News
Tesla can fall short of its battery goals and still dominate rivals, says expert
In a recent interview with a German auto publication, battery expert Maximilian Fichtner remarked that Tesla could move far beyond the reach of its competitors, even if it fails to achieve all of the goals that were presented during Battery Day. This, according to Fichtner, is partly due to competitors not doing enough to further electric vehicle technologies.
In an interview with Spiegel Mobility, Fichtner, a director at the Helmholtz Institute and a professor for solid-state chemistry at Ulm University, remarked that German automakers are simply doing something much different compared to Tesla. While Tesla considers batteries as part of its core business, German automakers seemed to be content outsourcing all the battery work to third-party suppliers and focusing their efforts on competencies that they know best, such as body design.
“You outsource more things to suppliers. They only develop core components such as the engine themselves. Battery production is not considered a core business. One tries at some point to use proven methods to build an electric car that is equivalent to Tesla, only with better body gaps. Tesla, on the other hand, achieves a lead through technology by processing the entire production chain, from the integration of its own hardware and software to batteries and the finished car,” the expert noted.
When asked about improvements that Tesla could achieve with its next-generation cells, Fichtner stated that the company’s larger 4680 cells open the door to longer range and other upgrades. Such innovation, according to the expert, is a “quantum leap.” Fichtner added that with Tesla’s goal of reducing its battery production costs by 56%, the EV market could reach or even exceed price parity with the internal combustion engine, effectively rendering gas cars obsolete.
“(They) would be at costs of 70 to 80 US dollars per kilowatt-hour. There would be no more reason to buy a combustion engine – not even the price. That would be around 20,000 euros for a mid-range to upper-class vehicle,” he said, adding that “The cost reduction in two to three years would be extremely quick. When it comes to cell design, however, Tesla has calculated everything well and the better integration of the battery into the vehicle has been well thought out.”
Granted, Tesla’s goals for its next-generation batteries are very ambitious. Yet according to Fichtner, even if Tesla fails to achieve all of the goals it outlined in Battery Day over its self-imposed timeframe, the company would still be far ahead of the rest of the auto market. The battery expert noted that this is especially true for German automakers, some of which are still adopting strategies that were effective for the internal combustion engine.
“Even if Tesla only manages half of the expected increases in the difficult changes to the anode and a few percentage points less in the cell design, 40 percent more range remains. That would be around 700 instead of 500 kilometers on one charge. That’s a lot, based on almost conventional battery chemistry. Elon Musk has worked everywhere, from processing the raw materials to the finished car, to make his cars better and cheaper. Tesla apparently managed to turn both screws in the right direction. Even if the company only achieves a fraction of the growth announced, that is still far above what the competition in this country is planning,” Fichtner remarked.
News
Tesla wins FCC approval for wireless Cybercab charging system
The decision grants Tesla a waiver that allows the Cybercab’s wireless charging system to be installed on fixed outdoor equipment.
Tesla has received approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to use Ultra-Wideband (UWB) radio technology in its wireless EV charging system.
The decision grants Tesla a waiver that allows the Cybercab’s wireless charging system to be installed on fixed outdoor equipment. This effectively clears a regulatory hurdle for the company’s planned wireless charging pad for the autonomous two-seater.
Tesla’s wireless charging system is described as follows in the document: “The Tesla positioning system is an impulse UWB radio system that enables peer-to-peer communications between a UWB transceiver installed on an electric vehicle (EV) and a second UWB transceiver installed on a ground-level pad, which could be located outdoors, to achieve optimal positioning for the EV to charge wirelessly.”
The company explained that Bluetooth is first used to locate the charging pad. “Prior to the UWB operation, the vehicular system uses Bluetooth technology for the vehicle to discover the location of the ground pad and engage in data exchange activities (which is not subject to the waiver).”
Once the vehicle approaches the pad, the UWB system briefly activates. “When the vehicle approaches the ground pad, the UWB transceivers will operate to track the position of the vehicle to determine when the optimal position has been achieved over the pad before enabling wireless power charging.”
Tesla also emphasized that “the UWB signals occur only briefly when the vehicle approaches the ground pad; and mostly at ground level between the vehicle and the pad,” and that the signals are “significantly attenuated by the body of the vehicle positioned over the pad.”
As noted by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, the FCC ultimately granted Tesla’s proposal since the Cybercab’s wireless charging system’s signal is very low power, it only turns on briefly while parking, it works only at very short range, and it won’t interfere with other systems.
While the approval clears the way for Tesla’s wireless charging plans, the Cybercab does not appear to depend solely on the new system.
Cybercab prototypes have frequently been spotted charging at standard Tesla Superchargers across the United States. This suggests the vehicle can easily operate within Tesla’s existing charging network even as the wireless system is developed and deployed. With this in mind, it would not be surprising if the first batches of the Cybercab that are deployed and delivered to consumers end up being charged by regular Superchargers.
Elon Musk
Tesla posts updated FSD safety stats as owners surpass 8 billion miles
Tesla shared the milestone as adoption of the system accelerates across several markets.
Tesla has posted updated safety stats for Full Self-Driving Supervised. The results were shared by the electric vehicle maker as FSD Supervised users passed more than 8 billion cumulative miles.
Tesla shared the milestone in a post on its official X account.
“Tesla owners have now driven >8 billion miles on FSD Supervised,” the company wrote in its post on X. Tesla also included a graphic showing FSD Supervised’s miles driven before a collision, which far exceeds that of the United States average.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable. As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
Tesla also recently updated the safety data for FSD Supervised on its website, covering North America across all road types over the latest 12-month period.
As per Tesla’s figures, vehicles operating with FSD Supervised engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles. In comparison, Teslas driven manually with Active Safety systems recorded one major collision every 2,175,763 miles, while Teslas driven manually without Active Safety recorded one major collision every 855,132 miles. The U.S. average during the same period was one major collision every 660,164 miles.
During the measured period, Tesla reported 830 total major collisions with FSD (Supervised) engaged, compared to 16,131 collisions for Teslas driven manually with Active Safety and 250 collisions for Teslas driven manually without Active Safety. Total miles logged exceeded 4.39 billion miles for FSD (Supervised) during the same timeframe.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company’s Music City Loop gains unanimous approval
After eight months of negotiations, MNAA board members voted unanimously on Feb. 18 to move forward with the project.
The Metro Nashville Airport Authority (MNAA) has approved a 40-year agreement with Elon Musk’s The Boring Company to build the Music City Loop, a tunnel system linking Nashville International Airport to downtown.
After eight months of negotiations, MNAA board members voted unanimously on Feb. 18 to move forward with the project. Under the terms, The Boring Company will pay the airport authority an annual $300,000 licensing fee for the use of roughly 933,000 square feet of airport property, with a 3% annual increase.
Over 40 years, that totals to approximately $34 million, with two optional five-year extensions that could extend the term to 50 years, as per a report from The Tennesean.
The Boring Company celebrated the Music City Loop’s approval in a post on its official X account. “The Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority has unanimously (7-0) approved a Music City Loop connection/station. Thanks so much to @Fly_Nashville for the great partnership,” the tunneling startup wrote in its post.
Once operational, the Music City Loop is expected to generate a $5 fee per airport pickup and drop-off, similar to rideshare charges. Airport officials estimate more than $300 million in operational revenue over the agreement’s duration, though this projection is deemed conservative.
“This is a significant benefit to the airport authority because we’re receiving a new way for our passengers to arrive downtown at zero capital investment from us. We don’t have to fund the operations and maintenance of that. TBC, The Boring Co., will do that for us,” MNAA President and CEO Doug Kreulen said.
The project has drawn both backing and criticism. Business leaders cited economic benefits and improved mobility between downtown and the airport. “Hospitality isn’t just an amenity. It’s an economic engine,” Strategic Hospitality’s Max Goldberg said.
Opponents, including state lawmakers, raised questions about environmental impacts, worker safety, and long-term risks. Sen. Heidi Campbell said, “Safety depends on rules applied evenly without exception… You’re not just evaluating a tunnel. You’re evaluating a risk, structural risk, legal risk, reputational risk and financial risk.”