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." Ford, Boeing and NU Form Nanotech Alliance Log in/Create an Account | Top | 70 comments | Search Discussion Display Options Threshold: -1: 70 comments 0: 66 comments 1: 47 comments 2: 25 comments 3: 10 comments 4: 4 comments 5: 3 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way. Interesting what's called nanotech. (Score:5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09, @05:26AM (#13749727) 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? [ Reply to ThisNeed a new term - picotech! by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:32AMRe:Interesting what's called nanotech. by biryokumaru (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @06:41AM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Who will be in business longest? (Score:3, Funny) by opencity (582224) on Sunday October 09, @05:26AM (#13749729) My money's on NU as it would be hardest for them to go bankrupt.Ford deserves credit for at least making some effort. [ Reply to ThisRe:Who will be in business longest? by nihaopaul (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:15AMNU = Northwestern University by storem (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:42AM What!? (Score:2, Funny) by RobbieGee (827696) on Sunday October 09, @05:29AM (#13749737) As if the seats weren't small enough... [ Reply to ThisRe:What!? by mikek3332002 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:19AMRe:What!? by mikek3332002 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @06:26AM Smaller components for smaller cars (Score:5, Interesting) by Alain Williams (2972) on Sunday October 09, @05:32AM (#13749743) (http://www.phcomp.co.uk/) 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. [ Reply to ThisRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by Anonymous Coward (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:42AMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by rock_climbing_guy (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:46AMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by DeafByBeheading (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @05:54AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Smaller components for smaller cars by arkhan_jg (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @08:15AMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by buraianto (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @11:36AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Smaller components for smaller cars by Balthisar (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @09:18AMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by chabotc (Score:3)Sunday October 09, @10:06AMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by sydbarrett74 (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @11:39AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Smaller components for smaller cars by dfjghsk (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @12:37PMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by Wyatt Earp (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @01:48PMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by Teun (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @02:36PMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by Balthisar (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @02:41PMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by milimetric (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @10:51AMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by Wyatt Earp (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @02:05PMRe:Smaller components for smaller cars by milimetric (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @02:34PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. And why didn't they... (Score:5, Funny) by 6pak (687010) on Sunday October 09, @05:36AM (#13749748) ...ask Matchbox to join in? They should have the obvious expertise! [ Reply to This1 reply beneath your current threshold. Like this will go anywhere... (Score:2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 09, @06:19AM (#13749812) 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. [ Reply to ThisRe:Like this will go anywhere... by dbIII (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @07:09AMRe:Like this will go anywhere... by jupiter909 (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @09:08AMRe:Like this will go anywhere... by netwiz (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @11:47AMRe:Like this will go anywhere... by Wyatt Earp (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @02:10PM nanotech alliance? (Score:4, Funny) by commodoresloat (172735) on Sunday October 09, @06:26AM (#13749826) (http://shockandblog.com/blog) I, for one, welcome our tiny new overlords.... [ Reply to This Those companies are in trouble! (Score:3, Interesting) by bogaboga (793279) on Sunday October 09, @06:28AM (#13749831) Ford and Boeing are in trouble. Makes me wonder whether these companies will even be relevant in a decade's time, when this technology is expected to be big. With competition from Airbus for Boeing and Ford having been replaced by Toyota, I doubt they will be strong participants in this field. Fact is, Airbus is now the largest airplane maker and not as many people want to buy Ford's vehicles. [ Reply to ThisRe:Those companies are in trouble! by dawhippersnapper (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:00AMRe:Those companies are in trouble! by scavok (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:12AMRe:Those companies are in trouble! by man_eleven (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:17AMRe:Those companies are in trouble! by H0D_G (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @08:55AM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Those companies are in trouble! by TimeForGuinness (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @12:21PMFord Nanotech by bobbuck (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @12:32PMRe:Those companies are in trouble! by Wyatt Earp (Score:1)Sunday October 09, @02:14PM2 replies beneath your current threshold. Nanotech (Score:2, Insightful) by H0D_G (894033) on Sunday October 09, @08:48AM (#13750100) 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 [ Reply to ThisRe:Nanotech by Secrity (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @11:18AM1 reply beneath your current threshold. Re:Old slashdot jokes... (Score:2) by hunterx11 (778171) <{hunterx11} {at} {gmail.com}> on Sunday October 09, @07:05AM (#13749902) (http://lavincolindo.net/ | Last Journal: Friday October 07, @03:21PM) In Korea, only old people lament the continued use the played-out /. memes. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Old slashdot jokes... by poopdeville (Score:2)Sunday October 09, @08:49AM not a MOPAR (Score:1) by zogger (617870) on Sunday October 09, @11:27AM (#13750644) (http://technocrat.net/ | Last Journal: Monday August 22, @11:57AM) but you can get a tzero by ac propulsion that does pretty good performance wise if you are looking for some sportscar. Instead of MPG look at cost per mile instead with whatever you pay for electric now for charging.http://www.acpropulsion.com/tzero_pages/tzero_home .htm [acpropulsion.com] [ Reply to This | Parent Re:Seriously don't b[u]y Ford (Score:1) by pintpusher (854001) on Sunday October 09, @12:03PM (#13750802) They might want to think about stopping their cars from spontaneously bursting into flames [detnews.com] while they're at it.... [ Reply to This | Parent1 reply beneath your current threshold. Re:Seriously don't by Ford (Score:2) by Bill Dog (726542) on Sunday October 09, @01:26PM (#13751199) (Last Journal: Thursday October 06, @05:16PM) You mean you had an extended warranty and they refused to pay for it? Did you mod it? My '01 GT is coming up on 46K, but I've got 3 more years on the extended warranty, and it's stock and I've got receipts for all the maintenance, so if my engine blew, I'd damn well expect it replaced. And get an attorney if I had to to get it replaced. [ Reply to This | Parent6 replies beneath your current threshold.