All I know is the technology works- it saves fuel-power. Europeans and Japanese in particular are interested in the technology because it will allow smaller cars to have more power to the wheels. Currently alot of small European cars forgo power steering to conserve engine power. American automakers, OTOH, are looking into the technology to cut costs.
often companies
I agree. "pollution" seems to be a big worry in the US, whereas the rest of the world has more lax standards; they just accept a certain amount of pollution as a fact of life, even if its not so pleasant. And yet can anybody say "our" approach in the US is any better? What good does it do to have stringent regulations on new cars, when anybody can go out and buy a car for 1000 dollars that probably emits far more pollution than the "worst" new car? And nobody in the regulatory or environmental community is willing to weigh the benefit of technology aganist the risks- the buttumption is that always engines-vehicles can be made both "clean" and efficient.
That's what disturbing about the spread of California's air laws to other states; on the one hand it mandates increased efficiency (lower greenhouse gbuttes), and on the other it functionally forbids more efficient, lean burning engines. The only "solution" under this kind of regulatory scheme will be highly underpowered, and potentially unsafe cars. This is why I believe environmental groups really have no realistic solution to global warming, should it be the threat that many scientists say it should be- it's going to require technological solutionts and sacrifices that environmentalists will be unwilling to make.
