News
Tesla’s resilience is forcing veteran automakers to draw the battle lines on diesel
There are probably very few companies in the market that have attracted the same amount of skepticism as Tesla. Since it started producing its first vehicle, the original Tesla Roadster, more than a decade ago, the “impending” death of the company has been foretold. Despite this, the small, disruptive electric car maker has stubbornly refused to die, and it continues to grow despite the noise. Today, Tesla is bigger than ever before, and the impending completion of a third Gigafactory 3 in China could signal yet another period of incredible growth for the company.
The inevitable electric age
The rise of Tesla did not only prove that electric cars need not be boring, glorified golf carts. The rise of Tesla also showed that consumers from various walks of life are willing to pay top dollar for well-designed electric vehicles, simply because they are superior to internal combustion cars. By proving these points, Tesla was able to force the hand of veteran automakers, pushing them to come up with their own battery-powered vehicles. Today, most of the world’s most notable carmakers are looking into electrification. Some brands such as Porsche have even decided to abandon diesel altogether, aiming instead to push the development of both all-electric and hybrid cars.
It’s not just Porsche either. Other automakers such as Jaguar even beat the German automaker’s Taycan to market with its I-PACE, which it started delivering last year. Daimler rushed to join the fray with the EQC, and Audi, not to be left behind in the emerging EV race, brought out the rather unfortunately-named e-tron, which was received warmly nonetheless. Even mass-market automakers such as Kia and Hyundai have come up with their own bang-for-your-buck electric cars in the form of the Niro EV and Kona Electric. Volkswagen recently made a splash with the debut of the ID.3 as well. Even British-bred MG, which has been reborn as a Chinese-owned hyper-budget brand, is preparing to attack the lower end of the market with the MG ZS EV.
Learning from Tesla
Amidst this transition, it is starting to become evident which carmakers are dead serious about their transition to the electric age. This became notable in Germany, when Volkswagen, Daimler, and BMW came together last March to call for the widespread adoption of EVs. Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess was at the helm of the radical stance, at one point practically butting heads with BMW CEO Harald Krüger and the industry lobby group Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) due to his push for widespread electric car adoption. Audi boss Bran Schot, in a recent interview with Manager Magazin, reiterated this point, noting that “electric is the core” of the automaker’s “new strategy.”
Audi is currently attempting to ramp the production of the e-tron SUV, its first all-electric vehicle, but things have not exactly been easy. Due to factors such as reported battery constraints from supplier LG Chem, as well as other incidents such as a workers’ strike in one of its plants earlier this year, the e-tron has been delayed. Yet, Schot noted that the company remains focused on pushing more electric cars. During the interview, Schot candidly admitted that Audi is behind other automakers such as Tesla, not only “in the electric cars” themselves, “but also at the pace with which they solve some software issues.”
Schot noted that he was recently “driven once again a Tesla,” and he came away impressed by the experience. “That was fun,” he said, later admitting that “No question, we are learning from Tesla.” Learning from the leader in electric mobility is an excellent strategy for Audi, as it would allow the company to develop vehicles that mix the best of veteran auto’s experience and Tesla’s tech mastery. In a way, Audi has already taken steps towards this goal with its e-tron GT sedan, a vehicle built on the same platform as the Porsche Taycan. The Taycan stands apart from other EVs from veteran auto in the way that it’s built from the ground up to be an electric car, making it the last thing from a compliance vehicle.
Commitments to diesel and a denial of EVs
While companies like Porsche have found it easy to commit to electrification and abandon things like diesel, other carmakers are not having such an easy time relinquishing their ties with oil. The most recent source of this shock was Jaguar Land Rover CEO Ralf Speth, who recently spoke with Automotive News Europe sister publication Automobilwoche’s publisher in an interview. When asked about the company’s powertrain strategy amid a decline in demand for diesels and V8 gasoline engines, the CEO was candid.
“According to industry forecasters, a global share of 20 percent to 30 percent for electrified vehicles is expected by 2025. When you turn this around, it means that 70 percent to 80 percent of all vehicles around the world will have conventional engines. Let me add that today’s diesels, (which) are absolutely CO2-efficient and clean,” he said.
When asked by the publication why electric mobility is still not important to consumers, the CEO noted that “On one hand, the products are still too expensive. On the other hand, the infrastructure is still too inconvenient and unreliable, so electric cars tend to be for people with deep pockets.” These are rather surprising to hear from the Speth, whose company produced the I-PACE, which has pretty much swept awards left and right since its debut last year.
Explaining his conservative stance on electric vehicles further, the Jaguar CEO argued that “When it comes to electric vehicles, the question isn’t how many cars I can build but rather how many batteries I can buy. The demand for batteries is so great that there will be a limited ability to deliver them over the next few years. And, unlike some others, I expect continually rising battery prices – at least for the next two to three years.”
Quite interestingly, the Jaguar Land Rover CEO’s concerns about electric cars have long been addressed by Tesla. When it came to charging infrastructure, the California-based carmaker developed and aggressively rolled out its Supercharger Network, which currently have over 12,000 stations across the globe. The company has also ironed out the supply of its vehicles’ batteries, thanks to a massive investment in facilities such as Gigafactory 1 in Nevada.
The transition to the electric age will be difficult for carmakers, and it would require massive investments just to get well-designed all-electric cars ready for the market. If these developments are any indication, it appears that in the next few years, the battle lines will be drawn between veteran automakers that are willing to go all-in on electric mobility, and veteran carmakers who will steadfastly hold on to oil and the internal combustion engine.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
