Connect with us

News

Tesla’s years of battery tech investments are becoming a buffer against nickel’s rising costs

Credit: Tesla Inc.

Published

on

For years, Tesla has invested heavily in its supply chain and battery strategy. So focused was the company in these endeavors that it even decided to design and produce its own batteries, the 4680 cells. The next-generation cells are a crucial component of Tesla’s long-term plan to make electric vehicles more affordable.

Elon Musk has been very open about Tesla’s need for nickel. Being a key component of its high-performance batteries, Musk stated back in 2020 that any company that can provide Tesla with environmentally-friendly nickel would be granted with a massive contract. During Battery Day, the CEO also highlighted that Tesla’s nickel-based 4680 batteries would be the heart of the company’s flagship products, like the Cybertruck. 

But while nickel is a critical ingredient of lithium-ion batteries, experts have predicted an upcoming shortage for some time. Norway-based energy analytics firm Rystad Energy estimated that demand would surpass nickel supply around 2024, and by 2026, there might be a shortage of the material. This timeframe seems to have been accelerated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

It should be noted that Russia controls 20% of the supply of the industry’s highest-grade nickel. The country also holds 10% of the world’s overall nickel supply. Thus, when Russia was hit by sanctions due to its invasion of Ukraine, the markets reacted. Nickel prices rose so much that the London Metal Exchange canceled trading for the material for more than a week. In a statement to Insider, auto industry analyst Lauren Fix noted that Russia’s control of nickel could have adverse effects for electric vehicle makers. 

Advertisement

“Relying on your enemies to supply you with critical materials is never to your benefit. They have the ability to control the price you pay and can make it more difficult for you to gain supply to meet your goals,” Fix said. 

Tesla is the market’s dominant electric vehicle maker, and for good reason. For years, the company has initiated plans to be as immune as possible from market shifts. Tesla built up a nickel supply practically independent of many market shifts by tapping into partnerships with nickel-mining companies and nickel production entities. The company even bought into a nickel mine in early 2021, providing itself with direct access to the material. 

Tesla has also worked heavily in its battery technology, from the 2170 cells currently being made in Gigafactory Nevada with Panasonic to the 4680 cells that are currently being ramped in the company’s Kato Road facility. Tesla’s 4680 batteries were announced as nickel-based cells, though they feature a number of efficiencies that make their production more cost-effective and their life cycle longer compared to traditional batteries. 

Interestingly enough, Tesla is not keeping its 4680 battery technology all for itself. In a previous announcement, Panasonic has confirmed that it would also be producing 4680 batteries, and they have already been validated by the electric vehicle maker. Panasonic has noted that mass production of the next-generation cells would begin around 2024

Advertisement

Tesla also managed to handle the rising cost of nickel by using batteries that do not use the material at all. As per CEO Elon Musk, Tesla has started focusing on using iron-based batteries for its entry-level vehicles like the Model 3 RWD and the Model Y RWD, both of which are produced in Gigafactory Shanghai. The company has also mentioned that it had begun using manganese for some of its batteries to help reduce its reliance on nickel. Lastly, Tesla also launched a recycling program for its nickel-based batteries, which should help the company’s supply chain further in the future. 

Tesla is still affected by shifts in the market. The fact that the company has raised its vehicle prices twice in recent weeks is proof of that. However, a number of experts have stated that Tesla’s forward-looking strategy still makes the company well-positioned to continue in its role as the undisputed leader in the electric vehicle industry. Tien Wong, a tech investor and the founder of Connectpreneur, shared his thoughts on the matter. 

“Prewar, nickel prices, and potential shortages were a huge concern of Elon’s and the EV industry as a whole. The war will exacerbate these dynamics, which will result in higher prices and slower deliveries for EVs. As for Tesla, they are the market leader right now, so the nickel situation may actually help them versus competitors in the short run,” Wong said. 

*Quotes courtesy of Insider.

Advertisement

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@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