News
Tesla tops Fast Co’s list for Most Innovative Transportation company
Tesla ranked third overall in the list of The World’s 50 Most Innovative Companies by Fast Company. Tesla also topped the list of the Most Innovative Transportation Companies of 2020 by the same publication.
The Silicon Valley-based carmaker finished just behind social media platform Snap and tech-giant Microsoft, which finished first and second, respectively. In the transportation sector, Tesla grabbed the top spot while Brightline/Virgin Trains, the first new privately-held passenger rail system in the United States in 100 years, finished second. Software company Swiftly, which helps cities optimize public transit systems using data analysis snagged the third spot.
Fast Company cited Tesla “for proving it’s a mass-market automaker by delivering more than 350,000 cars in 2019. Tesla proved it can compete with Big Auto when it delivered 367,500 vehicles to customers last year—more than double the number of cars it sold in the previous two years. It also opened a new factory in China, and began delivering cars to the world’s largest EV market.”
Aptiv came in fourth and was cited for completing more than 70,000 paid autonomous car rides with Lyft. Electric vehicle charging company Chargepoint got the fifth spot. Kodiak Robotics, Passport, Shipex, Cake, and LM Industries completed the top 10 in the transport sector
The publication highlights the achievements and promising ideas of the biggest and lesser-known industry players, but more importantly, puts the spotlight on how Elon Musk’s car company has been reshaping itself as an industry leader and how it continues to transform the the car industry as a whole.
Scaling up production of its vehicles, focused at the moment on the Model 3 electric sedan and now the Model Y electric crossover is an integral step to achieving Tesla’s mission of fostering a wider adoption of electric vehicles. For 2020, Tesla is aiming to deliver 500,000 vehicles.
While these numbers may sound ambitious to the company’s naysayers, it is a realistic goal with the carmaker eyeing production of 500K units per year in its Fremont factory once upgrades are completed mid-year. Giga Shanghai, according to a recent record of meetings between investors and experts, is expected to hit 170,000 vehicles this year, with an aim to produce 5,000 vehicles per week putting the facility all the way up to to almost 250,000 units annually.
Aside from its connected cars, it also continues to invest in improving its car battery technologies. Industry leaders and major players are awaiting what Tesla and Elon Musk would announce during its Battery Day in April. It could be about mass production of cheaper batteries or perhaps enhanced batteries for its existing and future vehicles, and while these could spell doomsday for other legacy automakers it opens the possibility of Tesla helping everyone as a supplier of reliable electric vehicle batteries in the future. If that happens, it would be a win-win situation for carmakers and the environment as this would make green cars from different brands more attractive to consumers. Tesla’s innovation is effectively innovation for the car industry as a whole.
Ramping production has indeed turned Tesla into a mass vehicle producer, but more importantly, it brings it a step closer to helping the world achieve a more sustainable future through its products.
“When I think what we have in front of us, the next couple of years, we’ve got Model Y, we’ve got Giga Berlin, Tesla Semi, Solarglass Roof, Cybertruck some very exciting improvements in battery technology,” Elon Musk said during its Q4 2019 earnings call. “It’s hard to think of another company that has more exciting product and technology roadmap. So super-fired up about where Tesla will be in the next 10 years.”
Fast Company’s list of The World’s Most Innovative Companies looked into groundbreaking businesses in 44 sectors across different regions of the globe. The nominated companies were assessed by the publication’s editors and writers based on their innovation and impact, with focus on their accomplishments in the past 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
