News
Tesla is ending the era of half-hearted, compliance electric cars
Carried forward by the momentum of electric vehicles like the Tesla Model 3, upcoming EVs from experienced carmakers such as Porsche and Volvo are showing a trend in the auto industry — from this point on, the automotive market will be fought with electric cars, and there will be no turning back.
It might be difficult to imagine today considering the success of the Model 3 and the influx of electric vehicles from veteran carmakers, but there was once a time when EVs were mostly half-hearted attempts whose primary purpose was to meet the mandates set by the California Air Resource Board (CARB). The EVs produced during this period even earned a very appropriate moniker — compliance cars. Among these were the Ford Focus EV, GM’s Spark EV, the Fiat 500e, the RAV4 EV, and the Honda Fit EV, all of which were adequate vehicles, but are costly and compromised in range and cargo compared to their gas-powered counterparts.
During the height of the compliance car era, some companies opted to pursue a different path. Among these is Nissan, whose all-electric vehicle, the Leaf, was sold across the United States. The Leaf would go on to be one of the best-selling EVs in the market. Tesla also saw a lot of growth in but a few years, bringing to market the Model X SUV and the Model 3 midsize sedan. Just like the Leaf, Tesla’s electric cars sold well, finding a strong following among consumers for who prefer the company’s no-compromises approach when it comes to the safety, performance, tech, and features of its vehicles. Tesla’s momentum never really stopped, as seen in the earlier-than-expected launch of the $35,000 Standard Model 3 recently.
It could be said that Elon Musk’s tenacity and his stubborn refusal to give up when faced with large challenges is a reason behind Tesla’s success. With Tesla all but proving that there is a demand for well-designed electric vehicles, other carmakers followed suit. In 2018 alone, several electric cars from established manufacturers were released, headlined by the Jaguar I-PACE, the Audi e-tron SUV, and the Mercedes-Benz EQC. Unlike compliance cars of years past, these vehicles were hyped as essential entries into their respective companies’ shift towards electric mobility. Nevertheless, some of these vehicles, such as the EQC, still carried over much of its gas-powered siblings’ characteristics, such as a front trunk full of components.
More recent electric vehicles from experienced carmakers seem to be better-designed. The Polestar 2 from Volvo, for one, proved impressive during its launch. With its dual motors that produce 408 hp, its deep integration of Google’s Android software, and a starting price of $45,000, the Polestar 2 can serve as an alternative for buyers who do not wish to purchase a Model 3. The Porsche Taycan, which is expected to be unveiled later this year, was also carefully designed from the ground-up as a high-performance electric car. Porsche has fully committed to electrification, with the company retiring its diesel lineup in favor of greener options. In the same way that the Polestar 2 can be an alternative to the Model 3, the Taycan can also be the perfect vehicle for buyers who wish to purchase a large sedan that is not a Tesla Model S.
-
- Porsche Taycan rendering via TaycanForum.com
The Polestar 2 and the Porsche Taycan. (Photo: Polestar, TaycanForum.com)
If there is anything more that experienced automakers can do, it is to produce their premium electric vehicles in large quantities. Porsche, despite being a low-volume carmaker, is adopting this strategy, with the Taycan’s initial 20,000 a year output being changed to 40,000 per year. Volvo is planning to produce a decent number of Polestar 2 every year as well, with the company planning on an output “north of” 50,000 units per year. This is something highlighted by Elon Musk in a tweet earlier this year, when he noted that Tesla’s competition is “not the small trickle of non-Tesla electric cars being produced, but rather the enormous flood of gasoline cars pouring out of the world’s factories every day.”
Elon Musk will be the first person to remind anyone that Tesla’s primary goal has always been to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport. Considering the influx of electric vehicles from veteran carmakers, as well as seemingly solid entries from younger companies like Rivian, it appears that finally, after years of swimming against the current, the auto industry is finally getting on board with Tesla’s mission. For Elon Musk, at least, it appears that his Master Plan, which outlines his vision for sustainable transportation, is coming together.
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.
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.
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.
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.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
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.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
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.
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.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
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.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
