News
Why Tesla’s lead acid 12V battery needs to be lithium-ion based
It’s a prominent issue surrounding the electric vehicle market that the old-school lead acid battery just isn’t appropriate for new technology vehicles. Many users of electric vehicles, especially Tesla owners, have cited concerns with the poor performance of their 12V or low-voltage battery, oftentimes requiring annual replacement.
In contrast, a lead acid battery in a traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle generally has a 4 year life-cycle, but why?
RELATED: Tesla Model S 12V Lithium-Ion battery replacement (up to 70% lighter, 4x life)
First off, some of the most important factors to consider in longevity of a battery are “cycle-life”, environmental conditions, discharge/charge rates and calendar-life; cycle-life is how many times the battery can be drained and recharged in its life. Environmental conditions include temperature and humidity. Discharge/charge rates are the amperages going out of and into the battery respectively.
There are two major differences between the way an ICE vehicle uses its 12V battery and the way an EV uses its 12V battery:
“OFF” state discharge and cycling frequency
ICE Vehicle: generally has a very low 12V load while the vehicle is in the “off” state, often this load doesn’t exceed a few watts and doesn’t present a major challenge for the 12V battery to maintain.
Electric Vehicle: The 12V load while in the off-state is often much higher due to advanced computer systems that are running to maintain the high-voltage battery, keep vehicle “connected” (all EV have some remote access features), maintain charging and BMS (Battery Management System) communications, etc. In fact a Tesla Model S/X puts about 50 Watts of load on the 12V system when the vehicle is in the “off” state. 50 Watts equals about 4.5 Amps of discharge on the 12V battery, this drains the battery down relatively rapidly and requires the 12V battery be “recharged” by the high-voltage battery regularly, this usage pattern results in many cycles being placed on the battery.
“ON” state utilization and purpose
ICE Vehicle: The 12V battery is used to initiate the ICE (start the car) and is designed for putting out large amounts of current to accommodate this process. Once an ICE vehicle is in the “on” state, it relies on an alternator to power all of the 12V sub-systems and also maintain the voltage of the 12V battery.
Electric Vehicle: The 12V is subjected to (practically) no additional load while the vehicle is being turned “on”, and although most vehicles are designed with DC/DC converters (which act as alternators) it is often an engineering design choice to reduce load on the DC/DC converter by minimizing the frequency with which it is utilized. This also extends the driving range of the vehicle because none of the precious high-voltage battery capacity is being shunted to non-driving tasks. Due to this usage profile the 12V battery is subjected to relatively low discharge and recharge currents.
When you combine the high number of cycles and the low current requirements of the electric vehicle 12V battery system you arrive at a completely different battery need than that of an ICE vehicle. Lead Acid batteries are very good at high discharge and low cycle count life-styles, this is their bread and butter and this is where they last a long time and provide the most bang for the buck (cheap cost and decent product life-cycle), but they aren’t lasting in electric vehicles.
The electric vehicle 12V battery system is one that is best suited by a battery capable of tremendous cycle-life as the main design goal. The battery chemistry that suits this usage scenario best? Lithium! Lithium battery technology is specifically very good at being cycled many times and continuing to provide minimal capacity loss and degradation. This, along with reduced weight, is why these batteries are used for the high-voltage battery packs, cell-phones, laptops, medical equipment and cars where batteries are being cycled frequently and longevity is important.
Editor’s note: This post was submitted into our network by Tesla Model S owner Sean Scherer. Having suffered an unfortunate incident in his Model S that left him stranded because of a faulty 12V battery, Sherer began on a mission to create a lithium-ion based 12V battery solution that was not only more reliable than the traditional lead acid battery, but better suited for the demands of a Tesla Model S, Model X, and electric vehicles in general. He began BattMobile Batteries, who have made it their mission to improve adoption of electric vehicles by solving some of the small details that has been missed by EV manufacturers.
We’ve also included a video tutorial on how to replace the Model S 12V battery.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
