Connect with us

News

Tesla partner Panasonic’s US plans hint at possible Model S and X battery update

Published

on

Tesla might be looking to expand its array of battery suppliers with the upcoming construction and operation of Gigafactory 3 in China, but its current exclusive battery supplier, Panasonic, is looking to double down on its partnership with the electric car maker nonetheless. In a recent statement to Japanese media, Panasonic announced that it plans to move its Tesla battery production facilities to the United States next year.

Panasonic already manufactures batteries for Tesla’s vehicles in the US in Gigafactory 1, though the cells it produces on the site are the 2170 cells being utilized for the Model 3. Tesla’s two flagship vehicles — the Model S and Model X — are still equipped with custom 18650 cells, which are produced by Panasonic in facilities located in Japan. Based on a report from the Nikkei Asian Review, these are the operations that the Japanese company will be bringing over to a “US-based unit starting next April.”

Considering that Panasonic is already producing 2170 cells for the Model 3 in Gigafactory 1, the company’s move of its Tesla battery production lines to a US-based facility could pave the way for a well-deserved and much-anticipated battery update for the Model S and X. The move, if any, provides Panasonic the opportunity to normalize its battery production for Tesla’s electric cars. It does not seem to be a strategic move for Panasonic, after all, to move its battery production operations to the United States to manufacture 18650 cells that are bound to be upgraded in the near future.

Tesla’s 18650 cells for the Model S and X, while not as energy-dense as the Model 3’s 2170 cells, still hold up well today. A recent range and efficiency test of the Jaguar I-PACE by German network nextmove, for example, showed that the Model X, which is equipped with 18650 cells, still seems to have superior battery tech than the newer electric crossover from the British carmaker. Elon Musk, for his part, lauded the Model 3’s 2170 cells in the third quarter earnings call, stating that the electric car currently stands as the “most energy efficient energy per mile electric vehicle out there.”

Tesla’s 2170 cells are hailed by industry experts as a difference-maker for the Silicon Valley-based company. Detroit veteran Sandy Munro, for one, noted after tearing down and analyzing the Model 3 that the electric car’s 2170 batteries are the best that he has seen to date. The potential of the 2170 cells could be seen in the Model 3 Performance’s recent Track Mode update, which allows the electric car to compete with the automotive industry’s best high-performance sedans on a closed circuit.

Elon Musk has noted that there is no such thing as a “full refresh” for its vehicles. In a statement on Twitter, Musk pointed out that Tesla’s electric cars are partially upgraded every month “as soon as a new subsystem is ready for production.” With this in mind, there seems to be little doubt that when the production of 2170 cells reaches a point where it is capable of supporting the Model S and X, Tesla will equip the vehicles with the larger, newer cells.

Advertisement
-

Both the Model S and Model X have defied the odds over the years, competing and even dominating their respective segments despite an abundance of skepticism and Tesla’s lack of experience in the auto industry. Considering that the vehicles are Tesla’s flagships, though, it stands to reason that both electric cars would be equipped with the best that the company has to offer — in terms of batteries, that pertains to the 2170 cells. 

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

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading