News
Tesla is looking to build on-site housing for Gigafactory 1 employees, says Elon Musk
At some point in the future, some employees working at Tesla’s Gigafactory 1 in Nevada would be able to simply walk or bike to their homes after a shift at the massive facility. Tesla is looking to expand Gigafactory 1, with Elon Musk recently stating during a conversation with NV Gov. Brian Sandoval that he envisions the company to hire more than 20,000 people for the factory. To help house this upcoming influx of workers, Musk noted that Tesla is looking to create an on-site housing compound in Gigafactory 1’s premises.
Tesla’s NV Gigafactory is less than 30% complete, but it already employs roughly 7,000 people. During a technology and innovation summit held at the factory on Tuesday, Elon Musk stated that in order for Gigafactory 1 to hit its target number of employees, the area needs to offer more infrastructure, such as schools, buildings, roads, and affordable housing. As a way to address the need for more housing units for Gigafactory 1’s future workers, Musk noted that Tesla is considering a project that involves building a housing compound for its employees.
“The biggest constraint on growth here is housing and infrastructure. We’re looking at creating a housing compound on site at the Gigafactory, using kind of high-quality mobile homes,” Musk stated.
Nevada’s real estate market was affected by the arrival of Gigafactory 1. The state of Nevada took a blow during the housing crash and recession, and by 2010, the state had a 14% unemployment rate, with more than 175,000 Nevada residents being unemployed. When Brian Sandoval became governor after winning the 2010 race, Nevada was ranked as one of the worst states in terms of bankruptcies and home foreclosures. To push the state’s recovery, Sandoval worked to attract tech companies to set up shop in the state. One of these companies was Tesla, which chose Nevada as the site for its Gigafactory 1.
Gigafactory 1 is located about 25 miles east of Reno, NV. For now, many of the facility’s employees live in Reno, as well as several surrounding cities linked to the battery factory via I-80 and the newly-completed Hwy 50, such as Carson City, Fernley, and Sparks. Real-estate prices in areas around Gigafactory 1 have risen over the past years. In Reno alone, the average monthly rent is now $1,318 per month, a 58% increase over rental rates six years ago. In the Reno/Sparks area, median home prices recently hit an all-time high, reaching $389,000 in July. Considering Musk’s new guidance, Gigafactory 1’s employees would almost triple once the facility is complete. Thus, there is definitely a need for practical, affordable housing around the facility.
It remains to be seen what type of housing Tesla would introduce for Gigafactory 1’s employees. That said, the housing initiative does go in line with some ideas that Elon Musk recently expressed. During his now-infamous podcast with Joe Rogan, for one, Musk teased the concept of a smart home with a more efficient air conditioning system. Musk’s side venture, The Boring Company, has also developed the Boring Bricks, which are designed as a cost-effective way to construct homes. Considering Elon Musk’s penchant for the creative, there is a good chance that Tesla’s on-site housing compound at Gigafactory 1 might feature some notable elements as well.
The concept of the mill towns, or settlements that are built around factories, have been around since the late 1800’s. In recent years, some of Silicon Valley’s most prominent companies have explored a rather similar concept. Last year, for example, Google and Facebook issued a proposal to build self-contained towns near their respective headquarters. These towns would feature amenities such as their own grocery stores, shops, cafes, movie theaters, gyms, and hundreds of apartments that can accommodate the companies’ expanding employee base. If Elon Musk’s words would prove to be true, it might only be a matter of time before a sort of “Tesla town” emerges just outside of Reno, Nevada.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
