Technology

How bad is Tesla’s hazardous waste problem in California?

Published

2 years ago

February 3, 2024

How bad is Tesla’s hazardous waste problem in California?

Allegations that Tesla mishandled hazardous waste point to a systemic failure at the company’s California facilities. This was no simple accident or one-off event.

No less than 25 counties sued Tesla this week for allegedly illegally disposing of hazardous waste. Within a couple days, the Elon Musk-led company agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle the suit that says the company “intentionally” and “negligently” disposed of materials that should have been handled with care.

Waste management experts tell The Verge that a large company like Tesla should have known better. On top of the trouble it’s facing in California, the company might even have run afoul of federal regulations for handling hazardous waste.

“That’s pretty egregious in my book.”

The California counties accuse Tesla of violating state health and safety codes by disposing or “caus[ing] the disposal of” hazardous waste at places that aren’t actually authorized to accept the materials. The suit alleges that the company tossed some of it in dumpsters or compactors; the waste could then wind up in a landfill not permitted to take in hazardous substances. It also says Tesla “failed to determine” if waste generated at its facilities was hazardous, “failed to properly mark, label, and store” hazardous waste at its facilities, and didn’t comply with record-keeping requirements or properly train employees on how to handle the materials.

“That’s pretty egregious in my book,” says Christopher Kohler, an adjunct instructor at Indiana University who is an expert on hazardous waste, environmental remediation, and chemical hygiene. “These rules and regulations have been around for gosh… almost 50 years, and they should know better by now.”

The complaint names 101 facilities across California that generated hazardous waste including: used lubricating oils, brake fluids, lead acid batteries, aerosols, antifreeze, waste solvents, paint, e-waste, and other “contaminated debris.”

These are pretty common types of waste, according to Kohler. Nevertheless, their disposal is regulated because of the risks these substances can pose when mishandled. Lead and chlorinated solvents are toxic, oils are flammable, and acids are corrosive, Kohler points out.

Investigators with the San Francisco District Attorney’s office started “undercover inspections” of trash containers at Tesla’s car service centers in 2018. They found “the illegal disposal of numerous used hazardous automotive components (i.e., lubricating oils, brake cleaners, lead acid and other batteries, aerosols, antifreeze, waste solvents and other cleaners, electronic waste, waste paint, and debris contaminated with the above),” according to the DA’s office. After that, investigators from other counties also started rifling through Tesla’s trash and found similar “unlawful disposals.” At Tesla’s Fremont factory, investigators also found welding spatter waste, waste paint mix cups, and wipes / debris contaminated with primer unlawfully chucked into the trash.

Lead and chlorinated solvents are toxic, oils are flammable, and acids are corrosive

“I have no idea of the motives or reason for the incorrect disposal. It would seem like a breakdown in a hazardous waste management plan,” Treavor Boyer, environmental engineering program chair at Arizona State University, writes to The Verge in an email.

Big companies typically have a waste professional on hand to determine how to handle these kinds of substances at their facilities, Kohler tells The Verge. He says it seems like Tesla lacked this and neglected to put proper company policies and procedures in place at its service centers.

Take lead acid batteries from motor vehicles, for instance, made up of primarily — you guessed it — lead and acid. It’s illegal in most states to dump them in the trash. They might corrode and release lead, which can escape a landfill and go on to pollute the surrounding environment and even drinking water sources, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Leaking batteries can also pose risks to workers at landfills, incinerators, and transfer stations. Incinerating the batteries might even release lead into the air. Lead is a known neurotoxin that’s especially dangerous to children.

Lead acid batteries in particular are supposed to be recycled, and the lead can be reused in new batteries. Other materials might need to be sent to a hazardous waste landfill that has double the plastic lining in place as a typical sanitary landfill in order to protect groundwater from anything that might otherwise leach into it. Moreover, materials need to be treated and show characteristics of being “non-hazardous” before they can even head to a hazardous waste landfill. It takes extra work to make these kinds of arrangements, which can be more expensive than handling less risky refuse.

When it comes to Tesla’s handling of these kinds of materials in California, “The situation seems to be a violation of RCRA [short for the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act] which is the federal regulation for managing hazardous waste,” Boyer writes. However, California mandates are more stringent than federal waste regulation.

The Verge reached out to the EPA to ask whether it is investigating Tesla for violating the law and, if so, whether the company might face any federal penalties. A spokesperson for the EPA said in an email that, “Due to ongoing litigation, EPA cannot comment on this case.”

Tesla didn’t respond to a request for comment from The Verge; it didn’t acknowledge any wrongdoing on its part in the settlement.

The settlement includes a five-year injunction during which Tesla will have to comply with measures including annual third-party waste audits and mandatory training for employees. The San Francisco DA’s office says Tesla “cooperated” with its investigation and “took steps to improve its compliance with the environmental protection laws brought to its attention by the prosecutors. After Tesla was notified of the issues, they began quarantining and screening trash containers for hazardous waste at all of its service centers before trash was brought to the landfill.”

Other automakers have terrible track records with hazardous waste

In 2022, Tesla agreed to pay $275,000 in a settlement with the EPA over violations of the Clean Air Act at its Fremont factory. Tesla also had to pay a $31,000 penalty as part of a settlement with the agency in 2019 for storing hazardous waste at its Fremont factory without a required permit.

The EPA also found that Tesla didn’t maintain enough aisle space for the safe movement of personnel through the main area where it stored hazardous waste, and violated air emission standards for three leaking transmission lines. It also spotted two open 55-gallon containers of hazardous waste with “no gasket or locking mechanism,” and that the company failed to “promptly clean up” flammable paint and solvent mixtures that leaked from transmission lines or pumps.

Other automakers have terrible track records with hazardous waste. GM agreed to pay a $773 million settlement in 2010 with the US, 14 states, and the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe over “environmental liabilities” including hazardous waste at its properties. In 2022, New Jersey sued Ford for dumping toxic paint sludge and contaminating “hundreds of acres of soil, water, wetlands” and state-recognized tribal lands of the Ramapough Lenape Nation.

“Today’s settlement against Tesla, Inc. serves to provide a cleaner environment for citizens throughout the state by preventing the contamination of our precious natural resources when hazardous waste is mismanaged and unlawfully disposed,” San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said in a Thursday press release.

Technology

Defense secretary Pete Hegseth designates Anthropic a supply chain risk

Published

11 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Press Room

Defense secretary Pete Hegseth designates Anthropic a supply chain risk

This week, Anthropic delivered a master class in arrogance and betrayal as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the United States Government or the Pentagon.

Our position has never wavered and will never waver: the Department of War must have full, unrestricted access to Anthropic’s models for every LAWFUL purpose in defense of the Republic.

Instead, @AnthropicAI and its CEO @DarioAmodei, have chosen duplicity. Cloaked in the sanctimonious rhetoric of “effective altruism,” they have attempted to strong-arm the United States military into submission – a cowardly act of corporate virtue-signaling that places Silicon Valley ideology above American lives.

The Terms of Service of Anthropic’s defective altruism will never outweigh the safety, the readiness, or the lives of American troops on the battlefield.

Their true objective is unmistakable: to seize veto power over the operational decisions of the United States military. That is unacceptable.

As President Trump stated on Truth Social, the Commander-in-Chief and the American people alone will determine the destiny of our armed forces, not unelected tech executives.

Anthropic’s stance is fundamentally incompatible with American principles. Their relationship with the United States Armed Forces and the Federal Government has therefore been permanently altered.

In conjunction with the President’s directive for the Federal Government to cease all use of Anthropic’s technology, I am directing the Department of War to designate Anthropic a Supply-Chain Risk to National Security. Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner that does business with the United States military may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic. Anthropic will continue to provide the Department of War its services for a period of no more than six months to allow for a seamless transition to a better and more patriotic service.

America’s warfighters will never be held hostage by the ideological whims of Big Tech. This decision is final.

Technology

What Trump’s ‘ratepayer protection pledge’ means for you

Published

12 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Press Room

What Trump’s ‘ratepayer protection pledge’ means for you

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

When you open a chatbot, stream a show or back up photos to the cloud, you are tapping into a vast network of data centers. These facilities power artificial intelligence, search engines and online services we use every day. Now there is a growing debate over who should pay for the electricity those data centers consume.

During President Trump’s State of the Union address this week, he introduced a new initiative called the “ratepayer protection pledge” to shift AI-driven electricity costs away from consumers. The core idea is simple.

Tech companies that run energy-intensive AI data centers should cover the cost of the extra electricity they require rather than passing those costs on to everyday customers through higher utility rates.

It sounds simple. The hard part is what happens next.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

At the State of the Union address Feb. 24, 2026, President Trump unveiled the “ratepayer protection pledge” aimed at shielding consumers from rising electricity costs tied to AI data centers. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Why AI is driving a surge in electricity demand

AI systems require enormous computing power. That computing power requires enormous electricity. Today’s data centers can consume as much power as a small city. As AI tools expand across business, healthcare, finance and consumer apps, energy demand has risen sharply in certain regions.

Utilities have warned that the current grid in many parts of the country was not built for this level of concentrated demand. Upgrading substations, transmission lines and generation capacity costs money. Traditionally, those costs can influence rates paid by homes and small businesses. That is where the pledge comes in.

What the ratepayer protection pledge is designed to do

Under the ratepayer protection pledge, large technology companies would:

Cover the full cost of additional electricity tied to their data centers
Build their own on-site power generation to reduce strain on the public grid

Supporters say this approach separates residential energy costs from large-scale AI expansion. In other words, your household bill should not rise simply because a new AI data center opens nearby. So far, Anthropic is the clearest public backer. CyberGuy reached out to Anthropic for a comment on its role in the pledge. A company spokesperson referred us to a tweet from Anthropic Head of External Affairs Sarah Heck.

“American families shouldn’t pick up the tab for AI,” Heck wrote in a post on X. “In support of the White House ratepayer protection pledge, Anthropic has committed to covering 100% of electricity price increases that consumers face from our data centers.”

That makes Anthropic one of the first major AI companies to publicly state it will absorb consumer electricity price increases tied to its data center operations. Other major firms may be close behind. The White House reportedly plans to host Microsoft, Meta and Anthropic in early March to discuss formalizing a broader deal, though attendance and final terms have not been confirmed publicly.

Microsoft also expressed support for the initiative.

“The ratepayer protection pledge is an important step,” Brad Smith, Microsoft vice chair and president, said in a statement to CyberGuy. “We appreciate the administration’s work to ensure that data centers don’t contribute to higher electricity prices for consumers.”

Industry groups also point to companies such as Google and utilities including Duke Energy and Georgia Power as making consumer-focused commitments tied to data center growth. However, enforcement mechanisms and long-term regulatory details remain unclear.

CHINA VS SPACEX IN RACE FOR SPACE AI DATA CENTERS

The White House plans talks with Microsoft, Meta and Anthropic about shifting AI energy costs away from consumers. (Eli Hiller/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

How this could change the economics of AI

AI infrastructure is already one of the most expensive technology buildouts in history. Companies are investing billions in chips, servers and real estate. If firms must also finance dedicated power plants or pay premium rates for grid upgrades, the cost of running AI systems increases further. That could lead to:

Slower expansion in some markets
Greater investment in renewable energy and storage
More partnerships between tech firms and utilities

Energy strategy may become just as important as computing strategy. For consumers, this shift signals that electricity is now a central part of the AI conversation. AI is no longer only about software. It is also about infrastructure.

The bigger consumer tech picture

AI is becoming embedded in smartphones, search engines, office software and home devices. As adoption grows, so does the hidden infrastructure supporting it. Energy is now part of the conversation around everyday technology. Every AI-generated image, voice command or cloud backup depends on a power-hungry network of servers.

By asking companies to account more directly for their electricity use, policymakers are acknowledging a new reality. The digital world runs on very physical resources. For you, that shift could mean more transparency. It also raises new questions about sustainability, local impact and long-term costs.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE HELPS FUEL NEW ENERGY SOURCES

As AI expansion strains the grid, a new proposal would require tech firms to fund their own power needs. (Sameer Al-Doumy/AFP via Getty Images)

What this means for you

If you are a homeowner or renter, the practical question is simple. Will this protect my electric bill? In theory, separating data center energy costs from residential rates could reduce the risk of price spikes tied to AI growth. If companies fund their own generation or grid upgrades, utilities may have less reason to spread those costs among all customers.

That said, utility pricing is complex. It depends on state regulators, long-term planning and local energy markets.

Here is what you can watch for in your area:

New data center construction announcements
Utility filings that mention large commercial load growth
Public service commission decisions on rate adjustments

Even if you rarely use AI tools, your community could feel the effects of a nearby data center. The pledge is intended to keep those large-scale power demands from showing up in your monthly bill.

Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?

Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: Cyberguy.com.

Kurt’s key takeaways

The ratepayer protection pledge highlights an important turning point. AI is no longer only about innovation and speed. It is also about energy and accountability. If tech companies truly absorb the cost of their expanding power needs, households may avoid some of the financial strain tied to rapid AI growth. If not, utility bills could become an unexpected front line in the AI era.

As AI tools become part of daily life, how much extra power are you willing to support to keep them running? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on “FOX & Friends.” Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

Technology

Here’s your first look at Kratos in Amazon’s God of War show

Published

23 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Press Room

Here’s your first look at Kratos in Amazon’s God of War show

Amazon has slowly been teasing out casting details for its live-action adaptation of God of War, and now we have our first look at the show. It’s a single image but a notable one showing protagonist Kratos and his son Atreus. The characters are played by Ryan Hurst and Callum Vinson, respectively, and they look relatively close to their video game counterparts.

There aren’t a lot of other details about the show just yet, but this is Amazon’s official description:

The God of War series storyline follows father and son Kratos and Atreus as they embark on a journey to spread the ashes of their wife and mother, Faye. Through their adventures, Kratos tries to teach his son to be a better god, while Atreus tries to teach his father how to be a better human.

That sounds a lot like the recent soft reboot of the franchise, which started with 2018’s God of War and continued through Ragnarök in 2022. For the Amazon series, Ronald D. Moore, best-known for his work on For All Mankind and Battlestar Galactica, will serve as showrunner. The rest of the cast includes: Mandy Patinkin (Odin), Ed Skrein (Baldur), Max Parker (Heimdall), Ólafur Darri Ólafsson (Thor), Teresa Palmer (Sif), Alastair Duncan (Mimir), Jeff Gulka (Sindri), and Danny Woodburn (Brok).

While production is underway on the God of War series, there’s no word on when it might start streaming.