If, as you suggest, the car-driven demand drops for the gasoline portion of a barrel of oil , but not the rest, it will force the oil companies to create new uses and new demands for gasoline in other industries. Since they currently have enormous resources at their disposal, it would result in the formation of a major new research industry to balance demand and minimize waste.

The transition, however, will not happen over night. A major shift in the U.S. might happen in as little as 5 years. But a complete shift globally could easily drag on over 20+ years.

The notion that they might give away engines in order to sell the gasoline is an interesting approach, similar to the Gillette strategy of giving away the razors to sell more blades.

The Hoyt Engine is fascination. I hope I can arrange a time to see a live demonstration sometime soon.

Tom

There is a general problem with the concept of “reducing our dependence on (foreign) oil” by changine the auto industry. From a 42 gal barrel of crude oil, 17 to 19 gal (nearly half) are gasoline product. There are no other significant consumption means for gasoline (a BIG problem 110 years ago when it was run off into fields and ditches). It is no big surprise that the gasoline ICE became the prime mover over steam and battery electric systems 100 years ago (both have always lurked closely in the background, never really “out of the hunt” in terms of price competitiveness) because society has NEEDED a customer for the gasoline. On a sheer volume basis, it is much more true today than 100 years ago.

There are more than 42 gal of product from the refined 42 gal barrel of crude oil (an odd chemistry fact) and there are customers for all it. If the demand for gasoline went down profoundly and suddenly (disruptive technologies realized), society would need to also adjust to the glut of gasoline (current environmental regulations would not allow dumping it into fields and ditches, especially at these gluttonous rates).

The economic machine enveloping oil is not just about cars and trucks. Any disruptive technology that permits multi-fuel use is simply too disruptive.

Free piston engines facilitate the use of any combustible fuel. Hydraulic or electric power generated from free piston engines will be that disruptive technology. (AC electric power can be generated locally, supporting up to a block of homes, using the natural gas already piped in – distributed power generation, similar to Edison’s original neighborhood DC power houses at the dawn of suburbia.)

While the disruption may be applauded by the prevalent public opinion (lower operating costs, improved fuel access due to alternatives), actual implementation must be carefully very managed.

I recommend that the oil companies and the power utility companies capture and develop free piston engines rather than the private sector because they can mete out the technology in the least disruptive manner, with the private sector (likely, the Chinese interests) lurking in the background to make the technology (like the steam and battery powered cars) to keep the oil and electric companies “honest”.

Please look at HoytEngine.com. This technology was crafted right here in Boulder county (mentioned in the Boulder County Business Report in 2001) but driven aground by poor management in 2004. I have been developing the Reciprotating Engine since 1982 and believe in its promise more now (after building three prototypes and attaining many significant technical milestones) than at any other time.

I hope to show this technology at the DaVinci Institute’s upcoming Inventor’s Showcase in October. I believe I own the technology outright and hope to start development again right here in Louisville, CO.

(I am sure you are familiar with Amory Lovin’s “Reinventing the Wheel” article. Good reading.)

Thanks for your time.

Best regards,

AJ