This concept from Volvo is not totally 'new' by any means, but here is a short well-done video explaining how the small details continue to evolve beyond the current Prius - and towards an immediately marketable system which is even 'greener' and more efficient.
The nice refinement here is the combination of 4 electric motors in the wheels (4-wheel drive, essentially), eliminating the transmission, a small engine which can burn biofuel for longer trips, along with an intermediate range for batteries, which can be plugged in at home. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmJTsHcZMFQ&feature=related The ~60 miles of range w/o combustion kicking-in is just about the right distance for many parts of the USA, and using the new version of the less-costly lead acid battery (the batt-cap which are already in limited production) makes this solution less costly than anything requiring lithium, or other exotic materials. http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/20105/ IOW instead of the pure plug-in hybrid, which would require a ma$$ive cost for needed amount of batteries for longer trips, you get the desirability of unlimited range with the small ICE. But if all you do is medium distance commutes with grid power available at the other end, then you could conceivably go for weeks or even months without needing the ICE or gasoline at all. The other option would be the 'trailerable' ICE. That would be a towed unit which contains the ICE and fuel tank, which does not need to be attached to the hitch until needed (or can be rented). Either concept using the advanced lead-acid is doable now for the cost of a Prius, whether or not the cheap 'bettery' gets here soon (and most versions won't be cheap for years). It would not surprise me at all if Toyota does not stun everyone with an early version of this using similar refinements in 2008, including the advanced lead-acid. Why do I predict this? Rumor-control (blogger) has Toyota licensing, or in negotiations, for the Oasis advanced lead technology: http://www.fireflyenergy.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=204&Itemid=89 The major knocks, from the peanut gallery, on this kind of implementation, are: [followed by my comments to answer their objections] "Is there a point in keeping this "hybrid"? If the car can already drive 100km with one charge, wouldn't it make sense to get rid of the 1.6L engine, fuel tank, etc. to lighten it up or put more batteries and extend the mileage/charge?" [What?? and never be able to go on a long vacation by car, or a long drive, without first doing some serious pre-planning] "lugging around a dead weight of 150kg in EV mode does seems pointless." [Not as pointless as running out of charge 5 miles from you destination on the Freeway!!] [The trailer-ICE option would also fit in to the options available here, but that gets back to the pre-planning issue.] "If it'll do 100km with it, then the range and performance will be even better without it. This is probably to placate all those whiners who claim they want 400km range but only drive 50km a day! " [The whiners are basically correct - as they are thinking ahead for contingencies. The good-life is not all short commutes, or resorting to rent-a-cars for vacations, and sometimes we just get the urge to take a spontaneous long drive.] It is probably true that the small engine itself could be even smaller and lighter, and the Wankel seems ideal for this ... but that is where we must go with the next iteration of refinement, after we get tooled up for this one. Jones
