Since February, Tesla has been dealing with protestors in the nearby forest it hopes to cut down for expansion plans. Many of the environmental activists still remain, and this week, local police have launched an operation to try to remove them.
Protestors have been staying in treehouses in a local forest near Tesla’s Grünheide Gigafactory in efforts to stop the company from removing trees in preparation for its upcoming expansion. On Monday, however, German publication Moz.de reported that a large team of police has been deployed to the site to remove the activists, after some of them refused to leave even when World War II bomb relics had been discovered on site.
The outlet says that a large number of police vehicles arrived at the forested area near the station’s fishing lock on L38, expected to be a longer-term deployment than usual for the authorities given the protestors’ refusal to leave. Grünheide press contact Beate Kardels has also said that the activists had so far been uncooperative and would likely continue to resist leaving, despite ongoing searches for World War II ammunition in the area.
“We stay here,” said a spokeswoman for the activists. “We will not allow the billionaire Elon Musk to destroy nature for its profit interests.”
Police have thus far resisted a flat-out eviction of the group, which is dubbed Tesla-den-Hahn-abdrh translating to Tesla-turn-off-the-faucet. The group has managed to rely on its right to assembly as a legal backing for its ability to stay in the forest.
Still, police have been removing protestors from the trees while the group shouts “revolution,” though many activists have attempted to scale the trees to avoid seizure.
Credit: Moz.de Credit: Moz.de Credit: Moz.de
Tesla Giga Berlin expansion progresses with 3K trees cut
“Come to Grünheide and show your protest with us,” says the group’s spokeswoman Karolina Drzewo. “This morning, freedom of assembly is being trampled under the pretext of a movement of struggle and the will of Elon Musk and Co. is being punched through.”
Although authorities have destroyed some of the barriers and treehouses created by the group, a spokesman for the police department has said that its goal on Monday was not to completely clear the camp, but rather to clear a roughly 5,000 square metre space in the camp where it seeks to continue searching for old ammunition.
Activists have said that police are also actively separating the rope connections to the tree houses, and they’ve been using loudspeakers to repeatedly ask them to leave the area. While the police have attempted to maintain a peaceful approach, they also say that they may be forced to dissolve the assembly through coercion if necessary, and they’ve managed to remove a few of the activists from the area.
Police are currently guarding the outskirts of the treehouse camp, though those in the group argue that the ammunition doesn’t pose a threat to the forest since it’s been embedded in the ground for several decades.
“We have opposed the profit interests of a billionaire here and we were and is aware that the police will implement their interests because they want to get us out of here,” 23-year-old activist Mara told Moz.de. “The police want us to volunteer to vacate parts of our protest camp for a bombing. But we will not give up the protest camp.”
Tesla was officially approved for the first stage of its expansion plans last month, which requires the company to remove several trees from the forest, as it has already begun doing so. The company has also shared plans to plant three times as many trees as it cuts down for the expansion, and it had already planted one million trees so far this year as of July.
As of September, Tesla had successfully cut down around 3,000 trees in preparation for the expansion, specifically to create a 1.86-mile construction road to the upcoming facility. The road will be located between L23 and the nearby motorway, and it’s expected to make it easier to transport construction materials to and from the site.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Tesla gives Giga Berlin workers new, higher wages without union involvement
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
