News
Tesla supplier sheds light on graphite supply challenge for EV battery manufacturers [Editorial]
Graphite is an essential part of a lithium-ion battery. There are many challenges that EV battery manufacturers might face in the graphite market as electric vehicle demand continues to rise.
Graphite is often an overlooked essential mineral when people think of EV batteries. However, it is a crucial component in the anodes of lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles.
Graphite and Transparency
The chief executive of Syrah Resources, Shaun Verner, shared a bit about graphite pricing and funding for new projects. Syrah Resources is an Australian company that supplies Tesla from its mine in Mozambique, one of the largest graphite producers.
Verner commented that the graphite market lacks transparency when it comes to pricing, leading bankers to hesitate when it comes to funding new graphite-related projects.
Only a handful of countries mine graphite and even fewer refine the mineral enough to be used in batteries and other products. With few producers in the graphite industry, graphite consumers enter into long-term bilateral supply agreements with little transparency on prices. In addition, relatively few analysts follow the graphite industry, making it difficult to get any long-term forecasts on graphite prices.
“The single biggest impediment to new investment is the opaque nature of the market because to get the commercial debt in place is really challenging,” said Verner.
Graphite Supply
Graphite prices have declined in recent months compared to the highs in early 2022. Fastmarkets reported that traditional graphite applications have decreased this year, resulting in “sluggish” conditions in the market. However, graphite demand is expected to rise in the next few years due to growth in the electric vehicle sector.
“Graphite has kind of been the poor cousin of the battery minerals and doesn’t get the attention of the other commodities,” commented Gregory Bowes, executive chairman of the Northern Graphite Corporation. “But we’re getting very close to an inflection point where demand overtakes supply and this is going to be first page news.”
Experts observing the graphite market expect graphite supply to hit a deficit as EV battery makers increase production. Fastmarkets estimates that natural graphite consumption would rise 40% year on year, on par with the EV sector. Benchmark Mineral Intelligence had the same forecast and calculated that graphite supply would hit a deficit of 20,000 tons in 2022.
China’s dominance in the graphite industry factors into the forecasted deficit since it dominates the graphite market. In 2021, China produced 820,000 metric tons (MT) of graphite, a significant increase compared to the previous two years. The US Geological Survey reported that China accounted for 79% of the world’s graphite mining last year. The country’s quick recovery from COVID-19 shutdowns contributed to its dominance in 2021.
“Chinese producers quickly increased production after a few months of closures in 2020. This allowed China to gain a more dominant position in the market for 2021 and slowed down the diversification of the supply chain,” noted the US Geological Survey’s report.
After China, Brazil and Mozambique are the next largest graphite producers. Brazil produced 68,000 MT last year, while Mozambique’s output was 30,000 MT. Russia, Madagascar, Ukraine, Norway, Canada, India, and Sri Lanka make up the remaining Top 10 countries that produce graphite.
Graphite and the Inflation Reduction Act
The graphite industry might be a major challenge for automakers seeking to launch their products in the United States over the next few years. The recently passed Inflation Reduction Act included EV tax credits that could go as high as $7,500 for automakers that adhere to a few specific requirements.
One of the requirements to qualify for the EV tax credit is related to batteries and the minerals used to make them. According to the Inflation Reduction Act, at least 40% of the critical minerals used to make US-made EV batteries must also come from US miners or recycling plants. Automakers can also qualify for the tax credit if the minerals used in their US-made batteries come from countries with free trade deals with the United States.
In 2021, natural graphite was not produced in the United States, but it consumed 45,000 tons of the mineral, estimated to be worth $41 million. The United States imported about 53,000 tons of graphite last year, mainly from China. It also imported graphite from Mexico, Canada, India, and other sources.
US Geological Survey mentioned one US automaker in its report about graphite imports. It did not mention the automaker by name.
“A US automaker continued building a large plant to manufacture lithium-ion electric vehicle batteries. The completed portion of the plant was operational, and it produced battery cells, battery packs, drive units, and energy storage products. At full capacity, the plant was expected to require 35,200 tons per year of spherical graphite for use as anode material for lithium-ion batteries,” stated the report.
Eric Desaulniers, the chief executive of Nouveau Monde Graphite, stated that discussions with cell manufacturers have ramped up after the Inflation Reduction Act was passed. Nouveau Monde is currently developing a graphite mine and battery-grade anode plant in Canada.
Desaulniers noted that challenges are ahead when it comes to securing project financing since “cell makers are cash-constrained.” He also noted that automakers had their hands full from scaling up their respective battery manufacturing facilities.
Tesla, considered the lead electric vehicle manufacturer in the United States, is already producing its 4680 battery cells in California. Rivian, General Motors, and other automakers also plan to develop their own battery cells in their own battery manufacturing plants.
The Teslarati team would appreciate hearing from you. If you have any tips, contact me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
