Connect with us

News

Tesla Model S police cruiser aces pilot program with remarkably short downtime

(Credit: Fremont PD)

Published

on

Last year, the Fremont Police Department launched a one-year Electric Patrol Vehicle Pilot Program aimed at determining if EVs could be effectively used as a standard police cruiser. The Fremont PD chose a second-hand Tesla Model S 85 for its program, which was outfitted with the necessary equipment and deployed as a pursuit vehicle for regular police use.

As it turned out, EVs like the Tesla Model S could not only perform well and withstand the rigors of police work; they could be on the road far longer than their gas-powered counterparts as well, thanks to their low maintenance. The department summed up its findings in a statement released on Thursday.

“After careful review, the Pilot Program was determined to be a success. The police patrol electric vehicle met the needs of police services,” the Fremont PD wrote in a report. Captain Sean Washington proved optimistic about the program as well. “The final results from the one-year Electric Patrol Vehicle Pilot Program have been encouraging as the City of Fremont continues to look for cost-effective ways to help make Fremont more sustainable,” he said.

What really set the Model S apart from its gas-powered colleagues was its low operating costs. During the pilot program, the all-electric sedan consumed $1,036 in energy, far lower than the Ford PPV’s $5,133, assuming that gasoline prices stood at $3 a gallon. The downtime for the Model S 85 was remarkably short as well, with the Tesla spending almost four weeks more on the road compared to its combustion engine-powered counterparts.

Advertisement

“With an average of 27 fewer days of downtime per year, a savings of $2,147 in the total annual cost of energy/fuel, maintenance, and repair, and no operational carbon dioxide emissions, the pilot program results have prompted Fremont PD to move forward with plans to expand its fleet of electric patrol vehicle alternatives,” the Captain said.

That being said, the repair costs for the Model S 85 proved higher at $4,865 during the pilot year as compared to the $2,915 required by the Ford PPV. According to the Fremont PD on Twitter, this was partly due to the fact that they had to replace the Model S’ tires, thanks in part to the vehicle being used on a pursuit course over multiple days to help train officers. A couple of flat tires over the year also added to the vehicle’s repair costs.

Ultimately, the Model S proved itself as a car that is more than capable of being used as a standard police vehicle. Its 265-mile range easily accommodated the 40 to 70 miles of driving that regular patrol vehicles accumulate on an average day. Police officers who used the Tesla even reported an enhanced feeling of safety and control, as well as a reduction in anxiety and stress, when using the Model S. Radio communications with the Tesla proved superior too, thanks to the lack of engine noise.

Thanks in part to the successful pilot year of the Model S 85, the Fremont Police Department has since added a Tesla Model Y to its fleet. The authorities noted that the Model Y could be even better than the Model S due to its lower starting price, longer range, increased storage space, and higher ground clearance.

Advertisement

The Fremont PD’s report on its Electric Patrol Vehicle Pilot Program could be accessed below.

Police Electric Vehicle Pilot by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

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

News

Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles

The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.

The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.

Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.

Credit: Tesla

The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.

The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable. 

Advertisement

As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.

At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.

With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”

Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.

Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”

Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality. 

“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.

Advertisement

When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.

After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”

“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.

Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.

Advertisement

During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.

As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike

The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Charging

Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.

The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.

While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing. 

“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely. 

Advertisement

“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said. 

The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.

Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”

Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker. 

Advertisement

“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all. 

“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said. 

Continue Reading