Tesla CEO Elon Musk promised a “giant contract” to a nickel supplier during the Q2 2020 Earnings Call. The problem is that the company will have trouble finding an efficient and environmentally-friendly nickel mine, and it could prove to be Tesla’s biggest challenge yet.
Nickel is a crucial metal in electric vehicle batteries because it can increase energy density and provide cars with more range. Musk stated during the Earnings Call that nickel-based cells are essential for the development of larger vehicles, like the Tesla Semi, for example. “Where every unit of mass that you add in battery pack, you have to subtract in cargo,” he said. “So it’s very important to have a mass efficient and long-range pack.”
Nickel-based cells would give Tesla an advantage in electric vehicle range, a category where the company already leads by a sizeable margin. However, with new vehicles on the way, cells have to be adjusted to work with specific workloads. The Semi is an excellent example of this.
Nickel could replace cobalt in Tesla’s current battery cells. Cobalt, a controversial element on its own, is responsible for stabilizing the cell and has been effective in increasing the safety of the high-energy batteries that Tesla has used. However, the mining process of cobalt is questionable, and mines which can obtain it likely are using child labor, which is highly illegal. It also is not environmentally-friendly to mine.
Tesla has taken extra steps to ensure that its cobalt suppliers are treating their workers humanely through a series of due diligence checks. Third-party companies complete random visits to these mines a few times a year to ensure that the cobalt Tesla is using in its batteries is humanely obtained.
The problem is: Nickel mining isn’t much different. Although it would be advantageous, safer, and provide more range for Tesla’s vehicles, it is tough to find nickel that is environmentally-friendly and responsibly mines. The largest nickel sources are in Indonesia, where millions of tonnes of waste are dumped into the sea, polluting coral reefs and damaging the homes of turtles.
-->Analysts believe that Indonesian miners will provide nearly all of the growth of nickel supplies over the next decade. With electric cars becoming more popular, batteries will be a large part of the surge in demand for the metal. Still, it is also used in everyday products, like stainless steel appliances, Financial Times says.
Other countries, like Canada and Australia, have nickel mines, but Indonesia is highly concentrated with it.
Steven Brown, a consultant and former employee at nickel mining company Vale, says that it could be challenging for customers who are environmentally-conscious to want products that contain the metal after hearing how some entities dispose of it.
“It could undermine the entire proposition of trying to sell a consumer a product that is environmentally friendly, if you have this back story,” he said.
Even though other countries have nickel available, the increased demand for EVs will require large automakers, like Tesla, to eventually have to source some of the metal from Indonesia. “At some point, it will happen where they can’t avoid Indonesian nickel,” Brown added.
-->Luckily, Tesla requires its sources to go through due diligence processes, and it is unlikely the company will steer away from them to obtain nickel. Of course, Tesla will benefit from having more nickel, but it has to be sourced responsibly for the company even to consider using it.
On top of that, nickel is the second most expensive metal in EV batteries. It only trails cobalt, which Tesla has worked intensively to get away from because of its environmental and humanitarian impact.
“We use very little cobalt in our system already, and that’s — that may to zero along, so it’s basically about nickel,” Musk said.
There is a delicate balance between positive environmental impact after EVs hit the road and the harmful impact sourcing some of the metals have. However, the automakers do not assume any of the responsibility for the mining companies’ process of getting rid of waste. But it is their responsibility to choose a company that decides to handle the ridding of environmentally-harming materials responsibly.
Tesla has made it a point to choose companies that share their mission for sustainability because the automaker realizes that building an electric car starts with sourcing the materials. If the materials are not responsibly obtained, then the EV isn’t as Earth-friendly as it could be.
-->Pius Ginting, an environmental activist, summed it up perfectly: “The net result is we have clean air in our cities — but then we destroy a rich biodiversity area.”
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
-->It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
-->The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
-->News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
