News
Tesla battery supplier LG Chem to double production capacity: report
Tesla battery supplier LG Chem will double its cell production capacity over the next year to keep up with the growing demand for Tesla’s electric vehicles in China, a new report says.
An exclusive report from Reuters states that sources familiar with the matter have talked about strategies moving forward to keep up with increasingly popular all-electric vehicles from Tesla. LG Chem, who supplies cells to Tesla in Shanghai for the production of the Model 3 sedan, stated that it would also ship its increased output from China and Korea to Tesla production facilities in the United States and Germany once they are completed. Tesla currently has a new production facility under construction in Austin, Texas, and in Brandenburg, Germany. Reuters indicated that two people who are familiar with the matter have seen LG Chem signal an increased role in the supply chain of Tesla as it continues to grow its lead in the EV production sector.
Tesla is LG Chem’s primary customer, and the plan to double its cell production capacity comes as Tesla begins to expand its global production processes aggressively. Tesla has been manufacturing vehicles in Shanghai for around a year and announced its intentions to build a European production facility around 13 months ago. Rumors also speculate that another factory could be on the way within the next few years, and India could be the location, but nothing has been confirmed.
LG Chem to double China battery capacity to meet Tesla demand | Reuters $TSLA
— David Tayar (@davidtayar5) December 1, 2020
LG Chem has already added additional production lines to increase the possible production capacity in South Korea this year. The main purpose of the expansion was to meet demand from Tesla’s U.S. plants, the two sources told Reuters. “Tesla simply doesn’t have enough battery cells, so LG Chem is going to more than double China outputs,” the person said.
Tesla sources batteries from Panasonic, LG Chem, and CATL, and CEO Elon Musk stated at the company’s Battery Day event in September that it plans to begin making its own 4680 cells that will be less expensive and more efficient. However, the company will continue to source batteries from suppliers for the time being, but could eventually become a battery supplier on its own as it has plans to open several battery cell production facilities across the globe.
Tesla China signs contract with LG Chem for Model Y production
To keep up with global demand, Tesla will have to source batteries from third-party sources for the time being, and an LG Chem spokesperson said that there is an increased demand for cells. However, he could not elaborate on who was the cause of the expansion in cell production capacity.
“We’re continuing to expand capacity for cylindrical battery cells in response to growing demand from automakers, but we can’t comment on specific customers,” an LG Chem spokesman told Reuters.
LG Chem plans to invest $500 million over the next year to raise the annual production of 2170 cells by 8 GWh. The 2170 cells are used in the Model 3 and Model Y, Tesla’s two mass-market vehicles. Currently, eight production lines are operational at the Nanjing, China plant that LG Chem manufactures its batteries, but it plans to expand its available lines to seventeen.
Tesla currently only manufactures the Model 3 at its Chinese production facility, but it plans to begin building the Model Y within the next few months. Because of the overwhelming demand for both the Model 3 and Model Y, the move to expand 2170 cell capacity is a no-brainer, especially considering the Government-offered subsidies that China provides for clean energy vehicles.
The person who spoke with Reuters also indicated that LG Chem’s Chinese factory would initially supply battery cells for Tesla’s Giga Berlin production facility in Germany when it begins production in Summer 2021.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
