News
Swedish unions, transportation agency comment on anti-Tesla strike efforts
Labor efforts continue against Tesla in Sweden, as the company faces strikes and sympathy strikes from multiple of the country’s largest unions that have now lasted well over a year. In recent months, these strikes have prevented Tesla’s buyers in the country from receiving their license plates directly from the transportation agency, along with stopping newly built Supercharger stations from being energized.
Tesla has been pursuing legal action for both of these issues, though Sweden’s long-standing history with a highly unionized workforce has some union and government officials scratching their heads as to why the company won’t sign a collective bargaining agreement. Originally approved by IF Metall, the country’s largest automotive and metalworkers union, the strikes have rippled into other major unions, including the government worker-focused Fackförbundet ST, and the Svenska Elektrikerförbundet (SEF) union, otherwise known as the Electricians’ Association.
In recent correspondence with Teslarati, Fackförbundet ST and the Transport Agency have shared their comments on the situation, after it was reported this week that the Electricians’ Association is under review from the Energy Market Inspectorate for its sympathy strike, and following Tesla’s latest appeal to an administrative court in hopes to force the Transport Agency to stop withholding license plates from the company.
🚨 UPDATE: IF Metall has contacted @Teslarati and said this regarding the strikes:
“When Tesla Sweden signs the collective agreement, the strike and sympathy strike ends immediately.” https://t.co/kAMxTvHdjV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 6, 2025
Fackförbundet ST: Tesla Sweden’s anti-union efforts are ‘remarkable,’ subject customers to ‘considerable inconvenience’
Sweden’s unions represent nine out of ten workers across the country, according to IF Metall, with that union’s membership alone representing about 300,000 employees in the metalworking industry. Fackförbundet ST called Tesla Sweden’s continued efforts to resist a collective bargaining agreement “remarkable,” highlighting that it believes the company should adhere to the country’s structures.
“It is remarkable that a well-established company like Tesla chooses to invest both time and significant resources, while also subjecting its customers to considerable inconvenience, simply to avoid implementing the highly effective regulatory framework (collective agreement) that has been carefully nurtured and appreciated by the social partners in Sweden for a long time,” wrote Anders Maxson, Fackförbundet ST Press and Opinion Manager, Communications and Impact, in an email to Teslarati.
“This is an example of a conflict between the Swedish system and a global company, and we do not believe it is too much to ask for large international companies to make certain adjustments to the systems of different countries.”
In response to the union, Tesla Sweden has said that it offers workers terms that are as good, if not better, than those that can be offered by the country’s unions.
Sweden’s Transport Agency: Why it dismissed Tesla’s demand, and company’s right to another appeal
After Tesla demanded that the Swedish Transport Agency resume providing license plates to the company in a way other than via postal delivery direct-to-consumer, it also urged the Karlstad administrative court this week to force mail provider PostNord to resume these deliveries.
Following the news, the Transport Agency explained why it dismissed Tesla’s demand to Teslarati, adding that the company also has a right to file such an appeal despite having been turned down by multiple other courts in the country throughout last year.
“The Swedish Transport Agency has received a demand from Tesla that license plates should be provided to the company in a way other than via postal delivery,” wrote Anna Berggrund, Department Vehicle Information Director. “However, the Swedish Transport Agency is of the opinion that it’s not possible for Tesla to make such a demand, since the question at hand emanates from the implementation of a task set upon the agency and not from an appealable decision. Therefore we have dismissed Tesla’s demand.
“Now Tesla has appealed against our dismissal to the Administrative Court, which is their right. The issue will now be examined by the Administrative Court. We await the outcome and do not want to make any further comments on the issue.”
Sweden’s Energy Market Inspectorate: Electricians’ Association grid operators ‘obligated’ to connect facilities, except under ‘special’ circumstances
Earlier this month, Tesla Director of Charging Max de Zegher said that over 100 Supercharger stalls that had been built over the winter were waiting to be energized due to the strike efforts, as they were being prevented from connecting to the country’s grid. The situation has resulted in an investigation from the Energy Market Inspectorate, which defended the Electricians’ Association in its right to participate in a sympathy strike in recent statements but said that the circumstances were currently under review.
“The Electricians’ Association as such does not commit any crime by taking sympathy measures,” said Jerker Sidén, Energy Market Inspectorate Analyst, in a statement to Teslarati. “This is because we don’t really have any supervisory responsibility towards them. On the other hand, the electricity network companies in Sweden are covered by regulations that fall under our supervisory responsibility.
“One of these provisions is that the grid companies have an obligation to connect facilities to their electricity grids upon request unless there are special reasons. There are also provisions that the connection must take place within a reasonable time.”
In particular, the government agency is looking into whether or not the union has eligible “special reasons” for failing to fulfill its obligation to connecting the chargers to the grid, though the analyst also admits that there is little precedent as to what qualifies for the exception.
“However, there is relatively little guidance as to what this type of special reason could be and we have not previously decided a similar issue, which means that we cannot currently answer whether the regulations are followed or not,” Sidén added.
IF Metall: Collective agreements ‘one of the cornerstones of a functioning labor market model’
IF Metall also commented on the situation, echoing previous statements it made to Teslarati about the fact that it thinks Tesla Sweden signing a collective bargaining agreement is the only way to end the sympathy strikes.
“IF Metall has requested sympathy measures for its endeavor to sign a collective agreement for its members at Tesla’s company in Sweden,” says Mikael Pettersson, the union’s Head of Negotiations. “The Swedish Electricians’ Union organizes the installation industry for electricians and works daily with signing collective agreements with employers who employ electricians. It is one of the cornerstones of a functioning labor market model, which has been in place since 1906.
“The hope is that Tesla’s Swedish company signs a collective agreement with IF Metall as soon as possible.”
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Court rules against Tesla Sweden in license plate withholding suit
Need accessories for your Tesla? Check out the Teslarati Marketplace:
It is safe to say SpaceX won’t be going for electric rockets anytime soon.
In a characteristically blunt reply on X, SpaceX frontman Elon Musk stated, “Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible,” following reports that MSCI had assigned SpaceX its lowest possible ESG rating of CCC.
The assessment, issued just this past week, coinciding closely with SpaceX’s public market debut, placed the company on par with nations like Russia in sustainability scoring and cited significant risks in environmental, social, and governance areas.
MSCI flagged SpaceX’s exposure to rocket emissions and other operational impacts, alongside governance concerns such as concentrated control by Musk and limited shareholder protections. Musk’s terse comment directly addressed the environmental pillar, underscoring a core physical constraint that ESG frameworks often overlook when evaluating high-thrust industries.
Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 21, 2026
Electric propulsion systems do exist and are widely used in space. Ion thrusters and Hall-effect thrusters accelerate ionized propellant, typically xenon or krypton, using electric fields, achieving very high specific impulse, often exceeding 3,000 seconds compared to roughly 300–450 seconds for chemical rockets.
This efficiency makes them ideal for satellite station-keeping, orbit raising, and deep-space missions where low thrust over long durations is sufficient. SpaceX’s own Starlink satellites employ electric propulsion for these purposes.
However, launching from Earth’s surface demands something entirely different: enormous thrust delivered rapidly to overcome gravity and atmospheric drag. A typical orbital-class booster must generate thrust far exceeding its weight, often in the millions of Newtons within seconds.
Chemical rockets achieve this through exothermic combustion of dense propellants, producing high-mass-flow, high-velocity exhaust. Electric systems, by contrast, expel very small amounts of mass at extremely high speeds. Generating equivalent thrust would require impractical onboard power levels, massive energy storage or generation systems, and prohibitive added mass, rendering the approach infeasible with current or near-term technology.
Musk has previously expressed a similar sentiment, noting a desire for electric orbital rockets while acknowledging the inescapable requirements of Newton’s third law and energy delivery. The distinction is clear: electric propulsion excels once a vehicle is already in space; it cannot replace the high-thrust chemical phase required to reach orbit from the ground.
The episode illustrates broader critiques of ESG ratings. Proponents argue they incentivize better risk management and long-term sustainability. Detractors, including Musk—who has previously called ESG a “scam”—contend that such metrics can penalize essential activities when no practical alternative exists, potentially discouraging innovation in sectors like space access.
Elon Musk dubs the S&P 500 ESG as “outrageous scam” after Tesla gets booted from index
SpaceX has sought to mitigate launch-related impacts through reusability: Falcon 9 boosters have flown more than 30 times in some cases, dramatically lowering the manufacturing and emissions burden per kilogram delivered to orbit. Starship’s design further emphasizes rapid reusability and methane propellant, which can theoretically be produced via sustainable pathways.
Ultimately, Musk’s remark serves as a reminder that certain engineering realities persist regardless of scoring systems. As humanity expands its presence in space for communications, science, and exploration, balancing genuine environmental progress with technological necessity remains a central challenge.
ESG frameworks may evolve, but the fundamental limits of electric launch propulsion are unlikely to change soon.
Tesla just trademarked ‘MEGAPOD’ with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), its latest move in what seems to be a hint that the company is incredibly focused on its AI efforts and storage needs as compute increases.
The application carries serial number 99893717 and lists the applicant as Tesla, Inc., located at 1 Tesla Road, Austin, Texas 78725.
The filing remains in ‘live pending’ status, and it is a new application waiting for assignment to an examining attorney. It has not yet been published or registered.
Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD
Summary:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and… pic.twitter.com/3l85DsKadl— Robin (@xdNiBoR) June 19, 2026
According to the official goods and services description in the application, Tesla describes ‘MEGAPOD’ as:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and cooling systems, sold as a unit; self-contained modular computing hardware systems for artificial intelligence workloads; integrated computer hardware platforms for artificial intelligence computing, namely, enclosures containing computer hardware, power distribution hardware, and cooling hardware, sold as a unit; downloadable software for monitoring, managing, optimizing, and regulating modular artificial intelligence computing hardware systems.”
This description specifies complete, self-contained modular units that integrate servers and specialized AI processing hardware with networking components, power distribution, and cooling systems. It also includes associated downloadable software for oversight and optimization of these systems. The language emphasizes hardware sold “as a unit” and enclosures that combine the necessary elements for AI computing workloads.
Tesla has an established history of developing and commercializing modular hardware systems. Its Megapack product line, for example, consists of utility-scale battery energy storage systems designed as containerized units for grid applications. The MEGAPOD filing follows a similar pattern of protecting a name for modular, integrated hardware platforms, this time focused on artificial intelligence computing infrastructure.
This could be an early move, especially as Tesla did not have trademark rights to the word ‘Cybercab,’ the name of its self-driving, ride-hailing-focused vehicle.
Trademark applications of this type allow companies to secure priority rights to a name for defined categories of goods and services. The USPTO examines applications for compliance with legal requirements, including distinctiveness and absence of conflicts with prior marks. If the application proceeds successfully through examination, publication, and any opposition period, it could result in a federal trademark registration providing nationwide protection. This is what Tesla’s obvious intention is with ‘MEGAPOD.’
Public reports and analysis suggest MEGAPOD could represent modular, container-style AI computing pods designed for easy deployment. These would bundle servers, AI accelerators, power systems, and cooling into self-contained units suitable for distributed AI workloads. This approach aligns with Tesla’s announced AI compute strategy.
In March 2026, Elon Musk outlined plans for “Digital Optimus” (also referred to as Macrohard), a joint Tesla-xAI project for AI agents capable of handling complex digital tasks. The plans include running these agents on Tesla’s AI4 hardware in parked vehicles as well as dedicated compute units installed at Supercharger stations, which collectively offer substantial unused electrical capacity.
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
A modular hardware platform like the one described in the ‘MEGAPOD’ filing would support scalable, rapid deployment of such distributed compute resources. It could complement Tesla’s other AI infrastructure efforts, including the Dojo supercomputer used for training models and the development of AI systems for autonomous driving and robotics, by enabling edge or regional AI inference without reliance on traditional centralized data centers.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX is launching a secret spacecraft that could change how things are made in space
SpaceX’s secret disk-shaped Starfall capsule is targeting a market no reentry vehicle has cracked.
SpaceX is targeting Tuesday, June 23 for the first flight of Starfall, a reentry capsule the company has developed almost entirely in private. The Falcon 9 launch window opens at 6:43 a.m. ET from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, with a backup window available the same time on June 24. SpaceX has made no public announcement about the vehicle, only providing launch details. Everything known about it has come through FAA and FCC regulatory filings.
What makes Starfall different starts with its shape. Rather than the traditional cone used by Dragon and every other cargo return capsule in operation, Starfall is a flat disk that measures roughly 10.2 feet (3.1 meters) wide and just 2.5 feet (0.75 meters) tall, and weighing 4,630 pounds (2,100 kg) and capable of returning up to 2,200 pounds (1,000 kilograms) of payload from orbit. The disk geometry maximizes structural efficiency and payload volume relative to mass, and the heat shield mechanically jettisons just before splashdown, allowing recovery teams to retrieve both the capsule and the shield separately from the Pacific Ocean.
The difference with Starfall from existing competitors, such as Varda Space Industries, which has largely built the orbital manufacturing market and returns heavy payloads per flight is that Starfall’s specification is roughly 30 times more per mission, and is designed to be mass-produced and launched on either Falcon 9 or Starship. That combination of volume and launch access is something no standalone startup can replicate, and it puts SpaceX in direct competition with the companies that currently pay it to reach orbit.
SpaceX to launch military missile tracking satellites through new Space Force contract
The intended market is orbital manufacturing: pharmaceuticals, protein crystals, semiconductors, and advanced optical fiber that physically cannot be produced in the presence of gravity. FAA documents describe Starfall’s long-term purpose as building a “self-sustaining commercial in-space manufacturing market” and as a potential successor to the industrial capabilities of the International Space Station, which is set to retire in the late 2020s. Military rapid global cargo delivery is a parallel application under active discussion with the Pentagon.
The reason some industries seek manufacturing in space comes down to gravity. On Earth, gravity causes materials to settle, separate, and deform during production. In microgravity, those constraints disappear.
SpaceX’s already controls launch access, which means it currently functions as the landlord for every competitor in the orbital manufacturing return space. Starfall converts that landlord position into vertical ownership, and it would no longer just carry other companies’ capsules to orbit, but rather operate the capsule, own the return logistics, and capture the service revenue directly. Viewed alongside Starlink, Colossus, and the xAI merger, Starfall fits a consistent pattern: SpaceX identifying infrastructure layers that others depend on and moving to own them outright. Orbital manufacturing return is the next layer on that list.
If Tuesday’s reentry, parachute sequence, and recovery demonstration goes as planned, the second FAA-approved test flight follows. A successful pair of demos would position SpaceX to begin offering Starfall as a commercial service, likely first to pharmaceutical and materials science customers before scaling toward the military and broader manufacturing segments.
Elon Musk responds to SpaceX’s ESG rating and says its rockets won’t go electric
Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD: here’s what it is
