News
Tesla has a misinformation problem, and silence may no longer be enough
During the first quarter earnings call, Lars Moravy, Tesla’s vice president of vehicle engineering, stated that the company is hard at work cooperating with local authorities and agencies like the NTSB and the NHTSA to investigate a fatal Model S crash in Texas earlier this month. Moravy’s statements provided some new insights into the ongoing investigation, particularly when he mentioned that Tesla did a study to see how the company’s technologies operate in the area of the accident.
“We did a study with them over the past week to understand what happened in that particular crash. And what we’ve learned from that effort was that Autosteer did not and could not engage on the road condition that — as it was designed. Our adaptive cruise control only engages when a driver was buckled in about 5 miles per hour. And it only accelerated to 30 miles per hour with the distance before the car crashed,” he said.
A look at Moravy’s statements shows that Tesla’s adaptive cruise control could only accelerate to 30 mph in the distance that the ill-fated Model S covered before it smashed into a tree. This goes against initial reports stating that the vehicle had been involved in a high-speed crash. The state of the Model S when authorities found it also hinted that the car collided with the tree at speeds beyond 30 mph. Moravy’s statement was clear enough, but apparently, it was not clear enough for some — and it’s causing even US congressmen to become misinformed about the issue.
Despite early claims by #Tesla #ElonMusk, autopilot WAS engaged in tragic crash in The Woodlands.
We need answers. https://t.co/e3TQTRv72Z
— Kevin Brady (@RepKevinBrady) April 28, 2021
Misreporting Spreads Quickly
Rep. Kevin Brady recently shared an article on his Twitter page which featured Moravy’s statement from the Q1 earnings call. The only problem was that the article Brady shared misunderstood the Tesla executive’s statement, with the article alleging that “at least one Tesla Autopilot feature was active” during the fatal Tesla crash. This, of course, is completely inaccurate, and EV owners and Tesla Twitter pointed it out as such. Moravy, after all, was referring to a test that the company ran, not the findings of the investigation, which is still ongoing.
Unfortunately, the US congressman seemed unconvinced. Despite the wave of corrections from the EV community and Tesla owners, or just Twitter users who actually bothered to listen and read the Q1 earnings call transcript, Brady argued in a later tweet that the source of his information was Tesla itself. And this, in a lot of ways, brings up a can of worms for the electric car maker and its longtime supporters.
Uh…Tesla. (Read the article, Sparky)
— Kevin Brady (@RepKevinBrady) April 28, 2021
Misinformation must be corrected
This is not the first time that Tesla has found itself on the receiving end of inaccurate reporting. Tesla has always battled misinformation since its early days, from reports claiming that the Model S was vaporware to ones claiming that Giga Shanghai was just an empty shell where Model 3s from Fremont were being stored. But while most of the misreporting surrounding Tesla is now expected by those following the company, and while some of this misinformation is almost humorous — such as a usually-critical Tesla reporter arguing that the Powerwall does not exist because she has never seen one in person — some stories require a more active hand.
Granted, Elon Musk has made his stance clear on advertising, or, as the CEO noted on Twitter, “manipulating public opinion.” However, it is not too difficult to see that Tesla will be fighting an unnecessarily uphill battle against misinformation if it does not have a way to make the correct information public. Musk has also stated on Twitter that “I trust the people,” which is no surprise considering his optimism. However, people are also very easy to manipulate, especially if they are immersed, for the most part, in misinformation.
Other companies spend money on advertising & manipulating public opinion, Tesla focuses on the product.
I trust the people.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 27, 2021
Not-a-PR Team
If there is anything that the ongoing misinformation surrounding the tragic Texas crash has shown, it is that Tesla may need a better strategy than just staying silent until an inaccurate story dies. This does not have to come in the form of a dedicated PR team or advertisements either, as those are strategies that have worked for companies that are almost antithetical to Tesla. Either way, the EV community may find it advantageous if something could be done about the ongoing inaccurate reports and allegations being thrown against the company. Perhaps Tesla could find a solution that meets these needs while staying true to its out-of-the-box character.
Tesla is a creative company that is unorthodox and bold enough that it decided to build a vehicle assembly line in a sprung structure to meet its goals. With this in mind, there is a pretty good chance that Tesla could find a workaround for its misinformation problem. Before this could happen, of course, Tesla would first have to admit that something more than silence is needed to usher in the company towards new heights.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
A California radiologist who drove his Tesla Model Y off a 250-foot cliff in an attempt to kill his family has had his charges dismissed after doctors say he is “doing well” in a mental health program.
Dharmesh Patel was charged with three counts of attempted murder in connection with a January 2023 crash where he drove his Tesla off a cliff, injuring his wife and two children, aged 7 and 4 at the time.
Patel drove the Tesla off Devil’s Slide in California, an area that is extremely rough to the point that investigators and rescuers expected the worst when arriving at the scene for the first time. Patel supposedly had schizoaffective disorder, according to Deputy District Attorney Dominique Davis.
Shockingly, Patel’s wife, who was in the vehicle, testified that she did not want her husband to be prosecuted, noting that their children missed their father and they wanted him to come back home. Patel’s attorney argued, “not everyone who commits a crime is a criminal.”
Doctor who took Tesla off cliff gets support from unlikely person
A three-day trial in Mental Health Diversion Court ruled in Patel’s favor, which kept him out of jail and instead on house arrest. He was admitted to a Mental Health Diversion Program, which he successfully completed, the Associated Press reported. San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe said the judge was “required by law” to dismiss the charges:
“If the person who’s given mental health diversion follows the treatment plan, there’s nothing that can be done, and at the end of the two years he gets it wiped out of his record.”
Wagstaffe said he has argued, along with other DAs in California, to have attempted murder removed from the list of charges eligible to be dismissed due to mental health diversion programs.
Patel had the charges officially dismissed on Monday; his wife waited for him as he left court and they departed the building together, according to Mercury News. Patel surrendered his California medical license in December.
The crash has been one of the best examples of Tesla’s incredible engineering, which has saved four lives in this particular instance. The car was totalled but kept the four human beings alive and safe, which is something that many referred to as “an absolute miracle.”
A common misconception of anti-EV proponents is that the batteries used in the vehicles are detrimental to the environment and that they cause more waste than they are worth. But a look at Tesla’s battery recycling efforts last year shows the company is doing more than ever to recover materials and give portions of the cells a second life.
Tesla reported a significant milestone in its sustainability efforts last year, with battery recycling volumes rising 20% compared to 2024. According to the company’s 2025 Impact Report, Tesla recycled over 14,000 metric tons of battery material through a combination of in-house processing at its Gigafactories and collaborations with third-party recycling partners.
Tesla: “In 2025, we recycled over 14,000 metric tons of battery material through a combination of in-house processing and through our network of recycling partners.”
That’s equivalent to 46,000 long-range battery packs, a +20% increase from 2024. pic.twitter.com/TC3Nz7Kaqf
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) July 7, 2026
This amount of recovered material is equivalent to the resources needed to produce approximately 46,000 long-range battery packs. The increase reflects growing operational scale as Tesla’s global vehicle fleet expands and more batteries reach end-of-life or manufacturing scrap becomes available for processing.
Tesla and Battery Recycling
Battery recycling forms a core part of Tesla’s circular economy strategy. The company designs its batteries for longevity, often exceeding 200,000 miles of driving, and prioritizes repairs, remanufacturing, and second-life applications before full recycling.
Once packs are decommissioned, Tesla ensures 100% are recycled with no materials sent to landfills. This approach recovers critical metals including lithium, nickel, cobalt, and copper, which can be refined and reused in new battery production.
Tesla has advanced hydrometallurgical recycling processes capable of achieving recovery rates up to 98% for key battery metals. These methods are more efficient and environmentally friendly than traditional pyrometallurgical techniques, reducing energy use and enabling higher-purity materials suitable for direct reintegration into battery manufacturing.
Tesla co-founder JB Straubel confirms Redwood’s battery recycling operations are already profitable
In-house capabilities are supplemented by a network of specialized partners, creating a robust system that handles both production scrap and end-of-life packs.
The environmental and economic benefits are substantial. Recycling reduces reliance on virgin mining, lowers the carbon footprint associated with raw material extraction and processing, and helps stabilize supply chains for critical minerals amid rising global EV demand. As millions of Tesla vehicles age, the volume of recyclable material is expected to grow significantly in the coming years.
This 20% year-over-year growth demonstrates the effectiveness of Tesla’s investments in recycling infrastructure and technology. It positions the company as a leader in addressing one of the automotive industry’s major sustainability challenges. Continued innovation in battery design for easier disassembly and higher recyclability will further enhance these efforts.
Overall, Tesla’s progress in 2025 highlights how scaling recycling operations supports both environmental goals and long-term business resilience in the transition to electric mobility. As the EV market matures, such closed-loop systems will become increasingly vital for sustainable growth.
Tesla has spent years trying to engineer its way out of the automotive paint shop, one of the most expensive, space-consuming, and environmentally costly steps in vehicle manufacturing. With the Cybercab, Tesla confirmed on X this week that a new reaction injection molding process will embed color directly into the panel itself during production.
“Our new reaction injection molding (RIM) process shrinks Cybercab paint cycles from hours to minutes. This cuts those parts’ manufacturing and supply chain emissions by 35% and eliminating 100% of paint volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted in traditional paint methods.” noted Tesla.
While the RIM process isn’t necessarily new and has existed since the 1960s, what makes Tesla’s application notable is how it is being used specifically for exterior body panels that traditionally required a separate paint process after forming.
Tesla’s RIM approach integrates the color directly into the panel material during the molding process itself. The pigment is part of the polymer mix injected into the mold, meaning the panel comes out of the mold already colored, with no separate paint application required. The clear coat or protective layer can be applied at the mold stage or through a much faster post-process than traditional multi-stage painting. Tesla claims this compresses what was a multi-hour paint cycle into minutes per panel.
Tesla’s obsession with killing the paint shop is one of the most consistent threads running through the company’s manufacturing philosophy going back years. As far back as 2018, Musk was trimming paint color options to simplify production, tweeting at the time: “Moving 2 of 7 Tesla colors off menu on Wednesday to simplify manufacturing.” Two years later, in a 2020 Automotive News interview, Musk laid out his broader vision, saying he believed Tesla factories could one day be 1,000 times more efficient than conventional plants, and pointing to the paint shop as one of the biggest sources of waste, cost, and complexity. The Cybertruck was the most extreme expression of that thinking. Tesla chose an unpainted stainless steel exterior partly because it would eliminate the need for a $200 million paint facility at Gigafactory Texas. The stainless approach proved harder and more expensive than anticipated, but the underlying ambition never changed. The Cybercab is what happens when that same ambition meets a manufacturing process that delivers on it.
Radiologist who drove Tesla off cliff has attempted murder charges dismissed
Tesla battery recycling efforts increased 20 percent last year
