News
Lucid CEO shares thoughts on EV batteries, range, and Tesla’s 4680 battery cells
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.
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.
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.
Elon Musk
Tesla owners explore potential FSD pricing options as uncertainty looms
We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.
Tesla is starting the process of removing the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving suite outright, as it pulled the purchase option in the United States over the weekend.
However, there has been some indication by CEO Elon Musk that the price of the subscription will increase as the suite becomes more robust. But Tesla finds itself in an interesting situation with this: the take rate for Full Self-Driving at $99 per month is about 12 percent, and Musk needs a significant increase in this rate to reach a tranche in his new compensation package.
This leaves Tesla and owners in their own respective limbos: Tesla needs to find a price that will incentivize consumers to use FSD, while owners need Tesla to offer something that is attractive price-wise.
We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.
Price Reduction
Although people are willing to pay the $99 per month for the FSD suite, it certainly is too high for some owners. Many suggested that if Tesla would back down the price to $49, or somewhere around that region, many owners would immediately subscribe.
Others suggested $69, which would make a lot of sense considering Musk’s obsession with that number.
Different Pricing for Supervised and Unsupervised
With the release of the Unsupervised version of Full Self-Driving, Tesla has a unique opportunity to offer pricing for different attention level requirements.
$50/mo for supervised.
$300/mo for unsupervised including insurance.— pɦoɿɟ pᴉʌɒp (@CSUDavid) February 15, 2026
Unsupervised Full Self-Driving would be significantly more expensive, but not needed by everyone. Many people indicate they would still like to drive their cars manually from time to time, but others said they’d just simply be more than okay with only having Supervised FSD available in their cars.
Time-Based Pricing
Tesla could price FSD on a duration-based pricing model, including Daily, Weekly, Monthly, and Annual rates, which would incentivize longer durations with better pricing.
Annually, the rate could be $999 per year, while Monthly would stay at $99. However, a Daily pass of FSD would cost somewhere around $10, while a $30 per week cost seems to be ideal.
These all seem to be in line with what consumers might want. However, Tesla’s attitude with FSD is that it is the future of transportation, and with it offering only a Monthly option currently, it does not seem as if it will look as short-term as a Daily pass.
Tiered Pricing
This is perhaps the most popular option, according to what we’ve seen in comments and replies.
This would be a way to allow owners to pick and choose which FSD features they would like most and pay for them. The more features available to you, the more it costs.
For example, if someone only wanted Supervised driving and Autopark, it could be priced at $50 per month. Add in Summon, it could be $75.
This would allow people to pick only the features they would use daily.
Tesla has left a single loophole to purchase Full Self-Driving outright. On Sunday, the option officially disappeared from the Online Design Studio in the United States, as Tesla transitioned to a Subscription-only purchasing plan for the FSD suite.
However, there is still one way to get the Full Self-Driving suite in an outright manner, which would not require the vehicle owner to pay monthly for the driver assistance program — but you have to buy a Model S or Model X.
Months ago, Tesla launched a special “Luxe Package” for the Model S and Model X, which included Full Self-Driving for the life of the vehicle, as well as free Supercharging at over 75,000 locations, as well as free Premium Connectivity, and a Four-Year Premium Service package, which includes wheel and tire protection, windshiel protection, and recommended maintenance.
🚨 Tesla increased the price of both the Model S and Model X by $10,000, but both vehicles now include the “Luxe Package,” which includes:
-Full Self-Driving
-Four years of included maintenance, tire and wheel repairs, and windshield repairs/replacements
-Free lifetime… pic.twitter.com/LKv7rXruml— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 16, 2025
It would also be available through the purchase of a Cyberbeast, the top trim of the Cybertruck lineup.
This small loophole would allow owners to avoid the monthly payment, but there have been some changes in the fine print of the program, as Tesla has added that it will not be transferable to subsequent vehicle owners or to another vehicle.
This goes for the FSD and the Supercharging offers that come with the Luxe Package.
For now, Tesla still has the Full Self-Driving subscription priced at $99 per month. However, that price is expected to increase over the course of some time, especially as its capabilities improve. Tesla seems to be nearing Unsupervised FSD based on Musk’s estimates for the Cybercab program.
There is the potential that Tesla offers both Unsupervised and Supervised FSD for varying prices, but this is not confirmed.
In other countries, Tesla has pushed back the deadline to purchase the suite outright, as in Australia, it has been adjusted to March 31.
News
Tesla Sweden’s port deal sparks political clash in Trelleborg
The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition.
Tesla Sweden’s lease agreement at the Port of Trelleborg has triggered a political dispute, with local leaders divided over whether the municipally owned port should continue renting space to the electric vehicle maker amidst its ongoing conflict with the IF Metall union.
Tesla Sweden’s recently extended contract with the Port of Trelleborg has triggered calls for greater political oversight of future agreements.
Tesla has used the Port of Trelleborg to import vehicles into Sweden amid a blockade by the Transport Workers’ Union, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). By routing cars via trucks on passenger ferries, the company has maintained deliveries despite the labor dispute. Vehicles have also been stored and prepared in facilities leased from the municipal port company.
The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition. Initially, the Port of Trelleborg hinted that it would not enter into new agreements with Tesla, but it eventually opted to renew its existing contract with the EV maker anyway.
Lennart Höckert, an opposition councilor, described the port’s decision as a “betrayal of the Swedish model,” arguing that a municipally owned entity should not appear to side with one party in an active labor dispute.
“If you want to protect the Swedish model, you shouldn’t get involved in a conflict and help one of the parties. When you as a company do this, it means that you are actually taking a position and making things worse in an already ongoing conflict,” Höckert said.
He added that the party now wants politicians to review and approve future rental agreements involving municipal properties at the port.
The proposal has been sharply criticized by Mathias Andersson of the Sweden Democrats, who chairs the municipal board. In comments to local media, Andersson described the Social Democrats’ approach as “Kim Jong Un-style,” arguing that political leaders should not micromanage a company governed by its own board.
“I believe that the port should be run like any other business,” Andersson said. He also noted that operational decisions fall under the authority of the Port of Trelleborg’s board instead of elected officials.
Tesla owners explore potential FSD pricing options as uncertainty looms
Tesla leaves a single loophole to purchase Full Self-Driving outright
