News
Tesla Semi, all-electric trucks get scathing criticism from auto tech expert
The Tesla Semi might be receiving a lot of interest from companies and the electric vehicle community as a whole, but an automotive technology expert from Germany is not that impressed. In a statement, Chair of Automotive Engineering at the Technical University of Munich Markus Lienkamp criticized all-electric trucks like the Tesla Semi, stating that such vehicles are pretty much pointless in the economic and ecological sense.
“The battery for a Tesla Semi must have a capacity of about 1000 kWh, per 100 kilometers about 130 kilowatt-hours. This is technically not easily feasible and it’s also pointless both economically and ecologically,” he said.
Lienkamp’s scathing criticism comes on the heels of a study from Transport and Environment, a consortium of European environmental organizations that conducted a study comparing the energy consumption and environmental costs of conventional diesel trucks and their all-electric counterparts. Two diesel trucks were used for the study: one with an average consumption of 33 liters per 100 kilometers (around 7 mpg) and a more aerodynamic truck with a consumption of 22 liters per 100 km (10.69 mpg).
The results of Transport and Environment’s study found that diesel trucks consume between 2.2-3.3 kilowatt-hours per kilometer, far above the consumption of an average electric truck, which requires 1.44 kWh per km. Electric vehicles that are designed from the ground up for maximum efficiency such as the Tesla Semi require just 1.15 kWh per km. The study’s authors concluded that overall, using all-electric trucks reduces energy consumption by a factor of 1.5-2.9.
All-electric trucks surpass diesel trucks in terms of efficiency as well. The study revealed that a diesel truck engine has an efficiency of 20-45% on long-haul routes and a measly 10% in city traffic. In comparison, electric trucks have a 90% efficiency for long routes and 75% in urban traffic. Lienkamp is not convinced, arguing that the source of the electricity used by vehicles like the Tesla Semi affects efficiency.
“The efficiency of the electricity mix used for the truck battery is important. If the energy comes from a gas-fired power plant, for example, the overall efficiency quickly drops back to 40%. If, on the other hand, 80% to 90% of the electricity comes from renewable sources, as planned in the EU for 2040, long-distance trucks would be attractive from an ecological point of view,” he said.
The authors of the study maintained that electric trucks are cheaper to repair and maintain simply because they have fewer moving parts. Even brakes will rarely need replacing, thanks to systems like regenerative braking. While these are compelling advantages, Lienkamp stated that “for distances of 500 kilometers and beyond, battery-powered trucks simply won’t make any economic sense until 2030,” adding “with electric vehicles, the cost of trying to reduce CO2 levels is simply too high.”
It should be noted that the Tesla Semi, at least in its upcoming iteration, is not designed to enter the long-haul market that is dominated by trucks that can go over 1,000 miles in one full tank. Rather, the Tesla Semi is designed to compete in short-range routes that range from 300-500 miles. From this perspective, it becomes difficult to argue against the Tesla Semi.
The Tesla Semi is a Class 8 truck, and with its four Model 3-derived electric motors, the all-electric long-hauler is capable of sprinting from 0-60 mph in just 5 seconds without a trailer. With a full load, the Semi can reach highway speeds in 20 seconds, far quicker than conventional diesel trucks. The Tesla Semi is currently undergoing real-world tests, in preparation for its production, which is expected to start either this year or sometime in 2020.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
