News
Tesla supplier Talon Metals on Manchin EV Bill, Tesla & more
Tesla supplier, Talon Metals (TLO.TO) gave Teslarati an exclusive interview and we talked about the Manchin EV Bill, Tesla and more.
I received some great feedback on one of my recent articles from Todd Malan, Chief External
Affairs Officer & Head of Climate Strategy at Talon Metals, one of Tesla’s key suppliers of nickel
and other battery minerals in the USA.
The two companies signed an offtake partnership in January of this year to supply nickel from Talon’s project in central Minnesota. Todd is based in Washington DC for Talon and therefore has a front-row seat to the wrangling among various parties regarding Senator Manchin’s new EV tax incentives in the Infrastructure Reduction Act of 2022.
As of this morning, voting was slated to begin today and the bill is expected to pass on a partisan line vote in the early morning of Monday. If the House passes it next week, it should be on President Biden’s desk by the end of the week.
Manchin’s EV tax credit proposal
Todd shared his thoughts on Manchin’s EV tax credit proposal. On one hand, it’s breathtakingly generous in that it lifts all numerical limits on EVs that are eligible for the $7500 tax credit.
Previously, 200,000 cars per year for each nameplate. On the other hand, Manchin’s proposal sets some new eligibility parameters around the cost of the EV, the income level of the buyer, and the source of the battery raw materials (sourced from the US or countries that have a Free Trade
Agreement with the US).
As I reported last week, some automakers are unhappy with Manchin’s strings on the EV credit, others like Tesla seem to be taking more of a “can do” approach when it comes to the mineral content provisions.
Todd also walked me through the comprehensive approach that Senator Manchin took to
supporting domestic mining and mineral processing across the full bill.
So, Manchin isn’t just telling automakers to buy from domestic sources of minerals and metals from domestic sources and leaving it to them. He also added significant new government support to help the supply chain get up and running on an urgent basis.
The fact that he got commitments from Democratic leaders in Congress and President Biden to reform the permitting process in the US in separate legislation (not just for mines but for solar, wind and hydrogen too) is another signal of Manchin’s holistic approach to ramping up the full battery supply chain in the US and also rely on allies that happen to be mineral powerhouses like Australia and Canada.
Todd had a very optimistic view that all of these provisions, including the EV credit, will help the U.S. address its dependency on China for batteries and scale up its capability in battery mineral production.
The core of his view is that it will take partnerships between miners, automakers,
regulators, recyclers, and other parts of the supply chain to meet the Manchin content
requirements.
Todd thinks Tesla and Ford stand out as companies leading the way in this new
approach to supply chain security.
Some automakers are not happy with Senator Manchin’s EV tax credit proposal
Todd read my article, Automakers are not too happy with Senator Manchin’s EV tax credit
proposal and pointed out that there was not a universal view among the automakers or the rest of the battery supply chain.
“Mazda and Rivian have been out-front in the media complaining about aspects of Senator
Manchin’s EV incentive proposal. I understand the concern that the timeline is very ambitious but on the other hand, Senator Manchin’s draft includes some of the world’s largest producers of battery materials: Canada, Chile, Australia, South Korea, etc.”
“Those countries that don’t have free trade agreements with the US, there is plenty of time (and now incentive) for them to negotiate agreements. Senator Manchin didn’t just confine the provision to the U.S., or even USMCA countries, but all countries that now or in the future have free trade agreements.”
“This is a balanced measure that will encourage domestic mining investment and development while also ensuring we can draw on our allies for secure supplies. It may not be the cheapest option for the automakers, but supply from this broad base of countries can be ramped up to meet the requirements.”
Todd pointed out that other parts of the auto lobby had a more nuanced approach to
Manchin’s proposal to support EV adoption. The Zero Emissions Transportation Association (ZETA), in which Tesla is a lead member, was quick to offer support for Manchin’s EV incentives.
Joe Britton, ZETA Executive Director was quoted in a number of media articles admitting that the domestic and ally content provisions would be hard to meet but that they could be met.
“If you look at the landscape as it exists today, it’s a challenge, but it’s doable,” said Joe Britton, the head of the Zero Emission Transportation Association, which advocates for EV adoption, told Bloomberg.“We can meet these metrics.”
Britton also has been praising the Manchin bill for what it will do for EV adoption. He told
News12 Westchester that he hopes the rebate can entice more people to purchase EVs. Britton said:
“In most areas of the country, especially the Northeast, it is five to six times more expensive to drive your vehicle on gasoline than it is by electricity. So, by making these vehicles more affordable on the front end, you’re really driving down that total cost of ownership”
As with most people that are involved with Tesla as suppliers, Malan was extremely careful to not speak for Tesla or speculate on their positions. But I realized that someone glancing at the headlines without reading through the article might assume that Tesla was of the same view as the legacy auto industry.
We all know Tesla prefers to speak for itself and Elon Musk shared a thought about Senator Manchin on Twitter yesterday. Although many were wondering what his tweet meant, I think it’s pretty clear he thinks Manchin is doing something right.
Thank goodness for Senator Manchin
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 5, 2022
Partnerships across the value chain will be key
Todd pointed out to the Detroit News yesterday that it will take a range of
partnerships to meet the Manchin goals. He pointed out that Tesla and Talon have explicitly described their supply relationship as a partnership. Tesla is working with its suppliers.
Todd told me that everyone will need to work together to meet these goals.
“We need everyone working together to meet these ambitious goals in the Manchin bill.
Mining is the front end of the supply chain and it takes enormous knowhow, capital, and risk tolerance to discover, delineate, permit, construct and then safely operate a mine to supply battery minerals.”
“Processing has been the Achilles heel of the supply chain in the U.S. Luckily. Congress just provided new resources to address this issue in the bipartisan infrastructure bill. Everybody’s going to have to work together. The auto manufacturers, the miners, the people that do processing, and government at state and federal level.”
“Senator Manchin and others in Congress realize that governments are going to have to focus on improving the permitting process – not to cut corners in environmental protections but to make the process more certain, efficient, and reliable.”
“Not just for mines, processing or even EV battery factories – but also solar, wind, hydro and hydrogen projects. We can not afford a disorganized, uncoordinated, and inefficient regulatory process that causes unnecessary delays in progress. We need all these projects to come online to address the climate crisis while also ensuring we protect the environment through science-based permitting.”
Talon Metals on Senator Manchin’s proposal.
I’ve seen a lot of mixed feedback on Senator Manchin’s proposal. As noted in my earlier article, many automakers like Mazda and Rivian are lobbying hard to water it down. Not as much has been heard from the companies that source raw materials like nickel and lithium in the United States. So, I asked Todd to share his take–and that of Talon Metals.
“From the standpoint of a company that’s trying to build a responsible nickel mine in
Minnesota, we think that Senator Manchin has struck a good balance in this bill. First, it provides the most generous set of incentives for EV adoption ever enacted in law.
“It also encourages auto companies to work with domestic mines and mines in allied countries like Australia, Canada, and Chile and it provides some time for projects to ramp up. It also provides time for countries that don’t have FTAs to engage with the US and negotiate. Yes, it is a stretch goal but that seems appropriate given the climate crisis and our dependency on countries like China and Russia for battery supplies.”
“This is a carefully balanced bill that does push everyone to rise to the occasion. But that is appropriate because we want to create high-quality jobs in America as part of the energy transition and we don’t want to rely on Russia and China for the supply chain of battery minerals. It’s a matter of national security.”
How can automakers better work with their suppliers?
I asked this question because if automakers truly want to “get aggressive”; as Senator Manchin challenged them to do, then perhaps they need to take a page from Tesla and other leaders’practices.
“Having a Tesla off-take agreement in place has changed the perception of our project in the community. It’s very credentializing and our employees are proud of the partnership. People clearly understand that our proposed mine has a purpose: to supply nickel for the EV battery supply chain and contribute to the energy transition. This has helped shape how people perceive the project. It has a purpose and an important one.”
“Many of the large automakers are helping supply partners apply for some of the significant new funding opportunities being made available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. The Department of Energy is expected to give out over $1.8 billion in funding from that legislation this fall. This is another example of how the end-users can help the front end of the supply chain for battery materials.”
Todd commented that many auto companies are having a tough time adjusting to the new
reality of scarce commodities.
“They used to only focus on price and quality with a yearly focus on driving down the price. It’s a whole new game now, as they learned in the chip crisis. Some are still adjusting their mindset to scarcity and competition for supply.”
“It requires a change in mindset. No longer can the big auto company demand ever-lower price year over year. Smart end users have changed their mindset to partnership. That means understanding their partners’ issues, helping them to maximize productivity, access newtechnology, ramp up production, improve quality, and provide support during the permittingprocess or help obtain government funding.”
“This is the future, true partnership in the supply chain, from mine to cathode to recycling. That is how we meet Senator Manchin’s challenge and strengthen the supply chain for battery production.”
Todd didn’t come out and say it directly, but it came through in the way he talked about the Tesla. Yet again, Tesla is leading the industry in terms of securing supply from the right countries to feed its factories but also leading practices in working in partnership with key suppliers.
Knowing that I love cool rocks, Todd invited me up to Minnesota to check out what Talon is doing at Tamarack and show me some beautiful nickel samples. Todd also told me about Minnesota’s famous burger concoction, The Juicy Lucy.
Disclaimer: Johnna is long Tesla.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @JohnnaCrider1
News
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 began rolling out to some owners earlier this week, and there are some notable improvements that came with this update.
There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.
Overall operation saw a handful of slight improvements, especially with parking performance, which has been the most notable difference with the arrival of FSD v14.3. However, there are still some very notable shortcomings, most notably with region-specific signage and navigation.
Tesla Assisted Smart Summon (ASS) improvements
There are noticeable improvements to ASS operation, which has definitely been inconsistent in terms of performance. Tesla wrote in the release notes for v14.3.2:
“Unified the model between Actually Smart Summon, FSD, and Robotaxi for more capable and reliable behavior.”
As recently as this month, I used Summon with no success. It had pulled around the parking lot I was in incorrectly, leaving the range at which Summon can be operated and losing a signal while moving in the middle of the lot.
This caused me to sprint across the lot to retrieve the vehicle:
It was pouring when I left the gym so I tried to Summon my Model Y
It turned the opposite way and drove out of range, stopping here and forcing me to walk even further across the lot in the rain for it 🤣
One day pic.twitter.com/iD10c8sriB
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 5, 2026
Unfortunately, Summon was not dependable or accurate enough to use regularly. It appears Tesla might have bridged the gap needed to make it an effective feature, as two tests in parking lots proved that Summon was more responsive and faster to navigate to the location chosen.
It also did so without hesitation, confidently, and at a comfortable speed. I was able to test it twice at different distances:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 ASS testing part 1
This was a significant improvement than recent tries using ASS. The parking lot was pretty empty but getting it to come to my location in one singular motion and maneuver was encouraging. https://t.co/vF7TS48GGV pic.twitter.com/sYt8tyHgNn
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 ASS testing part 2 https://t.co/lxfWfnLUxf pic.twitter.com/2R0r3ohI3M
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
I plan to test this more thoroughly and regularly through the next few weeks, and I avoided using it in a congested parking lot initially because I have not had overwhelming success with Summon in the past. I wanted to set a low baseline for it to see if it could simply pull up to the place I pinned in the Tesla app.
It was two for two, which is a big improvement because I don’t think I ever had successful Summon attempts back-to-back. It just seems more confident than ever before.
New Disengagement Categories
This is a really good idea from Tesla, but there are some issues with it. The categories you can select are Critical, Comfort, Preference, and Other.
I think the reasons why people choose to take over would be a better way to prompt drivers, like, “Traveling Too Fast,” “Incorrect Maneuver,” “Navigation Error,” would be more beneficial.
I say this because it seems that how we each categorize things might be different. For example, I shared a video of an intervention because the car had navigated to an exit to a parking lot and put its left blinker on, despite left turns not being allowed there.
I disengaged and chose Critical as the reason; it’s not a comfort issue, it’s not a preference, it’s quite literally an illegal turn, and it’s also dangerous because it cuts across several lanes of traffic and is 180 degrees.
I chose to label this Navigation error as “Critical” while testing FSD v14.3.2
Here’s why:
✅ This intervention wasn’t “preference,” as the maneuver FSD routed was illegal
✅ If a police officer saw this maneuver, it would result in a ticket https://t.co/znhHb4haAo pic.twitter.com/bZOiLwWmQa— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Some said I should not have labeled this as Critical, but that’s the description I best characterized the disengagement as.
Categorizing interventions is a good thing, but it’s kind of hard to determine how to label them correctly.
Inconsistency with Regional Traffic Patterns
Tesla Full Self-Driving is pretty inconsistent with how it handles regional or local traffic patterns and road rules. The most frequent example I like to use is that of the “Except Right Turn” stop sign, which has become a notorious sighting on our social media platforms.
In the initial rollout of v14.3, my Model Y successfully navigated through one of these stop signs with no issues. However, testing at two of these stop signs yesterday proved it is still not sure how to read signs and navigate through them properly.
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 attempts the “Except Right Turn” stop sign: https://t.co/W5MjAybaNK pic.twitter.com/P6oeUsk4PN
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Off camera, I approached another one of these signs and felt the car coming to a stop, so I nudged it forward with the accelerator pedal pressed.
This helped the car go through the sign without stopping, but I could feel the bucking of the vehicle as the car really wanted to stop.
Musk said on the earnings call earlier this week that unsupervised FSD would probably be available in some regions before others, including a state-to-state basis in the U.S.
“It’s difficult to release this like to everyone everywhere all at once because we do want to make sure that they’re not unique situations in a city that particularly complex intersection or — actually, they tend to be places where people get into accidents a lot because they’re just — perhaps there’s — and like I said, an unsafe intersection or bad road markings or a lot of weather challenges. So I think we would release unsupervised gradually to the customer fleet as we feel like a particular geography is confirmed to be safe.”
This could be one of those examples that Tesla just has to figure out.
Highway Operation
Full Self-Driving is already pretty good at routine roadway navigation, so I don’t have too much to report here.
However, I was happy with FSD’s decision-making at several points, including its choice not to pass a slightly slower car and remain in the right lane as we approached the off-ramp:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 highway operation: generally happy with the performance here, especially behavior near the exit
Love that the car got over in the right lane after its final pass, and stayed there as the off ramp was approaching https://t.co/qVRVhg6XGR pic.twitter.com/1ELwHf2XKS
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Better Maneuvering at Stop Signs
Many FSD users report some strange operations at stop signs, especially four-way intersections where there is a stop sign and a line on the road, and they’re not even with one another.
I experienced this quite frequently and found that FSD would actually double stop: once at the stop sign and again at the line.
This created some interesting scenarios for me and I had many cars honk at me when the second stop would happen. Other vehicles that had waved me on to proceed through the intersection would become frustrated at the second stop.
FSD seems to have worked through this particular maneuver:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 with a singular stop at the correct spot
No double stopping anymore in my experience https://t.co/Wd0TaNjc1R pic.twitter.com/CdQPvJHaAM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
FSD should know to go to the more appropriate location (whichever provides better visibility), and proceed when it is the car’s turn to move. The double stop really ruined the flow of traffic at times and generally caused some frustration from other drivers.
News
Tesla plans to resolve its angriest bunch of owners: here’s how
Since the rollout of the AI4 chip in Tesla vehicles, owners with the last generation self-driving chip, known as Hardware 3, have been persistent in their quest for a solution to their issue: they were told their cars were capable of unsupervised Full Self-Driving. It turns out the cars are not.
Tesla has a plan to make Hardware 3 owners whole after CEO Elon Musk admitted that those with that self-driving chip in their cars will not have access to unsupervised Full Self-Driving.
The company’s strategy is so crazy that it is sort of hard to believe.
Since the rollout of the AI4 chip in Tesla vehicles, owners with the last generation self-driving chip, known as Hardware 3, have been persistent in their quest for a solution to their issue: they were told their cars were capable of unsupervised Full Self-Driving. It turns out the cars are not.
Tesla owners with HW3 finally get their answer: https://t.co/CSZTKKkWXx
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 22, 2026
During the Tesla Q1 earnings call on Wednesday, Musk finally clarified what the company’s plans are for Hardware 3 owners, what they will be offered, and what Tesla will have to do internally to prepare for it.
The answer was somewhat mind-boggling.
Musk said:
“Unfortunately, Hardware 3 — I wish it were otherwise, but Hardware 3 simply does not have the capability to achieve unsupervised FSD. We did think at one point it would have that, but relative to Hardware 4, it has only 1/8 of the memory bandwidth of Hardware 4. And memory bandwidth is one of the key elements needed for unsupervised FSD.”
He continued, stating that HW3 owners would have the opportunity to trade their cars in at a discounted rate in order to get the AI4 chip:
“So for customers that have bought FSD, what we’re offering is essentially a trade-in — like a discounted trade-in for cars that have AI4 hardware, and we’ll also be offering the ability to upgrade the car, to replace the computer. And you also need to replace the cameras, unfortunately, to go to Hardware 4.”
Obviously, Tesla has a lot of people to work with and make this whole thing right. Musk was adamant that HW3 would be capable of FSD, and now that the company has finally admitted that it is not, there are some things that could come of this.
There has been open talk about some sort of class action lawsuit against Tesla. The promises that Tesla made previously could be considered a breach of contract or even false advertising, and that’s according to Grok, Musk’s own AI program.
Musk went on to say that Tesla would likely have to establish new microfactories to effectively and efficiently replace HW3 computers and cameras:
…So to do this efficiently, we’re going to have to set up, like kind of micro factories or small factories in major metropolitan areas in order to do it efficiently. Because if it’s done just at the service center, it is extremely slow to do so and inefficient. So we basically need like many production lines to make the change.”
This is going to be an extremely costly process, especially if Tesla has to buy real estate, properties, and equipment to complete this work. Additionally, there was no wording on pricing, but Musk never said it would be free. It will likely come with some kind of price tag, and HW3 owners, after being left hanging for so long, will have something to say about that.
Elon Musk
SpaceX just got pulled into the biggest Weapons Program in U.S. history
SpaceX joins the Golden Dome software group, deepening its role in America’s most expensive defense program.
SpaceX has joined a nine-company group developing the core operating software for the Golden Dome, America’s next-generation missile defense system. According to a Bloomberg report, SpaceX is focused on integrating satellite communications for military operations and is working alongside eight other defense and artificial intelligence companies, including Anduril Industries, Palantir Technologies, and Aalyria Technologies, to build software connecting missile defense capabilities.
The Golden Dome concept dates back to President Trump’s 2024 campaign, and on January 27, 2025, he signed an executive order directing the U.S. Armed Forces to construct the system before the end of his term. The system is planned to employ a constellation of thousands of satellites equipped with interceptors, with data centers in space providing automated control through an AI network.
FCC accepts SpaceX filing for 1 million orbital data center plan
Space Force Gen. Michael Guetlein, director of the Golden Dome initiative, has described the software layer as a “glue layer” that would enable officers to manage and control radars, sensors, and missile batteries across services. The consortium is aiming to test the platform this summer.
Trump selected a design in May 2025 with a $175 billion price tag, expected to be operational by the end of his term in 2029, though the Congressional Budget Office projected the cost could reach $831 billion over two decades.
The Golden Dome role is only the latest in a string of military wins for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported, the U.S. Space Force awarded SpaceX a $178.5 million task order on April 1, 2026 to launch missile tracking satellites for the Space Development Agency, covering two Falcon 9 launches beginning in Q3 2027. That came on top of more than $22 billion in government contracts held by SpaceX as of 2024, per CEO Gwynne Shotwell, spanning NASA resupply missions, classified intelligence satellites through its Starshield program, and military broadband.
The accumulation of defense contracts, now including a seat at the table on the most expensive weapons program in U.S. history, positions SpaceX as the dominant infrastructure provider for American national security in space. With a SpaceX IPO still on the horizon, each new contract adds weight to what is already one of the most consequential companies in aerospace history, raising real questions about how much of America’s defense architecture will depend on a single private operator before it ever trades publicly.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla plans to resolve its angriest bunch of owners: here’s how
