Connect with us
tesla-battery-lithium-refining-facility-nueces tesla-battery-lithium-refining-facility-nueces

News

Tesla supplier sheds light on graphite supply challenge for EV battery manufacturers [Editorial]

(Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

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. 

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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. 

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

Maria--aka "M"-- is an experienced writer and book editor. She's written about several topics including health, tech, and politics. As a book editor, she's worked with authors who write Sci-Fi, Romance, and Dark Fantasy. M loves hearing from TESLARATI readers. If you have any tips or article ideas, contact her at maria@teslarati.com or via X, @Writer_01001101.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much

There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.

Published

on

(Photo: Hector Perez/YouTube)

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 began rolling out to some owners earlier this week, and there are some notable improvements that came with this update.

There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.

Overall operation saw a handful of slight improvements, especially with parking performance, which has been the most notable difference with the arrival of FSD v14.3. However, there are still some very notable shortcomings, most notably with region-specific signage and navigation.

Tesla Assisted Smart Summon (ASS) improvements

There are noticeable improvements to ASS operation, which has definitely been inconsistent in terms of performance. Tesla wrote in the release notes for v14.3.2:

“Unified the model between Actually Smart Summon, FSD, and Robotaxi for more capable and reliable behavior.”
As recently as this month, I used Summon with no success. It had pulled around the parking lot I was in incorrectly, leaving the range at which Summon can be operated and losing a signal while moving in the middle of the lot.

This caused me to sprint across the lot to retrieve the vehicle:

Unfortunately, Summon was not dependable or accurate enough to use regularly. It appears Tesla might have bridged the gap needed to make it an effective feature, as two tests in parking lots proved that Summon was more responsive and faster to navigate to the location chosen.

It also did so without hesitation, confidently, and at a comfortable speed. I was able to test it twice at different distances:

I plan to test this more thoroughly and regularly through the next few weeks, and I avoided using it in a congested parking lot initially because I have not had overwhelming success with Summon in the past. I wanted to set a low baseline for it to see if it could simply pull up to the place I pinned in the Tesla app.

It was two for two, which is a big improvement because I don’t think I ever had successful Summon attempts back-to-back. It just seems more confident than ever before.

New Disengagement Categories

This is a really good idea from Tesla, but there are some issues with it. The categories you can select are Critical, Comfort, Preference, and Other.

I think the reasons why people choose to take over would be a better way to prompt drivers, like, “Traveling Too Fast,” “Incorrect Maneuver,” “Navigation Error,” would be more beneficial.

I say this because it seems that how we each categorize things might be different. For example, I shared a video of an intervention because the car had navigated to an exit to a parking lot and put its left blinker on, despite left turns not being allowed there.

I disengaged and chose Critical as the reason; it’s not a comfort issue, it’s not a preference, it’s quite literally an illegal turn, and it’s also dangerous because it cuts across several lanes of traffic and is 180 degrees.

Some said I should not have labeled this as Critical, but that’s the description I best characterized the disengagement as.

Categorizing interventions is a good thing, but it’s kind of hard to determine how to label them correctly.

Inconsistency with Regional Traffic Patterns

Tesla Full Self-Driving is pretty inconsistent with how it handles regional or local traffic patterns and road rules. The most frequent example I like to use is that of the “Except Right Turn” stop sign, which has become a notorious sighting on our social media platforms.

In the initial rollout of v14.3, my Model Y successfully navigated through one of these stop signs with no issues. However, testing at two of these stop signs yesterday proved it is still not sure how to read signs and navigate through them properly.

Off camera, I approached another one of these signs and felt the car coming to a stop, so I nudged it forward with the accelerator pedal pressed.

This helped the car go through the sign without stopping, but I could feel the bucking of the vehicle as the car really wanted to stop.

Musk said on the earnings call earlier this week that unsupervised FSD would probably be available in some regions before others, including a state-to-state basis in the U.S.

“It’s difficult to release this like to everyone everywhere all at once because we do want to make sure that they’re not unique situations in a city that particularly complex intersection or — actually, they tend to be places where people get into accidents a lot because they’re just — perhaps there’s — and like I said, an unsafe intersection or bad road markings or a lot of weather challenges. So I think we would release unsupervised gradually to the customer fleet as we feel like a particular geography is confirmed to be safe.”
This could be one of those examples that Tesla just has to figure out.

Highway Operation

Full Self-Driving is already pretty good at routine roadway navigation, so I don’t have too much to report here.

However, I was happy with FSD’s decision-making at several points, including its choice not to pass a slightly slower car and remain in the right lane as we approached the off-ramp:

Better Maneuvering at Stop Signs

Many FSD users report some strange operations at stop signs, especially four-way intersections where there is a stop sign and a line on the road, and they’re not even with one another.

I experienced this quite frequently and found that FSD would actually double stop: once at the stop sign and again at the line.

This created some interesting scenarios for me and I had many cars honk at me when the second stop would happen. Other vehicles that had waved me on to proceed through the intersection would become frustrated at the second stop.

FSD seems to have worked through this particular maneuver:

FSD should know to go to the more appropriate location (whichever provides better visibility), and proceed when it is the car’s turn to move. The double stop really ruined the flow of traffic at times and generally caused some frustration from other drivers.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla plans to resolve its angriest bunch of owners: here’s how

Since the rollout of the AI4 chip in Tesla vehicles, owners with the last generation self-driving chip, known as Hardware 3, have been persistent in their quest for a solution to their issue: they were told their cars were capable of unsupervised Full Self-Driving. It turns out the cars are not.

Published

on

tesla-asia-model-3
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

Tesla has a plan to make Hardware 3 owners whole after CEO Elon Musk admitted that those with that self-driving chip in their cars will not have access to unsupervised Full Self-Driving.

The company’s strategy is so crazy that it is sort of hard to believe.

Since the rollout of the AI4 chip in Tesla vehicles, owners with the last generation self-driving chip, known as Hardware 3, have been persistent in their quest for a solution to their issue: they were told their cars were capable of unsupervised Full Self-Driving. It turns out the cars are not.

During the Tesla Q1 earnings call on Wednesday, Musk finally clarified what the company’s plans are for Hardware 3 owners, what they will be offered, and what Tesla will have to do internally to prepare for it.

The answer was somewhat mind-boggling.

Musk said:

“Unfortunately, Hardware 3 — I wish it were otherwise, but Hardware 3 simply does not have the capability to achieve unsupervised FSD. We did think at one point it would have that, but relative to Hardware 4, it has only 1/8 of the memory bandwidth of Hardware 4. And memory bandwidth is one of the key elements needed for unsupervised FSD.”
He continued, stating that HW3 owners would have the opportunity to trade their cars in at a discounted rate in order to get the AI4 chip:

“So for customers that have bought FSD, what we’re offering is essentially a trade-in — like a discounted trade-in for cars that have AI4 hardware, and we’ll also be offering the ability to upgrade the car, to replace the computer. And you also need to replace the cameras, unfortunately, to go to Hardware 4.”
Obviously, Tesla has a lot of people to work with and make this whole thing right. Musk was adamant that HW3 would be capable of FSD, and now that the company has finally admitted that it is not, there are some things that could come of this.

There has been open talk about some sort of class action lawsuit against Tesla. The promises that Tesla made previously could be considered a breach of contract or even false advertising, and that’s according to Grok, Musk’s own AI program.

Musk went on to say that Tesla would likely have to establish new microfactories to effectively and efficiently replace HW3 computers and cameras:

…So to do this efficiently, we’re going to have to set up, like kind of micro factories or small factories in major metropolitan areas in order to do it efficiently. Because if it’s done just at the service center, it is extremely slow to do so and inefficient. So we basically need like many production lines to make the change.”
This is going to be an extremely costly process, especially if Tesla has to buy real estate, properties, and equipment to complete this work. Additionally, there was no wording on pricing, but Musk never said it would be free. It will likely come with some kind of price tag, and HW3 owners, after being left hanging for so long, will have something to say about that.

Advertisement



Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX just got pulled into the biggest Weapons Program in U.S. history

SpaceX joins the Golden Dome software group, deepening its role in America’s most expensive defense program.

Published

on

By

US Golden Dome space defense system (Concept render by Grok)

SpaceX has joined a nine-company group developing the core operating software for the Golden Dome, America’s next-generation missile defense system. According to a Bloomberg report, SpaceX is focused on integrating satellite communications for military operations and is working alongside eight other defense and artificial intelligence companies, including Anduril Industries, Palantir Technologies, and Aalyria Technologies, to build software connecting missile defense capabilities.

The Golden Dome concept dates back to President Trump’s 2024 campaign, and on January 27, 2025, he signed an executive order directing the U.S. Armed Forces to construct the system before the end of his term. The system is planned to employ a constellation of thousands of satellites equipped with interceptors, with data centers in space providing automated control through an AI network.

FCC accepts SpaceX filing for 1 million orbital data center plan

Space Force Gen. Michael Guetlein, director of the Golden Dome initiative, has described the software layer as a “glue layer” that would enable officers to manage and control radars, sensors, and missile batteries across services. The consortium is aiming to test the platform this summer.

Trump selected a design in May 2025 with a $175 billion price tag, expected to be operational by the end of his term in 2029, though the Congressional Budget Office projected the cost could reach $831 billion over two decades.

The Golden Dome role is only the latest in a string of military wins for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported, the U.S. Space Force awarded SpaceX a $178.5 million task order on April 1, 2026 to launch missile tracking satellites for the Space Development Agency, covering two Falcon 9 launches beginning in Q3 2027. That came on top of more than $22 billion in government contracts held by SpaceX as of 2024, per CEO Gwynne Shotwell, spanning NASA resupply missions, classified intelligence satellites through its Starshield program, and military broadband.

The accumulation of defense contracts, now including a seat at the table on the most expensive weapons program in U.S. history, positions SpaceX as the dominant infrastructure provider for American national security in space. With a SpaceX IPO still on the horizon, each new contract adds weight to what is already one of the most consequential companies in aerospace history, raising real questions about how much of America’s defense architecture will depend on a single private operator before it ever trades publicly.

Continue Reading