Toyota's Secret Plans for Solar-Powered Car

Toyota is secretly developing a car powered by solar cells mounted on the vehicle’s roof, according to a report today from Japan’s Nikkei newspaper.

The report said the automaker hopes the vehicle will eventually be totally powered by the solar cells—but that would take many years. Prior to that time, energy from the sun could provide only some of the power for the vehicle’s batteries and other electric accessories.

The report didn’t cite sources and Toyota executives were unavailable for comment. In July 2008, media organizations speculated that Toyota would offer a rooftop solar panel as an option on the next generation Prius. Energy experts believe there’s a mismatch between the amount of solar power that can be delivered and how that energy might actually be used by the current Prius. A Prius solar panel will likely be limited to running a small ventilation fan while the car is parked.

Viable Solar-Powered Precedents: Lacking

A number of niche automakers have unveiled solar-powered concept vehicles in recent years. To correct the mismatch between the energy that could be produced and what is required, carmakers try to expand the available space for solar cells while reducing the weight of the vehicles. If the unconfirmed Nikkei report proves correct, Toyota could be the first major automaker to pursue a solar-powered design.

Venturi Eclectic
Mindset Six50

Top: The Venturi Eclectic, shown at the 2006 Paris Motor Show, is charged by the 2.5 square meters of solar cells on its roof. A complete charge of the nickel metal hybrid batteries provides a range of about 30 miles.
Bottom: Mindset AG, a Swiss company, announced its plans in 2008 to produce an ultra-lightweight hybrid vehicle with roof-mounted solar panels. According to the company, the hybrid “Six50,” features a roof equipped with solar panels that power the lithium ion batteries, providing around 60 miles of driving.

The current Toyota Prius hybrid—with a 1.3 kilowatt-hour battery pack—has limited ability to store energy to power the wheels. A Toyota plug-in hybrid or electric vehicle with expanded batteries would be better suited to using solar-generated energy.

In fact, Toyota will debut a small battery-electric concept car at the 2009 North American International Auto show next week. “This is a pure electric vehicle,” said Toyota spokeswoman Jana Hartline. “It’s a concept we are bringing to the show basically to confirm our interest in electric vehicles.”

Toyota’s plans to harness power from the sun could get a boost when Panasonic Corp., Toyota’s partner in advanced battery production, completes its planned takeover of Sanyo Electric Co., a leader in solar technology. Toyota uses solar panels at its Tsutsumi plant in central Japan to produce some of its own electricity—roughly enough to power 500 homes.


  • Shines

    I think solar panels on a car to help recharge the battery is a great idea. It’s better than the letting the sun fade the paint job.
    However, living in Seattle in the winter – I know there isn’t enough solar energy hitting a vehicles sized surface to transport a 200 lb man 20 miles no matter how light the vehicle is. Maybe in a place like Phoenix it might be viable. I’m sure Ford, GM and Chrysler are ciontinuing their reserch in solar vehicles. I remember reaing about their entries in that solar powered race held in Australia.

  • XHSV

    AP names today’s Nikkei as the source. The funny thing is, there is no such article in today’s Nikkei, nor is there one that was published in previous days. A search of both the Japanese and English versions of the Nikkei for “Toyota” and “solar” comes up with nothing. The car doesn’t exist. The Nikkei article quoted by the AP doesn’t exist either.

    What is in today’s Nikkei (sub) is a story about advances in construction technologies — of houses. It reads like this: “Homes that can use electric cars as power storage batteries is just one of the new construction technologies expected to receive attention in 2009. Such technology was jointly developed by Tostem Housing Institute Co., which belongs to JS Group Corp, Mitsubishi Corp., the Tokyo Institute of Technology and others. Their final goal is to develop a system whereby electric cars serve as a battery for homes. The cars are to be charged by solar power and less-expensive nighttime electricity, and their stored energy tapped to power homes when necessary. Such a system is seen slashing carbon dioxide emissions.” Granted, the story reads off-the-wall-ish. Don’t blame us, it’s the Nikkei’s official version. There is no Toyota mentioned anywhere. They are talking about charging a plug-in with solar panels on the roofs of houses. Big deal.

    A case of too much sake last night for Yuri Kageyama-san, who wrote the article for AP?

    The trouble is: The story is making headlines around the world, raising hopes for something that doesn’t exist. Not even in the news story that is quoted.

  • ACAgal

    This is pretty much the system that the Karma and the Sunset have in their design (extended range plug-in EV) The Karma production model car, and Sunset Concept car will be at the Detroit Auto show. I think this is interesting.

  • ACAgal

    To Shines in Seattle: I do live in So CA and I do have solar. I became aware of the effectiveness of solar while in Germany, which is closer to your climate than mine, and even heard an Irish home owner rave about how solar helped cut her energy costs. I scratch my head over those moments, but I see my system produce energy even on rainy or foggy days. The advantage to you in the north is in your annual production. During the summer, when you need AC (and my northern friends tell me they now happen), your days are longer than ours and the sun’s angle even more direct. You make more energy when the sunshines. It is true that you produce less in the winter. This is not a problem with the Fisker Karma and Sunset. These cars use plug-in recharging systems, and solar on the roof to cool the battery and the passenger compartment. Additionally, these cars have a generator (currently powered by gas, but may be adaptable to other fuels in the future) to extend the range beyond the 50 miles battery range of operation.

    What I think is interesting is that a California company has been using this system in military vehicles. This is the Q-drive and bits that make up the nuts and bolts of this extended range plug-in EV…..maybe this time Toyota is following a local leader.

  • 상율 한

    The time might be changing from IT to ET. The internet may be a matter of efficiency,though, the renewable energy can be a matter of life and death, I guess. As we know, the tremendous money flown into the oil-producing nations caused the world to be into painful recession. I thinnk the EV coupled with solar panel is able to get it gas-free via removing gas tank.

  • Sunshine Policy

    While the oil shock contributed to the recession, I would have to say the huge irresponsible credit crisis caused the painful global recession.

    Another example of forward thinking by Toyota. Is it any wonder over time Toyota improves in small steps while others tumbles and ask for bailouts? It’s all about long term vision and leadership. Good for Toyota and other companies thinking ahead and not becoming complacent.

  • Douglas G Danforth

    The solar constant is about 1KW per square meter. That is, each square meter at noon on a sunny day (in space) will have 1 kilowatt of energy striking it. On earth the number is slightly less. Also at 10% efficiency of solar panels one needs 10 square meters to capture 1 KW. That’s a little over 3 meters (10 feet) on a side.

    If you let the car stand in the sun for 4 hours and has the area described above then you can store 4KWH of energy. That’s 3 times the amount of energy that the Toyota Prius hybrid can store in its battery pack (as mentioned above).

    Around the world with solar: There was a television documentary recently that showed an electric car towing a flat bed of solar panels of about the size I mention which was able to circumnavigate the globe (except for ocean crossings on ships). Not a single penny spent on energy cost. Pretty cool.

  • Bryce

    i am sorry to debunk this, but Nikei who reported on this couldn’t substantiate it with anything and turned out to be speculation according to jalopnik.com. Furthermore, the calculations have been done on surface area of a car roof and the power conversion of a solar panel and it has been found not to be enough to charge the vehicle….unless of course u wanted to wait a week or two. This would be awesome, but I am afraid it just isn’t so……and, mathematically speaking, is actually impossible.

  • AP

    XHSV’s explanation and Sunshine Policy’s response show the situation for what it is: the press loves to play up Japanese “technological wonders” because typical Americans want to believe it, and have no way of knowing it’s exaggerated. Call it American Shame Syndrome (ASS). Other symptoms are ignoring improving American car quality and any faults in Japanese cars.

  • Old School

    I am curious why the term HYBRID has been so limited in design.
    A vehicle could contain several dozen systems or more to generate power ALL AT THE SAME TIME.

    Heat from the engine*, light from the sun, friction from the brakes, plug in ability at home with solar, home heat*, and wind powering the home charging device.

    I am sure there are plenty more … that all used at the same time, could cull gas use to a fraction.

    Just a thought.

  • Also…

    Also… it is amusing to me the short sighted “de-bunking” ot these concepts.
    Battery technology, Solar tech, and more grow exponentially every few years. The idea that tomorrows technology will be limited by todays limitations is comical.

    15 years ago, the internet an computing power of today was considered impossible.

    GM, IBM, Meryl Lynch out of business? Impossible.

    Bemember please, we are limited by our own beliefs. If you believe it cant be done, it means YOU cant do it. Just because it is out of your ability or belief… to believe someone else cant do it… thats just dumb.

    From the beginning of time, the “impossible” is achieved.

    If you can conceive it, you can achieve it.

  • John K.

    Slightly OT, but related, post: I’ve not heard any news of EEStor having delivered their product to Zenn before the end of ’08.

    Hopefully, they’ll deliver it before the end of the 1st Q of ’09.

  • John K.

    Old School,

    Your post reminded me of a company, Eneco, that was developing thermocouple that combined thermoionics and thermoelectrics and converted 17% of heat to electricity between 250 and 300 C.

    Unfortunately, I just searched and saw that they filed for Chapter 11 a year ago. Perhaps if any of those Ford reps read this posting they might suggest to their higher-ups that Ford look into buying — or at least jointly develop/license — Eneco’s technology. Imagine a hybrid or PHEV where the exhaust manifold, exhaust pipe, and catalytic converter are covered w/Eneco’s tech to feed even more electricity to the batts/caps!

    More at:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Eneco_power_chip

  • Greg Hoffman

    Oh here we go again

    Toyota is making come great Vehicle. Toyota PR makes me sick. They dont invent anyting. They just use tricks to make people think they are GREEN

    They are such a fake disgusting company.

    GM again has already produced a solar car with no engine or batts..

    Infact my university made one. RIT

    GM sun racer

    http://www.gmphotostore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=53217698

    We worked on one at RIT. We only came in 9th at the time.

    MIT came in 1

    I will never in my life buy a Toyota. They are a horrible company.

  • bill cosworth

    http://wiki.gmnext.com/wiki/index.php/GM_Sunraycer

    So funny Toyota copy cats.

    When I see toyota drivers I think of all the american engineering students ideas being stolen.

    the Prius is proof … stolen ford patients.

  • Sunshine Policy

    “Call it American Shame Syndrome (ASS). Other symptoms are ignoring improving American car quality and any faults in Japanese cars.”

    Oh I’m sure there are plenty of faults in Japanese cars and all other makes. With big ticket items like a car, people with no money to burn tend to favor cars that have long term quality, not some initial quality award being handed out by JD Powers. The beauty of the capitalist system is that consumers will learn and dictate which one they will accept base on experience.

    The point is, forward thinking is better than car companies that puts their heads in their ASS and fail to anticipate key demands of the consumer. For example, Ford betting on crossovers to be a “game changer” just couple years ago is clearly a shortsighted move for the company’s future given the trend of oil prices. The only game it seems to be changing now is its bottom line.

  • Sunshine Policy

    I’m sorry Mr Cosworth… If Prius is the proof of stolen Ford patents, try to explain this from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Escape_Hybrid):
    “The Escape Hybrid uses technology similar to that used in Toyota’s Prius. Ford engineers realized their technology may conflict with patents held by Toyota, which led to a 2004 patent-sharing accord between the companies, licensing Ford’s use of some of Toyota’s hybrid technology in exchange for Toyota’s use of some of Ford’s diesel and direct-injection engine technology.”

    It’s nice to be holding patients, but it’s what you do with the technology that counts. The consumer market is very realistic and unkind. What is GM doing with those technologies?

  • hybrid-man

    Article on PHEV Toyota Prius and solar Toyota Highlander:
    http://www.toyoland.com/prius/PHEV.html

  • AP

    “Also,” you said that “The idea that tomorrows technology will be limited by todays limitations is comical.”

    This is not true. Imagination is essential, but the laws of physics will be the same 100 years as they are today. Only so much solar radiation falls on an area the size of a car, and we couldn’t convert more than 100% of that into electricity no matter what. Likely, we will not get past 50%, due to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

    Inventions like the internet weren’t limited by energy laws, just the technology it took to develop them (although the speed of light puts a limit on a CPU of a certain size – so you make it smaller). Transportation is completely different; it’s all about moving things efficiently, and efficiently converting energy sources into the power to do it with. There are severe limitations on it.

    Because of movies and video games (where anything IS possible), we seem to have the idea that all we have to do is imagine something and it will be.

    But even if something is possible, that doesn’t mean it will be effective, reliable, or affordable. Hybrids themselves don’t have a self-sustaining business case, unless you have the advantages of a manipulated currency (to hide the real cost), an excellent PR machine to make it fashionable, a lap-dog media, and a naive public.

    Our imaginations should be used to create energy and industrial policies to foster vehicle designs that really do reduce our dependence on foreign oil, at a cost that is affordable without massive government subsidies or a company that subsidizes them by selling Tundras.

    We American individuals also need to try harder to comprehend the issues determining the viability of the different technologies. Otherwise we are like baby raccoons playing with shiny objects.

  • sean t

    Greg Hoffman,
    If you’re sick, see a doctor. Don’t whinge, OK?

  • Samie

    AP, I agree but I believe we see more innovation when we actually have a real market for hybrids and electric cars. 2-3% is not a real market if we see an increase to say 30-50% there would not be so much “greenwashing” or media hype over unrealistic concept cars. As for policy a mass of consumers at some point would have to adopt this move. Not so easy in my opinion when we choose comfort and power over efficiency. That’s why sedans like the Hybrid Focus & the compact Honda Insight are so important in growing this market beyond a small niche market. We will all get there but one step at a time we should not waste time with solar panels on cars when questions of production, competition, and affordability are more important.

    As for technologies like that of Eneco, these types would be better off as a whole leasing or co-developing technologies with major automakers instead of trying to do it all on their own. So many great ideas are often killed or captured by self interests that don’t ever make it to market eg non-flat tires for cars. I would argue that this is happening in California where all those “green” start-ups have some great concepts or technologies but lacks whats needed to run a successful corporation.

  • Total Solar Energy

    well, as much as I’d love this technology to work I have a feeling the hydrogen hybrid cars are going to pip them. I watched a tv programme on them a few weeks ag and I was very impressed with what I saw

  • Bryce

    From Mr. Sunshine:

    “people with no money to burn tend to favor cars that have long term quality, not some initial quality award being handed out by JD Powers”

    I assume you are referring to the awarding of several JD Power awards to GM cars. Initial quality generally transfers to long term quality expectancies. I guess JD Power now holds no credit now that they have admired some GM cars……lol……in your eyes. I guess the old folks just can’t accept that quality has improved since the 70s. When people start debunking JD Power, well, what is left. Who is a consumer to trust for recommendations.

  • Sunshine Policy

    “I assume you are referring to the awarding of several JD Power awards to GM cars. Initial quality generally transfers to long term quality expectancies. I guess JD Power now holds no credit now that they have admired some GM cars”

    I’m not saying JD Power has no credit, and it has nothing to do with domestic/foreign because both play mind games with that title. I’m saying it does not measures how the consumer defines quality when buying a vehicle. It’s true all car companies try to convince consumers that initial quality equals long term quality, it is a myth. Initial quality is only a prerequisite of long term quality. It takes more to get to the next level. This is where lots of car manufactures fail to understand.

    Personally, I don’t use the initial quality to gauge the long term quality. Initial quality tells me the assembly plants did a good job. Long term quality has more to do with fundamental design and quality parts of the car than assembly. The consumers of course do not care how long term quality is derived. If they or their families have nothing but problems with one make and have trouble free with another, which one would they choose for the next new car?

    In my case, it’s a life and death issue because I don’t want to freeze to death if my car decided to die in middle of winter. :-)

  • Jon

    Sunshine and Cosworth.. it’s PATENTS! not patients… if it was just one of you I’d have ignored it but really, both of you.. ford’s patients… ROTFLOL… I’m sure with time I’d come up with a joke about american car companies being in critical care to offend the flag wavers here.

    As for autonomous solar powered vehicles being beyond the laws of physics… I point you to Mars. Two, autonomous solar powered vehicles running around on another planet for more than a year.

    The truth is it IS possible, but it might require changes in what we consider a “vehicle”, but this is why automakers are starting to look at how small and light they can make a vehicle. Eventually they are going to dramatically rethink vehicles. 3 wheels? single passenger vehicles? vehicles without windows? Vehicles actually design to maximize sun exposure (SunRacer style). These are not things that are 3-5 years away, but they are within our imagination.

  • Jon

    Regarding this whole Japanese vs American garbage that seems to creep into every discussion here… get over it… I could care less who did what first, who has what patents, and who could do what some day if they pulled thier collective heads out.

    I care about reality. The reality is that over the last couple decades foreign car companies, even when using American factories, have turned out more reliable and better value vehicles than the big 3. I hope all 3 big three get chopped up into tiny little car companies which have to completely reinvent themselves.

    As for the “improving quality of american cars”… maybe… it takes years to change people minds, just like all those that held onto the “buy american” myth through the 80′s and 90′s and finally gave up that ghost, it’ll take a decade or two to convince most Americans to “buy american” again.

    Finally, back to reality again… GM pulled the EV1 off the streets and Toyota put the Prius on the street. You really want to support the company that was so short sighted that even WITH the future in their hands they threw it in the trash? or would you support the company about to drop the 4th generation of it’s best selling hybrid vehicle? One of those two companies is getting it done… the other is headed for chapter 11.

  • Sunshine Policy

    “Sunshine and Cosworth.. it’s PATENTS! not patients…”
    Hehe, he started it… I did get one of two, partial credit?

  • Bryce

    To Jon…..

    The probes on Mars take week long breaks most of the time between charges and their activities…….just to clarify the whole……look at these solar things do it.

    It is the third generation for the Prius if that I the vehicle you were referring to….and that won’t be out until a year from now

    And also just to clarify, those EV1s cost $80,000 if they were to be retailed, a little out of yours and mines price range. As for Toyota, they had their own EV1 program within RAV4 shells…..which they also smashed to get out of warranty obligations. Some got away but only after they had to tell Toyota that they would not expect the warranty to be respected and honored.

    As for American vs. Foreign….

    It isn’t a big deal in my mind. Folks can get whatever vehicle they want, whether it be German, Japanese, American, or what have you. Hell, people even bought Yugoslavian cars at one point….even though they were complete crap. I was helping my girlfriend car shopping and we visited all the different places. Nissan, Mazda, Chevy. (woulda visited Honda, but she strongly dislikes them) The Nissan Altima drives beautifully and the Mazda 3s the girlfriend really liked. Her true love is the Chevy Malibu though. (her mom has one actually) Sadly though she had to settle for used due to money constraints and got a used Pontiac Vibe 07. (Same basic vehicle as a Toyota Matrix due to a joint venture between Toyota and GM) Which brings me to my final point. Love or hate a car company based on their product and their service. I enjoy Chevy, Nissan, and Honda because I have seen nothing but good stuff. I loathe Toyota because, despite its supposed wonderful reputation, has awful interiors and boring exteriors. (engines work fine though, so getting the Pontiac Vibe was like the best of both worlds. An aesthetically pleasing styling coupled with a fun to drive package….a love child made in heaven.) In my eyes, buying Toyota is like those people who buy Jaguar because of the supposed fancy name even though Jaguar is the most craptastic luxury brand out there. Buy what you want, but before hand, do some research.

  • Sunshine Policy

    “As for the “improving quality of american cars”… maybe… it takes years to change people minds, just like all those that held onto the “buy american” myth through the 80′s and 90′s and finally gave up that ghost, it’ll take a decade or two to convince most Americans to “buy american” again.”

    That is a very good point. A lot of car manufactures do not keep their vehicle models for long enough to earn a solid reputation (most likely whatever reputation is being earned is a negative one?). A lot of Toyota and Honda vehicles went through generations of improvement to achieve their status. (e.g. Civic, Accord, Corolla, Camry, etc). It’s unfortunate Ford could have done the same with Escort and Taurus, but they gave them up because they were not competing well and not as profitable as SUVs. GM probably was forced to dump the Cavalier model due to build up of negative associations with that car. Let’s keep our fingers crossed on the Malibu model. The key is continued improvements such that consumers know they are not just getting the same vehicle year after year. One thing is for sure, it will take a substantial effort before a domestic model will be in the same mindset as the Accords and Camrys. Maybe Volt will be start of that trend.

  • Bryce

    Actually, the Taurus is still a nameplate under Ford. It is true though, names are often dropped for PR reasons, which is indeed sad. For a consumer to be able to associate a longstanding reputation with a vehicle line, it helps that it maintains its name over years. Even though each redesign essentially creates a completely different car, it would be helpful if the consumer could associate past good experiences with their next purchase….from a purely marketing standpoint anyways. It actually in the real world has nothing to do with what will happen in the future. I admire the Camrys of the 80s and even early 90s that were definetly one up from their competition, but that gap has since been closed and even been surpassed in some cases by their competitors by a combination of stronger competitors and a sort of laxness on the part of the Toyota team. It is dissapointing, but if they don’t want to maintain the market, let them fall. The Accord, the Malibu, and the Altima will be there to pick up the slack. (all of which whos year total sales are up……while Toyota’s are down for their midsize offering, the Camry)

  • Sunshine Policy

    “Actually, the Taurus is still a nameplate under Ford.”

    You are right. Though Ford clearly did not have a firm commitment to improve the vehicle or make it competitive (effectively killing the model). This was demonstrated by it’s production cut and brief discontinuation.

    Perhaps Camry is going through the same cycle. But I doubt if Toyota would neglected it to such degree. I would bet that Toyota will continue to fight for the model and do what’s necessary to keep it competitive. One can argue that they have done that by developing the Camry hybrid.

  • Bryce

    well Camry hybrid is a joke in my opinion….least fuel efficient mid-size hybrid on the market being beat out by both the Altima hybrid and the soon to be launched Fusion hybrid. The 2010 Taurus doesn’t look half bad and if it follows their recent trend of redone models, it should be headed in the right direction. Back to Toyota’s fuel efficiency……it is funny that Toyota’s fuel economy is beaten in every single segment. (except the funny looking hybrid segment, which I suppose the Honda Insight will soon overthrow it)

    Corolla has worse fuel economy than both the Honda Civic and the Chevy Cobalt

    The Toyota Camry has worse fuel economy than the Accord, Malibu, and the Altima

    Tundra and Seqoiua have worse fuel economy than the F series trucks, Silverado/Sierra, or the Tahoe.

    The one acception is of course the little Yaris which ekes by the Fit and Aveo, though I would still have to hand the trophy to the Aveo and Fit for their recent attractive redesigns.

    Is there a segment I have forgot? (and if you don’t believe me, go check the EPA mpg website)

  • Sunshine Policy

    If Toyota is the best in everything, I’d be buying their stocks!

  • Bryce

    eh, their stock is too high right now. Nissan’s, Ford’s, and GM’s look the most attractive. (strictly speaking about stocks here, not cars)

  • Sefa

    It is happy to see your posting. Yes really informative article. Oh yes I suggest you to check my blog on http://info-hybridcar.blogspot.com , I hope the article on my blog will be useful for you… and we can share each other. thank you…

  • AP

    Sefa, I read your blogspot, and you need to be careful of misinforming people.

    Hybrids DO NOT run on electrical power, unless they are plug-ins. Every Prius that Toyota makes, for example, runs a gasoline engine that 1) directly drives the wheels mechanically, and 2) makes electric power to drive an electric motor that drives the wheels. So all the power comes from burning fuel in the engine and converting it to mechanical power. The electrical power is not a primary energy source – it only transfers the energy, just like a spinning shaft would.

    Of course, electrical energy is never a primary source – it is always converted from another energy source, whether it be natural gas, nuclear, hydo-electric, or?

  • Bryce

    except for solar, which moves electrons from a material impacted by photons….which are both really small particles. (waves also in the case of photons)

    But he hell with all of this……EESTOR put out its patent with specs and pricing!

    http://gm-volt.com/2009/01/04/eestor-gets-a-trademark-patent-on-eesu-and-provides-specs-for-a-24v-eesu/

  • owlafaye

    In addition to the car mounted solar panels, a solar array could be built in the parking area of the auto…say on top of an open garage. East, West and South facing collectors in addition to the roof of the garage would supply a vast amount of energy during the day. This could be collected and stored to be transferred when you plug in the car. Solar collector efficiency advances at a phenomenal rate and even at this point, a well designed garage could supply all the energy for commuter driving, say 40 miles daily.

  • Bryce

    “vast amounts of energy”

    could u give me a number maybe as to how much energy a certain squarefootage could get and how long it would take to charge say a 16kW battery, such as on the Volt?

    I don’t doubt that it would eventually get charged…..I just think it would probably take days.

  • Rayson

    That’s really a great idea of putting solar panels on a car to help recharge the batteries. http://solar-powered-cars.info/

  • Mrs. K Money

    I think it will be really good 4 the environment

  • Mrs. K money

    The Hybrid cars are better than the standard automobiles. They use electricity & sometimes gas but it is much better for the environment.

  • Mr.Torres

    Ford!!!! If that was the case why don’t ford comes up with it first? no one has made it yet.
    Or you probably waiting for some company to make it first so then you can call them copycats?

    and as for Ford They Reputation For Stealing ideas is not a new thing not the we will ever know all they done or in the case any other company but as you use Ford As An Example Don’t You remember The case of Robert Kearns.
    Let me remind You:
    Kearns won one of the best known patent infringement cases against Ford Motor Company (1978–1990) and a case against Chrysler Corporation (1982–1992). Having invented and patented the intermittent windshield wiper mechanism, which was useful in light rain or mist, he tried to interest the “Big Three” auto makers in licensing the technology. They all rejected his proposal, yet began to install intermittent wipers in their cars, beginning in 1969.

    Please Don’t use Ford As An EXAMPLE And save your self the embarrassment.

  • Mr.Torres

    Both Of My Comments Are For Mr. bill cosworth
    And By who has made it first i mean (made it so we the people can go and buy it right now)
    and please tell me where so i can go and buy one tomorrow when I’m out for lunch.

  • Chelsea Vereen

    i totally agree..

  • Kayla Miller

    get me in on this i sooooooo want one !!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • ki-hb167-braclp

    This page certainly has all the info I needed concerning this subject and didn’t know who to ask.

  • EdelmiraLoron

    As soon as I detected this internet site I went on reddit to share some of the love with them. Website I like this website so much, saved to my bookmarks.