News
Tesla formally wins final environmental approval to open Gigafactory Berlin
The wait is finally over. After a long process that saw delays, controversies, and other drama, Tesla Gigafactory Berlin has won its final environmental approval from Germany. An official document confirming the update was published by the State of Brandenburg, outlining the next steps that the electric vehicle maker needs to do to start vehicle production in its Germany-based electric vehicle factory.
As per the state’s press release, the approval for Giga Berlin covers several activities, such as the production of up to 500,000 vehicles per year. The approval also includes battery cell production activities within the Giga Berlin complex, which should allow Tesla to manufacture its in-house cells from within Germany.
“The project, which was approved with the 536-page decision, includes the plant for the production of up to 500,000 vehicles per year, aluminum smelting plants and an aluminum foundry, plants for surface treatment, heat generation, and storage. The facility also includes battery cell production, an operational wastewater treatment plant, a fire brigade equipment house, a high-bay warehouse, as well as laboratories and workshops,” the press release read.
It should be noted that while it may have taken two years to get to this point, Gigafactory Berlin’s formal approval was still completed in a quick manner, at least relatively speaking. The past two years, after all, required the State Office of the Environment to not only inspect and approve the factory itself, but also the entire industrial area with several large-scale facilities. Environment Minister Alex Vogel expressed his thanks to the state’s employees and other authorities for Giga Berlin’s quick approval process.
“As a high-performing state administration, you have always focused on the technical requirements, the high level of protection of the environment, the protection of the general public and the neighborhood from dangers, even under the pressure of great public interest and unreasonable harassment as well as the legal certainty of the procedure. In times of climate crisis, the availability of water will play an increasingly important role for future developments and settlements. Above all, digitization can help to simplify and accelerate processes without restricting environmental standards and participation rights,” Vogel said.
District Administrator Rolf Lindemann emphasized that Giga Berlin benefits the region. The fact that the project faced much adversity, and was still able to achieve a milestone such as a final environmental approval in a relatively short time, proves that the project’s potential is vast. He also noted that Giga Berlin, as well as those that have been working with Tesla over the past two years to approve the project, shall face whatever challenges lie ahead with vigor.
“The Oder-Spree district described the Tesla Gigafactory as a real stroke of luck for the development of our region. We have therefore mobilized all our strength to help turn this unique opportunity into a visible success. It wasn’t always easy, and we’re anything but done when it comes to the final form of the overall project. But we all have reason to be proud of what we have achieved so far, despite all prophecies of doom.
“That is why we will face the further challenges that lie ahead with confidence and with undiminished vigor. I am referring to the official support of the further expansion stages, the completion of the battery factory and of great importance, especially for local politics: as far as possible, a stress-free integration of the Gigafactory into the traffic infrastructure . However, in order to be able to meet the sustainability aspect and smooth mobility in connection with production, it is of course necessary to start building housing close to the location and to create the associated social infrastructure. We trust in the same support from the state government that we have been able to rely on in the past,” Lindemann said.
While Giga Berlin’s final environment approval has been secured, Tesla still has to ensure that it meets the state’s requirements. These are highlighted by the mammoth size of its approval documents, which comprise over 23,700 pages in 66 files. More than 400 ancillary provisions are included, involving topics such as requirements for groundwater protection as well as water-saving and wastewater-reducing measures, species protection measures, limit values for air pollutants and regulations on their measurement as well as occupational safety requirements. Other specific rules on the plant’s operations, particularly with regards to how it affects the area’s groundwater, were also highlighted in the press release.
“There are 113 air pollution control requirements, which include respective chimney heights for each exhaust air stream. In addition, 22 requirements determine the methods and intervals at which the exhaust air is to be measured. 96 requirements for drinking water protection, waste water disposal and rainwater specify, among other things, limit values for discharge into the waste water pressure line and corresponding cleaning processes. When using building materials, it is important to ensure that no harmful substances get into the groundwater. With groundwater monitoring, both the formation of new groundwater and the quality of the groundwater must be checked regularly. In view of the tense water situation, not least due to climate change, it should be possible to react to changes as early as possible.
“After the inspection by the approval authority, the entire system falls under the provisions of the Hazardous Incidents Ordinance (12th BImSchV) and must therefore take special precautions to prevent incidents and limit the effects of incidents, as well as maintain an appropriate safety distance from adjacent protected objects. Tesla must draw up an incident concept and comply with special information obligations,” the press release read.
The state noted that Tesla may now start or continue with the further construction of Giga Berlin and that objections to the project now have “no suspensive effect.” It should be noted, however, that before Tesla can actually put its Model Y production facility into operation, several ancillary provisions must be met first. These provisions, which include the installation of measuring devices for air pollutants and precautions for fire protection and accidents, will be checked by the responsible authorities. Once Tesla completes this step, Model Y production for customer vehicles could finally commence.
Needless to say, all eyes are now focused on how quickly Tesla can meet the requirements for Giga Berlin’s operational permit.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
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
