News
Elon Musk’s Tesla Model 3 cobalt-free strategy is ushering in an LFP battery movement
About a year ago, Tesla effectively shocked the electric vehicle industry by announcing that the Made-in-China Model 3 Standard Range Plus would be using lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries produced by Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL). It seemed like an unprecedented decision, considering the company’s image as a maker of fast, powerful, premium cars.
LFP batteries are cheaper to produce than NCM (nickel-cobalt-manganese) and NCA (nickel-cobalt-aluminum) batteries, but they generally have lower energy density. This meant that usually, vehicles equipped with LFP cells end up lacking in range and charging. Tesla’s move towards LFP could then be considered a gamble–one that could have resulted in drawbacks for the Model 3 in China.

Today, it seems safe to say that the Silicon Valley-based electric car maker’s gamble has been successful. Recent tweets from Elon Musk even point to the idea that LFP is the way to go for Tesla’s standard range vehicles. This was especially notable, considering that cobalt and nickel prices have been rising over the past years. And with the advent of more electric cars in the market, securing more long-term supply for raw materials is incredibly important.
True to form, Tesla’s adoption of LFP batteries was immediately felt by the greater battery market. As noted in a Mining.com report, the 55KWh LFP-battery Tesla Model 3 from China captured 5.9% of the global full electric car market in terms of battery capacity in its second full month of sales. This was despite the Made-in-China Model 3 not being sold in the United States.
Based on Adamas Intelligence data, the momentum of Tesla’s LFP-equipped Model 3 only increased from that point. Propelled further by deliveries to Europe, the LFP-battery China-made sedan comprised 46% of all Model 3 sales in January and a remarkable 32% of the battery capacity in all LFP-equipped cars globally. This trend, Adamas’ data showed, boosted LFP’s overall share in the global battery market in terms of capacity to 18.5% in January 2021.
This was a remarkable milestone for LFP batteries, considering that it only commanded 1% at the beginning of last year and 3% by June 2020. Adamas Intelligence’s Head of Data and Analytics Alla Kolesnikova noted that the momentum of LFP cells had been particularly felt in China. In 2020, the adoption of the cobalt-free batteries saw a resurgence in the market, with both veteran automakers and younger EV companies adopting the technology.
“LFP battery capacity deployed onto roads increased six-fold and we continue to see cathode manufacturers ramping up output and a growing list of the automakers in China announcing upcoming model-versions that will incorporate LFP cells. Among the more prominent are Xpeng, Seres, and VW,” Kolesnikova said.
Roskill, one of the world’s first management consultancies and a key player in critical materials supply chain intelligence, has determined that LFP cathode and precursor material manufacturing capacity is currently up 10-fold in January-February 2021 compared to the same months in 2020. A good part of this is the adoption of the batteries by notable EV players like Tesla, as well as breakthroughs in the cobalt-free batteries themselves.
Roskill analyst Kevin Gunan Shang noted that LFP batteries are looking to be an excellent fit for cell-to-pack manufacturing, which would be adopted by Tesla for its mass-market vehicles like the Model Y. The analyst also pointed to the claims of Volkswagen-backed Chinese battery manufacturer Gotion, which noted that its latest LFP battery had achieved a cell-level energy density of 210 Wh/kg, putting it on par with NCM 523.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.

The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.