Connect with us

Published

on

If you ask the average American which country is doing the most to improve e-bike battery safety, most people probably wouldn’t guess China. But that’s exactly where the world’s strongest, most comprehensive lithium-ion safety rules are coming from – and the latest round just went into effect today.

Beginning December 1, China has officially banned the sale of all e-bikes built to the older national standard, replacing them with a new, far stricter rule set known as GB 17761-2024. Under the announcement from the State Administration for Market Regulation, any e-bike sold in China from today forward must carry a valid CCC certification under this brand-new standard. Older certificates are now invalid, and retailers caught selling non-compliant bikes face enforcement from local regulators.

The new rules go far beyond what most countries require. They tighten fire-resistance requirements, restrict the amount of plastic allowed on an e-bike, cap total vehicle weight, and mandate improved electrical safety. The regulations also work hand-in-hand with a second standard, the already-implemented GB 43854-2024, which sets some of the toughest lithium-ion battery testing requirements in the world, including mandatory over-charge protection, thermal abuse tests, puncture tests, and a ban on repurposed or second-hand cells, a major cause of past fires.

Balancing safety and convenience for existing owners, Chinese regulators also built in consumer protections. Bikes that were already purchased and registered under the old rules won’t be forced off the road. And companies are required to support repairs and spare parts for at least the next five years. But unregistered “old-standard” bikes must have been formally plated already, or they’ll no longer be legal to operate.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

For a country often stereotyped as producing unsafe batteries, the reality is almost the opposite. China is now setting the global pace on e-bike safety – aggressively tightening standards, sharply reducing fire risks, and pushing manufacturers to meet levels of testing that most of Europe and the US still haven’t matched.

via: ITHOME

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla Model 3/Y with Chinese LG batteries showing ‘catastrophic’ failure rates, repair shop warns

Published

on

By

Tesla Model 3/Y with Chinese LG batteries showing ‘catastrophic’ failure rates, repair shop warns

A prominent European EV repair specialist is sounding the alarm on Tesla Model 3 and Model Y vehicles equipped with LG battery cells manufactured in China, claiming they are seeing “catastrophic” failure rates and significantly shorter lifespans compared to Panasonic packs.

For years, the narrative around Tesla’s move to Chinese battery suppliers has been generally positive, with the LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate) packs from CATL proving to be extremely durable.

However, Tesla also sources Nickel Manganese Cobalt (NMC) cells from LG Energy Solution’s Nanjing facility for its Long Range and Performance models in Europe and parts of Asia.

Now, EV Clinic, a Croatia-based independent research and repair facility known for diving deep into battery diagnostics, has issued a severe warning regarding these specific LG NCM811 packs.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

According to the firm, data from its repair center suggests a stark difference in quality between Tesla’s two main higher-energy-density packs: the US-made Panasonic NCA packs and the Chinese-made LG NCM packs.

“We are raising serious concerns about Tesla Model 3/Y LG NCM811 battery packs (LGES Nanjing), which exhibit very high failure rates and significantly shorter lifespans compared to Panasonic NCA packs (Made in USA).”

The shop claims that while Panasonic packs are generally repairable and can last up to 250,000 miles before cell failure, the LG equivalents are approaching end-of-life at around 150,000 miles.

More concerning is the nature of the failure. EV Clinic states that in over 90% of the cases they see with LG packs, cell-level repair is “impossible.”

The issue appears to be widespread degradation across the modules rather than a single bad cell bringing down the pack. They found that LG cells often show extremely high internal resistance.

“A failing Panasonic cell hits roughly 28 mΩ, which is the measurement for LG cells when brand new… Out of 46 cells, it’s common to find 15 cells over 100 mΩ ACIR, and the remaining 30 cells above 50 mΩ ACIR.”

The lab shared an example from a Tesla battery module:

Because the degradation is so uniform and severe, replacing a single faulty module is described as “operationally unsustainable,” as the remaining weakened cells are likely to fail in a cascade shortly after.

The situation has become so problematic for the shop that they announced they are introducing a “feasibility fee” just to check if these specific packs can be repaired, noting that they are “losing over €20,000 each month” attempting to fix packs that are effectively dead.

At this moment, during ongoing experimental testing with real customers experiencing LG failures, we are losing over €20,000 per month in operational time while investigating whether LG’s Chinese NCM811 systems can be sustainably repaired. At this stage, we can confidently say: the cells are, to put it mildly, catastrophic. Panasonic has mostly single-cell failures at 250,000km, and it is repairable, whereas LG has multiple-cell failures.

Their advice to owners with failed LG packs? Swap it for a used Panasonic pack or go to Tesla for a full replacement.

Electrek’s Take

This is a pretty damning report from a shop that is well-respected in the aftermarket repair community for actually tearing these things apart and attempting to fix them rather than just swapping them out.

We know that Tesla has been diversifying its battery supply chain aggressively, and for the most part, it has worked out well. The CATL LFP packs are tanks, heavy, but durable. But the NCM chemistry is trickier, and if these findings from EV Clinic hold up across a larger sample size, it could be a headache for Tesla, especially in Europe, where many of the China-made NCM packs end up.

It’s worth noting that this applies specifically to the LG NCM811 packs from Nanjing. Many US Tesla owners have Panasonic packs, which this report actually praises as highly durable and repairable.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Cyber Monday Green Deals hub: e-bikes, EVs, power stations, tools, appliances, more

Published

on

By

Cyber Monday Green Deals hub: e-bikes, EVs, power stations, tools, appliances, more

Thanksgiving may be over, and the official Black Friday date may have passed, but that doesn’t mean savings have slowed down any, with us now having shifted over into Cyber Monday sales. Many of the previous Black Friday Green Deals we spotted up until today are continuing – some ending tonight with the holiday, while others are continuing on through the rest of the week. If you didn’t jump on these deals last week, you still have time to score the best prices of the year across e-bikes, EVs, power stations, tools, eco-friendly appliances, and much more. We’ve thrown all the best deals into this one-stop shopping hub for all your greener needs and will continue updating it throughout the week. Head below to browse all the best Cyber Monday Green Deals while they last.

Cyber Monday Green Deals

Lectric Cyber Monday Green Deals banner

Cyber Monday EV Green Deals

EcoFlow Cyber Monday Green Deals banner

Cyber Monday Power Station Green Deals

Segway Navimow Cyber Monday Green Deals
Anker eufy solar security camera cyber monday green deal

Cyber Monday Appliance and Device Green Deals

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

‘The Big Short’ Michael Burry slams Tesla (TSLA) valuation, warns of ‘ridiculous’ dilution

Published

on

By

‘The Big Short’ Michael Burry slams Tesla (TSLA) valuation, warns of ‘ridiculous’ dilution

Michael Burry, the investor made famous by The Big Short, is back to criticizing Tesla (TSLA). In a new article, Burry takes aim at the “tragic algebra” of stock-based compensation (SBC), which focused primarily on NVIDIA, but the famed investors also specifically highlight Tesla’s high dilution rate and argue that the company’s pivot to robotics is just the latest narrative shift to prop up a “ridiculously overvalued” stock.

Burry is an interesting character. A trained neurologist, he made an unlikely transition into investing in the 1990s, becoming a deep-value investor managing a hedge fund.

He became famous for being one of the first to recognize the impending US subprime crisis and for betting against it. Or more accurately, he became famous from being featured in Michael Lewis’s The Big Short book, which covered his role in uncovering the crisis, and the subsequent movie of the same name, in which Christian Bale played him.

Earlier this year, Burry shut down his hedge fund and returned money to investors, freeing him to discuss the AI bubble publicly. He recently launched a new Substack and quickly became one of the main thought-leaders breaking down the anatomy of the AI bubble.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Burry has had a tumultuous relationship with Tesla stock over the years, famously holding a massive short position against the automaker in 2021 before eventually closing it. While he has been quiet on Tesla for a while, his latest newsletter focuses on how tech companies use stock-based compensation to obscure their real costs.

While the bulk of his analysis targets Nvidia, his main target in the AI bubble, he dedicates a specific section to Tesla, and the math he presents is worth looking at for shareholders.

The “Tragic Algebra” of Dilution

Burry’s main argument is that Wall Street and investors generally ignore stock-based compensation when calculating earnings, treating it as a non-cash expense. He argues this is a mistake because it permanently dilutes existing shareholders.

Along with one of his associates, Burry has developed a formula that calculates the real dilution from stock options for companies.

He singles out Tesla as a prime offender when it comes to diluting its investors without offering buybacks to offset it:

Tesla dilutes its shareholders at about 3.6% per year, with no buybacks. The chart above shows the kind of present value destruction that this level of dilution can impart.

For context, Burry compares this to Amazon, which dilutes at roughly 1.3%, and Palantir, which is higher at 4.6%.

The concern here is that while Tesla reports profitability, a significant portion of the value created is being transferred directly to employees and management in the form of new shares, rather than retained by the current equity holders.

The Musk Pay Package

We reported extensively on Elon Musk’s massive compensation packages. After a judge rescinded his original massive ~$55 billion package, shareholders voted to reinstate it, and it is now up to the Delaware Supreme Court to decide whether Tesla can still use it or if it must fall back on a new $29 billion package it already pre-approved.

On top of this already absurd situation, shareholders recently approved a new stock option package for Musk worth up to $1 trillion.

Burry sees this package not as a reward for performance, but as a guarantee of future value destruction for current holders:

“With recent news of Elon Musk’s $1 trillion dollar pay package, dilution is certain to continue. Tesla’s market capitalization is ridiculously overvalued today and has been for a good long time.”

The issuance of those shares creates a massive overhang on the existing float. On top of a stock that already trades at almost 300 times earnings.

“The Elon Cult” and the Pivot to Robots

Perhaps the most biting comment in Burry’s note is regarding the shifting narrative around Tesla.

For years, Tesla was valued as an automotive growth story. As vehicle deliveries growth stopped in 2024 and reversed in 2025, the narrative shifted heavily toward the Cybercab and Optimus.

Burry characterizes this shifting focus as a way to keep the “cult” invested:

“[As an aside, the Elon cult was all-in on electric cars until competition showed up, then all-in on autonomous driving until competition showed up, and now is all-in on robots – until competition shows up.]”

While some could argue that these moves were made as Tesla took advantage of new technologies, the timeline Burry is highlighting is technically correct.

Electrek’s Take

I have a lot of respect for Burry. His arguments are sound and well-researched. I have been enjoying his Substack over the last few weeks, and he makes some undeniably great points about the AI bubble.

That said, it doesn’t necessarily make any of it a good short.

As John Maynard Keynes famously said, “the market can stay irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”

Tesla’s stock is undoubtedly irrational. A company with falling earnings trading at a P/E of 295 is absolutely insane.

Even rapidly growing tech companies run into problems when their price-to-earnings ratio hits 50. Tesla’s stock would have to crash ~80% or its earnings would have to increase by ~6x just to trade at a 50 P/E. And again, its earnings have been steadily declining for the past 2 years.

But it is being traded by irrational people who, as Burry pointed out, have a cult-like mentality toward Musk. That’s a recipe for disaster.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending