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
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks hit a new stage, and one hurdle remains
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks are reportedly advancing, and a deal could arrive by December.
Tesla and SpaceX are moving closer to a combination, with a deal announcement possible as soon as December, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The companies have also discussed a scenario in which the announcement slips into early 2027.
Boards and advisers on both sides are now working through the terms of the deal and the governance structure of the combined company, according to the report. One open item is how many SpaceX shares Tesla investors would receive. Bloomberg had previously reported that the two companies were aiming to announce a deal in the first half of next year and close it before the end of President Donald Trump’s term, so a December announcement would pull that schedule forward by months.
Tesla shares rose as much as 1.9% to $398.35 after the report, while SpaceX gained 0.6% to $140.63. SpaceX carries a market value of about $1.9 trillion following its June IPO, and Tesla is valued at about $1.55 trillion, which would make a combination the largest corporate deal on record. Neither company responded to requests for comment.
The talks became official on October 20, when Elon Musk said on SpaceX’s third quarter earnings call that both companies had formed special committees of independent directors to study a merger, as Teslarati reported. Musk said he could not take part because he is “a conflicted party” and called the process “an odd kabuki dance.” He also noted that Tesla would need approval from 50 percent of all outstanding shares, a bar the company missed in 2025 when a board declassification proposal won support from only 39.4 percent.
China remains the biggest structural problem. Bloomberg’s sources said the companies still need to work out how to isolate Tesla’s large and profitable manufacturing business in China from SpaceX’s U.S. government and defense contracts. JPMorgan analyst Rajat Gupta described those two factors last month as “key dynamics that are at odds with each other” for regulatory and shareholder approval. Musk has repeatedly said Tesla has no plans to separate its China business, a position he restated in August after ARK Invest predicted a merger announcement before the end of the year.
Washington adds another layer. Democrats took control of Congress in this month’s midterms and have pledged to investigate Musk’s business and political activities, which could bring added scrutiny to a deal involving one of the Pentagon’s most important launch and satellite contractors.
The report also lands three weeks before Tesla’s December 3 annual meeting at Giga Texas. That ballot has only three items, led by the re-election of Musk, board chair Robyn Denholm and JB Straubel, and includes no merger proposal. Any deal announced in December would likely require a separate special meeting for Tesla shareholders to vote on it.
The two companies already share a growing list of projects, including the Terafab semiconductor plant in Texas. Tesla’s next generation Roadster, which uses cold gas thrusters built on SpaceX hardware, turned up on display at SpaceX headquarters last month and has become one of the clearest public examples of that overlap.
News
SpaceX hid behind another name in the Arizona desert, and now it’s going big
SpaceX puts a $50 billion price on its Arizona supercompute campus ahead of December’s hearing.
SpaceX has put a price tag on the supercomputer campus it wants to build in the southern Arizona desert. In a statement Thursday, the company said it is pursuing a roughly $50 billion supercompute campus in Cochise County, about 80 miles east of Tucson. Together with a separate facility planned at Starbase, Texas, the two projects add up to more than $74 billion in planned investment.
The Arizona figure had not been disclosed before. SpaceX’s involvement only became public on November 4, when company representatives hosted a packed town hall at Cochise Elementary School for an application filed under the name Tombstone Resources LLC. A SpaceX representative told residents the filing used another name because putting SpaceX on it “draws attention” from outside the county, local station KVOA reported.
The application describes a 747-acre site near the Willcox Playa with up to nine buildings of about 493,000 square feet each. SpaceX plans to bring the campus online in four phases of roughly 1.5 GW, reaching 6 GW at full build, backed by a 24 GWh battery system and about $3.6 billion in grid upgrades. At that size, it would draw about 2.5 times more power than every data center in Maricopa County combined, according to an Arizona Republic analysis.
SpaceX says the project will create about 5,500 construction jobs and 1,000 permanent jobs, and that it could cut electricity bills for members of the local cooperatives by up to 20 percent. The campus would use dry cooling with no industrial groundwater use. Its application estimates ongoing water needs of 7 to 10 acre-feet a year, roughly what 20 to 30 homes consume.
Power is the bigger question. The site sits next to the Apache Generating Station, a coal and natural gas plant with about 1 GW of capacity that had been slated to retire by 2028. SpaceX told residents its investment could expand the station to more than 6 GW.
Local opposition is organized. A petition asking the county to deny the permit has gathered about 2,400 signatures, and the nearby playa is a landing spot for federally protected sandhill cranes, which SpaceX says its design accounts for. The Cochise County Planning and Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on December 9 in Bisbee, with written comments due November 27. If approved, construction could start in March 2027.
The Texas project faces a vote the same day. The Starbase City Commission will consider a property tax abatement for SpaceX’s $24 billion gas plant and supercompute facility at its own December 9 hearing, as Teslarati reported. SpaceX said Thursday the Starbase site has already generated more than 3,000 construction jobs, and it committed $220 million to Brownsville’s water and wastewater systems, $40 million of which has been paid.
Both campuses would expand a footprint still centered on the Memphis area, where SpaceX’s Colossus data centers run largely on gas turbines and the company won a permit for a power plant in Southaven, Mississippi earlier this year. SpaceX ended the third quarter with 1.7 GW of nameplate compute. The Arizona campus alone, at full build, would be more than three times that size.
Elon Musk
Nvidia’s board meets on Jensen Huang, and Elon Musk already has an answer
Elon Musk says it would be an honor to hire Jensen Huang amid Nvidia turmoil.
Elon Musk says he would welcome Jensen Huang at one of his companies if Nvidia’s board decides to push out its longtime chief executive.
On Wednesday evening, the financial account ZeroHedge posted “Elon please hire Jensen” on X. Musk replied roughly two hours later: “That would be an honor.” Neither Huang nor Nvidia had responded publicly as of Wednesday night.
Musk’s reply came as Nvidia’s board met to decide Huang’s future. The Wall Street Journal reported that directors were preparing to oust him following reports of two extramarital relationships. One involves Alice Huang, a Singapore-based businesswoman whom U.S. intelligence officials reportedly believe was working for China’s Ministry of State Security. The New York Times separately reported a relationship with Kimberly Powell, Nvidia’s vice president of health care. Huang acknowledged being unfaithful in a memo to employees on Sunday but gave no details.
@zerohedge That would be an honor
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 12, 2026
Under Nvidia’s bylaws, a majority of its 11 directors can remove the CEO with or without cause. Bloomberg reported that the board has been working with an outside firm on possible replacements and may name an interim chief, with CFO Colette Kress seen as the likely pick. Nvidia shares fell more than 8 percent in extended trading, according to CNBC, and the company is scheduled to report quarterly earnings on November 17.
Musk has more riding on Nvidia’s leadership than most tech executives. In August, he told investors on SpaceX’s first earnings call as a public company that it would build its AI infrastructure exclusively on Nvidia hardware, calling Vera Rubin “the best architecture.” SpaceX is also working with Nvidia on the compute payload for Starmind, its planned orbital AI constellation. In October, SpaceX said it had a binding commitment for a roughly $40 billion lease of Vera Rubin GPUs and related equipment, with the leases expected to begin in the first half of 2027.
The scale of that dependence is already enormous. On its Q3 call, SpaceX said it was bringing roughly 200,000 to 220,000 Nvidia GB300 GPUs online each month and expects 2.5 to 3 GW of nameplate compute by the end of the year. That buildout is now reaching new sites like the proposed $24 billion power plant and supercomputer campus at Starbase.
The relationship between the two executives also goes back nearly a decade. Huang has often told the story of personally delivering Nvidia’s first DGX-1 AI supercomputer to Musk in 2016, when no other customer wanted one. “Nobody wanted to be part of it, except for Elon,” Huang said on the Joe Rogan Experience last December.
Musk did not say what role Huang might fill, and his reply stops short of a formal offer. Huang co-founded Nvidia in 1993 and still owns about 3.6 percent of its stock, so any move to a Musk company would depend on whether, and how, he leaves the chipmaker he has run for more than three decades.