News
Former Tesla CTO’s battery recycling startup secures funding from Amazon
Redwood Materials, the battery recycling startup founded by former Tesla CTO JB Straubel, recently secured some funding from Amazon as part of the e-commerce giant’s efforts to reduce its emissions. Redwood is one of five companies that Amazon is investing in as part of its Climate Pledge Fund, which was announced last year and expected to cost about $2 billion.
In a statement about the five companies that received funding, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos stated that firms like Redwood are “channeling their entrepreneurial energy into helping Amazon and other companies reach net zero by 2040 and keep the planet safer for future generations.” Amazon, for its part, appears to be interested in Redwood’s recycling technology, which could allow materials like lithium, cobalt, and nickel to be extracted from old smartphones and other consumer devices.
Redwood was founded by the former Tesla CTO in 2017 after seeing that the global shift to electric vehicles will likely cause unnecessary environmental damage from a surge in mining. Such a scenario would only happen, however, if there is no recycling system in place that would allow EV producers to reuse the materials that have already been used in their cars’ batteries. Speaking with the Financial Times, Straubel shared his vision for the transportation sector, which involves the mass adoption of EVs and a closed-loop battery recycling system.
“(My vision is a) world where all of the transportation is done by electric vehicles and we have batteries powering a sustainable world. And all of those batteries are able to be recycled and remanufactured many, many times so that we can have a nearly closed-loop,” Straubel said.
This same concept stands just as true in the consumer electronics sector, according to the former Tesla CTO. Straubel remarked that while batteries are bound to degrade with repeated use, the underlying elements that comprise them remain sealed from the environment. This meant that the batteries’ materials, most of which are very valuable, could be broken down and repurposed once more. If this is accomplished, the former Tesla executive believes that mining would not be as necessary anymore.
“There are a phenomenal amount of cell phones in the world that currently are being discarded as trash or thrown into a landfill. It’s a massive, untapped resource. If we can recover 98 or 99% of those materials and reuse them, we don’t need very much new material to keep that whole process running… Even though the battery is internally degraded, all of the same materials are still in there — all of the same atoms of lithium, nickel, and cobalt. You can still harness all of those same materials, but they need to be reprocessed and brought back to a state where they could be used again and built into a new battery,” Straubel remarked.
The exact amount of funding that Redwood Materials has acquired from Amazon has not been disclosed by either company, through the former Tesla executive noted that there was a potential for “partnership on a number of different levels” between the recycling startup and the e-commerce giant. One of these levels may include aiding Amazon in building and developing an end-of-life process for consumer electronics that are sold through its e-commerce platform so that the devices and their components could be reused.
Redwood Materials has remained mostly in stealth mode since its founding, though signs have emerged that the company may be part of Tesla’s efforts to develop its own battery recycling processes. One of these involves an existing partnership with Panasonic to reclaim the scrap that is generated from the battery cells currently produced at Tesla’s Gigafactory Nevada facility. Reports have indicated that Panasonic initially started a trial run with Redwood to reclaim more than 400 pounds of scrap from Giga Nevada, and the results were so successful that the Japanese firm raised its contract to 2 tons not long after.
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
