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.
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
