News
Tesla owners' winter driving insights proves EVs' are great cars for sub-zero conditions
Thanks to outdated assumptions and what appears to be an ongoing misinformation campaign against electric cars, some mainstream car buyers may assume that vehicles like the Tesla Model 3 would be grossly ineffective in sub-zero temperatures. Yet despite this persistent stereotype, actual experiences from electric car owners have recently proven these notions wrong once again.
Tesla owner and president-founder of the Saskatchewan Electric Vehicle Association Matthew Pointer recently shared some of his winter driving experiences with CBC News. A resident of Saskatchewan, Canada, Pointer is no stranger to cold weather driving. His home, after all, experiences sub-zero temperatures on a regular basis, at times requiring him to drive in -45 C (-49 F) weather. If the stereotype holds true, then Pointer’s Tesla should be near-useless in certain parts of the year. But this has not been the case.
On the contrary, Pointer stated that his Tesla actually works better than his previous internal combustion cars in the cold. While he stated that his electric vehicle does experience some range loss during winters, the car works perfectly in extreme weather. Just this Thursday, for example, Pointer noted that he passed by several dozen ICE owners struggling to start their vehicles on his way to work. His Tesla, in comparison, handled the cold without any issues, even with its reduced range.
“I passed several dozen people that couldn’t even get their car started in front of their house this morning, as I kind of ripped by them in my electric vehicle that apparently doesn’t work in those sort of temperatures. I wake up with a ‘full tank’ every morning because I plug in at night, and I wake up, and my car’s fully charged in the morning. I’ve got more than enough range to do all the regular stuff that I need to do on a daily basis,” Pointer said.
Explaining further, the Tesla owner stated that it’s just a matter of design between EVs and internal combustion cars. Electric cars have far fewer components compared to gasoline or diesel-powered automobiles. Thus, there are far fewer things that can get compromised by the cold. Couple this with Tesla’s excellent battery management system, and the company’s vehicles become incredibly effective for winter.
“The great thing about an electric vehicle is that it has significantly less moving parts, and you’re essentially driving one massive battery that’s very good at maintaining its heat and keeping itself going. There’s no moving parts that need to go through this magical movement and means of combustion and getting things preheated all at a minus-45-degree temperature. Essentially for us to start our cars, we just touch a button, the screen pops up, and we just drive to work from there,” he explained.
In a statement to the publication, Tyler Krause, a fellow resident of Saskatchewan and a Tesla Model 3 owner, described how easy it is to live with an electric car during the coldest months of the year. “Yesterday it was -37 C (-34.6 F), and it wasn’t a problem. I went to heat it up. It took like 10 minutes and I was off. I drove by probably three or four people that were getting boosted on the side of the road and I had no issues,” he said, adding that none of the local Tesla Owners Club members have reported any issues during winter.
Perhaps one thing that usually gets forgotten by electric vehicle critics is the fact that all cars, even those powered with the internal combustion engine, lose range during the coldest months of the year. With this in mind, it all comes down to convenience, and based on the accounts of actual Tesla owners from one of the colder places in North America; EVs have ICE beat by a wide margin. The proof lies in actual experiences from Tesla owners, as well as the company’s sales figures from cold countries such as Norway and the Netherlands, where the Model 3 has been making its presence known.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
