News
SpaceX and “new space” up against traditionalists for future of NASA
Speculation about the direction of NASA under the Trump Administration has been circling for weeks, and although there are still no definite answers, there’s finally some news about the process being executed.
According to internal White House advisory documents obtained by Politico, there’s a huge push from many advisors for NASA to be used as a driver for privatized space technology; however, that push is bringing the rift between traditional NASA contractors and the “new space” companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin to a head. NASA’s $19 billion dollar budget is simply not large enough to accommodate both commercially-driven and traditional visions for the agency. The struggle is real, apparently, and it isn’t just affecting inner White House circles, either.
Earlier this week, the Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF) surprised its audience by endorsing NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), the heavy lift rocket being built to launch future NASA missions. In his remarks at the FAA’s Commercial Space Conference, CSF chairman Alan Stern characterized the SLS as a “resource” that could be complimentary to commercial space activity.
The surprise at this announcement comes in part from the fact that Boeing, a traditional NASA contractor and one-half of the government-customer-only launch service United Launch Alliance (ULA), is the prime contractor for the SLS. The cost comparison between private and government contracted technology is the issue.
Cost Effectiveness is Key
The billions of dollars it will take to fully develop SLS plus the high cost of launch missions is hard to justify when, for example, SpaceX estimates under $100 million dollars per flight on its upcoming heavy launch vehicle, Falcon Heavy.
SLS is estimated to be capable of carrying many times the payload weight of SpaceX’s vehicle, but it would still cost much less to use multiple SpaceX vehicles for a multi-part payload rather than justify the huge cost for a single launch. That, or one could argue that the cost of a SpaceX or Blue Origin developed vehicle in line with the SLS’s capabilities would be much more cost effective given the pricing record thus far. It also should be noted that such vehicles are, in fact, being designed by these companies already, albeit mostly still in non-tangible state. SpaceX has its Mars-bound Interplanetary Transport System (or “BFR” if you like), and Blue Origin has its “New Armstrong” in the works.
What about Congress?
The push from White House advisers will face obstacles in Congress as well. Space subcommittee members in both the House and Senate have discussed some of the details included in a draft 2017 NASA Authorization Act, the legislation which will define NASA’s priorities, and considering their comments alongside prior legislative drafts, “stay the course” looks to be the general direction. Concern over NASA’s need for “constancy of purpose” is a big driver, as missions requiring long-term development suffer when directives vary too widely from one presidential administration to another.
While prior presentations of NASA Authorization Acts have been lengthy and mostly inviting little to no controversy, they all still contain a requirement to use the SLS and Orion, NASA’s crew capsule under development, for deep space activity and anywhere else suitable. Such emphasis would likely clash with those advocating for transforming NASA’s role to one supporting commercial launch vehicles, especially those promoting the elimination of the SLS entirely.
Also, with thousands of NASA-dependent jobs on the line in the districts hosting SLS development facilities, the stakes are high for any congressional representatives thinking of supporting major shifts for NASA. The lines seem to have been drawn in the proverbial sand.
What about Mars?
News of commercial space supporters advocating for a NASA transition inside the White House may sound hopeful to those rooting for more privatized space technology; however, for colonization dreamers, Mars looks to be a carrot teased at the end of a “Moon first” road. The internal White House documents call for Moon development to begin by 2020, Mars falling under the “and beyond” category of capabilities that could be possible with an overhauled NASA.
In that light, the proposed NASA bills might sound like a Cinderella story for Mars enthusiasts: In order to go to the Prince’s ball (Mars), a whole host of lengthy chores (cis-lunar activity, Moon base, use the SLS, etc.) must be completed first.
If “Moon first” becomes the winner in the end, it still wouldn’t likely interfere with Elon Musk’s Mars plans but rather help them along with all the new space infrastructure launch income for SpaceX. And to continue with the Cinderella bit, we know there’s no way Musk would make it home by midnight anyway, although he does seem to have an affinity for mice.
Energy
Tesla Powerwall distribution expands in Australia
Inventory is expected to arrive in late February and official sales are expected to start mid-March 2026.
Supply Partners Group has secured a distribution agreement for the Tesla Powerwall in Australia, with inventory expected to arrive in late February and official sales beginning in mid-March 2026.
Under the new agreement, Supply Partners will distribute Tesla Powerwall units and related accessories across its national footprint, as noted in an ecogeneration report. The company said the addition strengthens its position as a distributor focused on premium, established brands.
“We are proud to officially welcome Tesla Powerwall into the Supply Partners portfolio,” Lliam Ricketts, Co-Founder and Director of Innovation at Supply Partners Group, stated.
“Tesla sets a high bar, and we’ve worked hard to earn the opportunity to represent a brand that customers actively ask for. This partnership reflects the strength of our logistics, technical services and customer experience, and it’s a win for installers who want premium options they can trust.”
Supply Partners noted that initial Tesla Powerwall stock will be warehoused locally before full commercial rollout in March. The distributor stated that the timing aligns with renewed growth momentum for the Powerwall, supported by competitive installer pricing, consumer rebates, and continued product and software updates.
“Powerwall is already a category-defining product, and what’s ahead makes it even more compelling,” Ricketts stated. “As pricing sharpens and capability expands, we see a clear runway for installers to confidently spec Powerwall for premium residential installs, backed by Supply Partners’ national distribution footprint and service model.”
Supply Partners noted that a joint go-to-market launch is planned, including Tesla-led training for its sales and technical teams to support installers during the home battery system’s domestic rollout.
Elon Musk
Tesla Giga Berlin growth could stall if not “free from external influences”: Elon Musk
The comments were delivered in a pre-recorded video discussion.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has reportedly warned that future expansion of Gigafactory Berlin could be jeopardized if the site does not remain “free from external influences.”
Musk’s comments were delivered in a pre-recorded video discussion with employees and came at a sensitive moment for the facility, where union representation has been a recurring issue.
According to reports from Handelsblatt and Der Spiegel, citing participants at the event, Musk suggested that if Giga Berlin is no longer “free from external influences,” further expansion would become unlikely. He did not, however, hint that the plant would shut down.
While Musk did not name IG Metall directly, his remarks were widely interpreted as referencing the union, which is currently the largest faction on the works council but does not hold a majority, as noted in an electrive report.
The video conversation was conducted between Musk in Austin and Grünheide plant manager André Thierig, then played back to the workforce in Germany. Works council elections are scheduled for early March, heightening the tension between management and organized labor.
The CEO has previously voiced concerns that stronger union influence could limit Tesla’s operational flexibility and long-term strategy in Germany.
Despite the warning on expansion, Musk praised the Giga Berlin site during the same address, describing it as one of the most advanced factories worldwide and highlighting its cleanliness and team culture.
The discussion also reportedly touched on battery cell production. According to attendees cited in German media, Musk indicated that Tesla has begun ramping cell production at the site. That would mark a notable shift from earlier expectations that large-scale cell manufacturing in Brandenburg would not begin until 2027.
Elon Musk
Tesla Full Self-Driving’s newest behavior is the perfect answer to aggressive cars
According to a recent video, it now appears the suite will automatically pull over if there is a tailgater on your bumper, the most ideal solution for when a driver is riding your bumper.
Tesla Full Self-Driving appears to have a new behavior that is the perfect answer to aggressive drivers.
According to a recent video, it now appears the suite will automatically pull over if there is a tailgater on your bumper, the most ideal solution for when a driver is riding your bumper.
With FSD’s constantly-changing Speed Profiles, it seems as if this solution could help eliminate the need to tinker with driving modes from the person in the driver’s seat. This tends to be one of my biggest complaints from FSD at times.
A video posted on X shows a Tesla on Full Self-Driving pulling over to the shoulder on windy, wet roads after another car seemed to be following it quite aggressively. The car looks to have automatically sensed that the vehicle behind it was in a bit of a hurry, so FSD determined that pulling over and letting it by was the best idea:
Tesla appears to be implementing some sort of feature that will now pull over if someone is tailgating you to let the car by
Really cool feature, definitely get a lot of this from those who think they drive race cars
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 26, 2026
We can see from the clip that there was no human intervention to pull over to the side, as the driver’s hands are stationary and never interfere with the turn signal stalk.
This can be used to override some of the decisions FSD makes, and is a great way to get things back on track if the semi-autonomous functionality tries to do something that is either unneeded or not included in the routing on the in-car Nav.
FSD tends to move over for faster traffic on the interstate when there are multiple lanes. On two-lane highways, it will pass slower cars using the left lane. When faster traffic is behind a Tesla on FSD, the vehicle will move back over to the right lane, the correct behavior in a scenario like this.
Perhaps one of my biggest complaints at times with Full Self-Driving, especially from version to version, is how much tinkering Tesla does with Speed Profiles. One minute, they’re suitable for driving on local roads, the next, they’re either too fast or too slow.
When they are too slow, most of us just shift up into a faster setting, but at times, even that’s not enough, see below:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
There are times when it feels like it would be suitable for the car to just pull over and let the vehicle that is traveling behind pass. This, at least up until this point, it appears, was something that required human intervention.
Now, it looks like Tesla is trying to get FSD to a point where it just knows that it should probably get out of the way.
Tesla Powerwall distribution expands in Australia
Tesla Giga Berlin growth could stall if not “free from external influences”: Elon Musk
