News
SpaceX orbital Starship launch debut officially slips to 2022 – but it’s not all bad news
US government documentation suggests that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aims to complete an environmental review of SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch site no earlier than December 31st, 2021, precluding an orbital launch attempt this year.
In light of the FAA taking until September 2021 to publish the draft of that environmental assessment (EA), a major delay has been the expected outcome for months. The latest development finally makes that delay official, confirming that even in the new best-case scenario, SpaceX will be unable to conduct Starship’s first orbital launch before January 1st, 2022. But while that unfortunate confirmation comes as little surprise, it’s not all bad news.
It’s unclear how accurate the Federal Infrastructure Projects’ “Permitting Dashboard” actually is but the information displayed on the website is specific and detailed enough for it to be deemed trustworthy. If correct, it states that the FAA aims to complete SpaceX’s orbital Starship EA by December 31st. To an extent, that internal estimate relies on the optimistic assumption that the FAA will rule in SpaceX’s favor on the matter and issue either a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).
Of course, there’s a chance that the portal’s claim that the FAA will file Starship’s final orbital EA and conclude the EA process on the same day actually implies that the FAA has already ruled out the worst-case scenario (a no action alternative finding), which would be excellent news for SpaceX. In an optimal scenario, the 12/31/21 target means that the FAA could issue a FONSI or mitigated FONSI before the end of 2021. However, even if that’s the case, a highly favorable environmental review is just one part of the process of securing an orbital Starship launch license, which will be the next gating factor for the SpaceX rocket’s full-up launch debut.
Update: In an official email, the FAA says that the final EA it intends to release by December 31st “will include a Finding of No Significant Impact or decision to initiate an Environmental Impact Statement.” It’s unclear if that FONSI includes the possibility of a mitigated FONSI, which would be the optimal compromise scenario. If the FAA pursues an EIS, it would effectively restart the environmental review process from scratch, potentially delaying orbital Starship launches by a year or more.
There is very little public insight into what that launch licensing process involves or how long it usually takes but it’s safe to say that it could take months for the FAA to move from issuing a favorable EA to approving even the most limited possible orbital Starship launch license (a permit for a single flight). Still, there is some reason for optimism. If the FAA actually publishes a final – and favorable – environmental assessment by the end of 2021, less than four months after issuing the first draft EA for orbital Starship launches, it would be an exceptionally quick turnaround for such a large project and review.
Now that SpaceX has completed the first successful six-engine Starship static fire, the company could potentially be technically ready for the first orbital Starship launch as soon as the ship’s Super Heavy booster completes similar testing. That test campaign is even more ambitious than Starship’s and will eventually culminate in the first one or several 29-engine booster static fires, making Super Heavy the most powerful rocket stage ever tested. Plenty of uncertainty remains about the timeline for Super Heavy Booster 4 (B4) testing, though.
With a quick burst of progress, both Super Heavy B4 and Starbase’s orbital launch site could feasibly be ready to support testing before the end of November. Before true Super Heavy testing can began, SpaceX will need to close out one or both of the orbital pad’s liquid methane (LCH4) tanks, fill them with several hundred to several thousand tons of LCH4, button up Booster 4’s aft section with six steel ‘aerocovers’, finish reinstalling 29 Raptors, and complete the heat shield that will protect most of those engines during ground testing and in flight. Normally, that would likely be a few-day or few-week process for SpaceX but the company’s unusually slow pace of work as of late could turn it into a several-month ordeal.
With any luck, SpaceX has simply prioritized work on Starbase’s orbital launch site over the last few months and will refocus on preparing Super Heavy B4 and Starship S20 for flight as the FAA’s environmental review and launch licensing processes finally near their end.
Elon Musk
Tesla Model Y tops California vehicle sales despite Elon Musk backlash
Data from the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA) showed the Model Y outsold its nearest competitor by more than 50,000 units.
The Tesla Model Y was California’s best-selling new vehicle in 2025 for the fourth straight year, despite protests against CEO Elon Musk and a changeover to the Model Y’s updated variant that caused a pause in production and deliveries early in the year.
Data from the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA) showed the Model Y outsold its nearest competitor by more than 50,000 units, according to KRON4.
The Model Y recorded 110,120 registrations in California in 2025. The second-best-selling vehicle, the Toyota RAV4, posted 65,604 units, followed by the Toyota Camry at 62,324. The Tesla Model 3 ranked fourth with 53,989 sales, ahead of the Honda Civic at 53,085 units.
Despite leading the state, Model Y sales have trended downward year-over-year. Registrations fell from 132,636 in 2023 to 128,923 in 2024, and then to 110,120 in 2025. Overall Tesla sales in California also declined, dropping from 238,589 in 2023 to 202,865 in 2024 and 179,656 in 2025.
The slowdown comes as the federal $7,500 EV tax credit ended, removing a key incentive that had supported electric vehicle demand for years.
“Tesla has a few advantages. Tesla, as a brand, has a status, cache, so I think folks in certain parts of the Bay. Owning a Tesla is a thing. I think that’s breaking down over time, especially given the political controversies surrounding Mr. Musk,” CNCDA President Brian Maas said.
California saw multiple anti-Musk protests in 2025, along with notable reports of consumer-owned Teslas being vandalized and attacked by protesters and activists. The fact that the Model Y and Model 3 remained strong performers in California is then a testament to the quality and value of the two vehicles.
Tesla’s sales of the Model Y and Model 3 might see an increase this year, as the company has announced that it is sunsetting its two more expensive cars, the Model S and Model X. With the Model S and Model X retired, more consumers will likely go for the Model Y and Model 3.
“Maybe the Model S has outlived its usefulness in terms of attracting customers. It’s no surprise the ones they kept are the Model Y and Model 3,” Maas noted.
News
Tesla Supercharger left offline as Swedish court backs union strike
The completed Supercharger has been stalled for nearly two years amid Tesla’s conflict with the IF Metall union in Sweden.
Tesla’s Supercharger station in Ljungby, Sweden will remain without power after a Swedish administrative court rejected the company’s appeal to force a grid connection to the site. The completed Supercharger has been stalled for nearly two years amid Tesla’s conflict with the IF Metall union in Sweden.
The court ruled that the ongoing union strike against Tesla Sweden is valid grounds for the Supercharger’s connection delay, as noted in an Allt Om Elbil report.
The Ljungby Supercharger was one of the first charging stations that were denied grid access after IF Metall launched its strike against Tesla Sweden in late 2023. Electricians at local grid operator Ljungby Energinät were pulled into a sympathy strike by the Seko union, preventing the site’s connection.
Tesla reported both Ljungby Energinät and Gävle Energi Elnät AB to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, arguing that grid operators failed to meet their legal obligation to provide connection to the location within a reasonable time frame.
The regulator ruled that the strike represented a valid exception under Swedish law, however, citing constitutional protections for industrial actions.
Tesla responded by appealing to the Administrative Court in Linköping, claiming it had the right to connection within a reasonable period, generally no more than two years. Tesla Sweden also argued that the country’s Electricity Act conflicts with EU law. The court rejected those arguments.
“The Administrative Court today finds that granting the company’s request in practice applies to the same thing as the blockade and that it would mean that the blockade would be ineffective.
“Such a decision would contradict the principle that labor market conflicts should be resolved to the greatest extent possible by the labor market parties, not by the state. The industrial action is also constitutionally protected,” Chief Councilor Ronny Idstrand stated.
The court also concluded that the Electricity Act does not conflict with EU regulations and that special reasons justified the extended delay.
While the ruling was unanimous, Tesla Sweden may appeal the decision to a higher administrative court.
News
Tesla China exports 50,644 vehicles in January, up sharply YoY
The figure also places Tesla China second among new energy vehicle exporters for the month, behind BYD.
Tesla China exported 50,644 vehicles in January, as per data released by the China Passenger Car Association (CPCA).
This marks a notable increase both year-on-year and month-on-month for the American EV maker’s Giga Shanghai-built Model 3 and Model Y. The figure also places Tesla China second among new energy vehicle exporters for the month, behind BYD.
The CPCA’s national passenger car market analysis report indicated that total New Energy Vehicle exports reached 286,000 units in January, up 103.6% from a year earlier. Battery electric vehicles accounted for 65% of those exports.
Within that total, Tesla China shipped 50,644 vehicles overseas. By comparison, exports of Giga Shanghai-built Model 3 and Model Y units totaled 29,535 units in January last year and just 3,328 units in December.
This suggests that Tesla China’s January 2026 exports were roughly 1.7 times higher than the same month a year ago and more than 15 times higher than December’s level, as noted in a TechWeb report.
BYD still led the January 2026 export rankings with 96,859 new energy passenger vehicles shipped overseas, though it should be noted that the automaker operates at least nine major production facilities in China, far outnumering Tesla. Overall, BYD’s factories in China have a domestic production capacity for up to 5.82 million units annually as of 2024.
Tesla China followed in second place, ahead of Geely, Chery, Leapmotor, SAIC Motor, and SAIC-GM-Wuling, each of which exported significant volumes during the month. Overall, new energy vehicles accounted for nearly half of China’s total passenger vehicle exports in January, hinting at strong overseas demand for electric cars produced in the country.
China remains one of Tesla China’s most important markets. Despite mostly competing with just two vehicles, both of which are premium priced, Tesla China is still proving quite competitive in the domestic electric vehicle market.
Tesla Model Y tops California vehicle sales despite Elon Musk backlash
Tesla Supercharger left offline as Swedish court backs union strike
