News
Rivian patent application hints at 900V fast charging capabilities
A recently published Rivian patent application titled “Configurable Battery Pack for Fast Charge” describes a method of switching between battery pack connection types to allow for both 450V and 900V fast charging without the need for specialized components. The invention was filed in both the US and internationally, and both applications just published today as US Patent Publication No. 2019/0126761 A1 and International Publication No. WO/2019/084507 A1.
Rivian’s application sets out to solve three specific issues with electric vehicle battery charging. First, increases in charging rates typically require more expensive parts that are rated for the higher current requirements. Second, electronic devices operated while a battery is charging may be impacted via increased voltage when a battery’s charging rate is increased. Finally, when a fault occurs in a battery module, a battery system often needs to be completely disconnected from any loads or the charging voltage must be changed.
The basic concept of the application purports to solve the above-referenced problems. As described, the invention claims that battery modules connected in parallel achieve a targeted maximum high voltage for an electric load (such as 450V), but when connected in series that voltage can be doubled (900V). Details of why this is advantageous are explained in the application as follows:
“A configurable battery system allows the techniques of [this invention] to be applied to an electric vehicle…to more fully utilize a battery charger’s potential [where] it is desirable to achieve a particular charging target. For example, a charging target of 150 kW at 450 V may require a current of 334 A…[and] components may need to be sourced to handle up to 400 A continuously to handle the charging….If a battery system were able to take advantage of charging at 900 V, the charging target of 150 kW could be achieved at just 167 A, which may allow for more numerous, better quality, or cheaper options for charging components. For example, a current of 167 A may allow different hardware to be used than if the current were nearer to 400 A.“
- Figure from Rivian’s battery connection switching patent application. | Image: Rivian/USPTO
- Figure from Rivian’s battery connection switching patent application. | Image: Rivian/USPTO
- Figure from Rivian’s battery connection switching patent application. | Image: Rivian/USPTO
The application also includes a battery management system to determine which connection should be used at a given point and switch the connection type accordingly. This same management system is also used to detect faults in the system while charging and use the switching capability to handle them accordingly rather than disconnecting any battery loads.
The US application for this invention was filed June 8, 2018 and thus has not yet been examined. However, in the international version, an examiner has already searched for related inventions based on the first 10 claims of Rivian’s application. These claims only describe “a configurable battery system in which connection of two batteries can be switched between a series and a parallel connection”, which is not considered novel on its own.
This kind of finding is not uncommon for applications undergoing the international filing process and will be further addressed once filed in specific countries. Three other inventions were determined to be present in the application which will likely be incorporated with the first ten as the invention’s proceedings continue.

Rivian aims to be the leading expert on battery technology, and patent applications such as this one are a nod towards that innovation goal. The Michigan-based all-electric car maker runs a battery lab in Irvine, California where it has picked up several engineers from renowned supercar brand McLaren. This talent pool includes hypercar engineer Richard Farquhar who is their VP of Propulsion, leading Rivian’s battery and powertrain development.
Currently, each Rivian battery module holds 864 cells, stacked evenly on top of one another, with a thin 7mm aluminum plate with liquid coolant in between. In addition to connection testing, the company uses machine learning to adjust battery cell settings to build predictive models and tune the cells based on situations that may be encountered, such as weather conditions.
Altogether, Rivian’s aim to achieve a level of battery technology that’s reliable and optimal for the electric outdoor adventure branding it has embraced looks to be moving in a promising direction.
Investor's Corner
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.



