News
Lithium mine near Tesla Gigafactory plans to break ground as global shortage rears head
Just 150 miles north of Tesla’s Gigafactory, a plan is brewing to a build a massive mine capable of growing the world’s lithium carbonate supply by a full 15% as early as 2022 and more than 20% by 2026, compared to 2018. Tesla could, in other words, find itself neighbors with one of the largest concentrated supplies of lithium carbonate in the world less than a decade from now.
Known as Lithium Americas, the company behind the study has conservatively estimated that it could break ground on its prospective Northern Nevada Li2CO3 mine as early as the end of 2020 and ramp up to an annual output of 30,000 metric tons of the basic Li-ion battery precursor just 21 months after that. The mine’s output would then double by 2026, coming to rest at a maximum annual lithium carbonate output of 60,000 tons.
Theoretical estimates conducted by a number of academic parties in the 2010s have shown that any given high-quality lithium-ion battery would be expected to require 2-3 kilograms of lithium carbonate per kWh of final capacity, although the absolute physical minimum is closer to 0.4 kg. To sustain Gigafactory 1’s 35 GWh 2018 production goal, that single factory alone could require between 60,000 and 85,000 tons of lithium carbonate annually to sustain its battery production operations alone.
-
- The Model 3 assembly line inside the Sprung Structure in Tesla’s Fremont factory. [Credit: The New York Times]
-
- Building giant factories like Gigafactory 2 demands major capital investments that often require private equity sales. (Tesla)
To put this requirement in context, the entire global supply of lithium carbonate is expected to peak at ~250,000 tons in 2018 after astounding YoY production growth of 21.5% from 2016 to 2017 – Tesla’s demands this year could thus easily swallow 25-30% of the entire global lithium carbonate supply.
Despite those staggering numbers, Gigafactory 1 production is still expected to ramp (albeit based on optimistic 2016 Elon Musk numbers) as high as 105 GWh of cells and 150 GWh of packs annually by the time it is fully completed, likely a few years after the original 2020 estimate. Roughly 7 times the volume of Tesla’s 2018 production goals for the massive factory, sustaining that final volume of production (255 GWh annually) would literally require the global supply of lithium carbonate to grow by a bare minimum of 250% in less than half a decade. To reiterate, that is for a single Gigafactory, of which Tesla plans to construct several more in China, Europe, and elsewhere.
-
- A peek inside a segment of a Tesla Model 3 battery pack.
-
- Gayle King tours the Tesla Model 3 production line with CEO Elon Musk at the Fremont factory [Source: CBS This Morning]
Put simply, Tesla is going to need every ounce of lithium supply they can get their hands on, and Lithium Americas’ prospective Nevada offering could theoretically supplement that total required supply by as much as 10% by the mid-2020s. Tesla, however, is already hard at work attempting to secure a strong and satisfactory supply of lithium and other rare earth metals and materials required to produce premium-grade Li-on batteries.
Tesla already has agreements to buy lithium from a somewhat smaller Nevadan effort from Pure Energy Minerals (phase 1 production NET 2020) and Bacanora’s Sonora Lithium prospect (NET 2020), lithium hydroxide (a product of lithium carbonate) from Australian upstart Kidman Resources (NET 2021), and also plans to invest directly in lithium heavyweight SQM to strengthen a foothold in Chile, the current owner of ~50% of the world’s lithium mining rights.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
