Ford Motor Company’s 2020 Sustainability report outlines the legacy automaker’s plans to become carbon neutral by 2050. In an attempt to solidify itself as an environmentally-friendly car maker with a goal that would decrease its contribution to global climate issues, Ford chose a conservative route instead of a challenging one that would assist the transportation sector’s strong push toward sustainability.
Tesla’s road to environmentally-friendly transportation started well before Elon Musk’s 2006 draft that is known as the “Master Plan.” Musk knew that CO2 emissions were threatening lift on Earth and that a change needed to be made. Fourteen years later, Tesla sets on top of the automotive world as the leader in electromobility, and arguably could be recognized as the company that made legacy automakers rethink a business model centered around gas-powered machines that are harming the Earth and its atmosphere.
A company with a short, but rich history like Tesla realized the issue was here before the first Roadster even rolled off of the production lines. However, Ford, a company that recently celebrated its 117th birthday, does not seem to recognize the issues at hand, pushing a date for its sustainability goals that sits 30 years down the road.
https://twitter.com/Ford/status/1275820983299870722
In 2018, Ford sold the most vehicles on Earth with 2.38 million units, according to EVadoption.com. However, the company can only attribute .39% of its total sales to its electric cars, which at the time only accounted for the Ford Focus EV. Although the company is planning to introduce its Mustang Mach-E, an all-electric version of the F-150 pickup, and three other models within the next few years, it seems to be too little, but it’s not too late.
Ford’s first step in moving toward sustainability is to introduce a fully-electric fleet well before 2050. Thirty years is far too long as other automakers, like Volkswagen, are pumping in billions of dollars into plans that involve making a lineup of vehicles battery-powered and not combustion-driven. Ultimately, the effort relies on recognizing the problem that gas-powered transportation gives to the environment, and Ford has to realize that its goal is far too distant. Change is needed now.
It is not all bad, though. Ford does plan to use locally-sourced renewable energy for all manufacturing plants globally by 2035. This effort bodes well for the company’s mission, and will undoubtedly help Ford move toward carbon neutrality.
The question is: Where is the urgency? Several countries around the world have already announced their intentions to phase-out fossil fuels. Of the fourteen that have announced bans of gas-powered vehicles, only one has a goal of 2050: Costa Rica.
Many of the locations are considering 2025, 2030, or 2040 as the year when gasoline and diesel-powered machines will no longer be permitted. If Ford doesn’t adopt a quicker timeframe, it could spell trouble for the automaker in these locations, which include large, dense car markets like China, Germany, India, and Spain.
Electric vehicles are becoming more popular, and Tesla is leading the charge. The company has inspired many automakers to adopt its style with minimalism, and its goal with sustainability. Many companies have gotten on-board with the idea, setting lofty goals that will accelerate the shift from gas to batteries. However, Ford is treating its sustainability plan as a way to gain support from a growing community, and not as a way to decrease its carbon footprint promptly.
It’s an emergency, Ford, and it is time to start acting like it.
Ford Sustainability Report 2020 by Joey Klender on Scribd
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 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’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.