News
Tesla Semi gets ‘peppy and quiet’ hydrogen fuel cell competitor from Kenworth-Toyota
With support from the California Air Resources Board, Japanese auto giant Toyota and truck maker are collaborating to develop and build a limited run of hydrogen fuel trucks. The vehicles, which are Kenworth T680 trucks modified with Toyota’s hydrogen fuel cell powertrains, are expected to drive on routes around Los Angeles and further inland to San Bernardino. The actual specs of the vehicles have not been announced by either company, but the range of the hydrogen fuel cell T680 trucks are said to be 300 miles in “normal drayage operating conditions.”
Toyota and Paccar, the parent company behind Kenworth, took the wraps off the first hydrogen fuel cell long-hauler at this month’s Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. The vehicle, which is classified as a Class 8 truck, stands to be a possible competitor for upcoming all-electric trucks like the Tesla Semi in the future. In a statement to CNBC, Brian Lindgren, Kenworth’s director of research and development, noted that utilizing hydrogen as a source of propulsion makes more sense for Class 8 vehicles than batteries, which power vehicles like Tesla’s all-electric long-hauler.
“We believe that carrying energy in the form of hydrogen for heavy-duty Class 8 trucks makes more sense than carrying it in batteries because the trucks can be refilled faster and offer longer range,” he said.
Lindgren’s point about faster refilling times for hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is quite justified, considering that a passenger car such as a Toyota Mirai could refill its tank with around 300 miles of range in roughly five minutes. That’s significantly faster than Tesla’s Superchargers, which are capable of charging roughly 200 miles of range in 30 minutes. Larger vehicles such as the hydrogen-electric Kenworth T680 trucks would likely take longer to refill than a passenger car such as the Mirai, but there’s a good chance that the long-hauler could still refill its tank faster than the Tesla Semi could charge its batteries, even if it is plugged into the upcoming Megacharger Network.
Toyota-Paccar’s Kenworth T680 hybrid fuel cell trucks caught the attention of some CES attendees due to the vehicle’s silent operation, which is nearly comparable to an all-electric truck. Lindgren, for his part, noted that drivers who have operated the truck actually appreciated the silence of the vehicle. “Drivers like these trucks because they are peppy and quiet,” he said.
Andy Lund, the Toyota chief engineer on the project, further stated that the hydrogen-electric trucks would have the same payload capacity as a diesel rig. Unlike its fossil fuel-powered counterparts, the hydrogen fuel cell Kenworth T680 long-haulers would only require a four-speed transmission, which is far simpler than the 18-gear transmissions usually fitted on Class 8 diesel trucks.
If there is one thing that would probably go against Toyota and Paccar’s hydrogen trucks, though, it would be their fuel efficiency. Kenworth’s director of research and development noted that the prototype trucks currently consume hydrogen at roughly the same rate as present diesel trucks, at around 5-7 mpg. The only advantage of the vehicles, of course, is that the trucks would only produce water vapor from their exhausts. This is a substantial advantage, considering that the trucking industry accounts for about 23% of carbon emissions from transportation in 2016, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
That said, this would be something that Tesla could capitalize on. During the electric long-hauler’s unveiling, Musk noted that the Semi would cost operators $1.26 per mile to run, less than the standard $1.51 per mile that diesel-powered vehicles cost. Musk’s estimate has been met by skepticism by veterans of the trucking industry, but if the Tesla Semi’s operating costs stay true to the CEO’s estimate, then the vehicle would most certainly give itself a notable advantage over diesel and hydrogen-powered rivals when it starts operating on America’s roads.
Hydrogen fuel cells remain a polarizing solution for sustainable transportation. Elon Musk, for one, has openly discussed his dislike for hydrogen-electric transportation. In a statement to Autocar in 2014, for one, Musk went so far as to describe hydrogen fuel cell systems as “mind-bogglingly stupid.”
“They’re mind-bogglingly stupid. You can’t even have a sensible debate. Consider the whole fuel cell system against a Model S. It’s far worse in volume and mass terms, and far, far, worse in cost. And I haven’t even talked about hydrogen being so hard to handle. Success is simply not possible. Manufacturers do it [FCEVs] because they’re under pressure to show they’re doing something ‘constructive’ about sustainability. They feel it’s better to be working on a solution a generation away rather than something just around the corner. Hydrogen is always labeled the fuel of the future – and always will be,” Musk said.
Elon Musk initially announced that the Tesla Semi would start production sometime in 2019. That said, later statements from Tesla’s head of investor relations Martin Viecha suggested that the electric car maker would “earnestly” start producing the Semi by 2020.
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
