News
Tesla shuts down battery swap program in favor of Superchargers, for now
Tesla’s battery swap station near the Harris Ranch Supercharger station in Coalinga, CA seems to have been shut down, at least for now. What started out as a company vision to recharge Tesla vehicles in the same amount of time, if not quicker, as refueling a gas vehicle, turned into a pilot program that saw little to no fanfare.
Now, three years after Tesla first demonstrated the ability to quickly swap out the floor-mounted battery on a Model S and replace it with a fully charged battery pack, the company has seemingly closed the pilot program in favor of expanding its global network of Superchargers.
The news comes from a Tesla owner who had been following the development of the battery swap station off Interstate 5 (I-5) since its first debut. TeslaOwner accounts on their blog the experience with using Tesla’s battery swap program.
![Battery Swap station at Harris Ranch [Credit: TeslaOwner]](http://www.teslarati.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/141222enteringswap.jpg)
Battery Swap station at Harris Ranch [Credit: TeslaOwner]
TeslaOwner described the battery swap process as being a mix of machine and human. Any automation that occurred during the exchange was augmented by humans. Swap time was, on average, seven minutes. There was some trepidation that, upon returning the battery, a driver would receive a different battery with more accumulated mileage on it. Onboard technology did not recognize the swap and assumed that the original trip totals were continuing.
“Presently the Battery Swap Program is not accepting any new requests for appointments.”
Since experiencing the battery swap last July, TeslaOwner tells us that the same station has remained relatively quiet and “looked quite closed” each time they’ve driven by the station which appeared to have no activity.
This prompted them to inquire with Tesla about scheduling an appointment for another battery swap. According to TeslaOwner, they received a response from the Service Manager for the battery swap station, indicating that Tesla is no longer taking requests for appointments. “Presently the Battery Swap Program is not accepting any new requests for appointments.”
The viability of battery swaps moving forward
The Tesla proprietary charging station service was projected to be able to support both battery pack swaps as well as fast recharging of the Tesla Model S and Model X electric vehicle battery packs. By December 2014, 18 months after the original announcement, no battery swapping stations had yet opened to the public. Then a single battery-swap station was opened in California as a pilot project, where only invited Model S owners could do battery swaps by appointment, to assess technical and economic aspects of the service. Demand for the priced service would be used to determine whether the company would fully commercialize battery swapping stations more generally.
Photos captured of the Tesla battery swap station at Harris Ranch from December, 2014
By June 2015, the company had indicated that the battery swapping capability was no longer a significant part of Tesla’s plans for on-road energy replacement for their vehicles. Tesla’s standardization of car and the swapping stations alongside battery and battery fasteners prohibited other EV car owners from utilizing the battery swap station. For battery swapping to grow, the following conditions might need to be considered:
- Find strategic locations for battery swapping;
- Use alternative energy onsite to recharge batteries;
- Draw upon grid electricity when it is off-peak, cheapest, or when the more environmental energy generation is available;
- Assure customers that swapped batteries have comparable life expectancy in relation to the original;
- Incorporate fleet vehicles to reduce battery swapping costs overall.
The Tesla battery swap program doesn’t receive much press these days, given the news about the impending SolarCity merger and glass roof tiles, among the other constant Tesla technological innovations. Work on accelerating the rollout of Supercharger stations ahead of the Model 3 coming to market next year seems most critical. Moreover, regular Tesla owners at this moment in time don’t really seem to find the battery swap option as attractive as the Supercharger.
Of course, speculation continues to swirl. Tesla recently hired Audi’s North America commercial account manager to lead a new B2B push for Tesla in “fleet management, rental, government/public sectors & corporate enterprises.” Large commercial fleets of Tesla vehicles could change many aspects of the way that Tesla provides services, including a revisit to the battery swap with special, private fleet stations.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Elon Musk
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
The real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.
Recent commentary on social media has highlighted what could very well prove to be The Boring Company’s real disruption.
The analysis was shared by tech watcher Aakash Gupta on social media platform X, where he argued that the real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.
According to Gupta’s breakdown, Nashville’s 2018 light rail proposal was priced at roughly $200 million per mile. New York’s East Side Access project reportedly cost about $3.5 billion per mile, while Los Angeles Metro expansion projects have approached $1 billion per mile.
By comparison, The Boring Company has stated it can construct 13 miles of twin tunnels in the Music City Loop for between $240 million and $300 million total. That implies a cost near $25 million per mile, or roughly a 95% reduction from industry averages cited in the post.
Several technical departures from conventional tunneling allow the Boring Company to lower its costs, from its smaller 12-foot diameter tunnels to its fully electric Prufrock machines that are designed to mine continuously with no personnel inside the tunnel and their capability to “porpoise” for easy launch and retrieval.
Tesla and Space CEO Elon Musk responded to the post on X, stating simply that “Tunnels are so underrated.”
The Boring Company has seen some momentum as of late, with the company recently signing a construction contract in Dubai and the Universal Orlando Loop progressing. Recent reports have also pointed to tunnels potentially being constructed to solve traffic congestion issues near the Giga Nevada area.
While The Boring Company’s tunnels have so far been used for Loop systems publicly for now, Elon Musk recently noted that the tunneling startup’s underground passages would not be limited only to ride-hailing vehicles.
In a reply to a post on X which discussed the specifications of the Music City Loop, Musk clarified that “any fully autonomous electric cars can use the tunnels.” This suggests that vehicles potentially running systems like FSD Supervised, even if they are not Teslas, could be used in systems like the Music City Loop in the future.




