Connect with us

News

Grünheide Mayor shares update on Tesla Giga Berlin’s proposed expansion plan

Credit: @tobilindh/X

Published

on

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

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. 

Advertisement

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. 

Advertisement

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.  

Advertisement

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).

Advertisement

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

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators

A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.

Published

on

By

A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.

The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.

Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:

Tesla Semi Spec Long Range Standard Range
Battery Capacity 822 kWh 548 kWh
Battery Chemistry NCMA Li-Ion NCMA Li-Ion
Peak Motor Power 800 kW 525 kW
Estimated Range ~500 miles ~325 miles
Efficiency ~1.7 kWh/mile ~1.7 kWh/mile
Est. Price ~$290,000 ~$260,000
GVW Rating 82,000 lbs 82,000 lbs

The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.

Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.

In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).

Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.

NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:

“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”

The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.

Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.

This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.

The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.

For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.

As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.

In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla to fix 219k vehicles in recall with simple software update

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.

Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.

The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.

Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.

Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed

Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.

By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.

The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.

Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”

Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.

Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.

Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.

For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.

Continue Reading