Connect with us

News

Former Tesla CTO’s battery recycling startup secures funding from Amazon

(Credit: Verge Science/YouTube)

Published

on

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. 

Advertisement
-
-

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. 

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.

The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.

SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.

Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.

There are plenty of ways the company can do this:

Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts

SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.

SpaceX is charging Anthropic massive money for its compute

High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity

The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.

Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.

Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.

High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online

GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.

Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications

Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.

These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.

Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages

SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.

Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.

SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y

Published

on

Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.

Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”

Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.

Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.

However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.

Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.

Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking

Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.

On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.

Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.

The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.

Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.

For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.

Continue Reading