News
VW prepares to spend first $300M of $2B on EV charging infrastructure project
Volkswagen will designate $300 million by 2019 to establish a network of more than 450 electric vehicle charging stations in 11 U.S. major metropolitan areas and along high traffic highways. The announcement came this week through Volkswagen’s new wholly owned subsidiary called Electrify America, which will support increased use of zero emissions vehicles (ZEVs) in the U.S.
The initiative is part of the Federal Trade Commission agreement with Volkswagen to compensate for “Dieselgate,” the systematic and willful deceit of U.S. emissions regulators through special software in Volkswagen’s diesel vehicles. Electrify America is a product of Volkswagen’s 2016 court settlement with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. EPA. We recently reported that the VW emissions scandal has given life to a new generation of electric vehicle start ups like Rivian Automotive. The Illinois-based electric car company has leased land to a logistics company that’s using the space as a temporary holding area for the Dieselgate VWs. Teslarati commissioned a videographer to capture drone shots showing roughly 14,000 affected cars waiting to be disposed of as a result of the scandal.
Thousands of VW Diesels being Stored at Rivian Factory, Photo: Jim Finch for Teslarati
Electrify America will support and promote greater availability of customer-friendly infrastructure in areas with high demand for ZEVs. With hundreds of stations with non-proprietary chargers across the U.S., Electrify America‘s first National ZEV investment cycle will make it easier and faster for millions of Americans to charge their electric vehicles while also “encouraging more drivers to explore and embrace electric driving.”
Electrify America‘s first stage plans
Electrify America has released information through a press release and website that it will establish a network of 2,500+ non-proprietary electric vehicle chargers at more than 450 station sites.
- Approximately 240 charging station sites will be installed or under development outside of California by the end of the first cycle.
- These sites will be located along high-traffic corridors between metropolitan areas, including multiple cross country routes.
- They will include between four and ten 150 kW and 320 kW individual DC fast chargers at each location.
- Charging sites will be present in 39 U.S. states.
- They will be built along corridors with a high correlation with the EV Charging Corridors recently designated by the Federal government.
- Sites will be, on average, about 66 miles apart, with no more than 120 miles between stations.
Comparisons to Tesla’s Supercharger network
The extent and speed of Electrify America‘s planned installation schedule roughly parallels the early years of Tesla’s DC Supercharger network in the U.S., which began in late 2012.
The new Electrify America chargers will be non-proprietary. Tesla vehicles use a proprietary plug design, although the company sells compatible adapters. Tesla’s DC CHAdeMO adapter is limited to 50 kilowatts of power.
With proposed charging power set at 320 kilowatts, the Electrify America network would be the first high power contender, at scale, to the Tesla Supercharger network. Tesla is the only EV manufacturer right now capable of charging vehicles at up to 120 kW, which equates to about 170 miles of range in as little as 30 minutes. Tesla has built a fast DC Supercharger network that supports maximum theoretical charging rates of up to 145 kilowatts, according to the company’s website.
The Electrify America network will provide 2500+ chargers at more than 450 stations. At this writing, Tesla Superchargers are at over 2,200 charging stalls at 350 locations across the U.S.
The proximity of Electrify America‘s chargers along frequently traveled corridors means that many shorter range ZEVs available today will be able to use this network. Most Tesla sites are located along highways away from large metropolitan areas and are primarily intended for use by travelers on long-distance trips.
It seems likely that the Electrify America chargers will be located in existing public infrastructure like rest stops. Tesla has a growing network of Destination Charging Partners with dedicated Tesla Wall Connectors at their properties. The company’s website describes how these are primarily destinations where a Tesla owner would stay for several hours at a time, such as ski resorts, restaurants, hotels and others. They are safe, well-lit, and infuse a feeling of security when Tesla owners need to recharge their vehicles.
Electrify America stations will be designed to support many existing and anticipated charging technology needs, including evolving industry standards like the Combined Charging Standard (CCS) and the Open Charge Point Protocol. Last year, Tesla joined the European CharIN consortium that is leading the development of CCS.
Tesla reminds its owners that there are many factors that affect the actual charge rate, including ambient temperature, utility grid restrictions, and charging traffic. Tesla constantly incorporates owner feedback into its maintenance and research and development efforts, offering a distinct consumer experience for Tesla owners who use its Superchargers.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
