News
SpaceX rolls first Starship booster hardware to launch site
While destined to remain on the ground, SpaceX has rolled Starship booster hardware to its Boca Chica, Texas launch pad for the first time.
Back in March, SpaceX completed the process of stacking Super Heavy booster number 1 (BN1), creating what amounted to the largest rocket booster ever assembled. Plans and designs ultimately changed during that several-month process, leading SpaceX to write off the first completed Starship booster structure as a “pathfinder” and scrap it before it could complete a single test. As a result, BN1 never made it to SpaceX’s nearby launch and test facilities and was unceremoniously cut into pieces days later.
Ten weeks after that development, SpaceX is well into the process of stacking its first flightworthy Super Heavy booster (BN2 or BN3) and has officially delivered the first real booster hardware to the launch site for crucial qualification testing.
While only a ‘test tank,’ BN2.1’s arrival at SpaceX’s South Texas launch facilities is an undeniable sign that the company has finally settled on some sort of firm design for Starship’s first-stage booster – at least enough for a custom test article to be worth the time, effort, and money to build and test. BN2.1 is the eighth custom test tank built by SpaceX in the last ~18 months but it’s the first such test article to center around hardware specific to Super Heavy.
Technically, thanks to the fact that Starship and Super Heavy are built out of the exact same steel rings, baffles, and stringers with almost identical production hardware, all past test tanks – and even full Starships – simultaneously mature large portions of Starship’s booster.
Super Heavy requires several unique parts and sections, though. Unlike Starship, which is designed to ultimately have six Raptor engines installed, the ship’s booster will have anywhere from 29 to 32 Raptors and have to withstand almost five times the mechanical stress. That necessitates a drastically different thrust structure for Super Heavy, as well as all additional structural elements to support the 20 Raptor engines – compared to three on Starship – that will mount to the interior wall of its skirt rings.
Beyond Super Heavy’s thrust puck, the booster also requires a much larger transfer tube to feed far more liquid methane through its oxygen tank, a custom dome to connect to that transfer tube, and a custom forward dome and ring section to support four vast grid fins.
BN2.1 is never going to (intentionally) fly and is just a single test tank, which rules out installing actual engines. Now routine, SpaceX’s solution to that challenge of qualifying new hardware without risking catastrophic pad damage has involved building short ‘test tanks’ that are then filled with nonexplosive liquid nitrogen (LN2) and mechanically stressed with hydraulic rams instead of actual engines. Thus far, that process has seemingly been successful time and time again and has helped SpaceX qualify new steel alloys, thinner skin, new welding techniques, and new ‘thrust puck’ designs for Starship.
SpaceX has also tested early full-scale prototypes with the same hydraulic ram systems as a further hedge against quality assurance or fluke design issues that might not have been caught with test tanks. Whether or not BN2.1 is successful, it’s safe to assume that SpaceX will put its first flightworthy Super Heavy booster through a similar thrust puck stress test before attempting wet dress rehearsals or static fires.
Wasting no time at all, SpaceX has already scheduled road closures for what is likely BN2.1’s first round of tests no earlier than (NET) 12pm to 8pm CDT (17:00-03:00 UTC) on Monday, June 7th, with backup windows on the 8th and 9th. Stay tuned to find out if Super Heavy’s thrust puck survives its first nine-engine thrust puck shuck.
A California radiologist who drove his Tesla Model Y off a 250-foot cliff in an attempt to kill his family has had his charges dismissed after doctors say he is “doing well” in a mental health program.
Dharmesh Patel was charged with three counts of attempted murder in connection with a January 2023 crash where he drove his Tesla off a cliff, injuring his wife and two children, aged 7 and 4 at the time.
Patel drove the Tesla off Devil’s Slide in California, an area that is extremely rough to the point that investigators and rescuers expected the worst when arriving at the scene for the first time. Patel supposedly had schizoaffective disorder, according to Deputy District Attorney Dominique Davis.
Shockingly, Patel’s wife, who was in the vehicle, testified that she did not want her husband to be prosecuted, noting that their children missed their father and they wanted him to come back home. Patel’s attorney argued, “not everyone who commits a crime is a criminal.”
Doctor who took Tesla off cliff gets support from unlikely person
A three-day trial in Mental Health Diversion Court ruled in Patel’s favor, which kept him out of jail and instead on house arrest. He was admitted to a Mental Health Diversion Program, which he successfully completed, the Associated Press reported. San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said the judge was “required by law” to dismiss the charges:
“If the person who’s given mental health diversion follows the treatment plan, there’s nothing that can be done, and at the end of the two years he gets it wiped out of his record.”
Wagstaffe said he has argued, along with other DAs in California, to have attempted murder removed from the list of charges eligible to be dismissed due to mental health diversion programs.
Patel had the charges officially dismissed on Monday; his wife waited for him as he left court and they departed the building together, according to Mercury News. Patel surrendered his California medical license in December.
The crash has been one of the best examples of Tesla’s incredible engineering, which has saved four lives in this particular instance. The car was totalled but kept the four human beings alive and safe, which is something that many referred to as “an absolute miracle.”
A common misconception of anti-EV proponents is that the batteries used in the vehicles are detrimental to the environment and that they cause more waste than they are worth. But a look at Tesla’s battery recycling efforts last year shows the company is doing more than ever to recover materials and give portions of the cells a second life.
Tesla reported a significant milestone in its sustainability efforts last year, with battery recycling volumes rising 20% compared to 2024. According to the company’s 2025 Impact Report, Tesla recycled over 14,000 metric tons of battery material through a combination of in-house processing at its Gigafactories and collaborations with third-party recycling partners.
Tesla: “In 2025, we recycled over 14,000 metric tons of battery material through a combination of in-house processing and through our network of recycling partners.”
That’s equivalent to 46,000 long-range battery packs, a +20% increase from 2024. pic.twitter.com/TC3Nz7Kaqf
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) July 7, 2026
This amount of recovered material is equivalent to the resources needed to produce approximately 46,000 long-range battery packs. The increase reflects growing operational scale as Tesla’s global vehicle fleet expands and more batteries reach end-of-life or manufacturing scrap becomes available for processing.
Tesla and Battery Recycling
Battery recycling forms a core part of Tesla’s circular economy strategy. The company designs its batteries for longevity, often exceeding 200,000 miles of driving, and prioritizes repairs, remanufacturing, and second-life applications before full recycling.
Once packs are decommissioned, Tesla ensures 100% are recycled with no materials sent to landfills. This approach recovers critical metals including lithium, nickel, cobalt, and copper, which can be refined and reused in new battery production.
Tesla has advanced hydrometallurgical recycling processes capable of achieving recovery rates up to 98% for key battery metals. These methods are more efficient and environmentally friendly than traditional pyrometallurgical techniques, reducing energy use and enabling higher-purity materials suitable for direct reintegration into battery manufacturing.
Tesla co-founder JB Straubel confirms Redwood’s battery recycling operations are already profitable
In-house capabilities are supplemented by a network of specialized partners, creating a robust system that handles both production scrap and end-of-life packs.
The environmental and economic benefits are substantial. Recycling reduces reliance on virgin mining, lowers the carbon footprint associated with raw material extraction and processing, and helps stabilize supply chains for critical minerals amid rising global EV demand. As millions of Tesla vehicles age, the volume of recyclable material is expected to grow significantly in the coming years.
This 20% year-over-year growth demonstrates the effectiveness of Tesla’s investments in recycling infrastructure and technology. It positions the company as a leader in addressing one of the automotive industry’s major sustainability challenges. Continued innovation in battery design for easier disassembly and higher recyclability will further enhance these efforts.
Overall, Tesla’s progress in 2025 highlights how scaling recycling operations supports both environmental goals and long-term business resilience in the transition to electric mobility. As the EV market matures, such closed-loop systems will become increasingly vital for sustainable growth.
Tesla has spent years trying to engineer its way out of the automotive paint shop, one of the most expensive, space-consuming, and environmentally costly steps in vehicle manufacturing. With the Cybercab, Tesla confirmed on X this week that a new reaction injection molding process will embed color directly into the panel itself during production.
“Our new reaction injection molding (RIM) process shrinks Cybercab paint cycles from hours to minutes. This cuts those parts’ manufacturing and supply chain emissions by 35% and eliminating 100% of paint volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted in traditional paint methods.” noted Tesla.
While the RIM process isn’t necessarily new and has existed since the 1960s, what makes Tesla’s application notable is how it is being used specifically for exterior body panels that traditionally required a separate paint process after forming.
Tesla’s RIM approach integrates the color directly into the panel material during the molding process itself. The pigment is part of the polymer mix injected into the mold, meaning the panel comes out of the mold already colored, with no separate paint application required. The clear coat or protective layer can be applied at the mold stage or through a much faster post-process than traditional multi-stage painting. Tesla claims this compresses what was a multi-hour paint cycle into minutes per panel.
Tesla’s obsession with killing the paint shop is one of the most consistent threads running through the company’s manufacturing philosophy going back years. As far back as 2018, Musk was trimming paint color options to simplify production, tweeting at the time: “Moving 2 of 7 Tesla colors off menu on Wednesday to simplify manufacturing.” Two years later, in a 2020 Automotive News interview, Musk laid out his broader vision, saying he believed Tesla factories could one day be 1,000 times more efficient than conventional plants, and pointing to the paint shop as one of the biggest sources of waste, cost, and complexity. The Cybertruck was the most extreme expression of that thinking. Tesla chose an unpainted stainless steel exterior partly because it would eliminate the need for a $200 million paint facility at Gigafactory Texas. The stainless approach proved harder and more expensive than anticipated, but the underlying ambition never changed. The Cybercab is what happens when that same ambition meets a manufacturing process that delivers on it.
Radiologist who drove Tesla off cliff has attempted murder charges dismissed
Tesla battery recycling efforts increased 20 percent last year
