According to a study from Nature Communications, Teslas alone have saved over 20,000 lives
Tesla
People are at risk from food and water shortages, flooding, high heat, an increase in disease, and economic loss due to climate change. Conflict and human migration are potential outcomes. Climate change has been named the biggest threat to world health in the 21st century, and it’s clear that taking prompt action to lessen its effects is of the utmost importance.
Amongst the many actions we can take to reduce our carbon footprint and amount of harmful emissions that can be directly tied to us, purchasing an electric vehicle is one that could surely have a long-lasting effect.
Studies have found that the more drivers transition their gas cars to electric ones, the better for ozone levels and the decrease of particulate matter or “haze”. When EV adoption is coupled with switching our power generation to renewable energies, the positive impacts are even greater.
Back in 2011 the Tesla Roadster - the first serially produced lithium-ion battery vehicle - served as the face of the new EV Revolution and hinted at the possibility of fast, seductive, and opulent electric vehicles in the future. Worldwide sales of electric vehicles are now in the millions of units since its introduction, with Tesla accounting for almost 2 million of those sales.
But a high EV adoption rate not only means good news for the planet we currently live in. It also dramatically increases the survival chances of our children and grandchildren, the generations to come. According to a study published just last year in Nature Communications, "adding 4,434 metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2020 - equivalent to the lifetime emissions of 3.5 ordinary Americans - could cause one extra death globally in expectation during 2020-2100."
This is where electric vehicles can play their part. Let's look at Tesla's most recent impact report as an illustration. The average combustion vehicle emits 450 g CO2e every mile, or 68 metric tons over the course of a lifespan of 150,000 miles (241,401 km), according to that report. In contrast, the Model 3 emits 180 g CO2e/mile when charged through the American power grid, which is equivalent to 27 metric tons of carbon dioxide over the course of a lifetime.
We save around 40 metric tons of carbon over the course of a lifetime for every person who abandons their gas car for an electric vehicle. Tesla sales alone have saved our planet from around 80 million metric tons of carbon, assuming that most people would have gone with a gas car in an alternative universe where the electric revolution never happened.
According to the above-mentioned study, since every 4,000 metric tons of carbon emissions are predicted to result in an additional death, around 20,000 lives have been saved as a result. If we take into account the 10 million electric cars sold by other manufacturers, the number of lives saved increases to a staggering 120,000.
Human lives are not the only direct beneficiaries of a higher EV adoption rate, however. Another study published by Northwestern university found that if EVs replaced 25% of combustion-engine cars currently on the road, the United States would save approximately $17 billion annually by avoiding damages from climate change and air pollution. In more aggressive scenarios -- replacing 75% of cars with EVs and increasing renewable energy generation -- savings could reach as much as $70 billion annually.
Many EV detractors mention that the electricity used to charge EVs still comes from fossil fuels, and therefore it balances out tail-pipe emissions savings. But this is not an accurate picture. Some electric charging stations even use renewable energy to charge EVs nowadays. However, EVs still result in fewer emissions overall even when their charging is coal powered. For example, electric vehicle use has resulted in a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in nations that rely heavily on coal, like China.
And sure, if done carelessly, EV battery manufacture might be dangerous to the environment. Nearly all EV emissions are ‘well-to-wheel emissions’ created during the battery production process. Because EVs are still a relatively new technology, the energy sources used to make batteries do not conform to industry standards, which increases the carbon footprint. But things are starting to change in this regard.
Compared to two years ago, the carbon footprint of modern EV batteries is two to three times smaller, and it is getting cleaner all the time. EV automakers are establishing standards for the suppliers of their batteries. For instance, they mandate that vendors exclusively produce using renewable energy sources like solar and wind. These sources can supply the substantial energy required to make EV batteries without producing damaging pollutants. Tesla, for example, intends to produce its batteries with only renewable energy.
Taking all these factors into consideration, we can only hope the EV Revolution is here to stay. We no longer have the luxury of being shy when it comes to reducing emissions and pollutants that are clearly accelerating climate change, and even though sometimes it can be easy to feel like there is not much we can do as individuals to prevent this, driving electric, while pushing for broader adoption of renewable power sources (including inside our own homes) is definitely a start.
Subscribe
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay up to date on the latest Tesla news, upcoming features and software updates.
As Tesla pushes the boundaries of autonomous driving with each iterative FSD update, the hardware that powers every vehicle also needs to continue evolving. With FSD V13 already pushing the capabilities of today’s AI4 hardware, Tesla is actively looking to update its FSD hardware.
Korean news outlet MK (Korean) has provided what seems to be a credible glimpse into Tesla’s next hardware iteration, AI5, and what it could be capable of. MK’s report claims that Tesla is preparing for the production of its new AI5 FSD computer with a performance target of 2,000 to 2,500 TOPS (Trillion Operations Per Second). According to the report, Tesla is considering using Samsung and TSMC to manufacture the hardware.
Putting the Compute Power into Perspective
To grasp what exactly that 2,500 TOPS number means, let’s compare it to Nvidia’s recently released gaming GPUs, the RTX 5080 and the RTX 5090 (about $1,500 and $3,000 GPUs, respectively). The 5080 clocks in at 1,800 TOPS, while the 5090 pushes a powerful 3,400 TOPS. Those also come alongside power draws of 360 and 575 watts, respectively.
For a dedicated automotive AI chip to be able to place itself squarely in the middle of those performance numbers is quite a feat, especially given Tesla’s previous hardware. HW3 clocked in at a measly 144 TOPS, while HW4/AI4, the current generation, pulls in at around 500 TOPS, a solid 3- 5x leap over HW3.
During a past earnings call, Elon claimed AI5 could be as much as 10 times more capable than HW4, which would imply an astronomical 5,000 TOPS. The 2,000 to 2,500 TOPS figure from this new report, however, represents a 4- to 5-fold generational jump, which feels more grounded and aligned with recent performance improvements elsewhere.
What is a “TOPS”?
TOPS is essentially a raw measure of processing power for a specific type of math, one related to the math used by neural networks. For an AI like FSD, it's the single most important metric. Think of it like the AI’s IQ - more TOPS means the computer can think faster and process more information, letting it better understand the environment around the vehicle and make smarter decisions.
True Performance or Skewed?
The key to understanding Elon’s claims about the TOPS figures lies in specialization. Tesla’s FSD computer is what is known as an ASIC - an Application-Specific Integrated Circuit. Unlike a general-purpose GPU in a gaming PC, Tesla’s AI hardware is designed from the ground up for one singular purpose: running the specific types of neural networks that FSD relies on.
This focus allows for incredible efficiency and performance in its designated tasks, and Tesla likely measures performance internally against AI inference benchmarks built around FSD.
The rumor that Tesla is tapping both Samsung and TSMC is pretty significant here as well. Tesla has previously sourced its chips from Samsung but likely requires additional capacity from TSMC, the world’s largest chip fabricator. A multi-source structure like this means Tesla is already putting the pieces together to mitigate supply chain risks.
AI Powerhouse
The need for AI5’s immense power isn’t just about running the current version of FSD, but about being able to support future versions of FSD that may require more computing power. Tesla continues to increase the size of thei AI models, which means that they’ll require more memory. One of the challenges in autonomy is that decisions must be made in just fractions of a second so that the vehicle can react accordingly. If output wasn’t required in nearly real-time, the vehicle could analyze video frames for a longer period and come up with better output, but the need for output in a timely fashion makes computing power critical.
Tesla’s executive team has repeatedly mentioned that the path towards fully Unsupervised FSD and Robotaxi lies in massive computational power alongside redundancy. The system will need to run increasingly complex neural networks to handle edge cases with greater reliability and start the march of 9s (improving from 99% to 99.9% to 99.99%, and so on). Layers of redundancy and multiple checks during the decision-making process will also be required for safety, which also requires additional compute.
What About HW3 and AI4?
With all this talk of AI5, the immediate question for every current Tesla owner and short-term buyer is: “What about MY car?”
AI4 is currently Tesla’s gold standard, and what they’re building today’s FSD, including FSD Unsupervised, around. For now, it offers Tesla enough headroom to continue expanding the neural nets and pushing new builds, but eventually, it too will one day need an upgrade.
Tesla has already stated that AI5 and AI6 will progressively improve FSD and become safer, but that doesn’t mean previous vehicles will be upgraded. Vehicles will only be upgraded if they’re not able to run Unsupervised FSD at a rate that’s safer than humans. Newer models will always perform better and at higher safety levels, but that doesn’t mean older hardware won’t be capable of safe driving.
The real story here is HW3. While Tesla’s executives have previously said that Hardware 3 is “Robotaxi Ready,” the practical reality of FSD V12.6 and V13.2 has set in for many. With FSD V13 pushing the envelope today, and Tesla’s intent to upgrade HW3 vehicles if they can’t figure out a solution, it seems the end of the line is coming.
For owners of HW3 vehicles, this likely means Tesla is planning a retrofit based around AI5 - likely a lower-performance version that will fit the current HW3 power and cooling packages. There could be a similar solution in the future for AI4 vehicles if Tesla plans to address the other half of the fleet, but that’s likely years away and only if they’re not able to achieve autonomy on that hardware.
The neural nets required for FSD to drive itself without supervision in complex urban environments will be orders of magnitude more complex than what we see today in just a few years. AI5 isn't just an upgrade; it's the necessary hardware to advance FSD to the next level.
In the race to deploy autonomous vehicles, there have been two schools of thought. One is led by sensor fusion, which means the more sensors and the more types, the better. The other is Tesla’s school of thought — vision.
So far, even Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, has described Tesla as the leader in the autonomy sector.
Google CEO on who is the leader in self-driving space: "I think obviously @Tesla is a leader in the space. It looks to me like Tesla and Waymo are the top two." pic.twitter.com/T0hlSICm8V
A new analysis from Bloomberg (paywall) offers a similar perspective, focusing on the numbers and real-world safety metrics. Tesla’s strategy isn’t just viable - it is far outpacing its competitors.
A Tale of Crash Rates
The most striking numbers from Bloomberg’s analysis are safety-related. According to their comparison, FSD reports approximately 0.15 crashes per million miles driven. In contrast, Waymo reported approximately 1.16 crashes per million miles.
That means that a Tesla using FSD is seven times less likely to be involved in a crash than a Waymo vehicle, even with its bevy of sensors. This is in line with Tesla’s latest vehicle safety report, which notes that a Tesla using FSD is 10 times less likely to be involved in an accident than a driver in any other vehicle.
Crash rates compared
Bloomberg
When it comes down to it, sensor fusion, while it can be fantastic, it simply provides too much data to process and analyze. While LiDAR, radar and cameras all have their unique advantages, cameras end up being the most versatile. Our roads and world were created around vision and audio, so a LiDAR-only vehicle can’t navigate our roadways since it would be unable to see signs or any other object that lacks depth. For LiDAR to be useful, it needs to be coupled with vision.
Vision works well because it applies to all situations, and it’s a system that continues to improve thanks to advancements in image processing and AI. While measurements with vision still lag behind LiDAR, they’ve reached a point where they’d “good enough,” and the millimeter-level accuracy of LiDAR isn’t needed.
When radar and vision disagree, which one do you believe? Vision has much more precision, so better to double down on vision than do sensor fusion.
Besides the difficulty of using sensor fusion, Bloomberg also points out that Tesla’s advantage is in the fundamental cost of the hardware. The Model Y costs just 1/7th of the total cost of a Waymo vehicle.
This enormous cost difference is a direct result of how Tesla and Waymo are approaching autonomy. Waymo’s vehicles are high-end, third-party electric cars, like the now-discontinued Jaguar I-Pace, which are then retrofitted with an expensive, custom-built suite of sensors. This sensor suite includes multiple LIDAR units, radars, and cameras.
Tesla’s ability to scale autonomous driving faster than its rivals gives it an edge in the self-driving race, says Bloomberg Intelligence's Steve Man https://t.co/B1x5Jhx6Lfpic.twitter.com/XYPCblWmXn
Tesla, meanwhile, includes all the hardware for autonomy as standard equipment on each of their vehicles, with a relatively inexpensive suite of cameras and its own in-house designed FSD computer. Using affordable hardware means it’s easy to produce and field more vehicles, resulting in more data.
On top of that, building more vehicles at a lower price creates a larger and larger economic difference as time goes on, as Tesla’s Robotaxis become profitable far quicker than Waymo’s.
3 Billion Miles… and Counting
The biggest advantage that Tesla has over any other entrant into the autonomy ring is simply just data. Tesla’s fleet has gathered over 3 billion miles of driving data globally, whereas Waymo’s fleet is just a minuscule 22 million miles.
Putting that into perspective, for every mile driven by a Waymo vehicle, a Tesla has driven over 135. Tesla’s advantage is also the fact that its data is global. It includes vehicles operating in a range of environments, from deserts to the Arctic, from cities to extremely rural areas, and is capable of achieving generalized autonomy.
Waymo’s data is extremely focused on urban and suburban areas and is effectively unusable for generalized vehicle autonomy. A larger, more capable fleet is the key to providing an effective robotaxi service, after all.
Scaling Manufacturing
Finally, Waymo doesn't produce vehicles. Tesla produces Robotaxis from scratch - every vehicle off the line has the ability to run Unsupervised FSD, and eventually join the Robotaxi fleet. Waymo needs to partner with other companies that have a good platform, and they must adapt their technology to that platform.
Waymo’s fleet is expected to be 2,500 vehicles by the end of 2025, while Bloomberg expects Tesla’s functional fleet to hit 35,000 by the same time. That’s not even counting the millions of AI4-powered vehicles that could also join the fleet by late 2026.
Overall, Tesla is a clear winner in the Robotaxi race - and it isn’t just because of one element. They’re winning through data, cost, and scalability, and the gap will only continue to grow.
![Tesla Launches 'TeslaVision' Contest With Big Prizes — See Last Year’s Winner [VIDEO]](https://www.notateslaapp.com/img/containers/article_images/2025/tesla-vision.webp/0458df1c6ed085c427608f0cf762de64/tesla-vision.jpg)
![Tesla Officially Unveils New Model S and Model X: All the Changes [Photos]](https://www.notateslaapp.com/img/containers/article_images/2025/refresh_s_x_1.jpg/31a01e933ae496b97965b27db360f11b/refresh_s_x_1.jpg)
![Elon talks about Twitter and job cuts at Bloomberg forum [video]](https://www.notateslaapp.com/images/news/2022/elon-musk-qatar-forum_300w.jpg)
