A new report shows that commercial vehicles are much higher polluters than passenger vehicles despite making up a much smaller portion of cars on U.S. roads. For this reason, the study’s authors say the U.S. should prioritize electrifying the commercial vehicles sector rather than just focusing on passenger vehicles.
PepsiCo- and KPMG-backed software logistics company Adiona Tech shared the Connected Thinking report on Tuesday, which suggests that last-mile combination trucks be electrified as soon as possible to help fight CO2 emissions. The company says that all urban deliveries of groceries, parcels, furniture and other goods should be performed by electric vehicles (EVs) by 2025.
“Commercial vehicles are a much bigger polluter than passenger cars and they are in desperate need of modernization,” Adiona writes in the report. “Large combination trucks are just 1 percent of vehicles on the road, but they produce 18 percent of vehicle emissions.”
The study compared Bureau of Transportation Statistics figures from 2019 to those of 2020 and 2021, looking at vehicle miles driven by passenger cars and trucks, along with their associated emissions. What it found was that emissions decreased significantly in 2020 and 2021, while truck miles and their associated emissions increased above 18 percent of road traffic emissions.
Sources: Connected Fleet data; BTS, fuel consumption by mode, additional combination truck stats, additional car stats, additional single-axle truck stats. Credit: Adiona Tech
The report included several key findings, notably including that the average fuel consumption of combination trucks is roughly 20 times higher than that of a passenger vehicle. The report also says that switching just five of these combination trucks to green alternatives — such as hydrogen fuel cells or lithium batteries — would be comparable to the effects of buying EVs for 100 households.
While the average truck drives about 22,930 miles annually, the report notes that large combination trucks travel an average of 59,929 miles in the same period, and single-unit trucks only average 12,278 miles annually.
According to data sourced from the Bureau of Transportation, light-duty vehicles with a short wheelbase have an average fuel consumption of 481 gallons per year, compared to 640 gallons consumed on average by light-duty vehicles with long wheelbases, and 1,639 gallons on average by single-unit, two-axle trucks with six tires or more. However, the data also shows that combination trucks consume an average of 9,909 gallons annually.
In a press release, Adiona Tech CEO Richard Savoie highlights the need to prioritize larger freight in the fight against carbon emissions, beginning with those that travel the most.
“America needs to aggressively decarbonize the biggest emitters on the road, large freight and delivery vehicles,” Savoie said in the release. “The US automotive industry is at a crossroads, but it needs to act now to electrify every car on the road. Doing so requires connected thinking and collective action. We cannot transform the national fleet of nearly 300 million vehicles overnight, so we need to make decisions that make the biggest difference, for the lowest effort first.”
The passenger vehicle sector has adopted EVs much more quickly than others, as several automakers have now followed Tesla’s lead in building fully electric vehicles. While electrifying every car is still an important goal, Savoie explains, it shouldn’t be the only one.
“Frankly, the data shows that consumer adoption of EVs should not be America’s number one priority,” Savoie said. “Electrifying fleets is by far the most efficient way to reduce vehicle emissions. Every battery we put in a combination truck counts for 20 households buying an EV, and businesses often have fleets of hundreds of vehicles.”
“We must prioritize the electrification of these vehicles that are on the road most, travel the longest distances, and are the least fuel-efficient,” Savoie added.
Several companies have begun piloting or at least stated plans to purchase electric last-mile delivery vehicles, including FedEx, Amazon, Walmart and more.
Adiona Tech backer PepsiCo is one of the first companies to have begun electrifying its semi-truck fleet after purchasing an initial batch of Tesla Semis last year. A recent event showed some serious range results for the Semi, and PepsiCo detailed last month how the truck was helping it reach its own sustainability goals.
You can read the full report from Adiona Tech here.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
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
