Flash News: No Model S Production Delays At Tesla Factory After Accident

NOV 14 2013 BY STAFF 16

Yesterday an incident at Tesla’s Fremont, CA assembly facility for the Model S described as “…a failure in a low pressure aluminum casting press” caused burn injuries to three workers via hot metal from that press; and left short term production of the Model S in question.

Emergency Crews At Tesla's Fremont, CA Factory On Wednesday (via Twitter - @nbcbayarea)

Emergency Crews At Tesla’s Fremont, CA Factory On Wednesday (via Twitter – @nbcbayarea)

One of the three workers was left with what is being described as a serious injury.

Today however,  Jeff Evanson, a Tesla spokesman, told Bloomberg that Tesla does not expect Model S production delays following yesterday’s accident.

Tesla has said it will sell about 6,000 Model S sedans this quarter and around 21,500 for the year.




Categories: Tesla


Leave a Reply

16 Comments on "Flash News: No Model S Production Delays At Tesla Factory After Accident"

newest oldest most voted

You would think that Tesla is the only car manufacturer that has ever had an accident at their plant. Would this even be news if it were GM or MB? I think not, which speaks clearly to the bias shown toward (or against) Tesla. What does prompt reports like this to be posted ONLY for Tesla?

Uhh, GM’s battery lab explosion ring a bell? All over the news.

Yeah, if it’s something to do with batteries it’ll be jumped on with glee!

Remind me, what is the name of this website?

There are so far only two companies selling a meaningful volume of EVs, I think that an industrial accident (whose magnitude was originally unknown) at one of them indeed deserves to be mentioned here, yes.

I for one found the two articles on this topic informative. Thanks Jay.

Great news! And again, best wishes for full and speedy recoveries to those injured in the war against big oil.

Roger to all that Anon! (thumbs up)

Sorry for those injured in their support of Big Coal and Big Nuclear.

You forgot to mention support of Big Natural Gas.


Sorry for the wounded warriors as they fight to support Big Natural Gas…….and as they fight for the right to have middle class taxpayers subsidize transportation vehicles for the 1%.

Uh, CherlG, the 1% thing died the day after the election. The checks stopped, so the “protestors” all went home. You didn’t buy in to that did you?? Lol! Seriously, I saw ads on Craigslist paying people for their “protesting.” Where is all of the “outrage” now? Surprised you even remembered the 1% thing. You have a great memory.

Don’t think the anual deaths of 13,000 + people a year in the US alone (don’t even talk about China), from coal use (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_coal_industry), or the folks who’ve died due to nuclear powerplant accidents (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_and_radiation_accidents_by_death_tol), is particularly funny… Bloody Troll.

Thank you for pointing out the problems created by Big Coal and Big Nuclear as well as natural gas which comes from…..Big Oil ! Gasp.

I’m glad the two of us can finally agree on something! High five! We both agree that the major sources of electricity in the US are very problematic.

Filling our EV batteries with energy from Big Coal, Big Nuclear and Big Natural Gas (aka Big Oil) is not a problem-free alternative.

I don’t recall anyone saying producing anything out of the environment didn’t have consequences… Not sure what your sources for such silly assumptions come from? You must think all pro-EV people are simple-minded greenies / liberals. :p. But as most educated folks know, electricity for transportation is so much better for humanity to utilize, than staying with inefficient fossil fuel engines– even if you’re using 100% pure coal to create that electricity. Try using Google and educate yourself on the topic… Maybe you’ve never thought of energy companies as evolving organisms, but in many ways, the are. Natural gas is a short term production fad, just as coal and nuclear were a short time ago. It will eventually give way to other cleaner forms of energy generation over time. In the end, it makes sense to utilize the tremendous power of the sun that rains down on the earth. Elon is just jumping ahead to show the world that there is no reason to stick with an unsustainable status quo– by providing free sunlight to power his cars, now. It takes time for the rest of humanity to catch up, but we’ll get there, no matter how hard you dig… Read more »

Using your own numbers, 13,000 deaths a year from coal and the devastation from nuclear accidents doesn’t fit my definition of “so much better”.

As for Elon, he is part of the problem. Protecting the status quo with current technology and trying to avoid competition from Hydrogen.

Why is Elon so much against progress and the next step to hydrogen? Why is Elon so much against hydrogen to power our transporation? Why would Elon be so vocal against others trying to bring hydrogen to market?

We really need to progress and evolve and grasp the future, and not be stuck with existing technology.

Sticking with the current technology available, which by your own admission results in severe side effects , while undermining progress toward the next step is a mistake in my opinion.

Die cast machines are inherently dangerous. The aluminum sits molten in a bath inside the machine. You are pumping molten aluminum into a die that is held together by hydraulic pressure. There are lots of fun factors that can go wrong. If water gets inside the machine the aluminum will explode from the steam. If the die halves don’t seat properly, the thing sprays molten metal. It has (of course) guards and safety’s on the machine preventing that from reaching an operator, but if the machine gets fouled, you have to open those and work on the machine, even while the metal lays in the molten state inside the machine. It takes to long to cool down and restart the machine. I know more than a few guys who won’t work on the machines.

Manufacturing is inherently dangerous, something Americans tend to forget since we have outsourced much of it. What you do is learn from it and move on. Cheryl EVs are better no matter what the fuel source as they are 3-4 times more efficient than internal combustion cars, there is also the matter of electricity and NG used in the production of fuels, a large amount better used directly to charge our cars. It would be nice if the grid was 100% renewable but I see these as 2 different problems, with possibly synergistic solutions.