US safety agency pressures Texas-based Tesla over full self-driving claims, crash concerns

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has raised concerns about Tesla's public messaging on its "Full Self-Driving" system. Photo via tesla.com

The U.S. government's highway safety agency says Tesla is telling drivers in public statements that its vehicles can drive themselves, conflicting with owners manuals and briefings with the agency saying the electric vehicles need human supervision.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is asking the company to “revisit its communications” to make sure messages are consistent with user instructions.

The request came in a May email to the company from Gregory Magno, a division chief with the agency's Office of Defects Investigation. It was attached to a letter seeking information on a probe into crashes involving Tesla's “Full Self-Driving” system in low-visibility conditions. The letter was posted Friday on the agency's website.

The agency began the investigation in October after getting reports of four crashes involving “Full Self-Driving" when Teslas encountered sun glare, fog and airborne dust. An Arizona pedestrian was killed in one of the crashes.

Critics, including Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, have long accused Tesla of using deceptive names for its partially automated driving systems, including “Full Self-Driving” and “Autopilot,” both of which have been viewed by owners as fully autonomous.

The letter and email raise further questions about whether Full Self-Driving will be ready for use without human drivers on public roads, as Tesla CEO Elon Musk has predicted. Much of Tesla's stock valuation hinges on the company deploying a fleet of autonomous robotaxis.

Musk, who has promised autonomous vehicles before, said the company plans to have autonomous Models Y and 3 running without human drivers next year. Robotaxis without steering wheels would be available in 2026 starting in California and Texas, he said.

A message was sent Friday seeking comment from Tesla.

In the email, Magno writes that Tesla briefed the agency in April on an offer of a free trial of “Full Self-Driving” and emphasized that the owner's manual, user interface and a YouTube video tell humans that they have to remain vigilant and in full control of their vehicles.

But Magno cited seven posts or reposts by Tesla's account on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, that Magno said indicated that Full Self-Driving is capable of driving itself.

“Tesla's X account has reposted or endorsed postings that exhibit disengaged driver behavior,” Magno wrote. “We believe that Tesla's postings conflict with its stated messaging that the driver is to maintain continued control over the dynamic driving task."

The postings may encourage drivers to see Full Self-Driving, which now has the word “supervised” next to it in Tesla materials, to view the system as a “chauffeur or robotaxi rather than a partial automation/driver assist system that requires persistent attention and intermittent intervention by the driver,” Magno wrote.

On April 11, for instance, Tesla reposted a story about a man who used Full Self-Driving to travel 13 miles (21 kilometers) from his home to an emergency room during a heart attack just after the free trial began on April 1. A version of Full Self-Driving helped the owner "get to the hospital when he needed immediate medical attention,” the post said.

In addition, Tesla says on its website that use of Full Self-Driving and Autopilot without human supervision depends on “achieving reliability" and regulatory approval, Magno wrote. But the statement is accompanied by a video of a man driving on local roads with his hands on his knees, with a statement that, “The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself,” the email said.

In the letter seeking information on driving in low-visibility conditions, Magno wrote that the investigation will focus on the system's ability to perform in low-visibility conditions caused by “relatively common traffic occurrences.”

Drivers, he wrote, may not be told by the car that they should decide where Full Self-Driving can safely operate or fully understand the capabilities of the system.

“This investigation will consider the adequacy of feedback or information the system provides to drivers to enable them to make a decision in real time when the capability of the system has been exceeded,” Magno wrote.

The letter asks Tesla to describe all visual or audio warnings that drivers get that the system “is unable to detect and respond to any reduced visibility condition.”

The agency gave Tesla until Dec. 18 to respond to the letter, but the company can ask for an extension.

That means the investigation is unlikely to be finished by the time President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January, and Trump has said he would put Musk in charge of a government efficiency commission to audit agencies and eliminate fraud. Musk spent at least $119 million in a campaign to get Trump elected, and Trump has spoken against government regulations.

Auto safety advocates fear that if Musk gains some control over NHTSA, the Full Self-Driving and other investigations into Tesla could be derailed.

Musk even floated the idea of him helping to develop national safety standards for self-driving vehicles.

“Of course the fox wants to build the henhouse,” said Michael Brooks, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety, a nonprofit watchdog group.

He added that he can't think of anyone who would agree that a business mogul should have direct involvement in regulations that affect the mogul’s companies.

“That’s a huge problem for democracy, really,” Brooks said.

From Your Site Articles

Investigators will look into the ability of “Full Self-Driving” to “detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions, and if so, the contributing circumstances for these crashes." Photo courtesy of Tesla

US to probe Texas-based Tesla's self-driving system after pedestrian killed in low visibility conditions

eyes on the road

The U.S. government's road safety agency is investigating Tesla's “Full Self-Driving” system after getting reports of crashes in low-visibility conditions, including one that killed a pedestrian.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in documents that it opened the probe last week after the company reported four crashes when Teslas encountered sun glare, fog and airborne dust.

In addition to the pedestrian's death, another crash involved an injury, the agency said.

The investigation covers roughly 2.4 million Teslas from the 2016 through 2024 model years.

A message was left Friday seeking comment from Tesla, which has repeatedly said the system cannot drive itself and human drivers must be ready to intervene at all times.

Last week Tesla held an event at a Hollywood studio to unveil a fully autonomous robotaxi without a steering wheel or pedals. Musk, who has promised autonomous vehicles before, said the company plans to have autonomous Models Y and 3 running without human drivers next year. Robotaxis without steering wheels would be available in 2026 starting in California and Texas, he said.

The investigation's impact on Tesla's self-driving ambitions isn't clear. NHTSA would have to approve any robotaxi without pedals or a steering wheel, and it's unlikely that would happen while the investigation is in progress. But if the company tries to deploy autonomous vehicles in its existing models, that likely would fall to state regulations. There are no federal regulations specifically focused on autonomous vehicles, although they must meet broader safety rules.

NHTSA also said it would look into whether any other similar crashes involving “Full Self-Driving” have happened in low visibility conditions, and it will seek information from the company on whether any updates affected the system’s performance in those conditions.

“In particular, this review will assess the timing, purpose and capabilities of any such updates, as well as Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact,” the documents said.

Tesla reported the four crashes to NHTSA under an order from the agency covering all automakers. An agency database says the pedestrian was killed in Rimrock, Arizona, in November of 2023 after being hit by a 2021 Tesla Model Y. Rimrock is about 100 miles (161 kilometers) north of Phoenix.

The Arizona Department of Public Safety said in a statement that the crash happened just after 5 p.m. Nov. 27 on Interstate 17. Two vehicles collided on the freeway, blocking the left lane. A Toyota 4Runner stopped, and two people got out to help with traffic control. A red Tesla Model Y then hit the 4Runner and one of the people who exited from it. A 71-year-old woman from Mesa, Arizona, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The collision happened because the sun was in the Tesla driver's eyes, so the Tesla driver was not charged, said Raul Garcia, public information officer for the department. Sun glare also was a contributing factor in the first collision, he added.

Tesla has twice recalled “Full Self-Driving” under pressure from NHTSA, which in July sought information from law enforcement and the company after a Tesla using the system struck and killed a motorcyclist near Seattle.

The recalls were issued because the system was programmed to run stop signs at slow speeds and because the system disobeyed other traffic laws. Both problems were to be fixed with online software updates.

Critics have said that Tesla’s system, which uses only cameras to spot hazards, doesn’t have proper sensors to be fully self driving. Nearly all other companies working on autonomous vehicles use radar and laser sensors in addition to cameras to see better in the dark or poor visibility conditions.

Musk has said that humans drive with only eyesight, so cars should be able to drive with just cameras. He has called lidar (light detection and ranging), which uses lasers to detect objects, a “fool's errand.”

The “Full Self-Driving” recalls arrived after a three-year investigation into Tesla's less-sophisticated Autopilot system crashing into emergency and other vehicles parked on highways, many with warning lights flashing.

That investigation was closed last April after the agency pressured Tesla into recalling its vehicles to bolster a weak system that made sure drivers are paying attention. A few weeks after the recall, NHTSA began investigating whether the recall was working.

NHTSA began its Autopilot crash investigation in 2021, after receiving 11 reports that Teslas that were using Autopilot struck parked emergency vehicles. In documents explaining why the investigation was ended, NHTSA said it ultimately found 467 crashes involving Autopilot resulting in 54 injuries and 14 deaths. Autopilot is a fancy version of cruise control, while “Full Self-Driving” has been billed by Musk as capable of driving without human intervention.

The investigation that was opened Thursday enters new territory for NHTSA, which previously had viewed Tesla's systems as assisting drivers rather than driving themselves. With the new probe, the agency is focusing on the capabilities of “Full Self-Driving" rather than simply making sure drivers are paying attention.

Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety, said the previous investigation of Autopilot didn't look at why the Teslas weren't seeing and stopping for emergency vehicles.

“Before they were kind of putting the onus on the driver rather than the car,” he said. “Here they're saying these systems are not capable of appropriately detecting safety hazards whether the drivers are paying attention or not.”

Ad Placement 300x100

Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

CenterPoint Energy names new COO as resiliency initiatives continue

new hire

CenterPoint Energy has named Jesus Soto Jr. as its new executive vice president and chief operating officer.

An energy industry veteran with deep ties to Texas, Soto will oversee the company's electric operations, gas operations, safety, supply chain, and customer care functions. The company says Soto will also focus on improving reliability and meeting the increased energy needs in the states CenterPoint serves.

"We are pleased to be able to welcome a leader of Jesus Soto's caliber to CenterPoint's executive team,” Jason Wells, CEO and president of CenterPoint, said in a news release. “We have one of the most dynamic growth stories in the industry, and over the next five years we will deliver over $31 billion of investments across our footprint as part of our capital plan. Jesus's deep understanding and background are the perfect match to help us deliver this incredible scope of work at-pace that will foster the economic development and growth demands in our key markets. He will also be instrumental in helping us continue to focus on improving safety and delivering better reliability for all the communities we are fortunate to serve.”

Soto comes to CenterPoint with over 30 years of experience in leading large teams and executing large scale capital projects. As a longtime Houstonian, he served in roles as executive vice president of Quanta Services and COO for Mears Group Inc. He also served in senior leadership roles at other utility and energy companies, including PG&E Corporation in Northern California and El Paso Corp. in Houston.

Soto has a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from the University of Texas at El Paso, and a master's degree in civil engineering from Texas A&M University. He has a second master's degree in business administration from the University of Phoenix.

“I'm excited to join CenterPoint's high-performing team,” Soto said in the news release. “It's a true privilege to be able to serve our 7 million customers in Texas, Indiana, Ohio and Minnesota. We have an incredible amount of capital work ahead of us to help meet the growing energy needs of our customers and communities, especially across Texas.”

Soto will join the company on Aug. 11 and report to Wells as CenterPoint continues on its Greater Houston Resiliency Initiative and Systemwide Resiliency Plan.

“To help realize our resiliency and growth goals, I look forward to helping our teams deliver this work safely while helping our customers experience better outcomes,” Soto added in the news release. “They expect, and deserve, no less.”

Oil markets on edge: Geopolitics, supply risks, and what comes next

guest column

Oil prices are once again riding the waves of geopolitics. Uncertainty remains a key factor shaping global energy trends.

As of June 25, 2025, U.S. gas prices were averaging around $3.22 per gallon, well below last summer’s levels and certainly not near any recent high. Meanwhile, Brent crude is trading near $68 per barrel, though analysts warn that renewed escalation especially involving Iran and the Strait of Hormuz could push prices above $90 or even $100. Trump’s recent comments that China may continue purchasing Iranian oil add yet another layer of geopolitical complexity.

So how should we think about the state of the oil market and what lies ahead over the next year?

That question was explored on the latest episode of The Energy Forum with experts Skip York and Abhi Rajendran, who both bring deep experience in analyzing global oil dynamics.

“About 20% of the world’s oil and LNG flows through the Strait of Hormuz,” said Skip. “When conflict looms, even the perception of disruption can move the market $5 a barrel or more.”

This is exactly what we saw recently: a market reacting not just to actual supply and demand, but to perceived risk. And that risk is compounding existing challenges, where global demand remains steady, but supply has been slow to respond.

Abhi noted that U.S. shale production has been flat so far this year, and that given the market’s volatility, it’s becoming harder to stay short on oil. In his view, a higher price floor may be taking hold, with longer-lasting upward pressure likely if current dynamics continue.

Meanwhile, OPEC+ is signaling supply increases, but actual delivery has underwhelmed. Add in record-breaking summer heat in the Middle East, pulling up seasonal demand, and it’s easy to see why both experts foresee a return to the $70–$80 range, even without a major shock.

Longer-term, structural changes in China’s energy mix are starting to reshape demand patterns globally. Diesel and gasoline may have peaked, while petrochemical feedstock growth continues.

Skip noted that China has chosen to expand mobility through “electrons, not molecules,” a reference to electric vehicles over conventional fuels. He pointed out that EVs now account for over 50% of monthly vehicle sales, a signal of a longer-term shift in China’s energy demand.

But geopolitical context matters as much as market math. In his recent policy brief, Jim Krane points out that Trump’s potential return to a “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran is no longer guaranteed strong support from Gulf allies.

Jim points out that Saudi and Emirati leaders are taking a more cautious approach this time, worried that another clash with Iran could deter investors and disrupt progress on Vision 2030. Past attacks and regional instability continue to shape their more restrained approach.

And Iran, for its part, has evolved. The “dark fleet” of sanctions-evasion tankers has expanded, and exports are booming up to 2 million barrels per day, mostly to China. Disruption won’t be as simple as targeting a single export terminal anymore, with infrastructure like the Jask terminal outside the Strait of Hormuz.

Where do we go from here?

Skip suggests we may see prices drift upward through 2026 as OPEC+ runs out of spare capacity and U.S. shale declines. Abhi is even more bullish, seeing potential for a quicker climb if demand strengthens and supply falters.

We’re entering a phase where geopolitical missteps, whether in Tehran, Beijing, or Washington, can have outsized impacts. Market fundamentals matter, but political risk is the wildcard that could rewrite the price deck overnight.

As these dynamics continue to evolve, one thing is clear: energy policy, diplomacy, and investment strategy must be strategically coordinated to manage risk and maintain market stability. The stakes for global markets are simply too high for misalignment.

------------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn.

New forecast shows impact of 'Big Beautiful Bill' on Texas clean energy generation

energy forecast

Texas is expected to see a 77-gigawatt decrease in power generation capacity within the next 10 years under the federal "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," which President Trump recently signed into law, a new forecast shows.

Primarily due to the act’s repeal of some clean energy tax credits, a forecast, published by energy policy research organization Energy Innovation Policy & Technology, predicts that Texas is expected to experience a:

54-gigawatt decline in capacity from solar power by 2035
23-gigawatt decline in capacity from wind power by 2035
3.1-gigawatt decline in capacity from battery-stored power by 2035
2.5-gigawatt increase in capacity from natural gas by 2035

The legislation “will reduce additions of new, cost-effective electricity capacity in Texas, raising power prices for consumers and decreasing the state’s GDP and job growth in the coming years,” the forecast says.

The forecast also reports that the loss of sources of low-cost renewable energy and the resulting hike in natural gas prices could bump up electric bills in Texas. The forecast envisions a 23 percent to 54 percent hike in electric rates for residential, commercial and industrial customers in Texas.

Household energy bills are expected to increase by $220 per year by 2030 and by $480 per year by 2035, according to the forecast.

Energy Innovation Policy & Technology expects job growth and economic growth to also take a hit under the "Big Beautiful Bill."

The nonprofit organization foresees annual losses of $5.9 billion in Texas economic output (as measured by GDP) by 2030 and $10 billion by 2035. In tandem with the impact on GDP, Texas is projected to lose 42,000 jobs by 2030 and 94,000 jobs by 2035 due to the law’s provisions, according to the organization.

The White House believes the "Big Beautiful Bill" will promote, not harm, U.S. energy production. The law encourages the growth of traditional sources of power such as oil, natural gas, coal and hydropower.

“The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is a historic piece of legislation that will restore energy independence and make life more affordable for American families by reversing disastrous Biden-era policies that constricted domestic energy production,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a news release.

Promoters of renewable energy offer an opposing viewpoint.

“The bill makes steep cuts to solar energy and places new restrictions on energy tax credits that will slow the deployment of residential and utility-scale solar while undermining the growth of U.S. manufacturing,” says the Solar Energy Industries Association.

Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, complained that the legislation limits energy production, boosts prices for U.S. businesses and families, and jeopardizes the reliability of the country’s power grid.

“Our economic and national security requires that we support all forms of American energy,” Grumet said in a statement. “It is time for the brawlers to get out of the way and let the builders get back to work.”

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME