News
Nikola Motor unveils 1,000 HP hydrogen-electric truck with 1,200 mi. range
Nikola Motor Company unveiled its zero emissions Class 8 truck at company headquarters this week. Dubbed the Nikola One, the once all-electric prototype now hydrogen powered, boasts an incredible 1,200 miles of range and will be stiff competition for Tesla’s planned entry into the long haul trucking segment with its all-electric Tesla Semi.
Nikola One is sleek and futuristic. Because it has no diesel engine, the cab can be pushed forward as far as possible to give the driver a panoramic view of the road ahead. Individual electric motors for each of its six wheels provides an incredible 1,000 horsepower and 2,000 lb-ft of torque. Both numbers are considerably higher than for a typical tractor.
Power comes from a 320 kWh battery developed by the company. “Our battery engineers have made major advances in storage and cooling,” said Nikola founder and CEO Trevor Milton. “We believe our lithium battery packs are more energy dense and weigh less than any available vehicle production pack per kWh.”
The company had previously designed Nikola One as an electric truck that would have a range extender via a turbine powered by natural gas. But at the reveal, the company announced the turbine has been replaced by a hydrogen fuel cell that will keep the battery charged and provide a range between 800 to 1,200 miles.
The prototype on display this week is technological marvel. An array of sensors and cameras permit the driver to have a full 360º view around the entire rig at all times, eliminating blind spots all together. Inside the cab there is room for a one or two full size beds, a refrigerator/freezer, a 40″ curved 4K TV with Apple TV, as well as Wi-Fi and 4G LTE connectivity. Comfort and convenience for the driver will be unparalleled.
The company says it is evaluating a number of locations for its factory. “Nikola will build a world-class advanced manufacturing facility which will create thousands of new jobs,” says Trevor Milton. He claims the factory will be able to build 50,000 trucks a year by 2020.
So far, one might be forgiven for thinking the Nikola One is mostly vaporware except for one thing. The company has struck a deal with Ryder Systems, which has agreed to be Nikola’s exclusive nationwide distribution and maintenance provider. Ryder has a network of over 800 service locations in North America today.
“We are extremely excited to finally show off the Nikola One to the public for the first time,” said Milton. “There are many out there that wondered if we would deliver, but today we proudly show off the most advanced semi-truck ever built. We couldn’t be more thrilled to have one of the best brands in America, Ryder, as our trusted partner providing nationwide sales, service and warranty for Nikola Motor Company.”
The financial plan for the company calls for leasing the trucks for 72 months at rates of between $5,000 and $7,000 a month. The lease fee will cover all scheduled maintenance at a Ryder facility and the cost of hydrogen fuel. Talking a page from the Tesla playbook, Nikola is accepting reservations for its battery/fuel cell Class 8 truck. It says it has received billions of dollars worth of deposits which cost $1,500 and are fully refundable.
Meanwhile, Elon Musk has let it be known that he also has his eye on the heavy truck market. We can be sure his vision for a Tesla Semi won’t involve any onboard fossil fueled range extender engines or what he dismissively calls “fool cells.”
The Coast of Hydrogen
Nikola says it intends to develop a network of 350 hydrogen fueling stations across North America for its trucks, beginning in 2018. It would be similar to the Supercharger network Tesla has been building to support long distance travel for its fleet of electric cars. But here’s the rub.
Hydrogen refueling stations cost $2 million or more to construct. It is estimated that a typical Tesla Supercharger location costs about one tenth as much to build. Exactly who will be paying for the hydrogen refueling system is unclear. And there are other issues with using hydrogen. Yes, the waste products of a fuel cell are water vapor and heat. But getting the hydrogen requires tremendous amounts of energy.
In the US, most hydrogen is derived from natural gas. Take the process back a step or two and that natural gas is often the result of fracking, a process that at the very least is controversial and at worst results in heavy pollution of the land and groundwater in the vicinity. Whether the Nikola One can accurately be called “zero emissions” is a matter for debate.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
