822 kWh 548 kWh
Battery Chemistry NCMA Li-Ion NCMA Li-Ion
Peak Motor Power 800 kW 525 kW
Estimated Range ~500 miles ~325 miles
Efficiency ~1.7 kWh/mile ~1.7 kWh/mile
Est. Price ~$290,000 ~$260,000
GVW Rating 82,000 lbs 82,000 lbs

The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.

Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.

In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).

Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.

NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:

“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”

The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.

Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.

This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.

The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.

For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.

As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.

In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla to fix 219k vehicles in recall with simple software update

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.

Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.

The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.

Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.

Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed

Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.

By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.

The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.

Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”

Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.

Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.

Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.

For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.

Continue Reading