News
Tesla Semi rival Nikola Motors aims to be US’ ‘largest energy consumer’ by 2028
Tesla Semi rival Nikola Motors recently revealed a rather ambitious goal for the future energy consumption of its hydrogen-electric trucks. In a post on its official Twitter page, Nikola announced that in ten years, the company would become the United States’ largest energy consumer.
Nikola pointed out that by 2028, its fleet of hydrogen-electric trucks will be supported by an estimated 820 refilling stations operating across the country. Considering the expected consumption of its long-haulers and estimates that each station will fill 160 trucks daily, each H2 station will likely consume 422 MWh of energy every day. At ~820 refilling stations, Nikola expects its fleet of hydrogen-electric trucks to consume a total of 349 GWh of energy per day.
Within 10 years,@nikolamotor will become the largest energy consumer in America. Estimated 820 stations going online by 2028. Each station fills 160 trucks daily- will consume 422 MWh of renewables (422 MWh X 828 stations = 349 GWh per day) pic.twitter.com/B8Ylovw46H
— Nikola Corporation (@nikolamotor) October 1, 2018
The hydrogen-electric truck startup did clarify that it intends to exclusively utilize renewables for its fleet’s energy consumption. In a follow-up to its initial announcement, the company even noted that it primarily uses solar with wind and hydropower as backups for its operations. Nikola further noted that its energy sources are all renewable, with on-site generation and zero-emissions “from production to consumption.”
Ultimately, Nikola Motors’ recent Twitter announcement gives the company an ambitious target. That said, if the company ramps the construction of its network of H2 refilling stations, its 10-year timeline could prove to be more than enough.
Nikola Motors’ recent announcement about its energy consumption estimates stands as the latest bold declaration from the startup truckmaker. Earlier this year, Nikola issued another bold announcement, seemingly throwing shade at Tesla by stating that all reservations placed for the Nikola One and Nikola Two will be refunded. As an aside, the company further noted in its post that it doesn’t “use (customers’) money to operate (its) business.” Nikola also announced that companies who wish to reserve its future vehicles could do so for free. On May, the company did get a large order for its electric trucks from brewery giant Anheuser-Busch, which ordered 800 units of the hydrogen-electric trucks.
Nikola has since adopted a more unfriendly stance against Tesla. The company has filed a $2 billion lawsuit against the electric car maker alleging that the Tesla Semi violated its design patents for the Nikola One. The hydrogen-electric truck maker lists several aspects of the Tesla Semi that were allegedly copied from the One, including its wraparound windshield, mid-entry door, front fenders, and the electric truck’s aerodynamic body. Nikola further alleged that due to the similarity of the One and the Semi, its brand is at risk due to Tesla’s reputation.
“Tesla’s design has caused confusion among customers. The confusion has diverted sales from Nikola to Tesla. Further, any problems with the Tesla Semi will be attributed to the Nikola One, causing harm to the Nikola brand. For example, Tesla has had problems with its batteries starting fires and its autonomous features causing fatal accidents. Should these problems arise with the Tesla Semi, the market will attribute these problems to Nikola because of the similarities between the two vehicles.”
The US Patent Office granted Tesla its own design patents for the Semi back in August, though, despite the examiner from the agency using the Nikola One as one of the comparison points for the all-electric truck. If Nikola opts to pursue its case against Tesla, it would have to prove that the US Patent Examiner made a mistake — a feat that would be very challenging to accomplish.
Nikola is currently preparing for a three-day event in April 2019, which would involve the unveiling of the pre-production models of its hydrogen-electric trucks, as well as a 2.3-megawatt hydrogen fueling station that would serve as a model for the company’s upcoming network of refilling stations.
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
