Ford, Boeing and NU Form Nanotech Alliance

spoonyfork wrote to mention an article detailing a collaboration between Ford, Boeing and Northwestern to research how nanotechnology can improve car and plane design. From the article: "Ford hopes the alliance will help it build more fuel-efficient cars and engines that are more durable because they run cooler. The research also will focus on designing vehicles that run on alternative energy sources, such as hydrogen and electricity. Nanotechnology should allow batteries for hybrid vehicles that produce more energy while weighing less and taking up less space, Stevens said. CEO Bill Ford Jr. recently said half of the company's models will have hybrid capabilities by 2010. By making batteries and other components smaller, it opens up space for more features that consumers want in their vehicles, Stevens said. Designers will be forced to make fewer compromises when choosing materials and amenities."

Comments

Interesting what's called nanotech.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was at a conference when Revlon was listed as in the top-5 nanotech companies in the world - apparently because they deal with fine poweders or something like that.

Apparently Cuervo (yes, the tequila company) is one of the top plant biotech companies too, trying to speed up the lifecycle of whatever plant it is that makes tequila.

With enough marketing, I suppose even Microsoft could be a nano-tech company - micro & nano both mean small, don't they?

Re:Interesting what's called nanotech.

[biryokumaru]

Tequila is made from agave, which often have a very slow life span. In some parts of the US a particular species is known as the "century plant."

This has been your biology update from the town drunkard.

Who will be in business longest?

[opencity]

My money's on NU as it would be hardest for them to go bankrupt.
Ford deserves credit for at least making some effort.

What!?

[RobbieGee]

As if the seats weren't small enough...

Smaller components for smaller cars

[Alain Williams]

By making batteries and other components smaller, it opens up space for more features that consumers want in their vehicles

Given the size of the typical US vehicle it has never struck me that space would be at a premium. Let us hope that this technology will be used to make smaller & more fuel efficient cars -- we all need to drive those to mitigate the causes of climate change -- especially cars made in the USA.

Re:Smaller components for smaller cars

[arkhan_jg]

One reason for that is because so many others are driving SUVs and light trucks. A car hit by a SUV is at greater risk of having fatalities than if it had been hit by a heavy car. It's the ride height and stiffness that makes SUVs more dangerous, not their weight.

Incidentally, SUVs themselves are held to the lower safety standards of light trucks, not passenger cars. They don't have the same safety standards for their occupants as passenger cars for side impacts, and their bumpers are not as strong. There's also the the significant increased risk of rollovers.

So buying an SUV or light truck not only puts other road-users at greater risk, it also puts the occupants at higher risk than if they'd bought a medium or large sized car.

To be fair, there are uses for light trucks and SUVs, mainly out of cities. In urban areas, a large car does the same job, is safer all round, and gets better fuel efficiency. The tax and safety loopholes that SUVs get should be closed, as they are primarily passenger vehicles, not business light trucks.

Re:Smaller components for smaller cars

[Balthisar]

US cars made for the US market (oh, might I add Canada and Mexico in there, as well?) meet US tastes and demands. Yeah, that means big, old Expeditions and Crown Victorias and big, gas guzzling cars. It's not Ford et al's fault -- it's market driven.

If you look at Ford products in Mexico, the UK, Europe, and Asia, you'll see that Ford builts and sells more small cars the world over than big SUV's and full size cars in the North American market.

I'm currently working in Mexico launching an American market car. Down here when you ask for "full size" at the airport, they give you a Focus! I'm currently driving a Mondeo that my 6'2" frame barely fits into and while it's a perfectly safe care, it "feels" dangerously small when you're used to something the size of a Taurus or larger.

Not too long ago, I was trying to find out some information about these Mondeos (they don't sell 'em in the US/Canada market). I read a review of Mondeos on a British site. The review exclaimed that among the good points were the cavernous amounts of space inside this absolutely huge vehicle. The principal bad point was the miserable gas mileage, at only 27mpg is was fuel hog!

It just goes to show that perception among different markets is, obviously, different, and that you can't pigeonhole Ford into being nothing but a huge SUV maker. Remember, Toyota and Nissan sell into the USA/Canada/Mexico market, too, and they sell huge, behemouth trucks and SUV's, too! I'm betting you don't see many of those in Europe.

Re:Smaller components for smaller cars

[chabotc]

I'm afraid i will loose any chance of not being marked a troll for asking this, but i'll be brave and do it anyway .. take pitty on me mods :-)

You speak of the US market, supply and demand and these are very good points, in the american mind puny european cars are just not 'cars', their toys that never feel 'safe' and just aint american enough. Europeans on the other hand think about things like 'gas is expensive', 'boy we polute a lot', 'wow taxes on huge cars are expensive' and the ever favorite 'how could i park such a monster of a car in town!'. So sure both sides have different ideas and concepts of what a car is and different problems they face.

However the enviriomental question isn't one thats unique to europe. Looking at recent huricanes one could say they are not becomming more frequent, but are becomming more powerfull .. one could argue that this could well be because the oceans are warming up, and warm water is the 'fuel' for a huricane, so a slightly warmer gulf of mexico directly equals stronger huricanes and more devistation.

Now the climate isn't changing its self, we as human kind contribute a lot to this, and thus we as people tried to initiate the kyoto convention, tax bigger cars and poluting industries, raise taxes on gas and a slew of other measures (here in the netherlands you get a big tax break on a small car equiped with state of the art filters, and get huge tax increases on big poluting cars forinstance).

Now the US didn't join the kyoto convention, still refuses too, sugested a watered down version that wouldn't mean taking drastic measures, the US doesn't choose (yet?) to drive less poluting cars, and doesn't stimulate less poluting industries 'as much' as europe does.

Doesn't anyone in america get the feeling that maybe their demands for bigger, more gas guzzling cars isn't such a bright idea and that maybe the kyoto convention isn't so silly afterall?

As you said its all supply and demand, and i'm just wondering why demand ain't shifting ..

Re:Smaller components for smaller cars

[sydbarrett74]

Demand isn't shifting because Americans as a whole are selfish, arrogant, ignorant gluttons (i.e., 'fat, happy and stupid'). Lest this get modded as a troll, I'm an American.

Re:Smaller components for smaller cars

[dfjghsk]

Now the climate isn't changing its self, ...

and why not? the climate has been changing itself for billions of years.. long before we were even here. So now that we are here, the Earth's temperature suddenly stopped changing by itself? We are the sole cause for the increase in temperature?

Sorry if I don't take your work for it.

And why didn't they...

[6pak]

...ask Matchbox to join in? They should have the obvious expertise!

Like this will go anywhere...

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt this will do much for cars, because whatever they come up with will be too expensive. That's the same reason cars currently aren't being made out of titanium. If better mileage was all the car companies cared about, cars would get a few hundred mpg, but cost too much for most people to buy.

Re:Like this will go anywhere...

[netwiz]

As for Titanium, it is costly due to not being widely available, the same reason gold and platinum is costly. Titanium is also not the easiest of materials to work with. It is unbeleively strong that is it's biggest pro factor.

Where to start? There's so much wrong here. One, titanium isn't expensive because it's rare; it's the ninth most common element in the earth's crust. You kind of got it right with the materials handling comment. Ti isn't easy to work with, and that's why it's expensive. It's strong, but only in particular ways. In fact, depending on what you're trying to do, cast iron can be a better material. It's very strong for it's weight, and when heated, maintains that strength almost all the way to it's melting point, making it a superior metal in high-temperature environments.

nanotech alliance?

[commodoresloat]

I, for one, welcome our tiny new overlords....

Re:Those companies are in trouble!

[scavok]

Boeing is still well in the game. http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,15 18,360417,00.html

Re:Those companies are in trouble!

[man_eleven]

You seem to be forgetting that Ford also owns: Lincoln, Mercury, Volvo, Jaguar, and Aston Martin (and possibly a few others, Mazda maybe(?)). Despite the fact that US car companies seem to have dropped the ball so spectacularly when cheaper, better Japanese competition came along, I doubt we'll see the Ford brand disappear any time in the near future. Of the major US auto makers, Ford is probably the one most closely aligned with the needs of its customers - minus the glut of SUV's they've foisted upon us. And while Boeing have been a bunch of 'tards recently (with their bogus marketing practices), I still think their new business model is gonna fly (so to speak); smaller, cheaper, more fuel efficient airplanes that fly to a wider range of destinations. Airbus is betting on the jumbo-jet, Boeing not so much.

Nanotech

[H0D_G]

As a student in a nanotech degree, it brings warmth to my heart that I'll be able to get a job once I finish Uni. Whether the term nanotechnology will lose some of its stigma as "grey goo" will have ended by then is another question. and whether I'll be able to say nanotechnology without a chorus oh "huh?"s is a better question

Re:Old slashdot jokes...

[poopdeville]

In Soviet Russia, the continued use of played-out slashdot memes laments you!

Re:Those companies are in trouble!

[H0D_G]

ford also does well in foreign markets- like australia