Ford's Electric Vision: New Hybrids, 700 Mile-Range PHEV by 2012

Miller cycle is super-charged, not turbo.

 

It would be if you could spin a turbine downstream of an Atkinson cycle engine. The object of the Atkinson cycle is to make more use of the energy from the A/F mixture combustion WITHIN the combustion chamber itsself. So the only implemenations of the Miller cycle to date have used a SuperCharger. Mazda Millennia "S" being the only passenger car implementation of which I am aware.

 

Drivers not ready yet for battery-powered cars: Ford

Read more: CBC News - Money - Drivers not ready yet for battery-powered cars: Ford

​

​

 

As soon as this recession eases, you'll see oil jump to $120 easy!

 

There are people who say recession won't ease at high oil prices. We are in a decade long Japanese type stagnation

 

Eventually market forces will push prices one way or another. Either high demand will push prices up or low demand will push prices down. Either way we cannot afford to participate

 

Eventually market forces will push prices one way or another. Either high demand will push prices up or low demand will push prices down. Either way we cannot afford to participate

 

Ford sees market risks of ev's but is building them. Because of their predictions they are making a smaller investment. They don't really care what kind of cars they make as long as they make money. It takes smaller players like Tesla, and now Nissan/Renault to really push. Selling more electric cars for these makers does not cannibalize sales of other vehicles. Toyota and GM have the most to lose if EVs take over the market. Nissan is taking a big risk, one that is heavily subsidized by the US government, and is projecting ev sales no matter what gas prices do.

Are you hoping for a world war also so that population goes down. How about not cheerleader for destruction and misery, and being sad if it doesn't happen.

There appears to be a choice of EV and PHEV cars coming to market. Its a good thing. Let's hope for choice, and that the markets choose these vehicles so that more are available. If the market moves this way, high demand for electric vehicles will likely reduce demand for oil.

 

Let's be reasonable rather than reactionary. The original statement was certainly motivated by a rational desire to see the US increase the transition to a sustainable future vs. the misery of ignoring future shortages. It's very clear to the thoughtful that economic motivation looks to be the only motivator for the larger population to reduce gas use.

 

I don't think it was reactionary at all. It was simply a reaction to an attitude that I see often. Hoping for something bad to happen so that those bad people get punished. In this case those bad people using lots of gasoline, which is most of the North America, Europe, and Asia. Peak oil, the kind of doom of quickly running out seems to be a money raiser for environmental movements, and a reason to have a big army to protect or invade thzose countries that happen to be sitting sitting on our oil. Oil price spikes by opec which is what has traditionally raised gas prices really creates a transfer of our weath to countries that are not exactly friendly and puts a toll on our economy and employment. So no I don't think those are exactly positive things to wish for. I'm all for getting rid of the artificial subsidies for gasoline though. There are large government subsidies for PHEVs and BEVs the US program alone is $10B in tax incentives, grants, and loans. Dave just wants a choice to buy one, and I think thats a good thing. Choice will be bigger in 2012 with BEV Tesla S and Roadsters, Leafs, focuses, Rav4s, imevs and hopefully many others. PHEV volts, prii, focuses, sonotas, and many others

 

Yes . . . and just a couple years prior to to THIS Ford stance, Ford was claiming they would NOT build EV's at all. Seeing what happened to GM vis a vis bankruptcy and a VERY poor forward-looking energy forcast, at least Ford is now doing a 180. Good for them.

.

 

But would that not raise the price of gasoline? (Same thing as the poster desired.)


I obviously agree with what you are saying about cause and effect, but I did not connect the dots of that post in the same way you did. The poster would be the proper person to state their thinking. However, I thought it was in support of the Ford article clearly stating that large scale EV adoption needed higher gas prices.

 

Well, yes it would raise the price of gas, and would lower the cost of government and government distortion in the markets. That is not what I heard from the poster, but I could be wrong.

Well we agree there. It is Ford's opinion of what they think needs to happen for BEV's to get penetration. There are other opinions out there, and they say if you build them people will buy. Ford is hedging its bets in two ways, making an investment in case people actually do want to buy BEV's with $2.50 gasoline and federal subsidies. Ford also wins on this bet if gas prices go up, and they have to eventually and this gives people the incentive to buy BEVs. Nissan wins bigger, but if they are wrong they also lose bigger.

 

My guess right now is that Ford is working on a improved version of their hybrid drive system so it can fit in the engine bay of the next-generation Mk. III Ford Focus and its related Grand C-Max "tall wagon." It will be available in conventional hybrid drive (using NiMH batteries) or a PHEV version with charging plug (using Li-On batteries). The PHEV version will have longer range since with the higher capacity of Li-On batteries, the gasoline engine will run a lot less, especially going downhill or in regenerative braking.