News
The Tesla Cybertruck’s tough character can help address a horrible emissions trend
An emissions problem that seems worse than Dieselgate may be brewing in the United States, and it would likely take a perception shift to battle it well. As indicated by a new federal report from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Civil Enforcement, over half a million owners and operators of diesel pickup trucks in the US have been illegally disabling their vehicles’ emissions control technology during the past decade. This trend, which continues to be popular, have allowed excess emissions equivalent to around 9 million extra trucks on the road.
Intentional Emissions
The EPA’s findings in its report echo the shocking revelations of the Dieselgate scandal, which involved Volkswagen admitting to illegally installing defeat devices in millions of passenger cars worldwide to cheat emissions tests. About half a million of these vehicles were sold in the United States. Yet inasmuch as Dieselgate was shocking, what makes the EPA’s recent report quite alarming is the fact that truck owners themselves are the ones–as well as small auto shops–who are willingly installing the illegal emissions-increasing devices on their pickups.
This makes it extremely difficult to accurately measure the scope of the US pickup truck market’s emissions problem. The EPA’s report estimates that there are over half a million pickup trucks in the US equipped with emissions-increasing devices over the past decade. However, the EPA’s study only focused on devices that were installed in heavy pickup trucks like the Chevy Silverado and the Dodge Ram 2500, which weigh between 8,500 to 14,000 pounds. Considering that some owners of smaller trucks like the Ford Ranger may also be engaged in the same practice, there is a good chance that the US’ pickup truck emissions problem may very well be far bigger, involving millions of vehicles nationwide.
“One reason it is difficult to estimate the full extent of tampering nationwide is that the Air Enforcement Division has reason to believe this conduct occurs within most or all categories of vehicles and engines, including commercial trucks, passenger vehicles, pickup trucks, motorcycles, forestry equipment, and agricultural equipment,” the report read.
Worse than Dieselgate
According to the report, the modifications that “diesel tuners” in the US place in pickup trucks could result in the release of over 570,000 tons of nitrogen dioxide, a substance associated with diseases like heart and lung disease, over the lifetime of the vehicles. This is more than 10x the excess nitrogen oxide emissions attributed to Volkswagen’s Dieselgate vehicles that were sold in the United States. The report further stated that the modified pickup trucks will hit 5,000 excess tons of industrial soot over their lifetime. Industrial soot, also known as particulate matter, is linked to respiratory diseases and higher death rates for COVID-19 patients.
John Walke, an expert in air pollution law at the Natural Resources Defense Council, noted in a statement to The New York Times that the EPA’s findings came at the worst time possible. “A global respiratory pandemic is the worst time to find out that there is this massive cheating by the makers of these devices. That is an astronomically high level of smog-forming pollution. It’s happening at ground level where people are breathing the fumes. And if the problem extends to other vehicles it’s almost unimaginable what the health impact will be,” he said.
Phillip Brooks, a former EPA emissions investigator and a veteran of the Dieselgate case, shared his thoughts on the US pickup truck market’s budding emissions controversy. “The aftermarket defeat device problem is huge. A lot of people just don’t understand what the problem is — your average person buys a vehicle and says, it’s my vehicle, I can do what I want with it. They may not even be aware that these devices are illegal,” he said. “But the real question is impact. If 10 people do it, there’s no impact. But these are numbers that are meaningful for air quality. This is not a great way to express how to be a free American, but there are a lot of people out there who think that way.”
The Need for a Diesel Pickup Predator
To battle such a horrible emissions trend, a change of perception is needed that is not that different from what the Model S ushered in for the high-performance sedan market. Diesel tuners, after all, equip vehicles with illegal emissions-increasing equipment largely to improve a pickup truck’s performance. If a vehicle were to be introduced in the pickup truck market that is so far ahead in durability, power, and performance compared to the veterans of the pickup segment, then large diesels could end up going the way of horse-drawn buggies. There are few vehicles that are better at leading this charge than the Tesla Cybertruck.
Similar to the next-generation Roadster, the Tesla Cybertruck has the potential to be a “smackdown” of sorts to the diesel pickup truck market. It’s a large vehicle with a domineering stance designed to look like a futuristic armored personnel carrier. Avid diesel aficionados tend to poke fun at EVs due to their tame, sleek, looks. There’s nothing of that in the all-electric pickup. The Cybertruck, with its XY, origami-like exoskeleton, is a steel beast: tough, unapologetic, and it looks like something that even a large diesel truck should not cross. This trend continues to the Cybertruck’s performance and utility, with its 0-60 mph time of 2.9 seconds, its 6.5-foot truck bed, its 14,000-lb towing capacity, and 500+ miles of range.
Assuming that Tesla does release the Cybertruck with specs that meet those that were announced during the vehicle’s unveiling, the all-electric pickup could utterly outperform diesel rivals to such a degree that it would be embarrassing for traditional trucks to stand toe-to-toe against the steel monster. And once this is established, perhaps the time would soon come when diesel-powered modified trucks could become laughable in the face of superior vehicles that just happen to have zero emissions. Such a time, while unfortunate for the US’ long history of large diesel trucks, would likely be appreciated by the environment and the populace as a whole.
Read the EPA’s report on tampered US pickup trucks and their emissions below.
EPA-US Emissions Scandal Pickup Trucks by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
