News
Tesla’s 4680 Kato Rd. facility has a top 10 capacity, and it’s not even close to finished
Tesla CEO Elon Musk disclosed some details about the electric automaker’s 4680 cell plant last week. After stating that the facility is “probably in the top 10 battery cell factories on Earth despite being a pilot plant,” speculation began about how massive Tesla’s new facility that sits just across the street from the Fremont production facility is. Although it is in the top 10, it’s not even close to finished.
Tesla’s introduction of the 4680 battery cell came in September 2020 at the Battery Day event. Musk and others outlined the company’s roadmap for global EV dominance through the most important part of an electric car: the cell. The new cell has 500% more energy, six times the power of the old 2170 cells, and also offers dramatic range increases for more drive time between charges. It was truly revolutionary because Tesla is already the most notable company in electric cars.
With a considerable lead in the EV sector, Tesla was effectively announcing, “eat our (sustainable) dust” after showing the new 4680 cells. Some were skeptical, believing that the new cell wouldn’t be available for some time. Musk immediately silenced those doubts, indicating that the new cells had been deployed in working vehicles for months.
Credit: Tesla
The point is, the Kato Road facility, as it is widely known as, is one of the largest facilities in the world. While we are not sure what the current capacity is, if it is a top 10 facility in terms of capacity, we can speculate how big it may be.
According to Argus Media, the 10 largest battery cell plants range from 24 GWh per year to 70 GWh per year. The largest, an LG Chem facility in Wroclaw, Poland, has the 70 GWh capacity, leading BYD’s Qinghai, China plant by 10 GWh. Tesla and Panasonic’s joint venture at Gigafactory 1 in Nevada is a 35 GWh per year facility, making it the fifth-largest plant globally.
Credit: Argus Research
Because Tesla’s Kato Road facility is a pilot plant, we can likely assume that it is within the bottom half of this list. Especially with Gigafactory 1 being the fifth-largest, it is very likely that Kato Road is simply not producing as many cells or as much battery capacity as Giga 1, but it’s not to say that this won’t happen. The issue is that Tesla is still battery constrained, even with a large-scale facility in Nevada and with several third-party manufacturers pumping cells to the automaker at a massive rate. Kato Road will contribute to the solution to the constrained problem, and the facility will likely be significantly larger than Giga 1, considering the projects that Tesla plans to fulfill with the 4680 cells, the largest being the Tesla Semi.
The Semi is still not ready for production, Musk said on the Q4 Earnings Call last week. “We will have cells group in ourselves for Semi when we were producing the 4680 volume. But for example, Semi would use typically five times the number of cells that a car would use, but it would not sell for five times what a car would sell for. So it kind of doesn’t make…it would not make sense for us to do the Semi right now,” Musk said. The issue is cell availability, and since the Semi is going to equip Tesla’s newest 4680 project, it is safe to assume that Kato Road still has some expanding to do. If it is already a top 10 facility, yet it is still not ready to take on the massive Semi task, along with all of the other vehicles it will eventually fulfill, Kato Road may become a top 3 facility.
Ultimately, Tesla requires more cells. With no plans to eliminate purchases from third-party suppliers in the near-term, Tesla wants to increase purchases from those suppliers. CATL, Panasonic, and LG Chem could supply Tesla with more batteries moving forward, even with the Kato Road facility’s expansion and ramping up. The fact is, Tesla isn’t done solving the battery constraint issue, and it could battle with it for years to come. However, it won’t stop production from increasing because more cells are becoming available almost every day through supplier deals, increased outputs, and in-house manufacturing advancements, all of which make Tesla the company to beat for the foreseeable future.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
News
Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Elon Musk
Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking
Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.
Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.
On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.
Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.
The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.
For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.
