The EV Truck Reality Check and Why Edison Motors’ Hybrid Might Be What Actually Works

I’m a diesel guy. Specifically, I’m a CAT guy. That’s not nostalgia talking or resistance to change, it’s 25-plus years of experience knowing what keeps trucks moving and freight delivered when conditions get ugly. Diesel has always given me peace of mind because it works. You can find fuel anywhere. The technology is proven. When something breaks, mechanics know how to fix it. In an industry where downtime means lost revenue and missed commitments, that reliability isn’t optional.

So when the EV conversation started dominating trucking discussions, my initial reaction was skepticism bordering on dismissal. Battery-electric trucks looked like solutions engineered by people who’d never operated in conditions where equipment failure has real consequences. The range limitations, charging infrastructure gaps, and operational disruptions seemed like deal-breakers that no amount of government subsidies or manufacturer marketing could overcome.

Then I started paying attention to what Edison Motors was building in British Columbia, and I realized something important: EVs can work in trucking if you actually engineer them for how trucking operates, rather than forcing trucking to adapt to technology limitations.

But before we get to Edison, let’s talk about why the Trump administration just pulled EV tax credits for commercial trucks. It’s not some political statement or shift in environmental priorities, it’s an acknowledgment of reality. America isn’t ready for wholesale adoption of electric trucks because we never did the planning and infrastructure work necessary to make it viable.

The UK’s relative success with commercial EVs didn’t happen by accident. They coordinated between government, utilities, fleet operators, and charging infrastructure providers before pushing mandates. They built charging networks that match operational needs. They focused deployment in applications where current technology actually works, shorter hauls, predictable routes, and operations that return to base for overnight charging. They planned the rollout based on what the technology could do rather than what they wished it could do.

The United States took the opposite approach. Throw tax credits at manufacturers, announce ambitious electrification targets, mandate technology adoption timelines, and assume infrastructure and economics will somehow sort themselves out. It’s the regulatory equivalent of throwing EVs at the wall to see what sticks, and, surprise, most of it didn’t stick.

The infrastructure problem is fundamental. Charging a passenger EV at home overnight is one thing. Charging Class 8 trucks that need megawatt-level power to recharge massive battery banks in timeframes that don’t obliterate productivity is something else entirely. The US doesn’t have that infrastructure. Building it requires grid upgrades, utility coordination, real estate acquisition, and capital investment measured in billions. Nobody figured out how to fund that at scale, so we’re left with announced initiatives, pilot programs, and scattered charging stations that don’t add up to functional networks.

Ford just announced an electric truck for the European market in 2026 with a 186-mile range. For UK operations where you can cover the entire country in a day and the charging infrastructure is relatively dense, that may work. Drop that same truck into American long-haul operations, and it’s useless. The geography doesn’t match, the infrastructure doesn’t exist, and the operational economics don’t work when you’re stopping for multi-hour charging sessions that turn a 10-hour driving day into a 15-hour ordeal with no additional revenue.

Range anxiety isn’t just about miles, it’s about operational flexibility and peace of mind. With diesel, if you need to adjust your route for traffic, weather, or a last-minute load change, you do it. If you’re running low on fuel, you pull into any of the thousands of truck stops and refuel in 15 minutes. That flexibility is what makes trucking work. Battery-electric trucks with fixed range and dependency on sparse charging infrastructure eliminate that flexibility. You’re locked into planned routes with no room for adjustment, and if something goes wrong, you could be stranded waiting for a tow or an hours-long charging session.

For someone whose career has depended on CAT diesels that work in conditions where failure means you’re stuck until a mechanic can reach you, which might be hours or days depending on where you broke down, the idea of voluntarily introducing that kind of vulnerability through technological limitations makes no sense. Diesel works because it’s proven, reliable, and supported by infrastructure that exists everywhere trucks operate.

But Edison Motors changed my thinking on whether EVs can work in trucking, because they approached the problem differently than everyone else.

Edison emerged from logging operations in British Columbia. If you know anything about logging, you know it’s an environment where equipment either works or you’re in serious trouble. You’re operating in remote areas, harsh weather, demanding terrain, and conditions where breakdowns can strand you far from help. Chase Barber and his partners weren’t building trucks to meet regulatory requirements or chase government subsidies, they were solving problems they faced daily running equipment in some of the most unforgiving conditions imaginable.

When they looked at available EV options, they saw the same problems every trucker faces: range limitations, reliance on charging infrastructure, and operational disruptions that make battery-electric trucks impractical for how trucking actually works. So instead of trying to force diesel operations into EV constraints, they built hybrid technology that captures EV benefits while eliminating the problems that make pure battery-electric trucks non-starters.

Edison’s trucks feature electric drivetrains with onboard CAT diesel generators that continuously recharge the system. It’s basically a diesel-electric locomotive concept adapted for highway trucking. The electric motors provide instant torque, regenerative braking, and reduced maintenance on brake systems and transmissions. But the onboard generator eliminates range anxiety, charging infrastructure dependency, and the operational flexibility problems that plague pure battery-electric designs.

Here’s what makes this brilliant for someone who trusts diesel: you get the efficiency and performance benefits of electric drive without giving up the reliability and infrastructure compatibility that makes diesel work. You’re not dependent on charging stations that may or may not exist where you need them. You’re not locked into a fixed range with no flexibility. You maintain an unlimited range as long as you can find diesel fuel, which is everywhere. And you’re using proven CAT generator technology rather than betting operations on battery systems that are still evolving.

The peace-of-mind factor is huge. With Edison’s hybrid approach, you can adjust your route or extend your day. If you’re in an area without charging infrastructure, which is most of America, you’re fine. If something goes wrong with the electrical system, you’ve got a diesel generator that can get you to a repair shop rather than being stranded waiting for a specialized EV technician.

Edison just received Canadian regulatory approval to manufacture and sell these hybrid heavy-duty trucks commercially. That’s an actual production vehicle competing in the real market. The approval validates that hybrid approaches can meet safety and emissions standards while addressing operational realities that pure battery-electric solutions ignore.

The fact that this innovation came from a small company emerging from logging operations rather than from major manufacturers or government programs tells you something important about where practical solutions come from. Legacy manufacturers built EVs around battery technology that doesn’t meet operational requirements, then expected infrastructure and regulations to catch up. Government mandates pushed carriers toward technology that doesn’t work for their business models. Meanwhile, Edison listened to what truckers actually need and built solutions that address real-world problems.

This pattern keeps repeating. When FMCSA couldn’t build practical tools to combat chameleon carriers, private companies like Freight Validate and Genlogs stepped in with solutions that work. When legacy systems couldn’t keep pace with technological change, startups built better platforms. When manufacturers focused on removing drivers through automation, Edison focused on giving drivers better tools to be more productive.

The UK’s EV success stems from matching technology to operational environments. Shorter distances, denser infrastructure, coordinated planning, and fleet operations aligned with current EV capabilities created conditions in which the technology could succeed. The US has none of those advantages for long-haul trucking, which moves most freight across the country. We needed better planning, more infrastructure investment, and technology that fits American trucking’s operational realities before pushing aggressive electrification timelines.

The Trump administration’s pulling EV tax credits acknowledges what should have been obvious from the start, we’re not ready. The infrastructure isn’t there. The technology doesn’t match how American trucking operates. And throwing subsidies at the problem without addressing fundamental operational and infrastructure gaps was never going to work.

But that doesn’t mean electric trucks can’t work in trucking. Edison’s success in some of the most demanding conditions imaginable, logging operations in BC’s interior, where equipment failure isn’t an inconvenience, it’s a crisis, proves that EVs can work if you engineer them right. The key is to build around operational realities rather than forcing operations to adapt to technological limitations.

For me, diesel will always be what I know and trust. CAT 3406s have kept me moving and freight delivered through conditions that would have killed lesser equipment. That reliability and peace of mind aren’t something you give up lightly. If Edison Motors has taught me anything, it’s that EV technology can work even in the woods of British Columbia if you approach it with practical engineering rather than regulatory fantasy.

The hybrid approach makes sense because it doesn’t ask truckers to give up the reliability and flexibility that make diesel work. You keep the infrastructure compatibility, operational flexibility, and the peace of mind that come with proven technology. But you add efficiency benefits, reduced maintenance, and emissions improvements that address legitimate environmental concerns without sacrificing operational viability.

That’s the kind of innovation that deserves attention, not because it’s revolutionary or disruptive or any other marketing buzzword, but because it actually solves problems that matter to people running trucks. It’s technology built by truckers for truckers rather than by regulators and manufacturers who think they know what trucking needs.

Ford’s 186-mile-range European EV might work fine in the UK, where geography, infrastructure, and operational profiles align with its technology capabilities. It won’t work in American long-haul operations, and removing tax credits that were propping up technology adoption before infrastructure and operations were ready is an acknowledgment of that reality.

What we need isn’t more aggressive mandates or bigger subsidies, it’s better planning, infrastructure investment that matches operational needs, and technology designed around how trucking actually works rather than how regulators wish it worked. The UK did that planning. The US didn’t. Edison Motors did that engineering. Most manufacturers didn’t.

I’m still a diesel guy. I trust what I know works. But I’m also paying attention to what Edison is building because they’re approaching the problem the right way, starting with operational needs and working backward to the technology that addresses them. That’s how practical innovation happens, and it’s proof that EVs can work in trucking if you’re willing to engineer solutions grounded in reality rather than regulatory timelines.

If Edison can make electric hybrids work in logging operations in BC, there’s hope that thoughtful engineering can bridge the gap between diesel reliability and electric efficiency. But it requires listening to what truckers actually need rather than telling them what they should want. The removal of EV tax credits might slow down the rush to electrification. Still, if it creates space for practical solutions like Edison’s hybrid approach to develop and prove themselves, that’s probably a better path forward than subsidizing technology that doesn’t work for how American trucking operates.

Sometimes the best innovations come from the people closest to the problems. Edison Motors getting approval to build electric hybrid heavy-duty trucks in Canada might matter more for trucking’s future than anything Ford or Tesla or any other major manufacturer announces, precisely because Edison was built by truckers who understand what actually works when you’re 100 miles from anywhere and your equipment has to perform or you’re in trouble.

That’s the kind of peace of mind I can respect, even from a diesel guy like me.

The post The EV Truck Reality Check and Why Edison Motors’ Hybrid Might Be What Actually Works appeared first on FreightWaves.