report

Texas billionaire Elon Musk, Houston energy execs named richest in America by Forbes

Elon Musk is the richest person in Austin and in America. Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

SpaceX and Tesla co-founder Elon Musk has topped Forbes' list as the wealthiest person in America for the third time. Musk is one of seven Austin billionaires who have made the new Forbes 400, a list of the 400 richest people in the United States for 2024.

Forbes estimates Musk's net worth in 2024 as $244 billion, which is $7 billion less than his estimated net worth last year. Musk, 53, is the cofounder of seven companies, including SpaceX, xAI, The Boring Company, among others. He serves as the CEO of Tesla, which is headquartered in Austin.

In 2022, Musk famously acquired Twitter in a $44 billion deal.

"Forbes estimates that the social media company, which he renamed X, is worth nearly 70 percent less as of August 2024.," Forbes wrote in Musk's profile.

Most recently, court filings revealed Musk shifted his plans to relocate X's headquarters from San Francisco to Bastrop, a city 30 miles southeast of Austin. He originally stated he would be moving the company's headquarters to Austin in July 2024, after California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a new law that barred school districts from requiring staff to notify parents of their child’s gender identification change.

A dozen of Houston's illustrious billionaires have also made the cut on the list. Houston hospitality king and Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta is the 12th richest Texan and the 99th richest person in the United States, according to Forbes' list, released October 1.

Forbes estimates Fertitta's net worth in 2024 as $10.1 billion, which has steadily climbed from his 2023 net worth of $8.1 billion. Fertitta, 67, purchased the Houston Rockets in October 2017 for $2.2 billion. The billionaire also owns Texas-based hospitality and entertainment corporation Landry's. In 2019, Fertitta embarked on a new venture as an author.

"Fertitta released his first book titled Shut Up And Listen! in September [2019], detailing his experiences in the dining and entertainment industries," Forbes wrote in Fertitta's profile.

The Forbes 400list is a definitive ranking of the wealthiest Americans, using interviews, financial data, and documentation provided by billionaires and their companies.

According to the report, America's elite class is now worth $5.4 trillion collectively, which is a $1 trillion jump since 2023.

“The Forbes 400 is richer than ever, and it’s harder than ever to be one of the 400 richest people in America," said Forbes senior editor Chase Peterson-Withorn in a press release.

In all, 43 Texas billionaires made the list. Newcomers include Houston-based Westlake Corporation co-owners Albert Chao, James Chao, and their respective families. According to their Forbes profiles, the Chaos own nearly 25 percent of Westlake Corporation, which produces low-density polyethylene that is used for food packaging and other products.

"His father, T.T. Chao, moved the family from Taiwan to the U.S. and founded Westlake in 1986," Albert Chao's profile says. "Albert and brother James Chao are credited with helping launch the company. Albert was CEO from 2004 to July 2024, when he became executive chairman. James was chairman from 2004 to July 2024, when he became senior chairman."

Here's how the rest of Houston's billionaires fared on this year's list:

  • Oil and gas chairman Richard Kinderranks No. 112 nationally with an estimated worth of $9.3 billion.
  • Houston pipeline heir Randa Duncan Williams ties for No. 126 with an estimated net worth of $8.6 billion. Fellow pipeline heirs Dannine Avara and Milane Frantz tie for 130th nationally. Each has an estimated net worth of $8.5 billion. Scott Duncan ranks No. 137 with an $8.3 billion estimated net worth.
  • Toyota mega-dealer Dan Friedkin and Houston oil tycoon Jeffery Hildebrand tie for 156th nationally with an estimated net worth of $7.6 billion.
  • Houston Texans owner Janice McNair ties for No. 210 nationally with an estimated net worth of $6.2 billion.
  • Energy exploration chief exec George Bishop of The Woodlands ranks No. 266 with an estimated net worth of $5 billion.

Missing from the 2024 list is local hedge fund honcho John Arnold, who ranked No. 345 nationally in 2023 but now ranks No. 991 in 2024 with an estimated net worth of $3.3 billion. As of October 1, Forbes estimates Arnold's net worth at $2.9 billion.

Find all the Texans on the new Forbes 400 list here.

———

This article originally ran on CultureMap.

Trending News

A View From HETI

No critical minerals, no modern economy. Getty images

If you’re reading this on a phone, driving an EV, flying in a plane, or relying on the power grid to keep your lights on, you’re benefiting from critical minerals. These are the building blocks of modern life. Things like copper, lithium, nickel, rare earth elements, and titanium, they’re found in everything from smartphones to solar panels to F-35 fighter jets.

In short: no critical minerals, no modern economy.

These minerals aren’t just useful, they’re essential. And in the U.S., we don’t produce enough of them. Worse, we’re heavily dependent on countries that don’t always have our best interests at heart. That’s a serious vulnerability, and we’ve done far too little to fix it.

Where We Use Them and Why We’re Behind

Let’s start with where these minerals show up in daily American life:

  • Electric vehicles need lithium, cobalt, and nickel for batteries.
  • Wind turbines and solar panels rely on rare earths and specialty metals.
  • Defense systems require titanium, beryllium, and rare earths.
  • Basic infrastructure like power lines and buildings depend on copper and aluminum.

You’d think that something so central to the economy, and to national security, would be treated as a top priority. But we’ve let production and processing capabilities fall behind at home, and now we’re playing catch-up.

The Reality Check: We’re Not in Control

Right now, the U.S. is deeply reliant on foreign sources for critical minerals, especially China. And it’s not just about mining. China dominates processing and refining too, which means they control critical links in the supply chain.

Gabriel Collins and Michelle Michot Foss from the Baker Institute lay all this out in a recent report that every policymaker should read. Their argument is blunt: if we don’t get a handle on this, we’re in trouble, both economically and militarily.

China has already imposed export controls on key rare earth elements like dysprosium and terbium which are critical for magnets, batteries, and defense technologies, in direct response to new U.S. tariffs. This kind of tit-for-tat escalation exposes just how much leverage we’ve handed over. If this continues, American manufacturers could face serious material shortages, higher costs, and stalled projects.

We’ve seen this movie before, in the pandemic, when supply chains broke and countries scrambled for basics like PPE and semiconductors. We should’ve learned our lesson.

We Do Have a Stockpile, But We Need a Strategy

Unlike during the Cold War, the U.S. no longer maintains comprehensive strategic reserves across the board, but we do have stockpiles managed by the Defense Logistics Agency. The real issue isn’t absence, it’s strategy: what to stockpile, how much, and under what assumptions.

Collins and Michot Foss argue for a more robust and better-targeted approach. That could mean aiming for 12 to 18 months worth of demand for both civilian and defense applications. Achieving that will require:

  • Smarter government purchasing and long-term contracts
  • Strategic deals with allies (e.g., swapping titanium for artillery shells with Ukraine)
  • Financing mechanisms to help companies hold critical inventory for emergency use

It’s not cheap, but it’s cheaper than scrambling mid-crisis when supplies are suddenly cut off.

The Case for Advanced Materials: Substitutes That Work Today

One powerful but often overlooked solution is advanced materials, which can reduce our dependence on vulnerable mineral supply chains altogether.

Take carbon nanotube (CNT) fibers, a cutting-edge material invented at Rice University. CNTs are lighter, stronger, and more conductive than copper. And unlike some future tech, this isn’t hypothetical: we could substitute CNTs for copper wire harnesses in electrical systems today.

As Michot Foss explained on the Energy Forum podcast:

“You can substitute copper and steel and aluminum with carbon nanotube fibers and help offset some of those trade-offs and get performance enhancements as well… If you take carbon nanotube fibers and you put those into a wire harness… you're going to be reducing the weight of that wire harness versus a metal wire harness like we already use. And you're going to be getting the same benefit in terms of electrical conductivity, but more strength to allow the vehicle, the application, the aircraft, to perform better.”

By accelerating R&D and deployment of CNTs and similar substitutes, we can reduce pressure on strained mineral supply chains, lower emissions, and open the door to more secure and sustainable manufacturing.

We Have Tools. We Need to Use Them.

The report offers a long list of solutions. Some are familiar, like tax incentives, public-private partnerships, and fast-tracked permits. Others draw on historical precedent, like “preclusive purchasing,” a WWII tactic where the U.S. bought up materials just so enemies couldn’t.

We also need to get creative:

  • Repurpose existing industrial sites into mineral hubs
  • Speed up R&D for substitutes and recycling
  • Buy out risky foreign-owned assets in friendlier countries

Permitting remains one of the biggest hurdles. In the U.S., it can take 7 to 10 years to approve a new critical minerals project, a timeline that doesn’t match the urgency of our strategic needs. As Collins said on the Energy Forum podcast:

“Time kills deals... That’s why it’s more attractive generally to do these projects elsewhere.”

That’s the reality we’re up against. Long approval windows discourage investment and drive developers to friendlier jurisdictions abroad. One encouraging step is the use of the Defense Production Act to fast-track permitting under national security grounds. That kind of shift, treating permitting as a strategic imperative, must become the norm, not the exception.

It’s Time to Redefine Sustainability

Sustainability has traditionally focused on cutting carbon emissions. That’s still crucial, but we need a broader definition. Today, energy and materials security are just as important.

Countries are now weighing cost and reliability alongside emissions goals. We're also seeing renewed attention to recycling, biodiversity, and supply chain resilience.

Net-zero by 2050 is still a target. But reality is forcing a more nuanced discussion:

  • What level of warming is politically and economically sustainable?
  • What tradeoffs are we willing to make to ensure energy access and affordability?

The bottom line: we can’t build a clean energy future without secure access to materials. Recycling helps, but it’s not enough. We'll need new mines, new tech, and a more flexible definition of sustainability.

My Take: We’re Running Out of Time

This isn’t just a policy debate. It’s a test of whether we’ve learned anything from the past few years of disruption. We’re not facing an open war, but the risks are real and growing.

We need to treat critical minerals like what they are: a strategic necessity. That means rebuilding stockpiles, reshoring processing, tightening alliances, and accelerating permitting across the board.

It won’t be easy. But if we wait until a real crisis hits, it’ll be too late.

———

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn on April 11, 2025.


Trending News