News
SpaceX aces Starship static fire days after NASA astronaut visit
Update: Around 9am CDT (UTC-5), SpaceX successfully fired up Starship serial number 11’s (SN11) three Raptor engines, completing the static fire test on the first try of the day and just two hours into in Monday’s eight-hour window.
As far as three-engine Starship static fires go, SN11’s Monday test was about as smooth and clean as they come, boding extremely well for a launch attempt as early as either Tuesday or Wednesday, according to Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) filed with the FAA. With flight termination system (FTS) explosive charges already installed and an FAA license in hand, all that stands between Starship SN11 and flight is a deeper static fire review and the cooperation of local weather conditions. Stay tuned for updates!
A group of NASA astronauts appear to have taken an agency-sanctioned trip down to SpaceX’s Boca Chica Starship facilities, including a visit with a prototype scheduled to fire up and launch as early as this week.
Seemingly in lockstep with the accelerating pace of Starship production and testing, the frequency of NASA astronaut visits to SpaceX’s South Texas facilities has also seen an uptick over the last six or so months.
Back in 2019, SpaceX built Starhopper, performed numerous tests with early Raptor engine prototypes, and performed two untethered hops. With that success in hand, SpaceX turned its focus to Starship Mk1 and suffered an almost immediate failure during pressure testing, encouraging a series of rapid manufacturing upgrades largely completed in just a few months’ time.
In 2020, SpaceX pushed those new facilities to the limits while continuing major expansions. In 12 months, SpaceX built and tested five small ‘test tanks’ and six full Starship tank sections, performed almost a dozen Raptor static fires with that hardware, hopped two of those tanks (SN5 & SN6) to 150m, fully integrated the first full-height Starship (SN8), and nearly landed that vehicle after an otherwise flawless 12.5 km (7.8 mi) launch and descent.
Back in 2019, NASA inked its first monetary Starship contract with SpaceX, awarding $3M to prototype a coupling mechanism Starships will need to dock and refuel in space. In April 2020, NASA revealed that SpaceX – with its Starship launch vehicle – was one of three finalists selected to compete for a Human Landing System (HLS) Moon lander contract, providing the company $135M of the full $970M award to begin preliminary design and certification work.
Around five months later, a group of NASA astronauts made their first public visit to SpaceX’s Starship development hub in South Texas, overflying the factory and launch pad in training jets on a routine sortie out of Houston and Johnson Space Center. Days later, SpaceX won a $53M NASA “Tipping Point” contract to demonstrate large-scale cryogenic propellant transfer with a Starship prototype.
Ultimately, excluding rock-solid commercial crew and cargo partnerships, NASA’s relationship with SpaceX and the company’s Starship appears to be growing stronger every day. While it’s hard to say just how indicative of that growth the visible attention of NASA’s astronaut corps is, it’s worth taking note of what those same astronauts aren’t (publicly) overflying, visiting, and touring – namely factories, R&D facilities, or prototype hardware of HLS competitors Dynetics and Blue Origin.
Delayed by about a week, SpaceX is currently preparing to fire up its fourth full-size Starship prototype – SN11 – for the first time as early as Monday, March 22nd, 19 days after Starship SN10 briefly landed in one piece. SpaceX has filed temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) with the FAA for SN11’s 10 km (6.2 mi) launch debut from Tuesday through Friday, leaving plenty of opportunities for a launch this week if the rocket can successfully test its three Raptor engines by Wednesday.
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.
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
