Tesla (TSLA) is making big progress in testing driverless robotaxis on public roads and attracting attention from analysts and investors. The company started testing its self-driving cars in Austin, Texas, on December 15. No human safety monitor was on board. This was a milestone that Tesla’s leaders said would happen by year’s end. This shift represents a key part of the EV giant’s long‑term strategy for autonomous vehicles and future mobility services.
At the same time, Wall Street firms, including Morgan Stanley, are issuing forecasts about Tesla’s robotaxi plans and their potential impact on the company’s future. Analysts calculate the scale of robotaxi fleets and potential valuation effects over the next decade.
These changes have kept Tesla’s stock in the spotlight for investors and the market, even with challenges in electric vehicle sales growth.
Driverless Robotaxis Hit Austin Streets
Tesla (TSLA stock) began testing its self-driving cars on public roads in Austin, Texas. There were no human drivers or safety monitors in the front seats. CEO Elon Musk confirmed that fully driverless tests are happening. He sees this as an important step toward commercial operation.
Earlier in 2025, Tesla had already launched a limited robotaxi service in Austin using modified Model Y vehicles. Initially, these vehicles included a human safety monitor in the passenger seat to observe system performance.
Over the months, Tesla grew its service area and fleet size. By December 2025, reports showed about 31 active robotaxis operating in the city.
Recent tests without monitors show progress. However, they are still for internal validation, not for daily commercial use. Tesla confirmed that tests aren’t open to paying customers yet. The company hasn’t provided a specific date for when fully autonomous rides will be available to the public.
The Technology Behind Tesla’s Autonomous Effort
Tesla’s autonomous driving push relies on its Full Self‑Driving (FSD) software and onboard sensors. The FSD system can manage various driving situations. It uses cameras, radar inputs, and neural network processing. This differs from some competitors that rely on additional sensors such as LiDAR for redundancy.
In June 2025, Tesla shared its Q2 tech update. The company boosted AI training by adding tens of thousands of GPUs at its Gigafactory in Texas. This expansion supports improvements in FSD, where the company reported its first autonomous delivery. A Model Y drove itself without human help for 30 minutes.
Vehicles with FSD software need regulatory approval to drive on their own. In the Austin pilot, removing physical safety monitors marks progress toward that goal. Achieving fully reliable, unsupervised autonomy is still a challenge. This is true, especially when it comes to safety standards and different road conditions.
- SEE MORE on TESLA:
- Tesla Rolls Out Full Self-Driving (FSD) in Australia & New Zealand: What Drivers and Investors Need to Know
- TSLA Stock Slides After Tesla Unveils ‘Affordable’ Model Y and Model 3 — Investor Confidence Wavers
- Tesla (TSLA Stock) Sparks $2.1B Samsung Battery Deal as Global EV Demand Charges Ahead
Wall Street Eyes Tesla’s Robotaxi Potential, Sending Stock Near Record Highs
Tesla’s autonomous ambitions are closely watched by financial analysts. Morgan Stanley just shared forecasts that say Tesla could greatly grow its robotaxi presence in the next 10 years.
The bank says Tesla might have 1 million robotaxis on the road by 2035. These will operate in various cities as part of its autonomous fleet plan.
Morgan Stanley’s analysis sees active robotaxi units growing in 2026. However, the first fleets will be small compared to the long-term plan. The forecasts show the possible size of the autonomous vehicle market. They also highlight Tesla’s role in this growth. However, there are uncertainties tied to technology and regulations.
Stock markets have reacted to these developments. Tesla’s stock price nearly hit record highs. It rose almost 5% during trading sessions. Investors were excited about progress in driverless testing and the promise of future autonomous revenue. Analysts say Tesla’s value might go up more if its autonomous services and AI products perform well.
Tesla’s Vision for Autonomous Mobility Services
Tesla’s robotaxi initiative fits into its broader vision of mobility services and artificial intelligence (AI)‑driven transport. The company plans to launch purpose-built autonomous vehicles, like the Cybercab. These vehicles won’t have traditional controls, such as steering wheels or pedals. They aim for mass production in April 2026.
Tesla sees a future where owners can add their cars to a decentralized robotaxi network. This could boost fleet availability and usage. This strategy could shift parts of Tesla’s revenue profile away from vehicle sales toward recurring service revenues if adopted at scale. The global robotaxi market could reach over $45 billion in 2030, as shown below.
Analysts say that major technical, regulatory, and safety issues still stand in the way of robotaxis operating widely and making a profit. Building public trust, meeting varied local regulations, and demonstrating consistent safety across different road environments will be key factors in future deployment.
Tesla vs Competitors and Safety Regulations
Tesla is not alone in the autonomous vehicle race. Other companies, such as Alphabet’s Waymo, owned by Alphabet, have been operating fully autonomous services in multiple cities for several years and continue to expand.
The company operates about 2,500 robotaxis across multiple cities. Waymo has logged millions of paid autonomous rides and already meets higher autonomy standards in some regions. In comparison, Tesla operates around 31 robotaxis in Austin, with plans to expand to several major U.S. cities by 2026.
Tesla chose camera-centric sensors over multi-sensor arrays. This decision shows their focus on scalability and cost. Critics and some experts argue that adding LiDAR or other sensors could improve safety and performance under challenging conditions.
Regulators also play an important role. In some states, pilot autonomously driven services are permitted under special testing allowances. Widespread commercial use needs approval from both state and federal agencies. This ensures that vehicles meet safety and operational standards.
What’s Next for Tesla’s Driverless Fleets
Tesla’s move to test robotaxis without onboard safety monitors in Austin marks a clear technical milestone, though it is not yet a commercial service. The company’s next steps will likely focus on scaling test fleets, improving software robustness, and navigating regulatory approvals to allow expanded operations in other cities in 2026 and beyond.
Morgan Stanley and other analysts think robotaxis might play a big role in Tesla’s growth. They could boost service revenue as traditional vehicle sales slow down. However, forecasts at this stage remain based on long‑range assumptions about adoption, pricing, and regulatory landscapes.
Investor sentiment has been mixed. Stock movements show excitement about tech advances but also worry about short-term vehicle sales and profit pressures in the auto industry.
Overall, Tesla’s autonomous ambitions continue to shape its corporate strategy and public profile. The speed of robotaxi rollout, along with improvements in Full Self-Driving software and AI, will be key to seeing if the company can shift from an EV maker to a driverless mobility platform.
The post Tesla Tests Driverless Robotaxis in Austin While Analysts Predict 1 Million by 2035 Growth, Sending Stocks Up appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Most businesses that decide to act on their net-zero targets reach the same point of friction. Buying carbon credits has meant tracking down brokers, sitting through sales calls, and requesting a quote just to learn a price, sometimes with limited proof of what you are buying.
The earnings calls that quietly reframed climate from sustainability question to operating risk.
Three earnings calls in the last 18 months tell the story without any help from a press release.
Hershey, May 2024: cocoa price exposure compresses margin, and the company attributes part of the cost shock to West African weather. Olam, July 2024: coffee climate exposure quantified in the annual report. JBS, January 2025: supply chain climate disclosures expanded materially in response to investor pressure and regulatory expectation. None of these companies issued the announcement as climate news. They issued it as financial news. The climate-linked supply chain risk did not arrive with a sustainability framing; it arrived as a P&L line.
You are probably reading this article because you suspect the same thing is happening to your business. This piece walks through what is showing up on which earnings calls, how procurement and finance leaders are quantifying the exposure, and what serious corporates are doing about it before the regulator asks.
Where climate risk has already appeared in earnings
The pattern is consistent across resource-intensive sectors. A weather event compresses supply, the price spikes, the cost flows through the income statement, and the analyst on the call asks whether the event is anomalous or structural. Increasingly, the honest answer is the second one.
Cocoa is the cleanest example. The 2023 to 2024 West African harvest fell sharply on the back of erratic rainfall and disease. Cocoa futures more than tripled. Companies with concentrated West African sourcing absorbed the cost; companies with diversified sourcing absorbed less. The exposure was not climate as ESG topic. It was climate as cost of goods.
Coffee follows the same pattern. Brazilian and Vietnamese harvests have moved on weather more sharply across the last several seasons. Roasters with long-tenor supplier relationships and origin diversification have managed the volatility; roasters with spot-market exposure have not. Wheat, sugar, palm oil, beef: the same dynamic in different commodities, a pattern the IPCC AR6 Working Group II report projects will intensify across agricultural systems through mid-century.
What this means: climate risk is no longer a footnote in the 10-K. It is a line item the CFO has to explain on the call.
The three commodity exposures that hit margin first
For most companies with material Scope 3 exposure, three exposures dominate the near-term P&L risk.
- Concentrated single-origin sourcing in a climate-vulnerable region. If your tier-one supply for any material commodity sits in one geography, you have a concentration risk that climate amplifies. Diversification across origins is the obvious hedge, but it takes years to build and requires relationships you cannot acquire by tender.
- Supplier financial fragility under climate stress. Smallholder farmers, who supply a large share of the global cocoa, coffee, and palm oil market, do not carry the balance sheets to absorb yield shocks. When yields collapse, they exit. When they exit, your supply base shrinks, and the surviving suppliers raise prices. The risk is structural, not cyclical.
- Logistics and storage exposure to extreme weather. Hurricane disruptions to Gulf shipping, drought-driven Panama Canal restrictions, flooding in European inland waterways: each of these has moved input costs in the last three years, a pattern documented in Munich Re’s natural catastrophe data. The exposure shows up as a one-quarter event in the financial press but accumulates over time on the cost line.
TCFD and ISSB disclosure changes
The disclosure architecture has now caught up with the risk. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, whose recommendations are now embedded in the ISSB’s IFRS S2 climate standard, requires companies to disclose climate-related risks across physical and transition categories, with quantification where possible.
For physical risk specifically (the climate-linked supply chain risk you are reading about), the disclosure must address both acute exposures (extreme weather events) and chronic exposures (gradual changes in temperature, precipitation, and growing seasons). The disclosure must address the time horizon over which the risk is material, the parts of the value chain exposed, and the financial impact under different scenarios.
The CSRD imposes similar requirements under European law, with double materiality (both financial and impact materiality) embedded in the assessment. The practical effect: your auditors and your investor relations team now need a defensible answer to the climate-linked supply chain risk question, and the answer needs to be quantified.
What procurement and finance can do now
Three actions matter near-term.
Map your exposure. Most companies do not have a clear view of which tier-one and tier-two suppliers sit in which climate-vulnerable geographies. Without the map, you cannot quantify the risk, and without the quantification, you cannot disclose it credibly. The map is the foundation, and World Resources Institute climate risk research provides useful public tooling to start.
Diversify and deepen, in that order. Diversification across origins reduces concentration risk, but the deeper move is to invest in the resilience of the suppliers you already have. Regenerative practices, agroforestry, soil health interventions: these reduce yield volatility under climate stress and protect your input cost trajectory.
Embed the climate spend inside procurement, not outside it. Treating climate risk as a sustainability cost line subordinates it to the ESG budget. Treating it as a procurement and resilience investment puts it in the budget that matters, which is the cost-of-goods budget that the CFO defends quarterly.
Nature-based supply chain investments are the asset class designed for exactly this purpose. They sit inside the value chain, they reduce climate-linked supply risk, they generate verifiable Scope 3 reductions, and they produce the documentation an auditor and a regulator can both test.
If you are quantifying climate-linked supply chain risk in advance of the next earnings cycle or the next disclosure period, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you map your exposure and structure a Dual-Value Model response that addresses reduction, resilience, and disclosure-readiness in a single program. Schedule a consultation.
More and more small and medium-sized businesses are hearing the same question from their larger customers: What is your carbon footprint? That question now travels down entire supply chains, and it arrives next to tender requirements, certification criteria, and rising customer expectations.
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits