Connect with us

News

Former Tesla 4680 cell production engineer lands at American Battery Factory

(Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

Former Tesla 4680 battery cell production engineer James Herbermann has been named Vice President of Manufacturing at the American Battery Factory (ABF).

“James brings to American Battery Factory incredible perspective and front row experiences in evolving battery cell technology and is the perfect complement to our team as we begin our journey to develop a domestic battery manufacturing ecosystem that will make energy independence and renewable energy a reality for the United States,” ABF CEO and President Paul Charles said. “As we lay the foundation for our factory network, I am confident James’ cross-functional leadership will not only enhance the efficiency of ABF’s modular approach to manufacturing, but it will also propel our unwavering quest to develop the longest-lasting LFP prismatic battery cells on the market.”

James Herbermann, formerly with Tesla, joins American Battery Factory as its new Vice President of Manufacturing.

ABF is working to develop the United States’ first network of Lithium-Iron Phosphate, or LFP, battery cell gigafactories. The LFP cell is a major part of many automakers’ plans for future electric vehicles as more cell chemistries are being utilized to combat excessive demand. Tesla, for example, started transitioning its Standard Range trim levels to LFP batteries last year. The automaker confirmed that it would utilize the cell chemistry in lower range vehicle as they are less expensive and have longer lifespans. They do have their disadvantages, especially in terms of energy density, which means less power and range with EVs that utilize these packs. They are also more likely to be affected by adverse weather conditions, especially in colder climates.

CEO Elon Musk has said in the past that LFP packs want to be charged to 100 percent, as opposed to nickel-based packs that prefer a 90 percent state of charge.

Tesla is just one of the companies working to use LFP cells. Rivian, Ford, and Volkswagen are also utilizing the cell chemistry for some of their vehicles. Therefore, the need to produce more cells to provide automakers and customers with suitable options is definitely a work in progress.

Advertisement

Tesla (TSLA) Q1 2022 earnings results: Another beat with 19% operating profit and margin

ABF is working to eliminate LFP shortages with a series of production plants across the U.S., and the company is looking for Herbermann to lead and support all aspects of its manufacturing and production operations. Prior to ABF, Herbermann worked at Tesla to lead the development and scaling of its new battery electrode processes in Austin from the pilot program to a full-scale production process. He was a direct piece of Tesla’s commercialization of the 4680 cells, which has been installed in early builds of the Model Y from the new Austin factory. Additionally, Herbermann has developed “novel Sodium Titanium Phosphate; F1 racing Li-Ion cells; Aquion Hybrid Ion (AHI®); Duracell Ultra®; Comfort Plus® modular carpet tiles; and ZIP Wall® sheathing,” a press release from ABF said.

“I am inspired by ABF’s mission to develop a domestic supply chain for LFP batteries, especially in light of the pandemic’s crippling effect on availability and our country’s glaring void in battery cell manufacturing,” Herbermann said about his new role. “With its strategic approach of constructing a network of modular rapid construction factories near or onsite at pack integrators and energy solution providers, ABF is on track to solve one of the planet’s most pressing energy needs. I look forward to being a part of this impactful work.”

I’d love to hear from you!  f you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement

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

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

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 denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

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.

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading