News
Hydrogen Cars Were Supposed to Be the Future. Now Owners Are Suing Toyota
Several Mirai drivers have found themselves still paying for cars they don’t even drive anymore.
The promise of a hydrogen-fueled future has turned into a nightmare for hundreds of car owners in California. Drivers who purchased Toyota’s flagship fuel cell vehicle, the Mirai, are now suing the automaker and other key players, alleging they were misled about the viability of the hydrogen fueling network. With infrastructure collapsing and hydrogen prices surging, several Mirai drivers have found themselves still paying for cars they don’t even drive anymore.
The legal backlash comes as Toyota and other early champions of hydrogen-powered mobility face growing criticism over whether they pushed a technology too soon into an unprepared market.
A green gamble gone wrong
Sam D’Anna had barely driven his $75,000 Toyota Mirai in July 2022 when he realized something was wrong. His Mirai’s hydrogen tank was nearly empty. A dealership staffer at Roseville Toyota ran over to inform him that the nearest fueling station, in Citrus Heights, was offline. The next closest one was in West Sacramento, nearly 25 miles away. That should not be a problem for the Mirai due to its 402-mile EPA-estimated range, but since the car was almost empty, his range indicator showed only 22 miles.

“I’ve already signed,” D’Anna told the Sacramento Bee. He ended up driving off the lot with the air conditioning turned off to conserve fuel. “This is bad. My heart was dropping into my stomach.”
D’Anna is now one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against Toyota, hydrogen station operator FirstElement Fuel, the Hydrogen Fuel Cell Partnership, and California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The complaint, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, accuses the defendants of fraud, negligence, and violations of consumer protection laws, among others. It alleges that Toyota knowingly sold vehicles reliant on a fueling ecosystem that was more than subpar, trapping buyers in loans for cars they can barely use.
D’Anna’s Mirai now sits unused under a tarp at his father’s house in El Dorado County. He still pays nearly $1,100 a month on the car, on top of a $1,200 monthly payment for a Ford F-150 hybrid he purchased in 2023 as a replacement.

Infrastructure that never materialized
At its peak, California’s hydrogen vision appeared ambitious but achievable. The state pledged tens of millions of dollars to build a network of fueling stations. Automakers like Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda introduced sleek zero-emission vehicles powered by compressed hydrogen gas.
The pitch was compelling. Drivers could refuel in a few minutes and emit only water vapor, a seemingly reasonable if not preferable alternative to electric vehicles, which were still gaining traction.
But the real-world rollout failed to keep pace with the marketing. California currently has about 50 hydrogen fueling stations, as per data from the Hydrogen Fuel Cell Partnership. And in 2024, Shell exited the market and shuttered multiple locations.
Even when hydrogen stations are available, they are often plagued by maintenance issues and inconsistent supply. Hydrogen prices have tripled too, and what once cost $70 to fill now runs closer to $200, the Bee noted.

In a statement to Teslarati, Patrick Peterson, auto expert at GoodCar.com, said, “Toyota and Hyundai were among the first to push hydrogen forward, and their vehicles are genuinely impressive. But the issue isn’t the tech, it’s everything around it. The infrastructure just isn’t ready. Most drivers aren’t willing to gamble on whether they’ll find a working hydrogen station or deal with issues like frozen fuel nozzles.”
Peterson said hydrogen’s biggest flaw is its lack of consistency. “EVs, for all their early bumps, have earned consumer trust. You’ve got widespread charging access, predictable performance, and fewer question marks. Hydrogen hasn’t hit that point yet. One bad fill-up can sour someone’s view of the entire platform.”
The price of faith in an idea
Ricky Yap of West Sacramento bought his 2016 Toyota Mirai in 2020 from Roseville Toyota. The vehicle, priced at $16,000, came with a prepaid fuel card worth the same amount. Initially, the fueling experience was “a bit cumbersome and confusing but not so bad,” Yap told the Bee. Then things got a lot worse.

Shell’s closure of hydrogen stations led to long lines at the only remaining site in Sacramento. Hydrogen prices soared, and fueling, thanks to long lines at the station, ended up taking as long as four hours. Yap eventually stopped using the car altogether. He canceled the insurance and registered it as a non-operational vehicle.
“I used it very seldom just because of the fact I don’t like the stress,” he said. “I don’t want to pay insurance on a car that I can’t use every day.”
The lawsuit claims that Toyota and its partners misled consumers about the viability of the hydrogen ecosystem. Many owners were driven by environmental motivations, enticed by generous incentives and Toyota’s reputation. But the resale value of hydrogen cars has collapsed.
One plaintiff, Parita Shah, a physician assistant from Sacramento County, told the Bee that her dealership offered her only $2,000 for her $36,000 Mirai after stations near her home shut down just months after purchase.

Consumers’ legal action turns up the pressure
In July 2025, frustrated Mirai owners organized a demonstration in Los Angeles to draw attention to what they called a broken promise. Protesters held signs reading “Mirai is a Lie,” “Toyota Made a Big Mistake,” and “Mirai Left Me Dry.”
Jason Ingber, attorney for D’Anna, Yap, and several other Mirai owners, spoke at the event. He accused the automaker of knowingly selling a product into a failing infrastructure.
“These are brands they thought they could rely on, and they go in, and they’re told ‘This is the next best thing!’ and it turns out, it’s not,” Ingber told KTLA 5.
Ingber also shared a comment to Teslarati: “Toyota is still selling this car. It makes no damn sense. No fuel for drivers. The car doesn’t work as advertised,” he said.

Automakers offer limited relief
Toyota has acknowledged the fueling issues and confirmed that it stopped selling new Mirais in the Sacramento area over a year ago. In a statement to the Bee, the company said it is “working with affected Mirai customers to identify ways to help them on a case-by-case basis.”
Rental cars and service credits are among the remedies offered, but plaintiffs argued that these are not sustainable solutions. Shah stated that the rental process is quite cumbersome. In her case, she has been relying on a series of short-term rental cars provided by Toyota, which she must exchange every 25 days. She continues to make $326 monthly payments on he Mirai, which she cannot use.
Hyundai, whose Nexo SUV also relies on hydrogen fuel, has offered similar 21-day rental options. The company also issued a recall for about 1,600 Nexo SUVs in late 2024 due to possible hydrogen leaks and potential fires, warning owners to park their cars outside until repairs were made.
A shrinking market
Since 2012, just under 18,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles have been sold in California. Toyota accounts for the vast majority of them, but the pace of adoption has slowed dramatically. For comparison, California now has millions of battery electric and hybrid vehicles on the road.

Policies have also seen a notable shift. California initially committed about $20 million annually to develop hydrogen fueling infrastructure. That number has since dropped to $15 million, and it’s no longer limited to light-duty stations.
Josh Newman, a former state senator and current Mirai owner, told the Bee that government support has fallen short. “I blame the state. We were supposed to have 200 stations up and running for light-duty hydrogen vehicles by 2025,” he said.
In a statement to Teslarati, Alex Black, Chief Marketing Officer at EpicVIN, said the problem now extends beyond infrastructure. “Yes, hydrogen cars do have an image problem right now,” he said.
“Many just do not have confidence in the technology, largely because they have not seen very many out there, there are not many places to fill them up, and have heard about previous recall problems or problems. That tends to stick with them.”
Black added that public sentiment plays a powerful role. “When public sentiment turns, all activity comes to an end: reduced demand, reduced investment, and fewer stations are built. It’s a vicious circle.”

A clean tech cautionary tale
Toyota’s investment in hydrogen was bold and well-intentioned. The technology offers apparent advantages, especially for long-haul or commercial use cases where quick refueling and long range are critical. But for personal mobility, hydrogen’s future remains uncertain, if not questionable, today.
The technology may still find its place in transportation. But for now, at least, consumer trust in hydrogen vehicles has been undermined, and infrastructure is still unreliable for those who have opted to become early adopters of the technology. For those who bought into the vision early, the experience has turned into a cautionary tale.
“People want something they can rely upon,” said Black in his statement to Teslarati. “And they want it to be easy. Hydrogen is not quite there yet.”
For Mirai owners still making monthly payments on cars they cannot drive, the idea of a hydrogen powered future is very sobering.
Elon Musk
California snubs Tesla in its newly passed EV incentive that favors Rivian and Lucid
California passed a $135 million EV incentive that rewards Rivian and Lucid while sidelining Tesla
California just drew a line in the EV incentive sand to put Tesla on the wrong side of it. The state recently passed a $135 million program offering first-time electric vehicle buyers a direct incentive with no application required, but the rules were written in a way that leaves Tesla at a structural disadvantage compared to Rivian and Lucid.
The program caps eligible vehicles at $50,000 for new EVs and $25,000 for used ones. That pricing threshold rules out a significant portion of Tesla’s lineup, though some lower-priced Model 3 and Model Y configurations would still qualify. California-based automakers are exempt from the price cap entirely, regardless of what their vehicles cost. Rivian, headquartered in Irvine, and Lucid, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, both benefit from that exemption. Rivian’s R2 starts at roughly $45,000 but has versions above the cap. Lucid’s Air and Gravity start at $70,990 and $79,990 respectively, well above any threshold a non-California company would face.
California hits Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi driverless cars with new law
Tesla built its reputation and a significant portion of its early market share in California, where EV adoption has consistently led the nation. The company operates its original factory in Fremont, California, and the state was home to Tesla’s headquarters for most of its existence. That changed in 2021 when Tesla moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas. Since then, the relationship between the company and California Governor Gavin Newsom has been openly adversarial, with Musk and Newsom trading public criticism on multiple occasions.
California’s EV incentive landscape has shifted repeatedly in recent years, and Tesla has previously lost eligibility for state-level programs as its vehicles exceeded income-adjusted price thresholds. The federal $7,500 EV tax credit, which Tesla models have qualified for and lost depending on policy cycles, is no longer available after it expired without renewal, making state-level programs more meaningful to buyers than they have been in years.
The practical impact for buyers is more nuanced than the headline suggests. California residents purchasing a Tesla under $50,000 for the first time can still access the incentive. But the exemption written for California-based manufacturers is a structural advantage that rewards where a company plants its headquarters flag rather than where it builds its products, and Tesla moved that flag to Texas.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s newest logo confirms everything about what it’s become
SpaceX officially absorbed xAI under the SpaceXAI brand, completing the largest private merger in history.
SpaceX made its corporate transformation official in May 2026 when Elon Musk posted on X that xAI would cease to exist as a standalone company. “xAI will be dissolved as a separate company, so it will just be SpaceXAI, the AI products from SpaceX,” he wrote.
A new SpaceXAI logo was announced today, visually embedding the xAI letters inside the SpaceX identity, which can be seen as a deliberate design choice that signals the merger is not a partnership but a full absorption and XAi a core function of the same company. The same way Starlink is not a separate brand but a SpaceX product. The announcement closed the loop on a process that began February 2, 2026, when SpaceX acquired xAI in the largest private merger in history, valued at $1.25 trillion. SpaceX at $1 trillion and xAI at $250 billion.
We are now @SpaceXAI. pic.twitter.com/ema66xDWC9
— SpaceXAI (@SpaceXAI) July 6, 2026
The reason SpaceX bought xAI was stated plainly by Musk at the time of the deal: to build orbital data centers. SpaceX had simultaneously filed with the FCC to launch up to one million satellites designed to function as AI compute nodes in low Earth orbit, escaping what Musk described as the energy constraints limiting AI development on Earth.
xAI provided the AI software stack, with Grok, the X platform, and the Colossus supercomputer infrastructure in Memphis with over 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs, while SpaceX provided the rockets, Starlink, and the capital base to fund it. The two companies needed each other. xAI was burning $2.5 billion in losses on $250 million in revenue. SpaceX was generating an estimated $8 billion in profit on $15 billion in revenue and needed an AI narrative to command the valuation it was targeting for its IPO.
What SpaceX has done, regardless of how the orbital AI vision ultimately plays out, is walk into a public market as something no company has been before: a rocket manufacturer, satellite internet provider, AI software company, social media platform, and supercomputer operator under one ticker. Whether that combination is worth $2 trillion depends entirely on which of those businesses you believe in most.
News
Tesla flexes how it will help the blind with Cybercab
Tesla brought its innovative Cybercab robotaxi to the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) Annual Convention in Austin, Texas, on July 3 at the JW Marriott Austin.
The hands-on demonstration highlighted the vehicle’s thoughtful design for blind and visually impaired users, underscoring Tesla’s commitment to inclusive autonomous mobility. Attendees, many using white canes or accompanied by service dogs, experienced the steering-wheel-free Cybercab firsthand.
Cybercab at the National Federation of the Blind’s Annual Convention in Austin for a hands-on experience of its accessibility features for blind or visually impaired customers⁰⁰For example:⁰– Braille lettering on physical controls
– Space for service animals & assistive… pic.twitter.com/8wrJcDHkw7— Tesla Robotaxi (@robotaxi) July 6, 2026
The showcase emphasized practical features tailored to the needs of the blind community. Braille lettering appears on physical controls, including door releases and emergency buttons, allowing users to navigate interfaces independently through touch. Generous interior space accommodates service animals and assistive devices such as canes, guide dogs, or mobility aids without compromising comfort.
Wheelchair-height seating facilitates easier transfers for users with additional mobility challenges. Photos from the event captured blind attendees approaching the vehicle confidently, service dogs relaxing inside, and hands exploring Braille-equipped handles.
Tesla Robotaxi’s official account detailed these elements, noting the Cybercab’s focus on accessibility, especially noting the Braille lettering and additional space for service animals.
How Tesla Will Transform Mobility for the Blind
Autonomous vehicles like the Cybercab promise revolutionary independence for the roughly 2.2 million visually impaired Americans. Traditional barriers—reliance on sighted drivers, costly paratransit, or limited public transit—often restrict spontaneous travel. Tesla Full Self-Driving aims to eliminate the need for a human operator, enabling on-demand, door-to-door rides via simple app hailing with voice guidance.
Users gain freedom to work, socialize, shop, or attend events anytime without scheduling hassles or safety concerns. This reduces isolation, boosts employment opportunities, and enhances quality of life, turning mobility from a dependency into true personal autonomy.
The NFB demonstration not only gathered valuable feedback but also generated excitement about a future where technology levels the playing field. By prioritizing inclusive design, Tesla advances a vision of transportation that serves everyone, potentially reshaping daily life for blind individuals and setting a standard for the autonomous industry.
As Cybercab deployment scales, these accessibility innovations could mark a significant step toward equitable mobility.