News
Grünheide Mayor shares update on Tesla Giga Berlin’s proposed expansion plan
Grünheide Mayor Arne Christiani has written a letter outlining an updated proposal for Tesla Giga Berlin’s planned expansion. The new proposal would involve Tesla cutting significantly fewer trees than initially intended, among other things. The proposal comes after the residents of Grünheide voted to deny Tesla’s request to clear out another 100 hectares of monoculture forest from the area.
Giga Berlin’s forest clearing activities have attracted criticism since the facility’s earliest days. More recently, anti-Tesla protesters have even gone so far as to build treehouses to show their defiance of the EV maker’s tree-clearing plans. What has been lost over the years, however, is the fact that the trees in the Giga Berlin complex are not a natural forest. Instead, it is a tree farm that’s originally intended to be used for cardboard, as noted by Elon Musk back in 2020.
Giga Berlin / GF4 will absolutely be designed with sustainability and the environment in mind— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 25, 2020
Despite this, Tesla’s tree-clearing activities have remained controversial. This came to a head recently when Grünheide residents were asked to vote for or against Giga Berlin’s planned expansion, which would, unsurprisingly, involve more of the monoculture forest being cut down. Ultimately, residents decided to vote against the EV maker’s plans. But in his letter, Grünheide Mayor Christiani noted that Tesla could adjust its plans so that less of the tree farm would be cut down.
Following is a translated version of the Grünheide Mayor’s letter.
After the vote of the citizens of #Grünheide against clearing another 100 ha at #GigaBerlin, a new sketch for an adjusted development plan has been published.
This would make all planned infrastructure projects possible, while saving 70 ha of forest.https://t.co/ID3FDn5z0n pic.twitter.com/0A7g611MsI— Tobias Lindh (@tobilindh) March 14, 2024
Dear residents,
Dear municipal representatives,
First of all, I would like to thank you all for the high level of participation in the residents’ survey.
The result of the residents’ survey on the submitted B-Plan No. 60 was clear to us, and we respect the opinions expressed.
Why is B-Plan No. 60 so important?
In my view, B-Plan No. 60 is urgently needed, as otherwise, the necessary transport infrastructure projects cannot be implemented in the foreseeable future, which would have considerable negative consequences for our community and the environment.
What has been adapted?
1. Preservation of 70.3 ha of Forest
The primary planning objective is to preserve as much of the forest as possible on the area covered by development Plan No. 60. To this end, around 47 ha, which was originally planned as industrial land, is now designated as forest land. In addition to further forest areas, which are secured by a planting commitment, a total of around 70.3 ha of forest will now be preserved. The adjusted planning is thus intended to take account of your wishes and ensure that the forest is preserved as far as possible under planning law.
2. State Roads and Goods Station
The existing traffic infrastructure cannot cope with the foreseeable volume of traffic. The other primary planning objectives are the creation of a planning law for the adapted and optimized planning of the state roads L 386 (as a relief for the existing L 38) and L 23, as well as for the possible realization of a company-owned goods station. This freight depot is the necessary prerequisite for the fact that significant volumes of traffic can be handled by rail, which will considerably reduce the volume of traffic on the roads in our districts.
Contrary to the frequent assertion that the construction of a freight station would also be possible on the existing site of the electric car manufacturer, it must be said that this is not possible due to the relocation of a Deutsche Bahn switch to the east and therefore due to technical railroad requirements. This also requires an adjustment to the planning for the L 386 already established in B-Plan No. 13, 1st amendment.
The original intention of the planning to significantly expand the operational area for the Gigafactory is now reduced to a small extent and only made possible to the extent that the connection of the factory premises to the L 386 can take place.
Another frequently voiced assertion that the establishment of development Plan no. 60 was intended to create a prerequisite for increasing production capacities must also be rejected! This was never the aim of the planning! It was merely a matter of creating additional storage and logistics space as well as the possibility of accommodating employee-related facilities. The latter facilities have now been completely omitted. Areas for storage and logistics will be significantly reduced in size.
The public and authorities will be consulted again on the amended draft of B-Plan No. 60 from 21.03.2024 to 04.04.2024 in accordance with Section 4a (3) BauGB.
For you and our municipality of Grünheide (Mark).
Arne Christiani
Mayor
Below are the updated plans for Tesla Giga Berlin’s proposed expansion.
Entwurf BPlan Gemeinde Gr Nheide Mark by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Mayor Christiani’s letter can be viewed below.
Erkl Rung B Plan Gem.gr Nheide Mark by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
News
Tesla analyst says Full Self-Driving is about to have its iPhone moment
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.