News
Tesla co-founder unveils electric garbage truck
The global transition from combustion engine to all-electric vehicle continues to move into new sectors as Wrightspeed has just released its first fleet of range-extended electric refuse trucks. The powertrain represents a new era in vehicle propulsion, repowering a generation of lighter, quieter, and more efficient vehicle fleets for urban streets.
Wrightspeed’s commercial application of the range-extended, turbine-electric powertrain is the heavy-duty Class 8 Freightliner, which will be delivered to The Ratto Group, a Sonoma County solid waste collection and recycling business. The Class 8 Freightliner is the first of at least fifteen electric vehicles that will be integrated into the trash company’s fleet over the next year, according to Tim Dummer, Wrightspeed’s chief business officer. Dummer, an engineering and commercialization executive, was brought into Wrightspeed in October, 2016 as part of the company’s ramp-up of its Range-extended Electric Vehicle (REV) powertrain systems.
Called The Route™, Wrightspeed’s REV powertrain is optimized for the refuse industry and can be customized to fit a variety of today’s heavy-duty truck platforms, replacing both the engine and the transmission. Much of the growing demand for the award-winning The Route is due to Wrightspeed’s founder, Ian Wright, one of the original co-founders of Tesla Motors. After his departure from Tesla Motors in 2003, Wright had a vision that electric vehicles could deliver high-performance without compromising intrinsic efficiency. Using turbines and applying electric vehicle principles to urban, heavy-duty trucks, The Route powertrain was the result.
The Wrightspeed system can power a 66,000-pound GVW truck, delivering up to 24 miles on battery power before the range extender kicks in. After that, range is nearly unlimited as long as there is fuel for the turbine. With fuel efficiency the equivalent of up to 7 mpg in combined electricity-liquid fuel operation, the powertrain can slash annual fuel consumption by 70 percent or more compared with the average diesel refuse truck. CEO Lou Ratto says he expects a fuel savings of at least 50 percent.
Eventually, all of Ratto’s 130 residential trash and recycling trucks may be retrofitted with the turbine-electric powertrain. This is an ambitious undertaking, as a refuse truck’s demanding duty cycle drains an electric powertrain’s batteries quickly. Think start, then stop. Start, stop. Wrightspeed’s electric powertrain drives more low-end torque to the wheels than conventional diesel engines, with less fuel, emissions, and noise.
Wrightspeed, in a sense, is recycling Ratto’s trash collection trucks. The Wrightspeed/ Ratto contract is thought to be in the range of $3 million to $5 million.
A new refuse truck that meets all California air quality standards costs more than $500,000, so Wrightspeed’s retrofit of Ratto’s existing trucks makes the system more cost-effective, Van Amburg relates. Sonoma County officials like the trash fleet electrification program because they see it as a means of improving local air quality, says Efren Carrillo, chairman of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. Ratto concurs. “Here in Sonoma County there is a lot of environmental consciousness, and we are always looking for ways to be cleaner, environmentally friendly, and help the bottom line. And the idea that [by electrifying the trucks] we can do this and get off the air quality rollercoaster and stop battling to meet California emissions requirements— that makes it all worthwhile.”
ALSO SEE: The Tesla Semi will shake the trucking industry to its roots
Wrightspeed featured its powertrain technology alongside Mack Trucks at Waste Expo 2016 in Las Vegas and signed a $30+ million agreement with NZ Bus, symbolizing multinational and multimodal demand for Wrightspeed’s powertrain technology. In June, the company was named a Technology Pioneer by the World Economic Forum (WEF), and CEO Wright was an invited presenter to the International Business Council of the World Economic Forum. He will be a keynote speaker at the upcoming SAE 2016 Range Extenders for Electric Vehicles Symposium in Knoxville, 2-3 November, 2016.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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 to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
