Daimler CEO just dropped some pretty WILD pro-hydrogen claims
Daimler Truck AG CEO Karin Rådström hopped on LinkedIn today and dropped some absolutely wild pro-hydrogen talking points, using words like “emotional” and “inspiring” while making some pretty heady claims about the viability and economics of hydrogen. The rant is doubly embarrassing for another reason: the company’s hydrogen trucks are more than 100 million miles behind Volvo’s electric semis.
Earlier this month, Daimler Truck AG issued a press release entitled, “Five and a Half Times Around the World: Daimler Truck Fuel Cell Trucks Successfully Complete More Than 225,000 km (~139,000 miles) in Real-World Customer Operations.” Don’t bother looking for it on Electrek, though. I didn’t run it. And I didn’t run it because, frankly, a fleet of over-the-road semi trucks managing to cover a little over half the number of miles that David Blenkle put on his single Ford Mustang Mach-E isn’t particularly impressive.
In the meantime, Daimler competitors like Volvo, Renault, and even tiny Motiv are racking up millions and millions of all-electric miles and MAN Truck CEO Alexander Vlaskamp is saying that it’s impossible for hydrogen to compete with batteries. Heck, even Daimler’s own eActros BEV semi trucks are putting up better numbers than those hydrogen deals.
So, why then is Rådström pouring on the hydrogen love over on LinkedIn?
For some reason – posts about hydrogen always stir up emotions. I think hydrogen (not “instead of” but “in parallel to” electric) plays a role in the decarbonization of heavy duty transport in Europe for three reasons:
- If we would go “electric only” we need to get the electric grid to a level where we can build enough charging stations for the 6 million trucks in Europe. It will take many years and be incredibly expensive. A hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive and you don’t need a grid connection to build it, putting 2000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy.
- Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen. Better to use that directly as fuel than to make electricity out of it.
- Some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.
At European Hydrogen Week, I saw firsthand the energy and ambition behind Europe’s net-zero goals. It’s inspiring—but also a wake-up call. We’re not moving fast enough.
What we need:
- Large-scale hydrogen production and transport to Europe
- A robust refueling network that goes beyond AFIR
- And real political support to make it happen – we need smart, efficient regulation that clears the path instead of adding hurdles.
To show what’s possible, we brought our Mercedes-Benz GenH2 to Brussels. From the end of 2026, we’ll deploy a small series of 100 fuel cell trucks to customers.
Let’s build the infrastructure, the momentum, and the partnerships to make zero-emission transport a reality. 🚛 and let’s try to avoid some of the mistakes that we see now while scaling up electric. And let’s stop the debate about “either or”. We need both.
Commenters were quick to point out that Daimler recently received €226M in grants from German federal and state governments to build 100 fuel cell trucks – but, while Daimler for sure doesn’t want to give back the money, it’s also pretty difficult to believe that Rådström’s pro-hydrogen posturing is sincere.
Especially since most of it seems like nonsense.
We’re not doing any of that
At the risk of sounding “emotional,” Rådström’s claims that building a hydrogen infrastructure in parallel will be less expensive than building an electrical infrastructure, and that “you don’t need a grid connection to build it,” are objectively false.
Further, if her claim that “putting 2,000 H2 stations in Europe is relatively easy” isn’t outright laughable, it’s worth noting that Europe had just 265 hydrogen filling stations in operation in 2024 (and only 40% of those, or about 100, were capable of serving HD trucks). At the same time, the IEA reported that there are nearly five million public charging ports already in service on the continent.
Next, the claim that, “Europe will rely on import of energy, and it could be transported into Europe from North Africa and Middle East as liquid hydrogen” (emphasis mine), is similarly dubious – especially when faced with the fact that, in 2023, wind and solar already supplied about 27–30% of EU electricity.
I will agree, however, with one of Rådström’s claims. She notes that, “some use cases of our customers are better suited for fuel cells than electric trucks – the fuel cell truck will allow higher payload and longer ranges.” That’s debatable, but widely accepted as true … for now. Daimler’s own research into lighter, more energy-dense, and lower-cost solid-state battery technology, however, may mean that it won’t be true for long, however.
Unless, of course, Mercedes’ solid-state batteries don’t work (and she would know more about that than I would, as a mere blogger).
Electrek’s Take
As you can imagine, Karin Rådström post generated quite a few comments at the Electrek watercooler. “Insane to claim that building hydrogen stations would be cheaper than building chargers,” said one fellow writer. “I’m fine with hydrogen for long haul heavy duty, but lying to get us there is idiotic.”
Another comment I liked said, “(Rådström) says that chargers need to be on the grid – you already have a grid, and it’s everywhere!”
At the end of the day, I have to echo the words of one of Mercedes’ storied engineering partners and OEM suppliers, Mahle, whose Chairman, Arnd Franz, who that building out a hydrogen infrastructure won’t be possible without “blue” H made from fossil fuels as recently as last April, and maybe that’s what this is all about: fossil fuel vehicles are where Daimler makes its biggest profits (for now), and muddying the waters and playing up this idea that we’re in some sort of “messy middle” transition makes it just easy enough for a reluctant fleet manager to say, “maybe next time” when it comes to EVs.
We, and the planet, will suffer for such cowardice – but maybe that’s too much malicious intent to ascribe to Ms. Rådström. Maybe this is just a simple “Hanlon’s razor” scenario and there’s nothing much else to read into it.
Let us know what you think of Rådström’s pro-hydrogen comments, and whether or not Daimler’s shareholders should be concerned about the quality of the research behind their CEO’s public posts, in the comments section at the bottom of the page.
SOURCE | IMAGES: Karin Rådström, via LinkedIn.
If you drive an electric vehicle, make charging at home fast, safe, and convenient with a Level 2 charger installed by Qmerit. As the nation’s most trusted EV charger installation network, Qmerit connects you with licensed, background-checked electricians who specialize in EV charging. You’ll get a quick online estimate, upfront pricing, and installation backed by Qmerit’s nationwide quality guarantee. Their pros follow the highest safety standards so you can plug in at home with total peace of mind.
Ready to charge smarter? Get started today with Qmerit. (trusted affiliate link)
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
After years of teasing that other automakers would license Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system, Elon Musk has now admitted that no other automakers want to license it.
“They don’t want it!” He says.
For years, the bull case for Tesla (TSLA) has relied heavily on the idea that the company isn’t just an automaker, but an “AI and robotics company”, with its first robot product being an autonomous car.
CEO Elon Musk pushed the theory further, arguing that Tesla’s lead in autonomy was so great that legacy automakers would eventually have no choice but to license Full Self-Driving (FSD) to survive.
Back in early 2021, during the Q4 2020 earnings call, Musk first claimed that Tesla had “preliminary discussions” with other automakers about licensing the software. He reiterated this “openness” frequently, famously tweeting in June 2023 that Tesla was “happy to license Autopilot/FSD or other Tesla technology” to competitors.
The speculation peaked in April 2024, when Musk explicitly stated that Tesla was “in talks with one major automaker” and that there was a “good chance” a deal would be signed that year.
We now know that deal never happened. And thanks to comments from Ford CEO Jim Farley earlier this year, we have a good idea why. Farley, who was likely the other party in those “major automaker” talks, publicly shut down the idea of using FSD, stating clearly that “Waymo is better”.
Now, Musk appears to have given up on the idea of licensing Tesla FSD. In a post on X late last night, Musk acknowledged that discussions with other automakers have stalled, claiming that they asked for “unworkable requirements” for Tesla.
The CEO wrote:
“I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy …
When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless.”
Suppose you translate “unworkable requirements” from Musk-speak to automotive industry standard. In that case, it becomes clear what happened: automakers demanded a system that does what it says: drive autonomously, which means something different for Tesla.
Legacy automakers generally follow a “V-model” of validation. They define requirements, test rigorously, and validate safety before release. When Mercedes-Benz released its Drive Pilot system, a true Level 3 system, they accepted full legal liability for the car when the system is engaged.
In contrast, Tesla’s “aggressive deployment” strategy relies on releasing “beta” (now “Supervised”) software to customers and using them to validate the system. This approach has led to a litany of federal investigations and lawsuits.
Just this month, Tesla settled the James Tran vs. Tesla lawsuit just days before trial. The case involved a Model Y on Autopilot crashing into a stationary police vehicle, a known issue with Tesla’s system for years. By settling, Tesla avoided a jury verdict, but the message to the industry was clear: even Tesla knows it risks losing these cases in court.
Meanwhile, major automakers, such as Toyota, have partnered with Waymo to integrate its autonomous driving techonology into its consumer vehicles.
Electrek’s Take
The “unworkable requirements for Tesla” is an instant Musk classic. What were those requirements that were unachievable for Tesla? That it wouldn’t crash into stationary objects on the highway, such as emergency vehicles?
How dare they request something that crazy?
No Ford or GM executive is going to license a software stack that brings that kind of liability into their house. If they license FSD, they want Tesla to indemnify them against crashes. Tesla, knowing the current limitations of its vision-only system, likely refused.
To Musk, asking him to pay for FSD’s mistakes is an “unworkable requirement.” It’s always a driver error, and the fact that he always uses hyperbole to describe the level of safety being higher than that of humans has no impact on user abuse of the poorly named driver assistance systems in his view.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
CPSC warns Rad Power Bikes owners to stop using select batteries immediately due to fire risk
In an unprecedented move, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has issued a public safety warning urging owners of certain Rad Power Bikes e-bike batteries to immediately stop using them, citing a risk of fire, explosion, and potentially serious injury or death.
The warning, published today, targets Rad’s lithium-ion battery models RP-1304 and HL-RP-S1304, which were sold with some of the company’s most popular e-bikes, including the RadWagon 4, RadRunner 1 and 2, RadRunner Plus, RadExpand 5, RadRover 5 series, and RadCity 3 and 4 models. Replacement batteries sold separately are also included.
According to the CPSC, the batteries “can unexpectedly ignite and explode,” particularly when exposed to water or debris. The agency says it has documented 31 fires linked to the batteries so far, including 12 incidents of property damage totaling over $734,000. Alarmingly, several fires occurred when the battery wasn’t charging or when the bike wasn’t even in use.
Complicating the situation further, Rad Power Bikes – already facing significant financial turmoil – has “refused to agree to an acceptable recall,” according to the CPSC. The company reportedly told regulators it cannot afford to replace or refund the large number of affected batteries. Rad previously informed employees that it could be forced to shut down permanently in January if it cannot secure new funding, barely two weeks before this safety notice was issued by the CPSC.
For its part, Rad pushed back strongly on the CPSC’s characterization. A Rad Power Bikes Spokesperson explained in a statement to Electrek that the company “stands behind our batteries and our reputation as leaders in the ebike industry, and strongly disagrees with the CPSC’s characterization of certain Rad batteries as defective or unsafe.”
The company explained that its products meet or exceed stringent international safety standards, including UL-2271 and UL-2849, which are standards that the CPSC has proposed as a requirement but not yet implemented. Rad says its batteries have been repeatedly tested by reputable third-party labs, including during the CPSC investigation, and that those tests confirmed full compliance. Rad also claims the CPSC did not independently test the batteries using industry-accepted standards, and stresses that the incident rate cited by the agency represents a tiny fraction of a percent. While acknowledging that any fire report is serious, Rad maintains that lithium-ion batteries across all industries can be hazardous if damaged, improperly used, or exposed to significant water intrusion, and that these universal risks do not indicate a defect specific to Rad’s products.
The company says it entered the process hoping to collaborate with federal regulators to improve safety guidance and rider education, and that it offered multiple compromise solutions – including discounted upgrades to its newer Safe Shield batteries that were a legitimate leap forward in safety in the industry – but the CPSC rejected them. Rad argues that the agency instead demanded a full replacement program that would immediately bankrupt the company, leaving customers without support. It also warns that equating new technology with older products being “unsafe” undermines innovation, noting that the introduction of safer systems, such as anti-lock brakes, doesn’t retroactively deem previous generations faulty. Ultimately, Rad says clear, consistent national standards are needed so manufacturers can operate with confidence while continuing to advance battery safety.
Lithium-ion battery fires have become a growing concern across the US and internationally, with poorly made packs implicated in a rising number of deadly incidents.
While Rad Power Bikes states that no injuries or fatalities have been tied to these specific models, the federal warning marks one of the most serious e-bike battery advisories issued to date – and arrives at a moment when the once-dominant US e-bike brand is already fighting for survival.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
Rivian’s e-bike brand launches $250 smart helmet with breakthrough safety tech and lights
ALSO, the new micromobility brand spun out of Rivian, just announced official pricing for its long-awaited Alpha Wave helmet. The smart helmet, which introduces a brand-new safety tech called the Release Layer System (RLS), is now listed at $250, with “notify for pre-order” now open on ALSO’s site. Deliveries are expected to begin in spring 2026.
The $250 price point might sound steep, but ALSO is positioning the Alpha Wave as a top-tier lid that undercuts other premium smart helmets with similar tech – some of which push into the $400–500 range. That’s because the Alpha Wave is promising more than just upgraded comfort and design. The company claims the helmet will also deliver a significant leap in rotational impact protection.
The RLS system is made up of four internal panels that are engineered to release on impact, helping dissipate rotational energy – a major factor in many concussions. It’s being marketed as a next-gen alternative to MIPS and similar technologies, and could signal a broader shift in helmet safety standards if adopted widely.
Beyond protection, the Alpha Wave also packs a surprising amount of tech. Four wind-shielded speakers and two noise-canceling microphones are built in for taking calls, playing music, or following navigation prompts. And when paired with ALSO’s own TM-B electric bike, the helmet integrates with the bike’s onboard lighting system for synchronized rear lights and 200-lumen forward visibility.
The helmet is IPX6-rated for water resistance and charges via USB-C, making it easy to keep powered up alongside other modern gear.
Electrek’s Take
This helmet pushes the smart gear envelope. $250 isn’t nothing, but for integrated lighting, audio, and what might be a true leap forward in crash protection, it’s priced to shake things up in the high-end helmet space.
One area I’m not a huge fan of is the paired front and rear lights. Cruiser motorcycles have this same issue, with paired tail lights mounted close together sometimes being mistaken for a conventional four-wheeled vehicle farther away. I worry that the paired “headlights” and “taillights” of this helmet could be mistaken for a car farther down the road instead of the reality of a much closer cyclist. But hey, we’ll have to see.
The tech is pretty cool though, and if the RLS system holds up to its promise, we might be looking at the new bar for premium e-bike head protection.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024