News
Tesla, VW lead the charge for EV dominance as EU sets plan to end combustion engines in 2025
Europe’s current emissions standards have already proven difficult for legacy automakers as evidenced by Honda joining Tesla and Fiat Chrysler’s pool deal recently. But if the EU Commission does decide to push through with its hyper-strict recommended Euro 7 standards, traditional automakers may find it even more difficult to stay competitive in the face of EV manufacturers like Tesla or legacy OEMs who have a leg-up in electric car production and development, like Volkswagen.
All of Tesla’s vehicles are tailor-fit for the strict Euro 7 standards, thanks to its S3XY line, all of which are battery-electric. Tesla recently started exporting Giga Shanghai’s Model 3 vehicle to Europe, thereby increasing its delivery capacity. Gigafactory Berlin seems to be on schedule to start Model Y production in 2021 as well.
On the other side of the aisle, Volkswagen’s ID.3 seems to be selling well in Europe and the ID.4, a crossover, is poised for a release soon. Volkswagen is also working on the other entries of its ID line, such as the ID.5 sedan and estate, the ID.6 SUV, and the ID.7 van. Other all-electric cars from Volkswagen AG, such as the Porsche Taycan and the Audi e-tron, are also being received quite well in their respective segments.
Other traditional OEMs have announced electric vehicles for the future. For instance, Daimler’s Mercedes-Benz brand has announced the EQV, EQS, EQE, and EQA, expanding its existing EV range. Things will likely not be easy for legacy automakers that are only getting their feet wet with EVs, however, as it isn’t just emissions standards that they have to contend with when it comes to releasing new energy vehicles. With each passing year, competitors like Tesla continue to improve the technologies in its vehicles, which also raises the EV standards for traditional OEMs.
The recommendations from the panel of experts in the EU Commissions’ recent study suggests that new car sales in the region will likely be geared towards electric vehicles in the near future. Even if the recommendations end up getting watered down as they are implemented, the shift to electric cars will definitely be palpable within the coming years. And amidst these changes, companies that have already laid the groundwork for their respective electric car programs will likely come out with an advantage.
Tesla would be wise to take advantage of Europe’s apparent war against the combustion engine. With Gigafactory Berlin poised to come online next year, Tesla would have the opportunity to saturate the market with the Model Y, its highest-volume car vehicle to date. The release of the company’s yet-to-be-announced $25,000 EV would also go a long way towards accelerating the mass adoption of all-electric cars. Tesla has not hinted at a concrete release date for its $25,000 car, but with the EU Commission’s stance, it may be a good idea for the electric car maker to accelerate the upcoming vehicle’s release.
Companies like Volkswagen, for their part, would best be advised to ensure that the rollout of its all-electric cars are done with no more delays. The ID.3 experienced severe problems with its software, resulting in the all-electric car’s rollout being pushed back. Amidst Europe’s push to end the internal combustion engine, Volkswagen must ensure that the succeeding vehicles in the ID family are rolled out in a much smoother manner.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
