News
Advancement in nuclear fusion tech continues transition to clean energy future
The development of unlimited, carbon-neutral, and safe energy through nuclear fusion is expanding around the world, and scientists at the Atomic Energy Authority in the United Kingdom (AEA) have recently cleared one more key hurdle to making it a commercial reality: exhausting gas that’s hotter than the Sun. The hot plasma created during fusion power generation needs to cool down as it’s being used, but at its extreme temperatures, there aren’t any materials available to withstand the heat. Now, that problem appears to have been solved.
The AEA team’s answer to the heat issue is a “sacrificial wall” design which will require replacement every few years. Plasma will be moved down a path within its fusion generator’s holding device to cool it slightly before coming into contact with a specially designed wall for the remainder of the cooling process. However, even at a lower temperature, the heat will degrade the wall’s integrity over time and need to be changed. With the first nuclear fusion reactor set to turn on in seven years, AEA’s fusion exhaust system may be one of the developments that keeps it on schedule.
It’s said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and recent fusion energy developments show that sentiment’s considerations don’t remain within the bounds of Earth. At about 90 million miles away, our Sun is essentially a fusion reactor in the sky, its large size creating enough gravity to force atoms together at its core and release massive amounts of energy. Artificially reproducing the conditions needed for this kind of generation is tough, but the attempt has been going on since the 1960s. The AEA is representative of one agency in a global endeavor.
The most advanced nuclear fusion project today is ITER, the International Nuclear Fusion Research experimental reactor in southern France, which hosts scientists from 35 countries dedicated to achieving the first ever positive fusion energy production. Their device is called a “tokamak”, and its structure is something like a flattened donut (torus) encapsulated by rings of powerful magnetic coils. The magnetic fields generated by the coils both suspend the plasma created by extreme heat and squeeze the plasma into a small space to create the fusion reactions. ITER is scheduled to turn its reactor on in 2025.
-
- A visualization of the ITER tokamak in operation.| Credit: ITER.org/Jamison Daniel, Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility
-
- A computer-animated visualization of the ITER tokamak in operation. | Credit: ITER.org
Creating fusion in a laboratory involves two primary parts: 1) creating plasma, a soup of electrons and nuclei released from their atomic structures due to extremely high temperatures; and 2) merging the nuclei of two different types of atoms, generally different forms of hydrogen. The heat in a tokamak is generated from both the magnetic field movement and external heating devices, and the nuclei merge is achieved by squeezing the plasma using those same magnetic fields into a constricted area to encourage collisions. Essentially, the high heat excites the atomic particles, speeding their motion, and their energetic movements within the magnetically confined area significantly increases the likelihood the nuclei will crash and fuse together. When this fusion occurs, a massive amount of energy is released, the object of desire for all involved in this field of research.
The amount of heat needed to convince atoms to release their electrons and form plasma is in the range of millions of degrees Celsius, the core of the Sun itself being 15 million degrees. Without high gravity to aid with squeezing plasma, as in the Sun’s case at 27 times the gravity of Earth, reactors on our planet need to heat well beyond the Sun’s temperature to ensure the atomic particles in the plasma collide and fuse. ITER’s tokamak heats to 100 million degrees Celsius.
All of this heating and magnetic control requires its own energy input, and this is where the current state of fusion energy development is focused. The ratio of energy used and energy produced is called “Q”, the desired amount aimed for by scientists in the field being 10:1. When ten times the energy is produced by nuclear fusion than used to produce it, it will have advanced to a level ready for further development as an alternative power source, or so goes the thinking. ITER’s specific goal is to produce 500 MW of fusion power from 50 MW of heating power.
Once energy is released from the fusion process, it can then be captured to create steam to power generators currently using other power sources such as coal and natural gas. This is another benefit purported benefit of fusion power; it can plug directly into existing power grids, minimizing any disruptions or requirements for new equipment. Combined with the abundant availability of hydrogen and the lack of greenhouses gases or radioactive waste, there are high hopes for fusion’s future as an all-in-one energy solution.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
A new report claims that Apple is in the process of developing what would be the missing link for Tesla to get CarPlay.
Apple and Tesla have been reportedly working together for some time to give Tesla owners the opportunity to utilize CarPlay within their vehicles. While many owners are more than happy with Tesla’s in-house UI, which is seamless, effective, and smooth, some still want CarPlay, which does have its advantages.
A report from 9to5Mac now states that a new CarPlay technology that was highlighted during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) would potentially be the bridge between Tesla and Apple. With the addition of a feature known as “Route Sharing,” which gives a navigation app the ability to share routing data with the vehicle, Tesla would be able to launch CarPlay in its vehicles, the report states.
CarPlay has not been a priority for Tesla because it has done extremely well with its in-house UI, but some drivers are just used to it. Additionally, it could improve Tesla’s subpar Navigation or offer improved app capabilities, especially with iMessage.
Route Sharing is an intended addition to CarPlay’s iteration in iOS 26.4, which was released in March:
The addition of CarPlay would undoubtedly be welcome, but at the same time, it seems like Tesla realizes it is not of the utmost priority. There are so many things that Tesla is working on currently within its own vehicles, especially attempting to solve self-driving.
Back in February, Bloomberg had reported that Tesla was still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles, but it had not due to app compatibility issues and incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
This bottleneck could buy Tesla the proper amount of time to develop CarPlay for its vehicles. It would be a welcome addition, and could be brought on with either the Summer or Fall 2026 Software Updates.
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
Tesla Cybertruck driver gets pickup seized for ‘legitimate concerns’ in UK
