News
Tesla Model X cited as “most significant vehicle”, by growth contribution to record 2016 PEV sales
Electric and plug-in hybrid car sales established new sales records in 2016 with the Tesla Model X earning the title of “most significant vehicle” according to EV Volumes. The industry tracking site cites the Model X for its contribution to the growth of plug-in car sales in the US this past year.
EV Volumes defines any car with a plug as a plug-in, which may cause some Tesla fans heartburn. The site does acknowledge that plug-in hybrids are probably a stop-gap solution until there are more pure electric cars with at least 200 miles of range available to American consumers.
“The volume increase in 2016 can be attributed to Tesla (+95 % for S & X combined), the new GM Volt (+61 %), Ford Fusion (+63 %) and a number of newcomers, mostly in the Plug-in Hybrid category.” indicates the published report. “By its growth contribution, the Tesla Model X must be regarded the most significant vehicle this year.”
The Tesla Model S was the overall sales leader for the year with 28,821 units sold to US customers, a 22% increase over 2015. The Model X finished the year with 17,629 US sales, good enough for 3rd place overall. The second generation Chevy Volt claimed 2nd place with 24,739 cars delivered to customers in the US, a 61% increase.
US plug-in car sales since January, 2011. Source: ZEV Facts by Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
California claimed nearly 50% of all plug-in sales with the other 9 states that adhere to the California zero emissions standards accounting for another 13%. Combined, all ten states accounted for nearly 62% of all US plug-in sales. In the conventional car market, those states make up about 28% of the US new car market.
Other cars with plugs that sold more than 10,000 units in the US in 2016 include the Ford Fusion Energi plug-in hybrid, which saw its sales grow 63% last year to almost equal the Tesla Model X in total sales. The Fusion Energi now accounts for about 10% of all Fusion sales, despite the fact that Ford CEO Mark Fields insists that nobody wants to buy electric cars.
Sales of the Fusion Energi took off midyear after Ford began to advertise it as the longest range plug-in hybrid available. That claim is technically accurate — the Fusion Energi can travel more than 600 miles on a tank of fuel. But it is misleading in that the car only has 22 miles of range on battery power alone, which is only fair to middling for a plug-in hybrid these days.
To give the Fusion Hybrid more range, Ford simply increased the size of the gas tank. All of which suggests that the buying public is still woefully uninformed about cars with plugs, just as Elon Musk always claims when he talks about what a poor job car companies and automobile dealers do marketing electric cars.
The last car to sell more than 10,000 units last year is the venerable Nissan LEAF. Although Nissan promises an all new second generation LEAF with 200 miles or more of range sometime before the end of 2019, the current car is hopelessly out of date. It is essentially the same as it was when it first went on sale at the end of 2010. Still, the LEAF soldiered on to sell just over 14,000 cars in the US last year.
2016 Plug-in car sales in the US. Source: EV Volumes
In all, more than 156,000 cars with plugs were sold in the US in 2016. EV Volumes predicts that number will climb to 250,000 or more in 2017, assuming at least 50,000 Tesla Model 3 sedans are included. Whether the Model 3 makes it to market in significant numbers is one of the biggest stories industry watchers will be following this year.
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
