backtop


Print 60 comment(s) - last by sorry dog.. on Dec 24 at 10:00 AM

Gas vehicle sales to decline slightly in next several decades

The U.S. Energy Department recently offered up its predictions for what fuel will powered the majority of vehicles in the U.S. over the next several decades. The Energy Department sees gasoline-powered vehicles dominating the market through at least 2040.
 
The Energy Department also predicts that the fuel efficiency of the cars and trucks on the roads around the nation will increase to 37.2 mpg by 2040 (current fuel efficiency is around 23.6 mpg on average).
 
During the same time span, the overall energy consumption of the U.S. is expected to fall by 4 percent.

 BMW i8 plug-in hybrid sports car

The percentage of gasoline vehicles sold over the next three decades plus will only decline slightly. The Energy Department predicts that 78 percent of all vehicles on the road in 2040 will be powered by gas compared to 82 percent of all vehicles using gas last year.
 
However, the agency does expect to see an uptick in hybrids by 2040 with 5 percent of vehicles on the roads being hybrids compared to the current 3 percent.
 
The agency expects to see a scant 1 percent of vehicle sales comprised of plug-in hybrids by 2040 with 1 percent being full electric vehicles by the same date. By 2040, the agency expects that 4 percent of vehicles on the roads will be diesel-powered, double the percentage from today.

Sources: Detroit News, The Energy Information Agency



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By Richard875yh5 on 12/19/2013 9:09:33 AM , Rating: 3
Whoever wrote this has no clue. Battery tech is moving too fast and it's getting near to the point where many people will buy electric cars.




RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By mdogs444 on 12/19/2013 9:12:39 AM , Rating: 3
Have you taken into account that not everyone lives the city, has an outside power station, let alone that batteries won't be able to power trucks used for farm/construction, and what about shipping?


By Mint on 12/19/2013 9:02:30 PM , Rating: 1
This isn't about "everyone". PHEV/EV penetration only needs to be more than 1% for these predictions to be wrong.

As for long haul transportation and farms, natural gas will take over there, assuming fracking keeps prices below $10 per million BTUs. Again, poor prediction.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By CaedenV on 12/20/2013 10:53:09 PM , Rating: 2
Not everyone lives in the city, but most people do. I mean, the whole point of the word 'city' is that it is a place that a lot of people live...

Trucks are doomed tech the way that they are today. I expect that in the next 50 years we will see a large resurgence in trains doing bulk movement between cities, and that trucks will be used more and more for local transport. If we are lucky then we will see something like the hyperloop used primarily as a goods transit system rather than a people moving device. But that may still be wishful thinking.
What trucks do exist in that time will start moving to alternative fuels like biodesal and natural gas.


By CaedenV on 12/20/2013 10:54:51 PM , Rating: 2
OH, and once self driving car technology takes off... well, lets just say that I don't want to be someone in the trucking industry. The job of a trucker only has another 10-20 years.


By SublimeSimplicity on 12/19/2013 9:14:26 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. Its very close to a tipping point already and battery tech could conceivably double to triple in performance while the price drops in half in the next 10 years. On the other side, I highly doubt we'll see the price of gas drop considerably.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By tanjali on 12/19/13, Rating: 0
By Dorkyman on 12/19/2013 11:05:23 AM , Rating: 4
Oh yeah, there you go.

Anybody saying something different than your point of view just MUST be in the pockets of Big Oil. I guess that includes me. Funny, I can't seem to find that secret slush fund check. Gotta be around here somewhere...


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By djc208 on 12/19/2013 11:51:22 AM , Rating: 2
Or maybe they figure that since internal combustion engines have been the main stay of the transportation industry for the last 150 years with 10's of billions of dollars invested in design in production that unless you invent a Mr. Fusion device tomorrow it's highly unlikely the gasoline engine will be supplanted in the next 26 years, especially when most vehicles stay on the road for at least 10 years.


By Monkey's Uncle on 12/19/2013 1:28:51 PM , Rating: 2
Or maybe you should read the article a little more carefully...

quote:
The percentage of gasoline vehicles sold over the next three decades plus will only decline slightly. The Energy Department predicts that 78 percent of all vehicles on the road in 2040 will be powered by gas compared to 82 percent of all vehicles using gas last year.


I think they are being short sighted if they think that over the next 3 decades the use of gasoline vehicles will decline only 4%.

However I also see this as a view into the U.S. gooberment mind. The recent glut of fracked oil is removing the pressure to look for alternative fuels and automotive power systems and this article shows that mental movement. After all why would investors dump money into alternative fuels and power systems if there is more than enough oil to supposedly support the American thirst for oil for the next 100 years? There just isn't the immediate short term ROI that investors demand.


By marvdmartian on 12/20/2013 7:49:09 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention, that new technology doesn't always plummet in price, and is sometimes a bit more (shall we say) glacial in dropping its price?

Chevy Volt has been around how many years now? Price is still "starting at" $34,000+, for a new model. Even with tax credits, it's still out of reach of many people, financially.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By Griffinhart on 12/19/2013 9:55:38 AM , Rating: 2
And there is still a long way to go. in 2013 the handful of "affordable electrics" have pathetic range. Between 21 and 60 miles on a single charge. This is under ideal conditions too. not too hot, not to cold. Ranges drop when AC (summer) and Heaters(winter) are added to the mix. We would need to see a 5 to ten fold increase in range while keeping cost down enough to be affordable.
Cars like the Tesla S get a reasonable 200 to 300 mile range, but with a starting price of $70K it is not in the price range of most.

It could easily be another 25 years before Electrics gain enough range while keeping cost down enough to supplant inexpensive ICE autos.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By tanjali on 12/19/2013 10:24:12 AM , Rating: 1
Where do you get 25 years.
If you ask me battery tech would be there yesterday.


By Griffinhart on 12/19/2013 10:53:58 AM , Rating: 2
Look at the history of batteries in our devices. There have been some phenomenal improvements over the past two decades, but I just don't see a 5 to 10 fold increase in capacity while keeping costs affordable. It's one thing to invent a better battery, it's a completely different thing to then take it, produce it cheaply enough to be viable in a car while keeping it affordable compared to the ICE which is also seeing steady improvements in economy. It is not out of the realm of impossibility to see a gas engine hitting 50 MPH + while costing $15K a few years from now. Battery tech doesn't tend to stay the same cost or become cheaper the better it gets. It's going to take a while for the technology to improve enough to be a decent replacement for ICE autos, it will then take a while longer for them to become cheap enough to make them affordable enough for them to realistically replace traditional cars in the marketplace.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By jimbojimbo on 12/19/2013 2:16:19 PM , Rating: 2
What all electric cars have just 20-60 mile range? You seem to use that 50 mile number to support your claims but neglect to add those 50 mile range cars are plugin hybrids so that is NOT their range, just their electric only range.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By Griffinhart on 12/19/2013 3:18:33 PM , Rating: 2
Once you are beyond the electric range, they aren't any better than existing cars for MPG's. The Chevy Volt, for example, is about 32MPG once the battery has run dry. It also adds a lot of complexity to the vehicle, potentially causing reliability issues. Then there is the cost. A chevy Volt is $46,000. I can get a Ford Focus or similar for around $16,000. It would take me 10 years of driving 20,000 miles a year (higher than the average) at $5 a gallon for gas (Higher than current) to hit the cost savings in fuel mark. And that's only if I never have to use the gas engine on the Volt and assuming The batteries wouldn't need to be replaced before then.

It's not that I think electric cars don't have potential. I just don't think we are anywhere near that point yet. Electric Car endurance and cost are two massive barriers to ownership and will continue to be so for decades.


By Mint on 12/19/2013 9:11:41 PM , Rating: 2
So what? "Once you are beyond the electric range", you've already covered 75% of you miles in a Volt, 95% of your miles in an i3, etc. It doesn't matter what the MPG is after that.

What I believe we'll see is range extender units, maybe even from Tata motors (they have a whole 38 hp car for $2500, and all we need is motor+generator) for $3k, and everyone who makes an EV will find room to stick one in. Even if they're crappy motors that die after 50k miles, an EREV will have gone 300k by then.

A Volt is $35k. A similarly equipped Cruze is $22k. Stop with your BS.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By Nutzo on 12/19/2013 11:14:15 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, this is probably the most realistic report I’ve seen.

Battery tech has a very long way to go before it’s cheap enough and has enough range for all-electric cars to replace cars with an ICE.

Even if they had some miraculous breakthrough in batteries, most people don’t have access to a 240 volt charging plug that would be needed to charge a large battery pack overnight.
(i.e. they park on the street, or in a parking garage)

I am surprised at the low numbers for Hybrids. I see more car companies pushing Hybrids & plugin Hybrids to increase their average mileage to comply with the government numbers.

A small improvement in batteries would make plugin hybrids cheaper and more viable. Use plugin electricity for short trips around town, yet still have a gas tank/ICE for those long trips on the highway. The smaller batteries on a plugin Hybrid (15-20 mile range) could be charged from a standard 120v plug overnight.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By Labotomizer on 12/19/2013 11:50:50 AM , Rating: 2
Graphene based tech could cause such a revolution in batteries and charging capabilities. 5 minutes to recharge a battery that has 200 mile range would make it worthwhile.

But if that were working tomorrow we're still a long way from it being affordable.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By The Von Matrices on 12/19/2013 5:57:06 PM , Rating: 2
It's a great idea, but then you have the infrastructure issue. How would you have an electrical connection that can provide a sustained ~1 MW to a car (based on a Tesla, 80 kWh in 5 min)? The infrastructure for that is not available either.

Current electrical installations in commercial and residential areas are not rated for this load. Even the largest common home electrical supplies in the U.S. are only 50kW (200A @ 240V), and that's for the whole house. There would have to be a drastic increase in electrical cable capacity even to support one car.


By CaedenV on 12/20/2013 11:03:01 PM , Rating: 2
That is for a quick charger. If you are doing a 6-10 hour overnight charge then most homes can manage just fine.

Still, that does not help the millions of people living in apartments and other such complexes who will be unable to use a traditional charger.


By Bladen on 12/22/2013 6:14:15 PM , Rating: 2
Super-capacitors or a larger battery of the same type in the charging station. It charges the car battery quickly, whilst it slowly recharges when not charging the car.


By Spuke on 12/19/2013 12:21:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am surprised at the low numbers for Hybrids.
Me too. I thought it much was higher. 3% is nothing. In that context, 2040 is not even close.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By Motoman on 12/19/2013 12:16:48 PM , Rating: 2
Please. ICE cars will dominate the market until such time as there's no more fuel to put in them. Then and only then would an electric car be the better choice for most drivers.

And battery tech is, in fact, not moving that fast at all. There's no reason to think that there's a magic battery coming up anytime soon that will make an EV a true replacement of an ICE car...which is to say, refill time of a couple minutes and several hundred miles of range.

Not to mention that we don't have the grid to support massive numbers of EVs anyway. We need to do the $1T smart grid first.


By Monkey's Uncle on 12/19/2013 1:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
And here is the crux of the matter.

With plenty of oil for gas-powered cars to run on, there is absolutely no financial incentive to invest in creating the Mr. Fusion device.

Stored electrical devices have one major drawback - they have to be recharged. The more capacity a battery has, the longer the range. But also is the longer recharge it is going to need when it runs down. I can't see technology overcoming this in the next 50 years much less the next 26.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By GotThumbs on 12/19/2013 2:00:37 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong.

Don't think you speak for everyone on this.

Only when a Nisson Leaf costs 5,000 would I consider buying one for work trips.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By jimbojimbo on 12/19/2013 2:28:52 PM , Rating: 2
Me too. I can only see buying it as a second car to use for short trips and errands but definitely not a primary car. Now if it had a 200 mile range like the Tesla I can definitely see it as a primary car but for now it's just a big toy. Even then though I really wouldn't get it since I would still have to pay for plates and insurance on the thing.


By Spuke on 12/19/2013 3:39:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Only when a Nisson Leaf costs 5,000 would I consider buying one for work trips.
This is about how much I figured I would pay for an EV to make it cost effective given the lack of range and flexibility and it still would be relegated to commuting duty only. I can't justify paying more than that for a car that I only use to drive back and forth to work with.


RE: ICE cars to be around for a lot longer
By snhoj on 12/19/2013 7:07:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think this forecast is based on linear extrapolation of trends of current statistics and doesn't take into account battery break through or tipping points (market critical mass). Electric cars have a lot of as yet untapped potential. Electric motors can be a lot more power dense than internal combustion piston engines. Precise and fat torque delivery from 0 RPM and across a large rev range can allow the car to have just one gear ratio. This will also allow individual drive to all wheels with individual torque control to each wheel for thrust vectoring around corners. Battery placement can allow such a vehicle to have a very low center of gravity, precise balance, and a low polar moment of inertia. These parameters would be difficult if not impossible to best with a conventional car. An electric vehicle could be dynamically superior to a petrol powered car. Component placement is much more flexible in an electric car due to the small size and mechanically disconected nature of its drive line components so vehicle designs can go in previously unexplored directions. I feel confident that at some point electric cars will capture the imagination of the masses and progress will accelerate dramatically.


By Motoman on 12/20/2013 12:25:50 PM , Rating: 2
None of which is really worth much at all if you can't match the refueling time of an ICE car, along with the nearly infinite number of places where you can do said refueling, and be able to drive your car for a few hundred miles before needing refueling.

Jetpacks are the most awesome mode of transportation in the world. But granted that they can only carry about 20 seconds' worth of fuel, they're still useless.


Not surprising...
By Labotomizer on 12/19/2013 9:07:06 AM , Rating: 2
The market isn't at a point where alternatives are better, or even as good as, gas powered engines. I do find it hard to believe we won't have some major technology advancements in the next 27 years but that's also very tricky to predict.

As for the 37mpg average, that sounds great. However it should be due to market driven technological advancement and purchasing decisions and NOT because the government mandates fuel requirements. Considering you can get 300HP+ cars that get over 30mpg on the freeway today I would have to imagine we'll see over 37 just from a natural evolution of car tech.

Hopefully we see some breakthrough that allows electric/hybrid systems to be better than regular gas or, at the very least, a shift towards natural gas in the interim. I doubt that will happen because of the cost of building out the infrastructure to support it.




RE: Not surprising...
By lagomorpha on 12/19/2013 9:17:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Considering you can get 300HP+ cars that get over 30mpg on the freeway today


That's just the thing - 300HP+ CARS that get over 30mpg on the freeway. It's relatively easy to make sports cars aerodynamic because people associate aerodynamics with speed, and people expect sportscars to be light weight. With those taken care of to make a fuel efficient sportscar you just need to design an engine that has a high efficiency at partial throttle but is still capable of high output.

You're probably not going to see many SUVs getting 37mpg because physics just aren't going to work in your favor.


RE: Not surprising...
By Labotomizer on 12/19/2013 10:14:42 AM , Rating: 2
The trend is moving away from large SUVs. There will still be a need. We're looking at average fuel consumption in 27 years. There is no reason to think that advances in build materials, engine and transmission tech combined with general driving trends that we shouldn't exceed 37 mpg as an average.

Perhaps we'll see adoption of diesel technology here, resulting in larger leaps in fuel economy. It's slowly catching on.

Keep in mind even 10 years ago 300HP+ cars with the fuel efficiency we see today wasn't something we thought we'd have so quickly.


RE: Not surprising...
By jimbojimbo on 12/19/2013 2:23:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The trend is moving away from large SUVs
Ha! Where do you live? I'm still seeing TONS of SUVs everywhere I go. Good old suburbs.


RE: Not surprising...
By Spuke on 12/19/2013 4:04:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The trend is moving away from large SUVs
The trend is moving towards crossovers. I guess some of you are just stubbornly dense so I'll repeat it again. Large SUV's NEVER sold in any great numbers. Not one large SUV EVER hit the top 20 sellers in the US. The only reason why you guys see lots of them is because you hate them so you take notice. Yes, a good size of the large SUV market is going to crossovers but there's an order of magnitude MORE from other markets going to crossovers.


RE: Not surprising...
By rountad on 12/20/2013 11:15:57 AM , Rating: 2
The Ford Explorer used to sell over 400K per year in the late 90s and early 2000s.

That is a great number.


RE: Not surprising...
By lagomorpha on 12/20/2013 11:34:01 AM , Rating: 2
Obviously what Spuke considers a "large SUV" and what sane people consider a "large SUV" are not the same thing.


RE: Not surprising...
By CaedenV on 12/20/2013 11:07:52 PM , Rating: 2
An Exploder is a small to medium sized SUV. They may look large on the outside, but they were oddly small and useless on the inside. When my parents had one I could actually fit more stuff inside of my Integra than they could fit in that "SUV".


good
By ERROR666 on 12/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: good
By Monkey's Uncle on 12/19/2013 11:34:54 AM , Rating: 3
Good for you.

BTW: How's that Hummer running?


RE: good
By jimbojimbo on 12/19/2013 2:31:31 PM , Rating: 2
Yah, Bah Humbug! Boo on everything! and get off my lawn!


RE: good
By drycrust3 on 12/19/2013 3:18:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well, what happens when the petrol needed to just drive to work for a week costs you what you earn in one day? Hmmmm... maybe then you'd consider something else ... like a bicycle? Oh no ... there are hills in my city, and it rains, and it gets dark in the winter, etc. I saw a person cycling along the road with no lights on at midnight yesterday.
Okay, what about a ... diesel car ... oh no, taxes on diesel for non-commerical vehicles will push it out of the range of the average motorist. Hmmm ... okay, what about a gas powered car? Oh no, by then the government will be wanting to get more money from fewer cars on the road ... so registration will cost a packet. Hmmm what about a ... no, don't say it .... an electric car? ARRGGGHHH no! I hate electric cars, I'd rather bicycle than use an electric car ... and besides those registration costs again! Okay ... that leaves ... ummm ... bicycling.
I'm guessing that somewhere in the future is everyone bicycling to their favourite train station.


RE: good
By Griffinhart on 12/19/2013 3:32:11 PM , Rating: 2
Since you use petrol and not gas, I assume you are from the UK. Trains make a lot more sense in countries like the UK where the population Density is much higher than it is in the US. 258 people per square kilometer vs 31 in the US.


RE: good
By Spuke on 12/19/2013 3:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yah, Bah Humbug! Boo on everything! and get off my lawn!
LMAO!


This announcement falls under the category of...
By Vertigo2000 on 12/19/2013 10:56:42 AM , Rating: 2
Duh.

I honestly don't believe a major breakthrough in battery tech is right around the corner. We see alot of interesting things on tech sites, but it takes FOREVER to make it into a consumer product. Rigorous testing (by the manufacturer and government organizations), figuring out how to mass produce and convincing consumers all take time. And when EV's do become close to matching ICE's, the oil conglomerates will just drop the price of oil and make it all moot.




RE: This announcement falls under the category of...
By Dorkyman on 12/19/2013 11:08:37 AM , Rating: 2
As if "oil conglomerates" had the ability to just "drop the price." I humbly suggest a class called ECON101 at your local community college.


By Vertigo2000 on 12/19/2013 11:43:27 AM , Rating: 2
OPEC's Mission Statement:

In accordance with its Statute, the mission of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is to coordinate and unify the petroleum policies of its Member Countries and ensure the stabilization of oil markets in order to secure an efficient, economic and regular supply of petroleum to consumers, a steady income to producers and a fair return on capital for those investing in the petroleum industry.

They easily control the price of oil by increasing or decreasing the supply... thanks Econ101!


By Spuke on 12/19/2013 12:30:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They easily control the price of oil by increasing or decreasing the supply... thanks Econ101!
X2 OPEC controls oil prices. Any other thinking is wishful at best. Besides, you can best believe that ANY breakthrough energy source will be purchased by them and said market controlled accordingly. They are ALREADY investing BILLIONS (over a $100 billion and climbing) in alternative energy. Do you really think they're going to let some podunk start up take away their market share?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7edeOEuXdMU


By Dorkyman on 12/20/2013 5:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
There is competition in the oil marketplace. OPEC controls only a fraction of the oil supply. They are thus unable to set the price long-term.


I have already predicted this.
By Monkey's Uncle on 12/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: I have already predicted this.
By Griffinhart on 12/19/2013 1:54:55 PM , Rating: 2
I see it less of an apathy of pursuing alternative fuels, and more down to the simple fact that battery technology isn't anywhere near where it needs to be yet. And this isn't caused by apathy. There is plenty of motivation to improve battery technology above and beyond the automotive world.

There is plenty of motivation to improve battery performance. Imagine laptops with 40+ hours life, not just standby. Phones that only need to be charged once a week. UPS's that go from 20 minutes to 2 hours run time.

Of course, even if battery technology were 100x better today than it is now we wouldn't be seeing any change in our dependence on fossil fuels as batteries don't affect how we generate electricity, merely how we store and deliver it.


RE: I have already predicted this.
By Spuke on 12/19/2013 3:44:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is plenty of motivation to improve battery performance. Imagine laptops with 40+ hours life, not just standby. Phones that only need to be charged once a week. UPS's that go from 20 minutes to 2 hours run time.
And rivers of gold pouring out of Jesus' butt.


RE: I have already predicted this.
By Monkey's Uncle on 12/19/2013 4:02:15 PM , Rating: 2
Thing is even if you could put 100x the capacity in a battery, it would take 100x as long to charge it. Injecting a charge into a huge capacity battery can only happen just so fast even with sophisticated high voltage charging equipment.

TANSTAAFL ("There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" - Larry Niven)

That does not cut it in the real automotive world where folks need to travel hundreds and thousands of miles in car trips every day. Stored electricity vehicles are fine for in-town grocery-getters that spend most of their time sitting in a driveway, but most people demand something that will run a long time between charges and charge in the same 10 or so minutes it takes to gas up a conventional ICE car. Nobody will want to wait the 12-24 hours needed to charge a 1000-Mile battery.

The thing is there is no pressure to improve battery life/range while at the same time reduce charging times to something resembling the time it takes to fill a car with gas. Not with abundant fracked oil sitting there for use. If there is no pressure, there will be no heavily funded projects making it happen. Necessity breeds innovation.


RE: I have already predicted this.
By sorry dog on 12/24/2013 10:00:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Thing is even if you could put 100x the capacity in a battery, it would take 100x as long to charge it. Injecting a charge into a huge capacity battery can only happen just so fast even with sophisticated high voltage charging equipment.


No problem.

There's like this high voltage plug down by the tennis courts at my kids school that I can charge up on. It's almost like free power...


I expected more electrics
By lagomorpha on 12/19/2013 9:11:11 AM , Rating: 2
In 2040 fusion power will still be only 20 years away.




RE: I expected more electrics
By Monkey's Uncle on 12/19/2013 11:33:31 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps in 27 years Mr Fusion will be available to everyone.

http://static2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb201307230423...


I'll just leave this here...
RE: I'll just leave this here...
By Vertigo2000 on 12/19/2013 3:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
It might be promising, but I didn't see anything about energy in vs energy out.

If it takes more energy to make than what is produced, it's not currently feasible.

But like I said, it might be promising. Might.


DUH
By Dr of crap on 12/19/2013 12:43:51 PM , Rating: 2
SO glad SOMEONE did a study and came out with the mind blowing fact.

Just one word would be enough to say - DUH!




Hybrids are the future
By PaFromFL on 12/20/2013 9:29:21 AM , Rating: 2
The best vehicle configuration is an efficient constant-rpm Diesel motor-generator charging a modest battery that drives two or four hub motors. This takes advantage of the huge energy density of oil, the packaging efficiency of using a tiny motor-generator and smallish battery and hub motors, the enormous acceleration capability provided by a battery (for brief periods), and eliminates mechanical transmission hardware. The unsprung weight problem disappears when a predictive active suspension is employed.




“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki