News
Tesla’s years of battery tech investments are becoming a buffer against nickel’s rising costs
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.
“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.
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.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
