Connect with us
tesla-4680-model-y-structural-pack-giga-berlin tesla-4680-model-y-structural-pack-giga-berlin

News

Lucid CEO shares thoughts on EV batteries, range, and Tesla’s 4680 battery cells

Credit: u/geniuzdesign | Reddit

Published

on

Lucid CEO Peter Rawlinson recently shared his thoughts about the electric vehicle industry, the battle for range supremacy, and rival Tesla’s efforts to develop and produce its own 4680 cells. According to the CEO, the range of electric vehicles may see some surprising trends in the distant future, and Tesla’s 4680 cells may not be as big of a breakthrough as initially expected. 

Rawlinson’s recent comments were shared in an extensive interview with IEEE Spectrum. As a company, Lucid is known to work extremely hard to maximize the range in its vehicles, with the Air sedan, its first car, becoming the first electric vehicle that received an EPA rating above 500 miles per charge. Using the same 2170 cells that are powering vehicles like the Tesla Model 3 and the Rivian R1T, Lucid’s six Air sedan variants have seized the top six spots in the EPA’s range rankings. 

The Lucid CEO is not a proponent of simply using more batteries to extend range, similar to what companies like GM are doing with the 350-mile Hummer EV’s 200 kWh battery or what Rivian seems to be doing with the ~400-mile R1T’s 180 kWh pack. As per IEEE, Rawlinson calls such strategies as “dumb range.” This was definitely something that Lucid avoided with the Air sedan, as the vehicle is able to achieve its class-leading 131 MPGe with a 118 kWh battery pack. 

Interestingly enough, Rawlinson believes that while there is a battle for range in the electric vehicle sector today, this would likely not be the case in the future. With electric vehicles becoming more commonplace and affordable, and with home charging becoming the norm, the Lucid CEO believes that future electric vehicles may actually have less range. “Fifty or sixty years from now, EVs may actually have less range. Psychologically, there won’t be this sort of paranoia and dependence on a public supercharging network. And home charging is healthier for the battery, anyway,” the Lucid CEO said. 

Advertisement

Rawlinson did not seem particularly convinced that some near-term battery breakthroughs are at hand. In the case of Tesla’s 4680 cells, for example, the Lucid CEO noted that he sees potential in the technology. But the upcoming batteries seem more like a triumph of packaging, not of chemistry, with its tightly packed jelly rolls that allow more active cell material vs its surrounding casting. Ultimately, Rawlinson noted that the idea of 4680 batteries being a huge breakthrough is a “fantasy.”

“I do think there’s an upside to going to large format. That would reduce internal resistance, and that’s a valuable step forward. But people are looking at 4680 as this huge breakthrough, and that’s a fantasy,” the Lucid CEO said. 

Time would likely prove or disprove Rawlinson’s recent insights on the electric vehicle battery industry. Batteries are only getting better with time, for example, so there may eventually be a point where even extremely affordable electric cars could have range that’s comparable to premium EVs today. Tesla’s 4680 cells could also prove to be a difference-maker in manufacturing, as the cells are specifically designed to lower costs

Ultimately, the 4680 cells may not necessarily be a silver bullet in the electric vehicle transition, but when they’re coupled with incremental improvements in battery chemistries, dry electrode technologies, structural battery concepts, and the use of megacastings, they could form the backbone for the next generation of mass-market vehicles that may very well take the world by storm. The next few years of Tesla’s growth, which would be represented by the rise of vehicles like the Cybertruck and the Semi, would likely determine just how much potential the 4680 cells really have. 

Advertisement

Peter Rawlinson’s full insights from his interview with IEEE Spectrum could be accessed here

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history

AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon just joined forces for one reason: Starlink is winning.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

America’s three largest wireless carriers, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, announced on On May 14, 2026 that they had agreed in principle to form a joint venture aimed at pooling their spectrum resources to expand satellite-based direct-to-device (D2D) connectivity across the United States in what can be seen as a direct response to SpaceX’s Starlink initiative. D2D, in plain terms, is technology that lets a standard smartphone connect directly to a satellite in orbit, the same way it connects to a cell tower, with no extra hardware required.

The alliance is widely seen as a means to slow Starlink’s rapid expansion in the satellite internet and mobile markets. SpaceX’s Starlink Mobile service launched commercially in July 2025 through a partnership with T-Mobile, starting with messaging before expanding to broadband data. SpaceX secured access to valuable wireless spectrum through its $17 billion deal with EchoStar, paving the way for significantly faster satellite-to-phone speeds.

The FCC just said ‘No’ to SpaceX for now

SpaceX was not shy about its reaction. SpaceX president and COO Gwynne Shotwell responded on X: “Weeeelllll, I guess Starlink Mobile is doing something right! It’s David and Goliath (X3) all over again — I’m bettin’ on David.” SpaceX’s VP of Satellite Policy David Goldman went further, flagging potential antitrust concerns and asking whether the DOJ would even allow three dominant competitors to coordinate in a market where a new rival is actively entering.


Financial analysts at LightShed Partners were blunt, saying the announcement showed the three carriers are “nervous,” and pointed to the timing: “You announce an agreement in principle when the point is the announcement, not the deal. The timing, weeks ahead of the SpaceX roadshow, was the point.”

As Teslarati reported, SpaceX’s next generation Starlink V2 satellites will deliver up to 100 times the data density of the current system, with custom silicon and phased array antennas enabling around 20 times the throughput of the first generation. The carriers’ JV, which has no definitive agreement, no financial structure, and no deployment timeline yet, will need to move quickly to matter.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX is targeting a Nasdaq listing as early as June 12, aiming for what would be the largest IPO in history. With Starlink now serving over 9 million subscribers across 155 countries, holding 59 carrier partnerships globally, and now powering Air Force One, the carriers’ joint venture announcement landed at exactly the wrong time to look like anything other than a defensive move.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Asia | X

Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.

The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.

The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.

The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.

Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.

After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.

By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.

Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t

For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.

This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.

In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.

In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.

The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:

“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”

He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.

The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.

Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.

By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.

SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk

Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.

Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.

Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.

Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.

Continue Reading