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.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
