News
Lithium Mining is a Hot Topic In Nevada Thanks to Tesla
Lithium mining is suddenly a hot topic in Nevada, where a local state senator is up in arms about a deal to import lithium from Mexico. Other sources exist.
Grid scale electricity storage concept via Tesla Energy
Lithium mining has become a hot topic in Nevada largely because of Tesla’s interest in sourcing lithium hydroxide, one of the main ingredients needed for Gigafactory scale production of lithium-ion batteries.
Tesla announced it had signed a deal with Canadian company Bacanora and British company Rare Earth Minerals towards the end of August. Bacanora is a minerals explorer, while Rare Earth Minerals owns Sonora Lithium Project. That partnership is designed to develop a “low-cost”, “sustainable” mining project in Northern Mexico based on clay deposits found in the region.
The Sonora mine does not exist yet, but could yield between 35,000 and 50,000 tons of lithium deposits annually. The deal will be extended and scaled up contingent on the mine’s ability to meet Tesla’s forecasts and actual output from its Gigafactory. The two Sonora project partners will need to find debt or equity to finance the operation and Tesla is permitted under the deal to participate in financing activities.
The state of Nevada has agreed to give Tesla almost a half billion dollars in tax incentives in order to lure the Gigafactory to the site north of Reno, which seems little enough considering the increase in economic activity the factory will bring to the state. But now, a Nevada politician, Democrat state senator Tick Segerblom, has tweeted, “Tesla to get lithium from Mexico – where’s Trump when you need him?”
tesla to get lithium from mexico – where's trump when we need him? $TSLA http://t.co/8NGT7OgjXp via @WSJ
— Tick Segerblom (@tsegerblom) August 28, 2015
-->
That got the Las Vegas Sun involved. They contacted Elon Musk, who tweeted back that press interest in the story was “unwarranted” as the lithium deal was “not exclusive” and had “many contingencies”. He said that Tesla would “definitely” be interested in talking to local suppliers of lithium feedstocks. According to the Sun’s sources, developing lithium mines in the US is a lengthy process taking as much as 10 years, while lithium mining operations already located in Nevada are either too small or nearing the end of their planned lifetime.
@ScottLucasNV Lithium deal is not exclusive & has many contingencies. The press on this matter is unwarranted.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 2, 2015
Now up pops Nevada Sunrise Gold Corporation, which apparently is a played out gold mining operation. It announced on September 2nd that it has “entered into a letter agreement for an option to purchase” a site in Esmeralda County, which is in Nevada’s Clayton Valley. The company believes that area could hold lithium brine deposits in subterranean aquifers, based upon studies and reports made of the local area.
-->Meanwhile, researchers at the University of Wyoming report they have discovered an enormous supply of lithium at the Rock Springs Uplift, a geological feature in southwest Wyoming. Initial tests indicate the lithium-rich brine from a 25-square-mile area could contain 228,000 tons of the stuff. That’s enough to meet annual U.S. demand and is twice the amount available at Silver Peak in Nevada, which is the biggest domestic lithium producer today.
What has the University of Washington team excited is that the lithium at the Rock Springs Uplift can be processed more cheaply than the lithium found at other locations, due to a number of factors.
First, extracting the lithium from brine requires large quantities of soda ash (sodium carbonate). The Rock Springs Uplift site is located within 30 miles of the world’s largest industrial soda ash supplies, so the cost of transporting it to the production area will be minimal.
Second, magnesium must be removed from brine before it can be used for lithium recovery and that can be an expensive process. The brine from the Rock Springs Uplift reservoirs is lower in magnesium than at other sites. Less magnesium means less money to remove it.
Third, the brine must be heated and pressurized to release the lithium it contains. Because the Rock Springs Uplift brine is far underground, it is already at a higher pressure and temperature than brine at existing lithium operations. That factor may eliminate an expensive step in the process, resulting in significant cost savings.
-->The Chinese thought they had cornered the market for lithium when they locked up rights to much of the world’s lithium supply located in Bolivia a decade ago. But apparently, the demand has created interest in new sources of supply. Hopefully, all this interest in lithium will spur competition which could lead to lower prices. And that could spell lower battery prices for the electric cars and electrical storage batteries of the future.
Source: PV-Tech
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
-->It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
-->The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
-->News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
