Drew Baglino on Master Plan 3 / Tesla Fights Back / Clean Energy Taking Over ⚡️

Now what about this $56 billion pay package? That does sound extreme, I guess. Well, it sounds extreme. Now, as Tesla noted at the outset, the accounting fair value of the award in 2018 would have been about $2.3 billion. Why did it get to $56 billion? Well, the size of the award grew in proportion to the value that Tesla created for shareholders. So from $2.3 billion to $56 billion. Now, for perspective, just to put that $2.3 billion into perspective, this is what the Board of Directors were considering in 2018. For perspective, GM and Ford, each of them spent $4 billion on advertising in just one year 2018. Elon Musk is Tesla's best salesman. He is the best advertisement for Tesla. Tesla has never paid for advertising until very recently. Certainly not in 2018, 2020, 2022. That five year period, Tesla did not advertise. And Ford and GM each spent $4 billion. So Tesla's or Elon's pay package at $2.3 billion was less than the advertising budget that Tesla would have had to have spent, if GM and Ford are any indication, were Elon Musk not the advertising platform himself for Tesla? How can shareholders renege on his pay package? We do not understand. In fact, we would say reneging on that agreement is unconscionable.

那么，来谈谈这个560亿美元的薪酬包吧？我猜这听起来确实有点极端。确实是这样。现在，正如特斯拉在一开始所说的，2018年这个奖励的会计公允价值大约是23亿美元。那为什么变成了560亿美元呢？奖励金额的增长是与特斯拉为股东创造的价值成比例的。所以从23亿美元涨到560亿美元。为了更好理解这23亿美元，请考虑董事会在2018年所面对的情况。通用汽车和福特在2018年各自仅在广告上就花了40亿美元。而埃隆·马斯克是特斯拉最好的销售员，他是特斯拉最好的广告。特斯拉直到最近才开始支付广告费，肯定在2018年到2022年这五年期间都没有做广告。福特和通用都花了各40亿美元。所以相比之下，特斯拉或埃隆的23亿美元薪酬包比特斯拉可能需要花的广告预算还要少，如果以通用和福特作为参照的话。而埃隆·马斯克自己是特斯拉的广告平台。股东们怎么能反悔他的薪酬方案呢？我们不理解。事实上，我们认为反悔那个协议是不可接受的。

Welcome to Electrified. It's your host, Dylan Loomis. Real quick, Victor, if you happen to see this, it was a pleasure meeting you and your wife. And as always, thank you for being a part of the Electrified community. FSD12.4.1 is out to employees. We've already covered some of the updates, but don't forget they're saying improved comfort by reducing the acceleration and the heartbreaking. And that your car will now look for a parking spot upon arriving at the destination. I know, sometimes on 12.3 this would happen, but it was definitely inconsistent at best. The new software branch with 12.4.1, which is 2024.15.5, is supposed to be the update that brings together the non-FSD and FSD branches into one. So of course, if you're stuck on 2024.3 or .8 or .14, you should be eligible for this upgrade. Additionally, when the cabin camera is being used for driver monitoring, there will now be a green dot on the UI just to let you know that's what's being used. That would be the replacement of sorts for the steering wheel nag to ensure you're paying attention. But if you have sunglasses on or a hat with a low brim and the camera can't see your eyes, then it'll default to using the steering wheel nag. Elon has said before that banish or what used to be reverse summon was going to be included with 12.4, but so far for .1 that has not been found in the release notes. But hopefully it's on a future 12.4.revision.

欢迎来到Electrified节目，我是你的主持人Dylan Loomis。先说一句，Victor，如果你恰好看到这个视频，非常高兴认识你和你的妻子。并且一如既往地感谢你成为Electrified社区的一部分。 FSD 12.4.1版本已经发布给员工了。我们之前已经介绍过一些更新，但别忘了这次更新提到了通过减少加速和急刹车来提高舒适度。而且，你的车现在在到达目的地后会自动寻找停车位。我知道，有时候在12.3版本上这个功能会实现，但肯定是不稳定的。在12.4.1版本，也就是2024.15.5的新软件分支中，这次更新计划将非FSD和FSD软件分支合并。因此，如果你还停留在2024.3或2024.8或2024.14版本，这次升级你应该是可以获得的。 另外，当车内摄像头用于驾驶员监控时，界面上会显示一个绿色小点，告诉你摄像头正在工作。这将替代方向盘提示的功能，确保你保持注意力。不过，如果你戴着太阳镜或帽檐较低的帽子，摄像头无法看到你的眼睛，那么系统将默认使用方向盘提示。 Elon之前说过，原本叫做“反向召唤”的功能会在12.4版本中包含，但目前在.1版本的说明中还没有找到这个功能。不过，希望它能在未来的12.4版本修订中出现。

There's been plenty of critics out there over the past year or so calling Elon a part-time CEO and things of that nature. But let's not gloss over things like this. Elon explaining why Starship actually uses stainless steel. Elon continued, it's worth mentioning that switching to ultra-hard cold-rolled stainless steel for Starship is what led me to make Cybertruck out of it too. Exhibit A of Tesla benefiting from Elon's other ventures. On X, Elon congratulated his buddy Narendra Modi on winning a third term by saying congratulations on your victory in the world's largest democratic elections. Looking forward to my companies doing exciting work in India. Elon is very fond of Modi and has said that Tesla will be in India as soon as humanly possible.

过去一年左右，许多批评者称埃隆·马斯克是“兼职CEO”等等，但我们不能忽视类似这样的事情。埃隆解释了为什么Starship实际上使用不锈钢。他继续说道，值得一提的是，将Starship改用超硬冷轧不锈钢也是促使我用它制造Cybertruck的原因之一。这是特斯拉从埃隆的其他事业中受益的一个例子。在X（社交媒体平台）上，埃隆祝贺他的朋友纳伦德拉·莫迪赢得第三个任期，他说道，恭喜你在全世界最大规模的民主选举中获胜。期待我的公司在印度展开令人兴奋的工作。埃隆非常欣赏莫迪，并表示特斯拉将在最快的时间内进入印度。

Kyle Connor from Out of Speck was talking about a Model Y over in Germany, but specifically it had the BYD LFP battery pack and they were raving about the charging speed and ultimately the charging curve. We cannot forget that Tesla is working with CATL for a new factory in Nevada. Their CEO did say CATL is working on faster charging batteries and specifically CATL CEO said they're working on faster charging batteries for Tesla. If Tesla could crack the code for a 300 mile Model Y with an LFP pack and those faster charging speeds and the better curve, with the ability to continually charge 200% without thinking about battery degradation, that would be pretty nice.

来自 Out of Speck 的 Kyle Connor 在德国谈论了一款带有比亚迪磷酸铁锂（LFP）电池组的 Model Y，他们对其充电速度和充电曲线赞不绝口。我们不能忘记，特斯拉正在与宁德时代（CATL）合作，在内华达州建立新工厂。宁德时代的CEO表示，他们正在研发更快充电的电池，特别是为特斯拉研发的。如果特斯拉能够破解使用 LFP 电池组的 Model Y，在保持300英里续航的同时，充电速度更快、曲线更优，并且能够持续充电至200%而不用担心电池退化，那将会非常不错。

Upfit has officially launched the Cybertruck for police fleets as they teased it last week and they're saying it will be available for delivery later this year. If you go to their website it's actually customizable depending on what each department is looking for so you can have extra weapon storage or enclosures for canines, you can have Starlink hooked up. The CEO of Unplugged said we've been thrilled with the direct feedback from police departments that have participated in our Cybertruck development and we look forward to deploying these complete upfit vehicles to law enforcement agencies across the nation this year.

Upfit 公司正式推出了为警队打造的 Cybertruck，就像他们上周预告的那样，他们称这款车将在今年晚些时候开始交付。如果你访问他们的网站，会发现车辆是可以根据各部门的需求定制的，比如说可以增加武器储存空间或者警犬的围栏，还可以安装 Starlink。Unplugged 公司的 CEO 表示：“我们对参与 Cybertruck 开发的各个警察部门给出的直接反馈感到非常兴奋，并期待今年向全国的执法机构部署这些全面升级的车辆。”

Here's another quick clip of the Baidu V20 maps for Tesla in China showing the very precise lane level guidance rather than the consistently zoomed out view that many of us are used to in the states. The granularity of this would be an awesome option for places you're not familiar with to easily discern when turns are coming up and it would help choosing the proper lane for merges and such as well. So far no rumblings that I've seen of this coming to the US but we can hope. As Tesla posted on Weibo that map is what they're referring to as city lane level navigation.

这是一个关于中国特斯拉使用百度V20地图的简短视频，该地图显示了非常精确的车道级导航，而不是我们在美国常见的持续缩放视图。这样精细的地图对于不熟悉的地方非常有用，可以轻松辨别即将到来的转弯，也有助于选择正确的车道进行并线等。目前，我还没有看到这种功能会在美国推出的消息，但我们可以期待一下。特斯拉在微博上发布的信息称，这种地图功能叫做城市车道级导航。

I think the whole price parity conversation between EVs and ice is a bit overdone simply because who actually is deciding what the direct comparison really is. But understanding those inherent flaws Bloomberg is pointing out that the cheapest 300 mile range EV is now starting at about $35,000 where the average price for a new car in the US sits around $47,000. That chart was highlighting Hyundai's Ionic 6 which has 361 miles of range. At least three manufacturers Tesla, Honda Kia and GM now offer EVs with over 300 miles of range for less than the cost of the average new vehicle sold in the US.

我觉得电动车和燃油车价格平价的讨论有点被过度关注了，因为到底什么才是直接对比的标准，并没有一个明确的决定。但理解这些内在缺陷后，彭博社指出，现在续航里程为300英里的最便宜电动车起价大约为3.5万美元，而美国新车的平均价格大约为4.7万美元。那张图表突出了现代的Ionic 6，它的续航里程为361英里。至少有三个制造商——特斯拉、本田、起亚和通用汽车，现在都提供续航里程超过300英里的电动车，价格都低于美国新车的平均售价。

I think the far more important chart though is this one the number of unique models offering over 300 miles per charge. So far this year we're up to 30 up from about 22 last year and roughly 14 in 2022. Speaking of EV demand in the US. Some people need to go far. Some people don't want their car built in China. Some people you know their advantages to other and basically what people have to have a choice.

我认为更重要的一张图表是展示续航超过300英里的独特车型数量的这张。截至目前，今年有30款车型，而去年有大约22款，2022年大约有14款。说到美国对电动车的需求，有些人需要长途续航，有些人不希望他们的车产自中国，还有些人有其他偏好。基本上，人们需要有选择的余地。

The electric cars don't go far and by the way they're incredible. He does an incredible job with Tesla but and I tell him I said you know and I think he agrees with me frankly but you can't they don't go far. Same thing with the trucking industry. I met with the trucking industry the other night. They said they want us to switch to electric trucks. They have to stop six times going to California with a load of diesel. They don't have to stop at all. Oh boy. Now look I'm not going to rebut some of the points he made but it was somewhat refreshing at least hearing some positive comments about Elon and Tesla twice in a matter of seconds.

电动车跑不远，不过顺便说一下，它们非常了不起。他对特斯拉的工作也非常出色，我告诉他，我说你知道吗，我觉得他其实也同意我的观点，但电动车就是跑不远。同样的情况也发生在卡车行业。我前几天晚上跟卡车行业的人见面，他们说希望我们能换成电动卡车，但这些电动卡车运送一车柴油去加州需要停六次，而柴油卡车完全不需要停。天啊。好吧，我不会反驳他的一些观点，但至少听到他对埃隆·马斯克和特斯拉的正面评价，感觉有点耳目一新，毕竟在短短几秒钟内听到了两次。

Honestly though the one distinction I wanted to make is pretty clear Trump stance all along has been anti-ev mandate not necessarily anti-ev and believe it or not Elon actually agrees with that sentiment in the event that these subsidies are also wiped out for oil and gas. So overall if we can just level the playing field save that money and let the technologies win out on their own that's a scenario personally I would be okay with because Tesla would still have a huge competitive edge and it would take away that attack vector for the anti-ev crowd. Are we going to get to that point? Who knows but something to keep an eye on.

说实话，我想要澄清的一点其实很明显：特朗普一直以来的立场是反对电动汽车的强制规定，而不是反对电动汽车。信不信由你，埃隆·马斯克其实也同意这种观点，只要这些补贴也同时取消对石油和天然气的支持。所以总体来说，如果我们能公平竞争，节省那些钱，让技术自行取胜，这是我个人可以接受的情景，因为特斯拉依然会有巨大的竞争优势，这样也能消除反电动汽车人群的攻击点。我们能不能达到那一点？谁知道呢，但这是值得我们关注的事情。

Not only is Amy going to bat for all of Tesla shareholders but Tesla just claimed in a court filing that proposed $5.2 billion award for the lawyers is effectively a joke saying that they only deserve about $13.6 million. They said at over $5 billion it would be 17 times larger than any fee in Delaware legal history and equal to the state's entire 2024 budget. As we've said before it's the equivalent of $288,000 per hour and would collectively make the three law firms a top three Tesla shareholder. Tesla said the justification for this extraordinary request defies established Delaware case law mangles basic economics and seeks to evade entirely the fairness checks this court imposes on fees.

不仅艾米在为所有特斯拉股东奋斗，特斯拉公司还在法庭文件中声称，律师们所提议的52亿美元的奖励实际上是一个笑话，他们认为律师们只应得到大约1360万美元。特斯拉表示，如果奖励金额超过50亿美元，将是特拉华州法律史上任何费用的17倍，且相当于该州2024年整个预算。正如我们之前所说，这相当于每小时28.8万美元，并且会使这三家律师事务所集体成为特斯拉前三的大股东。特斯拉还表示，这个非凡要求的理由违反了特拉华州已确立的案例法，扭曲了基本经济学原理，并试图完全逃避法院对费用设立的公平性检查。

This case did not require the Herculean efforts that might justify the hourly rate in history by many orders of magnitude. Replying to that article on X Elon said they deserve to repay Tesla legal costs and get nothing. In the filing Tesla's lawyers are arguing that the lawsuit provided almost no benefit to Tesla mainly because Elon didn't actually exercise any of those options. As Robin said the other day they're already fully accounted for in the fully diluted shares outstanding count. Not only that but the grant cost which was around $2.3 billion at the time of issuance was already accounted for in Tesla's financials and shout out to everybody who stepped up in the article they said hundreds of Tesla shareholders have written to the company or to the court to object to the legal fee request.

这个案件并没有需要付出惊人努力的程度，以至于可以证明其小时收费合理。对于X平台上那篇文章的回复，Elon说他们应该偿还特斯拉的法律费用，并且一无所获。在提交的文件中，特斯拉的律师辩称，这场诉讼几乎没有给特斯拉带来任何利益，主要是因为Elon实际上并没有行使任何这些期权。正如Robin前几天所说，这些期权已经完全计入在已发行的完全摊薄股份中。不仅如此，当初授予这些期权所需的成本大约是23亿美元，已经在特斯拉的财务报表中反映出来了。值得一提的是，在那篇文章中提到数百名特斯拉股东已经写信给公司或法庭反对这笔法律费用。

Listen to this globally more money is being poured into solar than all other electricity generation technologies combined. This IEA report finds the share of total energy investments coming from private households has doubled from 9% in 2015 to 18% today fueled largely by spending on rooftop solar installations as well as investments in energy efficiency home electrification and EV purchases. Beyond solar the IEA says total energy investment worldwide is expected to exceed $3 trillion this year for the first time around $2 trillion of which will go to clean tech ranging from solar and wind, battery storage grids, EVs, low emission fuels, efficiency improvements and heat pumps. The remainder just over $1 trillion is still going to coal gas and oil. An easier way to say that though for every $1 being spent on fossil fuel investment another $2 is being spent on clean technology investment.

听好，全球范围内在太阳能上的投资已经超过了所有其他发电技术的总和。根据国际能源署（IEA）的报告，来源于私人家庭的总能源投资比例从2015年的9%增加到如今的18%，主要是由于在屋顶太阳能安装、能效提升、家庭电气化和电动汽车购买上的支出推动。 除了太阳能之外，IEA表示，今年全球能源总投资预计将首次超过3万亿美元，其中约2万亿美元将用于清洁技术，包括太阳能和风能、电池储能、电动汽车、低排放燃料、能效提升和热泵。而剩下的则是略高于1万亿美元仍然流向煤炭、天然气和石油。 更容易理解的是，每花1美元在化石燃料投资上，就会有2美元被投入到清洁技术上。

This chart shows the breakdown each year and compares fossil fuel investment compared to clean energy so you can see starting around 2020 the bars on the right for each year which refer to clean energy have been steadily increasing. Fossil fuel investment is still recovering from the illness lows but not nearly as fast as clean energy. I can tell you it definitely does not feel like this in the United States and it may not be the case but at least globally things are looking good. There's a new Bloomberg law piece out there talking about Elon's comp plan it was written by Zohar Goshen who teaches at Columbia University specifically on corporate law and governance.

这张图表显示了每年的分布，并比较了化石燃料投资和清洁能源投资的情况。从大约2020年开始，每年的右侧柱状图（指清洁能源投资）在稳步上升。化石燃料投资仍在从疫情低谷中恢复，但速度远不及清洁能源。在美国，我的感觉并非如此，情况可能也不完全一样，但至少从全球来看，形势向好。最近彭博推出了一篇关于埃隆·马斯克薪酬计划的文章，是由哥伦比亚大学教授祖哈尔·戈申（Zohar Goshen）撰写的，他专门研究公司法和公司治理。

There are some scholars out there arguing that Elon's comp plan for services already rendered is not permitted under Delaware law because it amounts to a gift and a waste of corporate assets with which Zohar disagrees which should be obvious because of course consideration was received by Tesla in that Elon actually achieved all of the targets. So for me I don't think it takes a lawyer to recognize that that waste argument is pure nonsense but he continues can Tesla shareholders ratify the same package that was deemed excessive by the court. The answer is also yes Delaware courts offer great deference to decisions embraced by independent directors and minority shareholders the latter who are the owners and the real parties and interest.

有一些学者认为，埃隆的薪酬计划是为已提供的服务支付报酬，但根据特拉华州法律，这种做法不被允许，因为它等同于赠与和浪费公司资产。Zohar对此表示不同意，这显然是因为特斯拉确实通过埃隆实现目标而获得了相应的回报。所以我认为，不需要法律背景也能看出，这种浪费资产的说法纯粹是无稽之谈。但问题是，特斯拉股东是否可以批准被法院认定为过度的同一薪酬方案？答案也是肯定的。特拉华州法院对独立董事和少数股东的决策给予高度尊重，而少数股东是公司的实际所有者和利益相关者。

It would be strange to conclude that a majority of Tesla stockholders including some very large and sophisticated institutions lack ordinary sound business judgment on the question of how much Elon should be paid as their CEO. Delaware law is designed to protect minority shareholders during negotiations with a controller. The argument that Tesla stockholders cannot ratify Elon's pay package essentially contends that once an error in the approval process is made the question of how much Tesla CEO should be compensated is now forever out of the hands of the company stockholder owners and solely in the purview of Delaware courts. This result would be contrary to the spirit and substance of Delaware law which differs to the informed decision-making of disinterested shareholders whenever possible.

认为大多数特斯拉股东，包括一些非常大的和有经验的机构，在决定埃隆作为CEO应得薪酬的问题上缺乏普通的商业判断能力，这种结论会显得奇怪。德拉瓦法律旨在在与控股股东的谈判中保护少数股东。认为特斯拉股东不能批准埃隆薪酬方案的观点，基本上是在主张一旦批准程序中出现错误，特斯拉CEO应得薪酬的问题就从此永远脱离公司股东的掌控，而完全落入德拉瓦法院的裁决范围。这个结果将违背德拉瓦法律的精神和实质，因为德拉瓦法律在可能的情况下，会尊重无利益冲突的股东在知情决策下的决定。

Thus if you were concerned about the vote going yes but then ultimately it being shot down again by Delaware courts this piece should ease those fears to some degree. Today NHTSA has issued its final set of rules for new fuel economy standards for the end of this decade. These increases in fuel economy requirements will bring the average light duty vehicle fuel economy up to about 50.4 miles per gallon by model year 2031 which is fine but these standards are also reduced from what was initially introduced when this number could have been as high as 58 miles per gallon. Although the requirements are less stringent than they could have been over the next decade as EV demand takes more market share these cafe requirements will become less and less relevant.

因此，如果你担心投票结果是“通过”但最终又被特拉华州法院推翻，那么这段消息可能会在一定程度上缓解你的担忧。今天，美国国家公路交通安全管理局（NHTSA）发布了新一轮燃油经济性标准的最终规定，这些标准将适用于本世纪末。根据这些新规定，到2031年，轻型车辆的平均燃油经济性将达到大约50.4英里每加仑（MPG）。虽然这一标准比最初提出的58英里每加仑要低，但总体上还算不错。尽管未来十年的要求没有想象中那么严格，随着电动车需求占据更多市场份额，这些燃油经济性标准的相关性也会逐渐减弱。

Don't misunderstand me there, irrelevant is still decades away but that's where we're headed. The energy storage drum beat across Europe is finally picking up after months of lagging behind both the US and China. A trade association eased which stands for European Association for Storage of Energy, sent out a media alert regarding a manifesto it published this year. In it they said energy storage is a crucial tool to boost energy security and industrial competitiveness. They cited a data point, grid congestion costs in Germany alone totaled $4.3 billion in 2022 while the country experienced more than 150,000 electricity supply interruptions in the prior year.

请不要误会我的意思，尽管与能源储存无关的问题仍然是几十年后的事情，但我们正在朝那个方向前进。经过几个月的落后于美国和中国之后，欧洲的能源储存已经逐渐加快步伐。一个名为欧洲能源储存协会的贸易协会发出了一份媒体通告，提及了它今年发布的一份宣言。在宣言中，他们指出能源储存是提升能源安全性和工业竞争力的关键工具。他们引用了一个数据点：仅在2022年，德国的电网拥堵成本就高达43亿美元，而前一年，这个国家经历了超过15万次的供电中断。

Wouldn't it be nice if Germany could just embrace Tesla? We won't go through it but it's on the screen, ease did lay out a six points action plan on how they can actually adopt grid storage at scale. It should be obvious but this stuff really matters as this could be a huge market for Shanghai's megapack factory to export too. There's another new lawsuit out there on plain sight against Tesla and the board. We won't dive into this too much but they say as permitted by Delaware law, Tesla's charter provides for a higher voting standard applicable to the redomestication vote.

如果德国能接受特斯拉，不是很好吗？我们不会详细讨论，但屏幕上展示了一个六点行动计划，说明了他们如何大规模采用电网储能。显而易见，这非常重要，因为这可能是上海超级电池工厂出口的一个巨大市场。还有一场针对特斯拉及其董事会的新诉讼正在公开进行。我们不会深入讨论，但他们说，根据特拉华州法律的允许，特斯拉的章程对重新定居投票规定了更高的投票标准。

According to the proxy, the redomestication would entirely repeal Tesla's charter and because the redomestication to Texas would result in the amendment alteration or repeal of the whole charter, the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 66-3% of voting power. Of all then, outstanding shares is required to approve the redomestication. They also go on to touch on the comp plan ratification using some legalese to argue that ratification of the rescinded grant would be a gift that could only be ratified by a unanimous stockholder vote.

根据代理声明，重新注册会完全废除特斯拉的公司章程，而且由于重新注册到德州会导致整个章程的修改、变化或废除，至少需要66.3%投票权的股东投赞成票才能通过重新注册。此外，他们还提到薪酬计划的批准，使用了一些法律术语来论证废止授予的批准会被视为一种礼物，只有在全体股东一致同意的情况下才能批准。

And the last thing we'll touch on, they said, despite the invalidity of both a perspective ratification and redomestication in that any action to validate them is void, Elon has engaged in strong armed coercive tactics to obtain stockholder approval for both the redomestication and ratification vote. The plaintiffs in this case are requesting that the action is maintainable as a class action and a declaration that the redomestication and ratification are void because of Elon's coercion as a controlling stockholder and director. And of course, Donald Ball, the plaintiff, and his lawyers are asking for damages and other things as well.

他们说，尽管无论从哪个角度来看，重新注册和重新确认的有效性都是无效的，任何尝试使其合法的行为都将被视为无效。但埃隆使用了强硬的胁迫手段，试图让股东们批准这两个交易事项。案件中的原告请求法院将此案作为集体诉讼来处理，并宣布由于埃隆作为控股股东和董事进行胁迫，重新注册和重新确认应被视为无效。当然，原告Donald Ball及其律师也在寻求损害赔偿和其他补偿。

For me, it's pretty tough to discern the potential severity of this case or it's merit because it is very heavy in legalese. The simple takeaway though, Donald is arguing that Tesla redomesticating to Texas would in some way repeal or alter Tesla's charter and change the voting requirements to actually pass a vote. And of course, these charter changes or alterations would make it harder to pass certain items, not easier for Tesla.

对我来说，要判断这个案件的潜在严重性或其价值相当困难，因为里面充满了法律术语。不过，简单来说，唐纳德认为特斯拉迁移到德克萨斯州会以某种方式废除或改变特斯拉的章程，并改变投票要求，从而影响投票的通过。当然，这些章程的改变会让通过某些事项变得更加困难，而不是更容易。

Two quick things to lighten the mood a bit on X Elon replied to solving the money problems video about Jim Chino sent his embezzlement allegations to which Elon said Chino's is shady. And again, replying to an SMR video Elon said Wesley, Steve Wesley, the guy we talked about yesterday, former Tesla board member was fired from the Tesla board long ago for being an absolute weasel. Every time I read this, I picture Elon saying this with a look of disdain.

有两件小事可以让气氛轻松一些。首先，Elon 就 Jim Chino 寄出贪污指控一事在X平台上回复了解决金钱问题的视频，Elon 说 Chino 这人很可疑。接着，Elon 回复了一个 SMR 视频，说昨天我们聊过的那个人，史蒂夫·韦斯利（Steve Wesley），前特斯拉董事会成员，早就因为不靠谱被赶出特斯拉董事会了。每次读到这些，我都能想象到Elon面露厌恶地说这些话的表情。

Tesla released a new series of videos with quick clips from some of the board members answering some of these commonly asked questions when it comes to all of the voting right now. Honestly, though, if you've been following along with the electrified, you should be able to answer all of these questions and it's not really anything new. But I'll have this link below if you want to check it out. Tesla also just released a new 19 minute conversation between two partners at a law firm who served as independent counsel to Tesla's special committee.

特斯拉发布了一系列新视频，视频中一些董事会成员简短回答了目前投票相关的一些常见问题。不过，说实话，如果你一直在关注电动汽车相关的信息，你应该已经知道这些问题的答案了，这些内容并没有什么新意。不过，如果你感兴趣的话，我会在下面提供链接。特斯拉还发布了一段新的 19 分钟视频，内容是两位律师事务所的合伙人之间的对话，他们担任特斯拉特别委员会的独立顾问。

As we talked about, the committee was made up of one board member Kathleen Wilson Thompson as the other Joe Gebia had recused himself. As far as the process goes over eight weeks, the committee met 16 times for over 26 hours. Kathleen herself spent more than 200 total hours on the work and these two lawyers each spent more than 600 hours on the one board member for committee. They said committees of one are perfectly valid under Delaware law and in fact, Delaware courts have in prior cases specifically encouraged Tesla itself to use a committee of one if needed.

正如我们之前讨论的，委员会由一名董事会成员凯瑟琳·威尔逊·汤普森组成，另一位成员乔·吉比亚因自身原因退出。从过程上看，在八周的时间里，委员会共开了16次会议，总共超过26小时。凯瑟琳个人在这项工作上花费了超过200小时，此外还有两位律师各自花费了超过600小时在这一名董事会成员组成的委员会上。他们表示，根据特拉华州法律，一个人组成的委员会是完全合法的，实际上，特拉华州法院在以前的一些案件中明确鼓励特斯拉在需要时使用由一个人组成的委员会。

Again, though, I did go through this transcript and there's not really too much impactful news that I think is worth covering, but it'll be below if you're interested. I'll send you guys into the weekend with a few clips from a new podcast featuring Drew Baglino talking about Tesla's master plan part three. Don't forget opt into the electrified newsletter always links below or electrifiednews.com. Hope you have a safe and wonderful weekend. Please like the video if you did. You can find me on X links below and a huge thank you to all of my patreon supporters.

再说一遍，我浏览了这个记录，觉得没有太多重要的新闻值得报道，但如果你有兴趣，这些内容会在下面。我会带大家进入周末，分享几个新播客的片段，里面有德鲁·巴格利诺谈论特斯拉的第三部分总体规划。别忘了订阅《电动新闻》通讯，链接都在下面或者可以访问 electrifiednews.com。希望你度过一个安全而美好的周末。如果你喜欢这个视频，请点赞。你可以在 X 平台找到我，链接在下面，非常感谢所有支持我的 Patreon 粉丝。

What if anything gives you pause? Like as you look at the material requirement question, where do you think we actually have any degree of a bottleneck? Well, there. Yeah, it's not going to be are the resources in the ground. It's going to be to the geopolitics and the permitting authorities that be mean that those resources are rendered effectively inaccessible even though they practically should be accessible. That's probably my biggest pause. And so maybe that will be solved through trade agreements or rationalization of resource policy and certain developed economies. That's probably the thing I'm most worried about.

有什么让你停下来思考的吗？当你看材料需求这个问题时，你认为哪里可能会有瓶颈？嗯，是的，问题不在于资源是否在地下，而在于地缘政治和许可当局可能实际上让这些资源变得无法获取，尽管理论上它们应该是可以获取的。这可能是我最大的担忧。或许这个问题可以通过贸易协议或者某些发达经济体资源政策的合理化来解决。这是我最担心的事情。

You know, there's a lot of people that just do the straight math and they're like, well, look at all the neodymium in every magnet and and like all those magnets. We got to multiply that by a billion or trillion or whatever. And there's nowhere near enough neodymium. But the problem with that math is that people are using the edmium because the pricing signals they see in the marketplace make it seem like the best magnet to use. But actually magnet materials, for example, are incredibly substitutable. And if you think of the design space as not just the magnet, but the magnet plus the electromagnetic system, it's inside of with the steel and the geometry of the of the rotor and the stator and the whole motor. And actually maybe even the power electronics and the mechanical advantage gearing system it's attached to, you can dramatically change what magnet material you're using and still have and still achieve the mission objective. So you can't just do the simple math and say there's not going to be enough of something.

你知道，有很多人只是做简单的数学计算，然后他们会说，看每个磁铁里的钕元素，还有所有那些磁铁。我们要把这些数量乘以十亿或万亿什么的，而且钕的量根本不够用。但这种计算方法的问题在于，人们使用钕是因为市场上的价格信号让它看起来像是最好的磁铁材料。但其实，磁性材料是可以被其他材料替代的。如果你不仅考虑磁铁本身，还考虑到磁铁所在的电磁系统、钢材、转子和定子的几何结构以及整个电机，甚至可能包括它连接的电力电子系统和机械传动系统，你可以大幅改变所用的磁性材料，依然可以实现目标。所以，不能仅仅做简单的数学计算就说某种材料会不够用。

And in fact, we took advantage of that and said, well, all of these things are substitutable when coming up with our resource requirements. And something very, and that applies not just to like the motors and cars, but the motors and heat pumps, the motors and wind turbines, the motors and everything. And something similar like that applies to all of the resources that are in use to make this happen. There are a lot of substitutes. Our lithium refinery in Texas, we actually are doing a different process, specifically to kind of help with some of the permitting aspects like you've described. And some of them actually have lower total cost once they achieve their their end objective. And Tesla invested in a couple of those and there's other companies that have tried it. So I think, again, if the permits, if the rules to stay the same, then innovation will happen and companies can go out and solve these problems and go through the technology development cycle to get them done.

事实上，我们利用了这一点，说所有这些东西在制定资源需求时都是可以相互替代的。这不仅适用于电动机和汽车，还适用于电动机和热泵、电动机和风力涡轮机，以及所有需要电动机的东西。类似的情况也适用于实现这些目标所使用的所有资源。有很多替代品。我们在德州的锂精炼厂实际上在采用一种不同的工艺，特别是为了帮助解决你提到的某些许可问题。有些工艺在达到最终目标后，实际上总成本更低。特斯拉在其中一些工艺上进行了投资，还有其他公司也在尝试。所以，我认为，如果许可证和规定保持不变，创新就会发生，公司就能够解决这些问题，经历技术开发周期，最终完成目标。

With Master Plan 3, like what do you want it to accomplish? I would hope that the takeaway is that we should redirect the resources that are going into, let's say, fighting sustainable energy technologies into finding even better sustainable energy pathways. I think that the point of putting together all of the arguments in this paper was to say, there is a feasible path and that feasible path actually looks pretty attractive when you look at investment per year, resource use, total electricity production. I mean, one of the interesting stats in the paper, which I honestly is almost staggering to me that this is the case. 1.5 terawatts is the claimed, the paper claims that 1.5 terawatts is the total amount of renewable energy capacity that will need to be deployed on an annual basis to maintain the sustainable energy economy. And that's basically keeping up with plant retirements. So on a steady-state basis, 1.5 terawatts is how much you need to deploy.

通过《总体规划3》，你希望实现什么目标？我希望大家能明白，我们应该把资源从对抗可持续能源技术的方向，转向寻找更好的可持续能源路径。我撰写这份文件的目的是为了汇总所有的论据，表明有一条可行的路径，当你看投资的年度金额、资源使用情况和总电力生产时，这条路径实际上相当有吸引力。文件中有一个非常有趣的数据，令我感到几乎难以置信。文件声称，为了维持可持续能源经济，每年需要部署1.5太瓦的可再生能源容量，而这仅仅是为了跟上电厂退役的速度。所以说，在一个稳态情况下，每年需要部署1.5太瓦的可再生能源。

Now, last year, the world globally deployed almost 500 gigawatts, which is unbelievable. You know how much of that was like solar in China, though? I don't remember the exact number. It's an unbelievable amount. Yeah, I know it is. I mean, and there, I mean, it's because their economy is still growing rapidly and they've had this central decision-making pathway of like, we will go renewable, right? They can just command it shall be so. But yeah, 500 gigawatts, right? And that's only one, that's much closer than an order of magnitude away from where we need to be. You only need a three X from here and the growth rate has just been staggering, you know, more than 100 gigawatts a year of growth. Yeah, we might have a terawatt year this decade. It's not crazy. Wild. Those are the numbers.

现在，去年全球部署了接近500吉瓦的发电量，简直令人难以置信。你知道其中有多少是中国的太阳能吗？我不记得确切的数字，但那个数量真是惊人。我知道，是因为他们的经济仍在快速增长，并且有一个集中的决策过程，就是决定转向可再生能源。他们可以直接下令实现这个目标。不过，500吉瓦啊，这距离我们的目标也只是一个数量级之差。只需要再增长三倍，我们就能达到目标。而且增长速度实在是惊人，每年增长超过100吉瓦。这个十年内，我们可能会达到每年一太瓦的增长，这并不是天方夜谭。真是不可思议，那就是目前的数字。

We just wanted to put those numbers out there so that, again, people kind of redirect their brain space from fighting this concept to finding the best way to enable it. And again, I'm not stating that the Master Plan Part III is the best way. It is A-way. There are many ways to do it. And the carrots that are shown, like it's lower total investment, the resource required, all of these things are care. And of course you have less air pollutants, climate change goes away, or at least is moderated. You know, there's so many reasons to do it. And now we should just all collaborate on finding more paths, not just this path, but other paths, rather than continue to fight this concept. I mean, that's probably the primary point of the paper.

我们只是想把这些数据公布出来，这样人们可以把注意力从反对这个概念转向找到实现它的最佳方法。我并不是说《总体规划第三部分》是最好的方法，而是说这只是其中一种方法。有很多种方法可以实现目标。我们展示了一些好处，比如更低的整体投资、所需资源少等等。更重要的是，你会看到空气污染减少，气候变化得到缓解，甚至消失。这样做有很多理由，我们现在应该一起合作，寻找更多的路径，而不仅仅是这条路径，而不是继续反对这个概念。这大概是这篇文章的主要观点。