News
The case for Tesla to operate multiple car factories in the US has never been stronger
The recent controversial events surrounding Tesla and its main electric vehicle production plant in Fremont, CA, is one that will likely have repercussions on the company’s future. But beyond the controversy, the recent events surrounding Fremont highlight one key point: it is in Tesla’s best interests to ensure that its vehicle production facilities will no longer be exclusive to one state.
The Fremont factory and Alameda County’s insistence on keeping it closed has resulted in Tesla filing a case against the county. So far, the mayor of the City of Fremont and the City Palo Alto have sided with Tesla, and Elon Musk has remarked that the company’s HQ and future projects will be relocated to other sites, such as Gigafactory Nevada and a Texas site. In the midst of this all is a County Public Health Officer who has reportedly ignored Tesla’s efforts at proposing a reopening plan for the Fremont factory.
What is pretty ironic is the fact that among the carmakers currently operating a production facility in the United States, Tesla is arguably the most experienced in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. The electric car maker has successfully dealt with the virus in Shanghai, and following a government-mandated shutdown, Tesla was able to return to regular operations gradually. Once reopened, Gigafactory Shanghai adopted a series of serious anti-coronavirus strategies that helped the company’s workers stay safe despite the pandemic. Tesla intends to do the same in Fremont, if not more.
For now, reopening the Fremont factory will likely be the result of pressure on the county or a serious stroke of fortune that would allow Tesla and the County Public Health Officer eye-to-eye. Each of these requires more than its own stroke of luck, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be. That is, if Tesla has multiple electric vehicle production facilities in the United States. If Tesla has another factory in the US located in an area that is more supportive of the company, it would not have to go through legal means to reopen its primary production facility.
Tesla’s next facility will likely be located in Texas, and so far, Sen. Ted Cruz has stated on Twitter that the state is fully behind the electric car maker. Texas actually makes sense for Tesla, especially considering that SpaceX, Musk’s private space venture, already has a facility in Boca Chica. If speculations prove right, Tesla can very well be building its first Terafactory in the state, which will be making the Cybertruck, and perhaps other vehicles like Model Y and Semi as well.
Tesla is now at a point where it is producing vehicles that are not intended for a small demographic of car buyers. With the advent of the Model 3 and the Model Y, as well as the upcoming Cybertruck, Tesla is taking on the mainstream market, an industry that counts its production numbers in the hundreds of thousands. This means that the company is now poised to meet the juggernauts of the auto industry like General Motors and Volkswagen head-on, provided that it has the resources to do so. It just has to make sure that its vehicle production activities could not be stopped just because of a single factory shutdown.
With this in mind, it may be a good idea for Tesla to expand its vehicle production capabilities far beyond the Texas Gigafactory/Terafactory. Tesla’s vehicle lineup does not end with the Cybertruck, the Roadster, and the Semi, after all. References to a Tesla van have been stated before, and Tesla has also hinted at a vehicle that’s smaller and more affordable than the Model 3. The more successful Tesla gets, and the more advanced the company’s Full Self-Driving suite becomes, the healthier the demand for Tesla’s vehicles will be. To accomplish this, it may be a good idea to look at legacy auto’s playbook for once, and start establishing car factories across the United States.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
