Connect with us

News

‘Astongate’ controversy comes to fore as recent anti-EV narrative crumbles

Credit: Polestar

Published

on

Noted carmaker Aston Martin has found itself in a climate lobbying controversy, following the spread of an anti-EV study which peddled the idea that electric cars will have to travel as far as 50,000 miles before matching the carbon footprint of a comparable fossil fuel-powered vehicle. Needless to say, the controversy, which is now being dubbed in EV circles as #Astongate, is crumbling down, and it seems to be dragging Aston Martin’s name with it. 

The report, titled “Decarbonising Road Transport: There Is No Silver Bullet,” made the rounds in several key media outlets last week, with agencies such as The Times and the The Daily Telegraph reporting on its alleged findings. The findings of the study promptly drew raised eyebrows from EV authorities online, most especially Auke Hoekstra, Senior Advisor on Electric Mobility at the Eindhoven Technical University, who is known for debunking anti-electric car narratives. It didn’t take long before the study was thoroughly debunked. 

But the story only got stranger from there. 

Electric vehicle experts and researchers opted to trace the source of the study, and what they found was quite interesting. As it turned out, the study was commissioned by companies including Aston Martin, Bosch, Honda, and McLaren. The study was presented as the work of a firm called Clarendon Communications, and it was commissioned shortly after UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson called for a ban on the sale of new fossil fuel-powered vehicles from 2030. 

Advertisement

Interestingly enough, the communications firm behind the report, Clarendon Communications, was registered under the name of Rebecca Stephen, a part-time NHS nurse and the spouse of Aston Martin’s government affairs director, James Stephen. The PR firm was set up only this February, and it is registered to the address of a property jointly owned by the couple. 

In an email to The Guardian, Rebecca Stephen stated that the report from Clarendon was “compiled” by the same companies that commissioned the study itself. According to Stephen, Clarendon was contacted by Bosch “to provide public affairs and stakeholder support” so its logo and contact details appear on the back of the report “for this purpose.” Bosch, for its part, noted via a spokeswoman that it fully supports the report. The company also called for “greater transparency” on the carbon footprint of vehicles. 

As the “Astongate” controversy emerges, Labour MP Matt Western, who wrote the foreword to the Clarendon Communications report, expressed his disdain that the study was used as part of an anti-EV narrative. According to Western, he agreed to be part of the project to “push this agenda forward, rather than the opposite.” “I am disappointed that the report has since been used to push an anti-electrification line in the media. I was not aware of any link between the PR firm involved and Aston Martin,” he said. 

As for Francis Ingham, the director-general of the Public Relations and Communications Association, he noted that PR agencies such as Clarendon must fight misinformation, not spread it. “We have a duty to fight misinformation, not purvey it. PR agencies should be fully transparent about who they represent. Failure to disclose client relationships damages trust in our industry and lends credence to misleading perceptions of PR as a sinister practice,” Ingham said. 

Advertisement

Amidst the shift of the auto industry towards electric vehicles, Aston Martin is among those that are being left behind. The company has canceled its RapidE electric vehicle and is currently not promising anything electric until 2026. The company has handed a fifth of its equity to Mercedes-Benz in exchange for access to the German luxury automaker’s hybrid and EV tech. 

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla piggybacks recent Supercharger feature with update that takes it further

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has introduced an enhanced visualization in its Supercharger navigation system, building directly on the Site Maps feature rolled out a few months ago.

This latest software update adds detailed 3D icons that represent specific vehicle models parked at charging stalls, offering drivers a more precise view of site occupancy and layout.

The Site Maps debuted in Tesla’s 2025 Holiday Update, providing 3D overviews of select Supercharger locations with real-time stall availability.

Tesla supplements Holiday Update by sneaking in new Full Self-Driving version

Drivers could see which spots were open, occupied, or out of service when navigating to supported stations.

Now, the system takes this capability further by rendering accurate representations of Tesla vehicles, including distinctions between models such as the Model 3, Model Y, Model S, Model X, and Cybertruck. These icons appear as lifelike 3D renderings, complete with recognizable shapes and proportions that match the actual cars charging at the site:

This refinement improves the user experience during road trips and daily charging stops. As drivers approach a Supercharger, the navigation display now shows not just generic occupied markers but identifiable vehicle types plugged into each stall.

Blue indicators highlight active charging sessions, while other visual cues denote availability or maintenance status. The feature integrates seamlessly with the existing map interface, allowing quick assessment of the best available spot based on vehicle size and positioning.

Tesla continues to expand the availability of these detailed Site Maps across its global network. Initially piloted at a limited number of locations, the rollout has progressed steadily, with more stations gaining support in recent software versions.

Owners benefit from better planning, as the system helps identify compatible stalls and reduces uncertainty upon arrival. The update reflects Tesla’s ongoing commitment to refining its navigation and charging ecosystem through iterative software improvements.

In addition to model-specific icons, the enhanced maps maintain all prior functionalities, such as integration with nearby amenities and energy usage predictions. This ensures a comprehensive tool for efficient Supercharging.

As Tesla’s fleet grows and the network scales, such features play a key role in optimizing the overall ownership experience. Future updates may extend similar visualizations to additional sites and incorporate even more data points for drivers.

With this piggyback enhancement, Tesla demonstrates how small but thoughtful additions can elevate an already useful tool, making Supercharger visits smoother and more informed for its customers. The company is expected to broaden the feature’s reach in upcoming releases, further solidifying its leadership in EV charging infrastructure.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.3 driver monitoring: We tested it

Published

on

Credit: TESLARATI

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.3 driver monitoring was reportedly scaled back in recent releases, but a new version that was released in the early hours of June 3 aimed to do a better job of keeping those in control of their cars honest, according to release notes.

The release notes for FSD v14.3.3, via Software Version 2026.14.6.7 added:

“Improved driver monitoring system sensitivity with better eye gaze tracking, eye wear handling, and higher accuracy in variable lighting conditions.”
However, Tesla said this was already enabled in the first rollout of FSD v14.3.3 in late May. We tested it anyway, especially as the Standard Speed Profile seemed less-than-worried about what you were doing during operation.

I decided to try out the Hurry and Mad Max Speed Profiles for this test, and it gave me results that I would have expected. Tesla has evidently ramped up driver monitoring based on the Speed Profile you are using to travel.

The more aggressive the Speed Profile, the more on the hook you will be for taking your attention away from the road. Our testing showed that Mad Max was less likely to allow you to do normal things like change music or adjust navigation without getting an on-screen warning or nag from the driver monitoring system.

Hurry Mode Results

On Hurry, the driver monitoring system on FSD v14.3.3, via Software Version 2026.14.6.7, was more restrictive than Standard but less restrictive than Mad Max. I found that I could scroll through music options for a considerable amount of time, more than 30 seconds:

Standard gave me about 80 seconds of phone scrolling with absolutely no nags or warnings in a previous test. It is worth noting that this was a previous branch of v14.3.3, but Standard is such a goodie-two-shoes on the road that it is my impression it would not change much.

Mad Max Results

I spent the majority of the drive on Mad Max to see how it truly reacted to the driver having their attention elsewhere. While I did do a short phone test, I am aiming to steer away from those and use the center screen. I think it is a valid criticism that the phone test is dangerous and, not to mention, illegal in Pennsylvania. Changing the navigation and music is a more reasonable, more responsible, and safer test.

With Mad Max being the fastest and most aggressive Speed Profile, I anticipated this being the quickest mode to give me an alert that I needed to look at the road. That was the case with music:

As well as adjusting Navigation, when I received two nags:

These nags were more than reasonable, and I think it’s probably good that Tesla is ramping up the driver monitoring. I do believe that it should be relatively strict across all of the Speed Profiles, especially with phone use. When using the center screen, the nag intervals should be based on the speed profile you are utilizing at the time.

These driver monitoring adjustments are a great thing to have while FSD is still under its “Supervised” moniker, but I expect Tesla to continue pushing the limits on what it will allow, especially considering CEO Elon Musk has hinted that phone use is capable with the more recent versions.

You can watch the full drive on YouTube below:

 

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to Robotaxi skeptics with a massive move in Austin

Published

on

Credit: @AdanGuajardo/X

Tesla has responded to the skeptics of its Robotaxi program by launching a massive expansion of the unsupervised program in its initial rollout city of Austin.

The company’s geofence, the enabled area of operation for rides, now covers the entire Austin Metropolitan area, an incredible move just days after media headlines attempted to discredit the ride-hailing service.

Those who have access to the Tesla Robotaxi app on their smartphones can now request a ride in any portion of the Austin Metro area. The company confirmed this on the social media platform X:

This is Tesla’s fifth expansion of the geofence, with the others occurring in July, early August, late August, and late October 2025. It has remained at that size since October 26, but Tesla has now more than doubled that size.

It is now covering the entire area, including suburbs like Pflugerville and Manor, as well as I-35 highways, Gigafactory Texas, and the Austin-Bergstrom Airport.

The move comes just days after various media outlets highlighted the small fleet size of Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet in Austin, something that is a reasonable criticism but an understandable move on the company’s part to prioritize safety.

Tesla expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage

Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence many times, but its fleet has remained at a relatively conservative size as the company continues to push safety as its most crucial metric.

The latest expansion is a key indicator of Tesla’s comfort level to expand the ride-hailing service. The move shows Tesla is scaling unsupervised autonomy, as it demonstrates that the company’s Full Self-Driving system has reached sufficient reliability for a broader real-world deployment, which is something the company has worked on extensively.

It also shows Tesla is game for a competition with its rivals in the autonomous ride-hailing sector. Tesla has often matched or exceeded competitors like Waymo in coverage area, despite its smaller fleet. This step highlights Tesla’s iterative, data-driven progress toward a high-margin, app-based Robotaxi network.

It’s not the absolute largest area expansion ever, but achieving full unsupervised operations across a major metro is a key moment in the Robotaxi story. It shifts the program from limited pilot/testing toward a more mature commercial service, while gathering the miles needed for faster growth.

Continue Reading