Tesla’s Robotaxi event came and went last night, and we finally learned (very few) new details about the much-hyped car that CEO Elon Musk thinks will add $5 trillion to Tesla’s market capitalization.
But the main thing it left me (still) thinking is: why does this car even exist?
Tesla has been talking about robotaxis for a long time, so of course it makes sense that it would unveil a robotaxi… right?
But here’s the rub: when Tesla first started talking about robotaxis, it was in the context of the Model 3 and other vehicles that the company already makes.
As far back as 2016, Tesla was talking about “Tesla Network,” a proposed system that would allow Tesla owners to send out their cars to work as taxis once the company had solved full self-driving.
I mentioned all of this in my Tesla Model 3 review back in 2018, showing some of the details that indicated that Tesla was getting ready for this robotaxi future – such as the use of a phone as a key and an interior camera to keep tabs on occupants.
Musk even went so far as to say that Tesla will stop selling cars once it solves autonomy. The idea is that those cars would be more profitable to keep around as robotaxis, that each would be worth $100k-$200k due to this function and that they should be considered “appreciating assets” as a result. (Though Musk did say last night that Tesla will sell Robotaxis for $30k, which runs counter to this past assertion of his).
So there is a long history of Tesla referring to its vehicles as potential future robotaxis, rather than talking about an individual robotaxi product. And it even said the same last night, as there were 20 Robotaxis and 30 other Tesla vehicles shuttling people around at the event. Musk reiterated last night that all cars Tesla makes would be capable of full autonomy, and even said that existing cars would be driving all by themselves prior to when he said the Robotaxi will hit the road in 2026-2027 (though he stumbled and said “let’s not get nuanced here” when the crowd asked whether this would apply to HW3 cars, which Tesla previously promised full autonomy for).
But hey, maybe it makes sense to release an individual Robotaxi product that would be fully focused on this function and no other, in order to save cost and reduce complexity.
Also, I have to say, it looked great out there. Compared to the previous renderings/models/spy shot we’ve seen, I thought the final product looked fantastic. If it were just a normal EV, with that design, a small sporty low 2-seater for about that price, I’m sold.
A smaller car, without many of the creature comforts that might be desired by a driver, with more simplicity for less maintenance and easier cleaning, can certainly help to get costs down. And that’s great and needed. A $30k vehicle will be available to more people than a $42k Model 3, the next-cheapest car Tesla currently sells.
But…. why not a $25k Model 2 then?
Tesla already had the answer to this question: the cancelled Model 2
So if Tesla wants to have a cheaper, simpler car that is capable of robo-driving tasks, and if it’s still clear that all of its vehicles will gain this capability, why doesn’t it just make the cheaper, simpler car that it’s been talking about for years: the Model 2.
Not much was known about the Model 2, except that it would be a cheaper, smaller EV, starting at $25,000 – long thought to be the appropriate entry-level for consumer vehicles (the cheapest gas cars in America are around $17k – and a $25k EV would cost about the same after the $7,500 federal tax credit).
Instead, Musk directed the company to pivot to Robotaxi, and rhetorically, he has been talking a lot more about robotaxis, artificial general intelligence robots, and various other pie-in-the-sky promises, in keeping with the tech buzzword du jour..
But while there’s a lot of demand in the stock market for CEOs who incessantly talk about AI, there’s also a lot of demand in the car market for a cheap electric vehicle. And Tesla is a car company, after all, not a stock company (isn’t it?).
And what we do know from the event is that Tesla thinks they can make a self-driving electric vehicle for under $30k, and that that vehicle would be “over-specced” for what it is, using a more powerful AI computer than necessary. And they think they can do this within the next 2 years or so.
If these two things are possible, I believe that those efforts would be better channeled towards the Model 2, rather than the Robotaxi.
While Musk stated in the event that existing vehicles would be capable of full autonomy before the Robotaxi starts shipping, I don’t think anyone believes this. After a decade of FSD coming “at the end of next year,” the boy has thoroughly cried wolf and this timeline does not seem realistic.
Further, Musk said that it would come to California and Texas first, pending regulatory approval. Even if Tesla does swiftly get regulatory approval in those states, that still limits the addressable market while it works to scale up and get approved in other regions. The process of homologating a Model 2 would go much more smoothly than that, and could be sold globally much faster.
And while Tesla’s car timelines also tend to slip by several years, with how long we’ve been talking about a “cheaper Tesla car” and its relative similarity to existing vehicles (as opposed to the vast differences involved in making a Cybertruck or Roadster), I also think the Model 2 could have been manufactured before Robotaxi could (especially when taking into account regulatory timelines).
If that’s the case, then wouldn’t it be better for Tesla to make this car that I believe would be ready before Robotaxi will, that will fulfill a need for a lot of buyers right now (especially in a circumstance where affordable Chinese EVs are popular enough to force protectionist trade measures), that would have global appeal, and that will have all the capabilities of a Robotaxi once (or if) FSD finally ever gets solved?
Maybe it’s about cost-cutting… or maybe it’s about the stock
Now, perhaps part of the reason for Model 2’s cancellation is because Tesla did not see enough cost-cutting possible to build an EV for $25k, or thought the level of cutting would be too severe to sell desirable consumer vehicles at that price. With a Robotaxi, perhaps customers would accept a more bare bones experience than in a Model 2 that they own as a personal vehicle, and maybe that’s the only way that Tesla can get the price down.
And there’s something to be said for a vehicle that’s fully autonomous-focused, with things like inductive charging and being designed for robo-vacuums to clean the car without human intervention (both were briefly glossed over in last night’s presentation).
But there’s definitely demand for a cheaper, human-driven EV, and I think Tesla got the order wrong on this one – it would be better to sell a bunch of Model 2s earlier than a bunch of Robotaxis later, since I don’t think full level 5 FSD, along with regulatory approval, is coming within the next year or two. And if you have to choose whether to have hardware or software ready first, you definitely want to choose software – because hardware costs a heck of a lot to build.
Or… maybe all this AI talk is more about the stockthan it is about actual products, as alluded to above. This has been a common theory among Tesla haters for some time, but was never all that realistic because Tesla did and does sell a lot of cars, and a whole ecosystem around them of energy products like Powerwall and Superchargers, which work well and make a lot of revenue, with pretty good margins.
But if it is about that, it seems that Elon has run out of rope. The market, this time, doesn’t seem too convinced. Maybe instead of sky-high promises that nobody thinks will be met, and that you are burning public trust with each time you make them (or uh, maybe that’s happening for another reason)… people really do just want a cheaper car that everyone can buy.
Make it.
Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
In a joint statement, French and German economists have called on governments to adopt “a common approach” to decarbonize European trucking fleets – and they’re calling for a focus on fully electric trucks, not hydrogen.
France and Germany are the two largest economies in the EU, and they share similar challenges when it comes to freight decarbonization. The two countries also share a border, and the traffic between the two nations generates major cross-border flows that create common externalities between the two countries.
And for once, it seems like rail isn’t a viable option:
Advertisement – scroll for more content
While rail remains competitive mainly for heavy, homogeneous goods over long distances. Most freight in Europe is indeed transported over distances of less than 200 km and involves consignment weights of up to 30 tonnes (GCEE, 2024) In most such cases, transportation by rail instead of truck is not possible or not competitive. Moreover, taking into account the goods currently transported in intermodal transport units over distances of more than 300 km, the modal shift potential from road to rail would be only 6% in Germany and less than 2% in France.
That leaves trucks – and, while numerous government incentives currently exist to promote the parallel development of both hydrogen and battery electric vehicle infrastructures, the study is clear in picking a winner.
“Policies should focus on battery-electric trucks (BET) as these represent the most mature and market-ready technology for road freight transport,” reads the the FGCEE statement. “Hence, to ramp-up usage of BET public funding should be used to accelerate the roll-out of fast-charging networks along major corridors and in private depots.”
The appeal was signed by the co-chair of the advisory body on the German side is the chairwoman of the German Council of Economic Experts, Monika Schnitzer. Camille Landais co-chairs the French side. On the German side, the appeal was signed by four of the five experts; Nuremberg-based energy economist Veronika Grimm (who also sits on the National Hydrogen Council, which is committed to promoting H2 trucks and filling stations) did not sign.
With companies like Volvo and Renault and now Mercedes racking up millions of miles on their respective battery electric semi truck fleets, it’s no longer even close. EV is the way.
On today’s tariff-tastic episode of Quick Charge, we’ve got tariffs! Big ones, small ones, crazy ones, and fake ones – but whether or not you agree with the Trump tariffs coming into effect tomorrow, one thing is absolutely certain: they are going to change the price you pay for your next car … and that price won’t be going down!
Everyone’s got questions about what these tariffs are going to mean for their next car buying experience, but this is a bigger question, since nearly every industry in the US uses cars and trucks to move their people and products – and when their costs go up, so do yours.
New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Got news? Let us know! Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
GE Vernova has produced over half the turbines needed for SunZia Wind, which will be the largest wind farm in the Western Hemisphere when it comes online in 2026.
GE Vernova has manufactured enough turbines at its Pensacola, Florida, factory to supply over 1.2 gigawatts (GW) of the turbines needed for the $5 billion, 2.4 GW SunZia Wind, a project milestone. The wind farm will be sited in Lincoln, Torrance, and San Miguel counties in New Mexico.
At a ribbon-cutting event for Pensacola’s new customer experience center, GE Vernova CEO Scott Strazik noted that since 2023, the company has invested around $70 million in the Pensacola factory.
The Pensacola investments are part of the announcement GE Vernova made in January that it will invest nearly $600 million in its US factories and facilities over the next two years to help meet the surging electricity demands globally. GE Vernova says it’s expecting its investments to create more than 1,500 new US jobs.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Vic Abate, CEO of GE Vernova Wind, said, “Our dedicated employees in Pensacola are working to address increasing energy demands for the US. The workhorse turbines manufactured at this world-class factory are engineered for reliability and scalability, ensuring our customers can meet growing energy demand.”
SunZia Wind and Transmission will create US history’s largest clean energy infrastructure project.
If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.