News
Are hydrogen cars competition for Tesla?
Reading the news and making sense of PR pitches is an art and a science. The art is reading through the pitches, determining where the motivation is and what lies behind. The science is re-articulating the message behind pitches. The latest news campaign is that hydrogen fuel cells cars are competition to Tesla and electric vehicles (EV).
Sifting through the news
Are hydrogen fuel cell cars competition to EVs? And if so, how are they competing? Those are basic, relevant questions we need to keep in mind when reading the news. Matthew Levy on Seeking Alpha believes Toyota and Hyundai’s hydrogen fuel cell vehicles compete with the Model S. The truth is, Toyota and Hyundai are not in the same league as Tesla Motors in terms of their respective segments and innovations.
The article tries to make a point that by opening the doors to its charging protocols, Tesla won’t sue those who use these protocols in good faith. The article argues that Tesla’s new competitors are growing, but include the Detroit VIA Motors that converts pickup trucks to plug-in hybrids (PHEV) and Harley-Davidson’s new and loud Project LiveWire, a noisy electric motorcycle I covered on CarNewsCafe. According to Matthew Levy: “While these are not direct competitors to Tesla’s sedans, they do show the shift in attention to electric vehicles. Combined with Chevrolet’s Volt (GM) and the Nissan Leaf, the electric vehicle market is becoming crowded behind Tesla. With the availability of Tesla’s patents to other electric vehicle manufacturers (who have more resources than Tesla), the gap should continue to shrink.”, indeed, it will and it should. No one would argue that, least of all Elon Musk.
The article points to a theoretical advantage Tesla has over the competitors. “With the same driving range on the upgraded models,” we suppose the article refers to the P85, “as well as much longer charging times,” larger tanks take longer to fill as well, “the Model S only holds a slight advantage over its hydrogen competitors, if any.” Really? How so? Try an encyclopedia of advantages. It is a full electric vehicle that comes with the freedom of choice of accepting your very own home 110V outlets, your dedicated 240V plug, your home high-powered Tesla charger, the option for the free Supercharger, depending on your time to recharge and where you are. Now, add to this the fact that you and I can make electricity from solar energy, wind, hydro, and any other alternative and renewable energy, or simply just plug it in anywhere.
These are huge advantages hydrogen does not offer yet. Using hydrogen, we go back to the pump and are not in control of the energy price. To be fair, utilities are slowing down personal alternative energy systems and are trying to inflate energy prices, but almost anyone can choose which energy origin to use for their EVs. If you don’t like the grid, install an alternative energy system at home. The same can’t be said about hydrogen fuel cell. I can build an electric motor or buy one on the cheap, I can’t do the same with a fuel cell. EVs offer energy choice, hydrogen does not yet.
The hidden message and the driving motivation
It is obvious by now that the hydrogen phenomenon hasn’t taken the world by storm. Contrary to the article, Hyundai already has a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle offered to the public and Honda has had its Clarity for lease since 2008. Hydrogen fuel cell has its place in the world of energy, but so far it’s been limited to places where solar panels have limited application without better energy storage. Who is driving the push for hydrogen fuel cells when we already have proven EVs, such as the Model S that uses commodity batteries and achieves close to 300 miles? The question to ask is who has benefited the most from the automobile this past century.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
