Jay Leno, the longtime car enthusiast and former late-night host, has pointed to the Tesla Semi’s lower running costs as a potential force that could reshape commercial trucking. His comments arrive at a time when real-world fleet data is starting to confirm that electric semis can deliver meaningful savings over diesel, though significant questions about scale and upfront investment remain unanswered.
PepsiCo’s Fleet Puts Numbers Behind the Hype
The strongest evidence for Leno’s thesis does not come from a showroom or a press conference. It comes from PepsiCo’s own operations. The beverage giant took delivery of its Tesla Semi trucks in December 2022 and, by the end of August 2023, had logged nearly 680,000 zero-emission miles, according to PepsiCo’s corporate records. That figure represents one of the largest publicly documented electric Class 8 truck deployments in the United States, and it offers a concrete baseline for evaluating whether electric semis can actually cut costs at scale.
What matters for fleet operators is not just mileage but the cost per mile. Diesel fuel, maintenance intervals, and engine complexity all drive expenses higher for conventional trucks. Electric drivetrains eliminate many of those costs: no oil changes, fewer brake replacements (thanks to regenerative braking), and energy prices that tend to be more stable than diesel. Leno’s argument rests on this math. If the per-mile operating expense drops far enough, the higher purchase price of an electric truck starts to look like a smart long-term bet rather than a luxury.
PepsiCo’s reported experience suggests that these theoretical advantages are translating into day-to-day operations. High utilization across hundreds of thousands of miles indicates that the trucks are not just demonstration units; they are working assets integrated into regular routes. That level of deployment gives analysts a more reliable window into how electric semis behave under real commercial pressure, from varying loads to changing weather conditions.
Independent Telemetry Tracks Real Efficiency
PepsiCo’s self-reported mileage is one data point. Independent verification adds another layer of credibility. The Run on Less Electric DEPOT program, organized by NACFE and RMI, tracked participating fleets during 2023, including PepsiCo’s Tesla Semis. All vehicle data was collected through Geotab-based monitoring, which recorded energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per mile, charging durations, power levels, and route patterns without relying on manufacturer claims.
The public results portal for the program provides day-by-day and trip-level charts for PepsiCo Beverages’ Tesla Semi operations. Those charts show miles driven per day, state-of-charge curves during routes, and how long each charging session lasted. For anyone trying to calculate whether electric trucks pencil out financially, this dataset connects real energy consumption directly to operational behavior. It is, in effect, a transparent ledger of what it actually costs to move freight with battery power instead of diesel.
That transparency is rare in trucking. Most fleet cost data stays proprietary, making it difficult to test bold claims about savings or reliability. The NACFE/RMI dataset, available for download from the Run on Less portal, gives researchers, fleet managers, and policymakers a shared factual foundation. When Leno talks about lower running costs, this is the kind of evidence that either supports or undermines the claim, and so far, the numbers have not contradicted it.
Equally important, the telemetry captures how charging is woven into operations. Instead of relying on hypothetical duty cycles, observers can see how often trucks return to base, how deeply batteries are discharged, and whether charging sessions align with planned breaks. Those details will shape future decisions about depot design, utility connections, and route planning.
What Drivers Say About the Experience
Cost savings on paper mean little if the trucks cannot handle the daily grind of commercial freight. PepsiCo’s own reporting includes driver testimony that speaks to this concern. The company’s account of its first Tesla Semi driver describes a vehicle that handles well and delivers strong performance on routes that include hills and highway stretches. Drivers noted the instant torque of the electric motor, which eliminates the lag that diesel engines produce when accelerating under heavy loads.
This is not a trivial detail. Driver satisfaction affects retention, and trucking companies across the country have struggled for years to recruit and keep qualified drivers. If electric trucks are easier and more pleasant to operate, that has a direct financial benefit beyond fuel savings. Lower turnover means lower training costs and fewer disruptions to delivery schedules. The operational picture, in other words, extends well beyond the price of electricity versus diesel.
Cab design and noise levels also influence how drivers perceive the technology. Electric powertrains tend to reduce vibration and engine noise, which can make long shifts less fatiguing. While PepsiCo’s materials focus primarily on performance and range, the implicit message is that these trucks are not demanding exotic new skills. For fleets already struggling to fill seats, that familiarity could make the transition less daunting.
The Gap Between Running Costs and Total Cost
Leno’s framing focuses on running costs, and that distinction matters. Running costs cover fuel, maintenance, and day-to-day operational expenses. Total cost of ownership adds the purchase price, financing, insurance, and depreciation. Electric Class 8 trucks still carry a significant price premium over their diesel equivalents, and battery prices, while declining, remain a major factor.
No publicly available institutional analysis from the Department of Transportation or the Environmental Protection Agency currently provides a direct, apples-to-apples comparison of the Tesla Semi’s total cost of ownership against a comparable diesel rig over a five-year or ten-year period. That gap in the data is worth acknowledging. PepsiCo’s operational telemetry offers strong indirect evidence about energy costs and utilization rates, but it does not settle the total ownership question on its own.
This is where the dominant narrative around electric trucks often oversimplifies. Advocates point to lower fuel and maintenance bills. Skeptics point to battery degradation, charging infrastructure costs, and the upfront premium. Both sides are working with incomplete information because so few electric semis have been in service long enough to generate full lifecycle data. PepsiCo’s fleet, with its roughly nine months of documented operation through August 2023, is among the most transparent examples available, but even that dataset covers only the early phase of vehicle life.
For now, the most accurate statement is that running costs appear favorable where duty cycles match the strengths of electric drivetrains, shorter regional hauls with predictable routes and depot-based charging. Whether those advantages hold up after a decade of use, including potential battery replacements or resale value shifts, remains an open question.
Charging Infrastructure as the Hidden Variable
Running costs also depend heavily on how and where trucks charge. The Run on Less Electric DEPOT data includes charging durations and power levels, which reveal how much time trucks spend plugged in versus on the road. For a fleet like PepsiCo’s, which operates from fixed depots, overnight charging can take advantage of lower electricity rates during off-peak hours. That scheduling flexibility is a real advantage over diesel, where fuel prices fluctuate based on global crude markets and regional supply.
But not every fleet operates from a central depot. Long-haul trucking, which accounts for a large share of freight miles in the U.S., requires a public charging network that does not yet exist at the density needed for widespread adoption. The Tesla Semi’s running cost advantage is most clear in regional and return-to-base operations where vehicles can reliably start and end their days at the same location. For cross-country routes, the economics will hinge on whether high-power chargers can be deployed along major corridors without imposing unacceptable downtime.
Infrastructure also influences utility demand charges, interconnection timelines, and local grid capacity. A depot that adds multiple megawatts of charging may need upgrades that take years to complete, shifting some of the cost savings into upfront capital projects. Those investments blur the line between vehicle economics and facility planning, making each fleet’s case highly specific.
A Transitional Moment for Trucking
Leno’s comments tap into a broader shift underway in commercial transport. For the first time, major fleets can point to real-world electric truck data rather than pilot projects measured in a handful of vehicles. PepsiCo’s experience, backed by independent telemetry, suggests that lower running costs are more than a marketing slogan, at least in certain use cases.
Yet the story is far from complete. Total cost of ownership remains uncertain, public charging for heavy-duty vehicles is in its infancy, and long-term durability data is still emerging. For now, electric semis appear best suited to niches where their strengths (efficient energy use, regenerative braking, and depot charging) align with operational needs.
In that context, Leno’s focus on running costs is both insightful and incomplete. Lower operating expenses can be a powerful lever, but they sit within a larger equation that includes infrastructure, financing, and policy. As more fleets share detailed performance data and as independent programs continue to publish transparent telemetry, the trucking industry will gain a clearer picture of whether electric semis are a disruptive force or a specialized tool. The answer will likely arrive not in a single headline, but in millions of quietly logged miles.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
