Connect with us
Insurance company faked a Tesla battery fire to prove batteries catch fire Insurance company faked a Tesla battery fire to prove batteries catch fire

News

Insurance company faked a Tesla battery fire to prove batteries catch fire

Credit: Axa

Published

on

An insurance company wanted to prove that Tesla batteries catch on fire and performed a test without the battery. Yes, you read that right. Axa Insurance put on a show marketed as a crash test and admitted to 24auto.de that there were no batteries in the tested videos.

According to a statement by the Axa, EVs can pose a risk of fire due to the batteries. However, Axa chose to perform these tests ‘proving’ it by not including the batteries. Instead, they set the car on fire in a different way.

Advertisement

Axa told 24auto.de that it would have been too dangerous to demonstrate an actual battery fire so they removed the battery cells before the tests. This same reasoning applied to their decision to ignite the fire of a Tesla Model S with pyrotechnics.

“For safety reasons, it was not possible to ignite a real battery fire at an event with around 500 people, which is why a fire with pyrotechnics was staged.”

“We wanted to use the fire the accident researchers: on the one hand point out the danger of a cell fire, which can result from damage to the underside of the electric car, and on the other hand point out the problems with fires in electric vehicles in general. Fortunately, fires are very rare in electric cars as well as in conventional combustion engines. In the rare case of a battery fire, so-called thermal runaways can.”

Michael Pfäffli, head of accident research at AXA Switzerland, said that the high torque found in most EVs could result in unwanted, jerky acceleration and loss of control. During the crash test, it was assumed that the driver would lose control of the Tesla which would then roll over on a traffic island.

Advertisement

After the crash, Axa noted that the passenger side was intact but the underbody was badly damaged. Axa researchers also noted that the drive battery was very well protected but could still pose a fire hazard.

I have so many questions…

How can you claim that something catches on fire and then do a test without that object? And honestly, anything will catch on fire if you set it on fire. Except for water unless the water is contaminated with something flammable.

Advertisement

In my opinion, this so-called test combined with the claim that fires are rare with conventional combustible engines is just FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).

Another question. How is it legal for any company to openly test a vehicle in this manner on public roads? If they were worried about safety, they shouldn’t be testing and setting cars on fire in places where innocent people could get hurt. Did they have a permit or some type of agency approval for testing?

Tesla owners get criticized for using Full Self-Driving Beta but it’s okay for insurance companies to stage car fires on public roads?

One last question. Would Axa have come out and admitted that this whole thing was staged if 24auto.de hadn’t asked them? They presented the photo to the media which would have harmed Tesla’s reputation. So the question has to be asked, what were Axa’s real motives here?

Advertisement

Note: Johnna is a Tesla shareholder and supports its mission. 

Your feedback is important. If you have any comments, concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

SpaceX to launch Starlink V2 satellites on Starship starting 2027

The update was shared by SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell and Starlink Vice President Mike Nicolls.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX is looking to start launching its next-generation Starlink V2 satellites in mid-2027 using Starship.

The update was shared by SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell and Starlink Vice President Mike Nicolls during remarks at Mobile World Congress (MWC) in Barcelona, Spain.

“With Starship, we’ll be able to deploy the constellation very quickly,” Nicolls stated. “Our goal is to deploy a constellation capable of providing global and contiguous coverage within six months, and that’s roughly 1,200 satellites.”

Nicolls added that once Starship is operational, it will be capable of launching approximately 50 of the larger, more powerful Starlink satellites at a time, as noted in a Bloomberg News report.

Advertisement

The initial deployment of roughly 1,200 next-generation satellites is intended to establish global and contiguous coverage. After that phase, SpaceX plans to continue expanding the system to reach “truly global coverage, including the polar regions,” Nicolls said.

Currently, all Starlink satellites are launched on SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. The next-generation fleet will rely on Starship, which remains in development following a series of test flights in 2025. SpaceX is targeting its next Starship test flight, featuring an upgraded version of the rocket, as soon as this month.

Starlink is currently the largest satellite network in orbit, with nearly 10,000 satellites deployed. Bloomberg Intelligence estimates the business could generate approximately $9 billion in revenue for SpaceX in 2026.

Nicolls also confirmed that SpaceX is rebranding its direct-to-cell service as Starlink Mobile.

Advertisement

The service currently operates with 650 satellites capable of connecting directly to smartphones and has approximately 10 million monthly active users. SpaceX expects that figure to exceed 25 million monthly active users by the end of 2026.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s xAI and X to pay off $17.5B debt in full: report

The update was shared initially in a report from Bloomberg News, which cited people reportedly familiar with the matter.

Published

on

Credit: xAI

Elon Musk’s social platform X and artificial intelligence startup xAI are reportedly preparing to repay approximately $17.5 billion in outstanding debt in full. 

The update was shared initially in a report from Bloomberg News, which cited people reportedly familiar with the matter.

Morgan Stanley, which arranged the debt financing for both companies, has reportedly informed existing lenders that X and xAI plan to pay back the full amount of the $17.5 billion debt. Bloomberg’s sources did not disclose where the capital for the repayment would be coming from.

X, formerly known as Twitter, assumed roughly $12.5 billion in debt during Musk’s acquisition of the company. xAI separately borrowed about $5 billion through bonds and loans last June. The two firms merged last year under xAI Holdings.

Advertisement

Bloomberg noted that portions of the debt are relatively recent and may carry early repayment penalties. xAI’s $3 billion in high-yield bonds are expected to be redeemed at 117 cents on the dollar, reflecting a premium since the debt was expected to stay outstanding for at least two years.

X has been servicing tens of millions of dollars in monthly debt payments, while xAI has reportedly been burning approximately $1 billion in cash per month as it invests heavily in data centers, chips, and AI talent. That being said, xAI also concluded a funding round in January, where it raised $20 billion of new equity.

The repayment plans come as Musk consolidates several of his businesses. SpaceX recently acquired xAI, making it a subsidiary as the company explores plans for space-based data centers. The combined entity has been valued at approximately $1.25 trillion.

Bloomberg previously reported that SpaceX is targeting a confidential IPO filing as soon as this month, potentially positioning the private space firm for a public listing later this year. Representatives for Morgan Stanley declined to comment, and X and xAI did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Giga Berlin head calls out Handelsblatt’s claimed 2025 production figures

Andre Thierig, Senior Director of Manufacturing at Giga Berlin, published a detailed post on LinkedIn challenging several points made in the publication’s coverage of the Grünheide facility.

Published

on

tesla-model-y-giga-berlin-delivery
Credit: Tesla

Tesla Gigafactory Berlin’s plant manager has publicly pushed back against recent reporting by German business publication Handelsblatt, which cited reportedly erroneous data about the factory’s production figures and financial performance.

Andre Thierig, Senior Director of Manufacturing at Giga Berlin, published a detailed post on LinkedIn challenging several points made in the publication’s coverage of the Grünheide facility.

In his LinkedIn post, Thierig called out Handelsblatt’s claim that 149,000 Model Y vehicles were produced at Giga Berlin in 2025. He noted that “the article is simply filled from front to back with false information and claims!

“I have to set the record straight here! In the last article about Tesla in Grünheide, the Handelsblatt speaks e.g. of 149,000 Model Ys built in 2025. WRONG! 

Advertisement

“In 2025, we again produced over 200,000 vehicles. And this despite the fact that we stopped production in Q1 for the changeover to the new Model Y and then ramped it up again to 5,000 units per week over several weeks,” Thierig wrote. 

He added that production increased each quarter in 2025 compared to the prior quarter and stated that more than 700,000 Model Y units have been produced at Grünheide since manufacturing began in 2022. For the first quarter of 2026, he stated that the factory is planning another production increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2025.

Thierig also questioned Handelsblatt’s reported 0.74% profit margin, writing that how the publication calculated the figure “remains reserved for their secret ‘calculation skills.’”

Beyond production data, Thierig highlighted Tesla’s broader footprint in Germany, stating that the company has invested more than €5 billion in Grünheide since 2020 and created nearly 11,000 permanent, above-tariff jobs. He added that Tesla is currently investing nearly €100 million into battery cell production at the site, which is expected to generate several hundred additional positions.

Advertisement

In a follow-up comment, Thierig noted that he did communicate with the publication’s editor-in-chief in an effort to “start fresh,” but he was informed that Handelsblatt’s current approach works just fine. 

“Last year, I spoke to a representative of the Handelsblatt editor-in-chief and suggested that we “start anew” again. Handelsblatt turned down this offer on the grounds that their current approach works well for them,” Thierig noted. 

Sönke Iwersen, Head of Investigative Research at Handelsblatt, responded to Thierig’s post, stating that the newspaper’s figures were based on Tesla’s own annual financial statements for the Grünheide entity.

He cited reported 2024 revenue of €7.68 billion, operating profit of €156.8 million, and net income after taxes of €55.6 million. Iwersen also referenced prior public comments from Elon Musk about Cybertruck demand, noting the gap between reported pre-orders and subsequent annual sales figures. 

Advertisement

He also stated that the works council election eligibility figures Giga Berlin had dropped to 10,703 employees today from 12,415 two years ago.

“As far as production figures are concerned, these are figures from the data service provider Inovev. This is also stated in the article. Please compare this with Elon Musk’s information on demand for the Cybertruck. According to Musk, there were one million pre-orders. In the first year, 39,000 units were sold, in the second year 20,000. How can this be explained? With a million pre-orders?

“You yourself have repeatedly pointed out in recent months that no jobs would be cut in Grünheide because Tesla is different from the competition. Now a new works council is being elected in Grünheide. 10,703 people are eligible to vote. Two years ago, 12,415 people were eligible to vote. So there were exactly 1712 fewer from 2024 to 2026,” Iwersen wrote. 

Continue Reading