News
President Joe Biden’s Tesla-void EV speech gave Ford too much credit [Opinion]
Earlier today, President Joe Biden spoke at Ford Motor Company’s Dearborn plant in Dearborn, Michigan, with intentions of delivering more details regarding his plans to expand the EV sector in the United States through a more broad charging infrastructure, freely unionized manufacturing jobs, and a heavily supportive dialogue that failed to include any details on companies that are pushing electrification forward, like Tesla. In my opinion, it showed that the President doesn’t have a broad understanding of electrification. While that’s okay, his position as President of the United States requires more comprehension on subjects that involve reducing emissions and increasing the number of EVs on the road, a direct factor in the reduction of greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere.
His speech gave Ford entirely too much credit, especially as the main essence was combining EV production with unionized jobs for U.S. workers.
In the speech, President Biden commended Ford for its extensive history of automotive legacy, something that nobody can deny. Ford has a rich history when it comes to cars, and some of its vehicles are still the best and most popular on the market. Two of the four vehicles I have owned have been Fords, the most recent being a 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid. It was the best car I’ve ever had. My Dad has owned nothing but Fords for as long as I can remember.
President Biden was increasingly concerned about the number of jobs that could be offered to U.S. workers or whether American companies would have to depend on foreign countries to build and produce EVs. It simply wasn’t an option for the American economy, the President hinted. Ironically, his speech took place at a facility owned by a company that outsourced its first mass-market electric vehicle production to Mexico.
With Ford entering the EV sector with the Mustang Mach-E, it opened up a favorable introduction into the industry for the company that Henry Ford started in 1903. The vehicle is safe and was awarded an IIHS Top Safety Pick award, and has received favorable reviews from owners thus far. Despite minor issues early on related to software, the Mustang Mach-E undoubtedly has a bright future in the sector and will likely be one of the company’s most popular vehicles for the coming years. But it’s not going to throw Ford into EV superstardom, especially not with the U.S.-produced tune that Biden spoke highly of during his speech. The vehicle is actually built at the Cuautitlán Assembly Plant in Cuautitlán Izcalli, Mexico.
That’s not going to help the American economy, nor will it supply U.S. workers with union jobs that Biden talked so much about during his speech.
The issue is, Biden seemed to give Ford credit for things that they’re just not very well-versed with quite yet. President Biden mentioned during the speech that the United States was falling behind China in terms of EV tech and battery cell efficiency. “Right now, China is leading in this race. Make no bones about it. It’s a fact.” The problem is this just simply is not true.
An American company is winning this race. An American company is dominating this race. An American company is growing its employment force hand over fist on an annual basis. An American company had the most popular electric car in China last year.
It was Tesla.
The issue with this is that America is in the lead when it comes to EVs. It is in the lead when it comes to EV batteries, and employment isn’t an issue for the company that continues to dominate the electric vehicle sector as a whole. Tesla is the benchmark for all three of these subcategories: overall EV performance, EV battery tech, and employment.
Tesla’s electric vehicles are the leader of the industry. With performance and range ratings that sit well above any other vehicle on the market, there is no secret why the company continues to be held to such a high standard. Recent data compiled by the EV Sales Blog shows that Tesla was the most popular EV OEM through Q1 2021, leading the partnership between SAIC, GM, and Wuling by nearly 82,000 units. Tesla sold roughly 184,500 cars through Q1. SAIC-GM-Wuling sold 102,574.
Ford was 17th, with 17,891 units sold in Q1.
Credit: EV Sales Blog
In batteries, Tesla’s 2170 cells come from Panasonic in Nevada at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Sparks. It is currently developing the 4680 cell, which will provide more power, range and decrease production costs by a significant margin. Tesla is effectively on the verge of decreasing electric vehicle costs by a significant margin, and in a few years, it expects to build a $25,000 car that will reach price parity with gas-powered rivals. While Biden spoke highly of Ford’s Georgia-based battery production plans for the electric F-150, he didn’t mention Tesla’s production of the 2170 cells in Nevada, nor did he mention the massive project at Kato Road in Northern California, just a stone’s throw away from Tesla’s Fremont Factory. This building is where Tesla is developing the 4680 cells, and it is rumoredly a Top 10 capacity cell manufacturing facility in the world.
Tesla’s 4680 Kato Rd. facility has a top 10 capacity, and it’s not even close to finished
While Biden’s enthusiasm for electric vehicles seems to be evident, it appears that the President needs a crash course in the world of EVs. It is rather bothersome to hear our President give zero credit to the American EV powerhouse Tesla, and while I can understand that Tesla may be on the list of banned words during a speech at Ford factories, it is a scare tactic to state that it’s an absolute fact that China is kicking our butts in EV development.
Make no bones about it, President Biden. It’s a fact that Tesla is leading this race. It’s not a close one at the current time, either.
I would love to see Biden make his way to Northern California for a tour of the Fremont Factory, or even a talk with Elon Musk regarding what Tesla is doing for the planet in terms of EV production. As Tesla has taken a commanding lead in the sector, legacy automakers have been forced to oblige and adapt to the changing industry. It is no coincidence that when these companies talk about who they are gunning for, Tesla is atop the list.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
