News
Tesla’s 1 million-mile battery takes a step forward with new electrode patent
A newly released patent from Tesla has teased what appears to be a step towards Elon Musk’s one-million-mile battery target. The patent describes a new lithiation process for battery cells, which has the potential to improve the quality of cells and possibly even save on costs.
Tesla has submitted a patent titled “Method for Synthesizing Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminum Electrodes.” The document outlines a new electrode synthesizing method that could be used for battery cell production. The proposed application defines an efficient heating process for Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminum (NCA) electrodes. According to the document, previous heating methods at times cause the formation of a lithium substrate known as L15AIO4, which is an impurity. Lowering the amount of lithium within a battery reduces the presence of the contamination, but also leads to “materials with inferior electrochemical properties.”
As noted in the patent, batteries would heat to a temperature high enough to allow for single crystal growth. The revised ratio of lithium to other metals would limit the formation of impurities during the first heating process. Then, the battery would be heated a second time at a temperature lower than the first heating cycle. Researchers involved in the patent noted that this process helped develop an impurity-free single crystal NCA that allowed battery cells to achieve over 4,000 charge cycles.
The patent outlines the heating process:
“Methods disclosed herein include a first lithiation step, wherein a lithium and an other metal component are present in a first lithium/other metal ratio of less than 1.0 and are sintered at a temperature between 800 and 950°C for a time period between 1 and 24 hours to obtain a first lithiated material. The method further includes a second lithiation step, wherein a lithium and a other metal component are present in a second lithium/other metal ratio and further wherein the first lithiated electrode material is sintered with additional LiOHTLO at between 650 and 760°C for a time period between 1 and 24 hours to obtain a second lithiated material.”
In summary, the use of NCA electrodes in batteries would allow for single-crystal materials to present themselves without impurities. The lack of contaminants could lead to an increased lifespan of the cells altogether, helping Tesla take a giant leap forward in its quest to produce a one-million-mile battery for its vehicles.
Interestingly enough, one of the listed names on the patent is battery expert and researcher Jeff Dahn, who has worked with Tesla in the past. Tesla summoned the help of Dahn, who leads a team of researchers at Canada’s Dalhousie University, to help the electric car maker improve its batteries. Dahn’s research has helped Tesla’s development of high-quality battery cells by inventing new electrode combinations, like the one described in this patent, and electrolyte solutions aimed at further increasing battery life.
Tesla’s batteries are always in a state of improvement, and over the years, the cells that the company utilizes for its vehicles and energy storage systems have gotten more energy-dense. Economies of scale that is made possible with facilities such as Gigafactory Nevada have also gone a long way towards helping Tesla near the $100 per kWh mark, a level that is widely considered the point where electric vehicles could achieve price parity with their internal combustion-powered counterparts.
Apart from its battery patents, Tesla has also been busy acquiring several battery companies. Among these are Maxwell Technologies and Hibar Systems, both of which were developing technologies that would allow for better battery quality and more efficient production costs. Relatively simple developments such as those described in Tesla’s recent patent help this cause too, especially since every little bit of optimization helps.
Tesla’s development of its battery technology could lead to its vehicles lasting 20 to 30 years, far longer than petrol-powered cars. It appears the company is planning to create a product line that could stay with owners for extended periods with relatively no annual maintenance. And that, together with price parity, can very well be the catalyst for society’s acceleration towards sustainability.
The full text of Tesla’s “Method for Synthesizing Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminum Electrodes” patent could be accessed in the document below.
METHOD FOR SYNTHESIZING NIC… by Joey Klender on Scribd
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
