Skip to Content

  • Bill
  • Member Since Mar 22nd, 2006

Are you Bill? If So, Login Here.

BlogComments
Autoblog13 Comments
ParentDish1 Comment
The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)3 Comments
Engadget167 Comments
Engadget HD10 Comments
Engadget Mobile4 Comments
BloggingStocks3 Comments
Autoblog Green643 Comments
TMZ3 Comments
News Bloggers2 Comments
The Jason Calacanis Weblog1 Comment

Recent Comments:

Aptera 2e three-wheeler deemed a car by the DoE, eligible for funding {Engadget}

Oct 31st 2009 10:04AM Aptera has only done computer simulations and static crush tests on the 2e.

Last year they said actual crash tests would be done that summer, but they're already more than a year behind that promise.

Now that they're eligible for the money don't hold your breath waiting for actual crash tests.

Remember, it's not about how rigid a vehicle is, but how much energy gets transferred to the occupants in a crash.

Even at surface road speeds (not highway), there's a heck of a lot of energy you want to see absorbed in the "crumple zone" of the vehicle instead of it being transferred to the occupants.

Since Aptera is marketing the 2e as a conventional, highway-capable vehicle (not a low-speed NEV) they should be required to perform the same tests as for any 4-wheeled vehicle before it can be sold.

GM CEO: electric cars require teamwork; hydrogen cars 10x more expensive than Volt {Autoblog Green}

Oct 30th 2009 6:58PM Or the efficiency issue - will we see even 60% in a production stack?

President signs bill expanding ATVM program to three wheelers {Autoblog Green}

Oct 30th 2009 6:47PM It's all speculation until actual crash tests because no matter how rigid the vehicle, what counts is energy transfer to the occupants.

Simply because an OEM can design a roof that won't fail in rollover doesn't mean you won't have to hose out the inside following a crash, even at surface road speeds.

I hope actual crash tests will occur, but they didn't last year (Aptera said then they would happen that summer).

Now that they've got the money, don't hold your breath.

REPORT: Generation Y will "redefine" automotive market, trends green and big {Autoblog Green}

Oct 28th 2009 2:26PM The diesel cycle is always more efficient than any spark-cycle.

Which is why everyone wants to see HCCI make it into a production gasoline-fueled ICE.

You can get better than diesel efficiency by designing a gasoline-electric hybrid, but you'll pay at least 2x the cost of a turbodiesel.

Lotus now offering the Evora chassis to other automakers {Autoblog Green}

Oct 28th 2009 2:19PM 71 kWh battery, what's that gonna cost?

REPORT: Detroit ignored voices calling for fuel efficient vehicles, says GM insider {Autoblog Green}

Oct 27th 2009 9:34AM You'd sell SUVs all day long too when gas was cheap and consumers were willing to pay $40,000 for a SUV that cost you $20,000 to make.

Samsung's 40-inch LCD is world's thinnest at 3.9-mm, attracts magic pencils {Engadget}

Oct 26th 2009 7:17AM These ultra-thin panels have had serious problems with light blooming in the corners (see avsforum).

It's annoying enough that most end up returning them.

Sharp solar cell sets Conversion Efficiency record {Engadget}

Oct 24th 2009 9:27AM Just quote us a panel price in $/watt.

Honda CEO: People will embrace fuel cells when they realize battery limits {Autoblog Green}

Oct 23rd 2009 3:06PM Capital cost remains THE issue with fuel cell range extenders.

Right now a fuel cell stack large enough to move a vehicle costs six figures, which is at least an order of magnitude more than a 100-mile vehicle battery pack.

There is no technological path to reducing the cost of a fuel cell stack faster than reducing the cost of a battery pack.

Fuel cells will also always be more complex and less efficient than batteries.

If an OEM feels their EV vehicle design needs a range extender, they can simply use an onboard ICE genset fueled by gasoline/E85 or natural gas (cleaner, but lower mpg equivalent)

REPORT: Nissan's Ghosn rules out hybrid-only models like Toyota Prius, Honda Insight {Autoblog Green}

Oct 23rd 2009 1:10PM Cost, not weight, is still the issue with vehicle-sizes lithium battery packs.

I know Tesla expects something like a 2/3 reduction in battery cost over the next 7 years, but I don't know if I'm that optimistic.

And IIRC, going battery-only (no ICE) means OEMs avoid CARB's 10 year/150,000 mile warranty requirement for the battery pack.


Featured Galleries

  • 1 Liter Racing League
  • Suzuki Alto in Global Green Challenge
  • Proterra Electric Bus
  • Local Motors Rally Fighter
  • 1916 Woods Dual Power Model 44 Coupe
  • Audi Avatar
  • Global Green Challenge Tesla Roadster goes 313 miles
  • Meyers Motors NMG
  • Cozmo NEV
  • Tokyo 2009: Suzuki Swift PHEV
  • Tokyo 2009: Suzuki SX4-FCV
  • Honda mobility devices

Autoblog

Daily Finance

Download Squad

Engadget

Joystiq

Autoblog Spanish

Switched.com

FanHouse

Asylum