GE progressing on next generation engine for Boeing 777X Aircraft; 10% fuel improvement
In-wheel electric drive company Protean receives $84M in funding; to build production plant in China

China publishes plan to boost fuel-efficient and new energy vehicles and domestic auto industry; targeting 500K PHEVs and EVs in 2015, rising to 2M by 2020

China’s State Council has published a plan to develop the domestic energy-saving and new energy vehicle industry, which includes battery-electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid vehicles and fuel cell vehicles. The central government’s plan, posted on its website, is targeting the production of 500,000 plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles by 2015, with output to grow to 2 million units of those types by 2020. China is targeting the cumulative production and sales of more than 5 million new energy vehicles, including fuel cell vehicles, by that time as well.

China has made progress with automotive energy-saving technologies over the past 10 years through implementing passenger car fuel consumption limits and the use of fiscal policy to encourage the purchase of small cars, the government statement noted. This progress includes advanced internal combustion engines; efficient transmissions; lightweight materials; and hybrid and other energy-saving technologies. Natural gas and other alternative fuel vehicle technology is basically mature, the government said, and is headed toward initial industrialization. However, generally speaking, the government continued, China has not achieved a breakthrough with new energy automobiles and core components of the key technologies.

2012 Chinese Auto Industry Development Report
Xinhua. The fifth annual report on China’s auto industry—2012 Chinese Auto Industry Development Report—says that the next 20-30 years will be a “critical period” that will see the formation of a global new-energy vehicle industry.
The report was jointly released by the Research Department of Industrial Economics under the Development Research Center of the State Council, the Society of Automotive Engineers of China and Volkswagen China.
China has made big progress in electric car technologies but still lags behind other countries in certain areas, said the report. Gaps in core technologies and the absence of mass production have caused the country’s electric car sector to lag behind that of other nations, it said.
The report said only a few companies have participated in the construction of infrastructure facilities, such as charging stations. Data cited in the report indicated that only 168 charging stations had been built in 25 trial cities as of the end of last year.
Experts urged greater efforts on China’s part to boost development of the new energy vehicle industry.

Energy-saving and new energy vehicles have become the development direction of the international automobile industry. The next 10 years will usher in the transformation of the global automotive industry and offer important strategic opportunities. The scale of China’s automobile production and sales in the world, is expected to continue to grow. We must seize the opportunity, seize the deployment, speed up the cultivation and development of energy-saving and new energy automotive industry, to promote the optimization of the automobile industry.

—Energy-saving and new energy vehicle plan

Under the plan, by 2015 average passenger car fuel consumption is targeted to drop to 6.9 L/100km (34 mpg US) with the fuel consumption of energy-efficient vehicles dropping to 5.9 L/100km (40 mpg US) or less. By 2020, average passenger car fuel consumption is to drop to 5.0 L/100km (47 mpg US), with energy-efficient passenger car fuel consumption dropping to 4.5 L/100km (52.3 mpg US) or less.

New energy vehicles. The plan lays out steps to strengthen the key core technology for new energy vehicles, including:

  • Vigorously promoting battery technology and innovation, with a focus on battery power system security, reliability studies and lightweight design.

  • Accelerating the development of the anode, separator, electrolyte, and other key materials and production, control and detection equipment; the development of new supercapacitor and battery combinations; and promoting assembly standardization and serialization.

  • Focusing on high specific energy and power battery materials, concentrating on breakthroughs in a number of key generic technologies to support long-term development.

  • Focus on supporting the development of the electric traction motor, power electronics, and electric ancillaries.

  • Fuel cell stack research.

Specified performance targets for 2015 for battery-electric and plug-in hybrid electric passenger vehicles include:

  • Maximum speed of not less than 100 km/h (62 mph);

  • All-electric driving range of not less than 150 km (93 miles) and 50 km (31 miles), respectively;

  • Battery power/kg target of 150W/kg, at a cost of 2 yuan/Wh ($0.31/Wh), with a cycle life of 2,000 or more than 10 years;and

  • Electric drive system power density of 2.5 kW/kg, at a cost of 200 yuan/kW.

  • In 2020, the battery module should have a specific energy of 300 Wh/kg or more.

Energy-efficient automotive technology R & D efforts. To increase overall automobile fuel economy substantially, the government calls for a focus on hybrid technology; the development of a dedicated hybrid engine and the electromechanical coupling devices; and support for the implementation of efficient internal combustion engines.

These include high-pressure common-rail diesel engines; gasoline direct injection; homogeneous combustion; turbo technology; and advanced electronic control technology research and development. The plan also calls for further work on six-speed and higher transmissions; dual clutch automatic transmissions, commercial vehicle automatic mechanical transmission as well as breakthrough low resistance components; lightweight materials; forming and laser welding technology.

Developing the industrial system. The plan puts a great deal of emphasis on accelerating the establishment of a rationalized development system for energy-saving and new energy vehicles. The government intends to guide enterprises to increase investment in R&D in the target areas, and to encourage the establishment of cross-industry energy-saving and new energy vehicle technology development alliances to accelerate the construction of common technology platforms.

While focusing on core technology R&D for battery-electric, PHEVs, hybrid commercial vehicles and fuel cell cars, the government is looking to establish a test platform shared by the related industries. Sharing of product development and patent databases, and resources; the integration of existing scientific and technological resources; the construction of a number of national vehicle and parts research experimental base; the development of a number of enterprise-led, research institutions and institutions of higher learning actively participate in the Industrial Technology Innovation Alliance, are all on the plan.

The government calls for implementing trademark and brand strategies to strengthen IPR creation, utilization, protection and management, building the patent system of the whole industry chain, and improving industrial competitiveness.

Existing auto companies are to co-ordinate the implementation of the renovation and expansion to consider building a new energy automobile production capacity. In the process of industrial development, we must prevent the low level of blind investment and redundant construction.

—Energy-saving and new energy vehicle plan

China is also seeking to promote the large-scale production of traction batteries, with two to three key manufacturing enterprises delivering production and sales of more than 10 billion watts, and handling R&D and production of key materials.

The government also seeks to cultivate 2-3 backbone enterprises in the field of drive motors.

Popularization and demonstration. With new energy vehicles still in the early stages of industrialization, the government called out the need to increase policy support, promote pilot demonstrations, accelerate the development of the market, and promote technological progress and industrial development.

This will include new energy vehicle demonstrations in large- and medium-sized cities, the pilot subsidies for the private purchase of new energy vehicles; city-level pilots for performance verification and production of new energy automotive products; after-sales service; and battery recycling.

This area also includes exploration of different business models for recharging.

Fuel cell vehicles demonstrations are to continue, to improve the reliability and durability of the fuel cell system to drive the preparation, storage and filling of hydrogen technology development.

The government said it would also study and improve the car tax policy system, as well as guide financial institutions to encourage energy conservation and the development of a new energy automotive industry credit management and loan review system. Financial institutions are to promote IPR pledge financing, industrial chain financing and other financial product innovation; accelerate the establishment of multi-level security, including the financial investment and social investment system; and the integrated use of risk compensation policies to promote and increase financial support.

International cooperation. International cooperation will play an important role, the government noted, urging auto companies, universities and research institutions to conduct international collaborative research in the field of energy-saving and new energy auto base and cutting-edge technology, global R&D outsourcing, setting up overseas R&D institutions, carrying out joint research and development and submitting foreign patent applications.

Actively create conditions to carry out a variety of technical exchanges and cooperation and learn from foreign advanced technology and experience.

—Energy-saving and new energy vehicle plan



Is it true or it is just fake pr while petrol trading is huge and millions of petrol traders, politicians, contries are cashing the money.

First, they are still talking about batteries and actual battery commercialisation is a proven failure and the supposed recharging infrastructure is a joke fulfilled by different incompatible charging standards.Why still investing in that after losing billions in stupid research and experimentation with proven failure.

Look at hydrogen. After PATENTING tons of technology and after building proven working prototypes they had to stop any more devellopment because it was too good at replacing petrol. Now they talk about it but for the forseable future instead of now.


Also they never talk and experiment big tractor-trailer trucks powered by hydrogen and no airplanes and no ships or helicopters but we can see that all these devises use a lot of petrol. When they talk a little bit about hydrogen, they just talk about small or medium cars or little suvs but they omit the big machineries like trains. All they do is just fake all around and they decided clearly to protect petrol trading all over the world and hydrogen is their enemy and battery is their false pr to give them some credential but it is not sincere.


Most, if not all, goals set for 2015 and 2020 advance/improved batteries are reasonable and have a very high probability to become reality.

The number of partially and/or fully electrified vehicles set to be built locally by 2015 and 2020 are also very reasonable and will certainly be met unless another longer and deeper economic recession sets in.

Post 2020 figures will take off and are difficult to forecast accurately.


Most, if not all goals and claims previously set for 2010 thru 2012 were feasible but apparently not likely, as they did not come close to reality.

The number of partially and/or fully electrified vehicles set to be built locally by 2015 and 2020 are likewise feasible and could possibly be met - but look at the track record.

Post 2020 (not to mention post 2012) figures are difficult to forecast accurately.

That China is a distant, authoritarian empire should not justify your dreams for it nor your assumption that it is a budding utopia.

Roger Pham

China is an authoritarian regime controlled by the communist party that is relatively immune to influences by lobbying interest groups and big corporations. Sinopec is a state-owned Chinese oil company whose purpose is not to make a profit but to provide oil to the people of China at a much subsidized prices. This type of subsidization cost the Chinese government a lot of money, so they are seeking ways to lower petroleum consumption by mandating very highly efficient vehicles and fast-pace the adoption of BEV's.

The USA and Canada are democracies in paper, but in reality, are heavily controlled by Big Oil and Big Defense and other multi-national big businesses whose main motive is to make profit.

The above difference may help us envision the more forceful governmental push for alternative-energy vehicles in China.


This is phase 3 of the Chinese plan. In 2002, average fuel consumption in China was 9.11 L/100 km. Through the
implementation of phase 1 which took effect in July 2005 for new vehicle models, and in July 2006 for
continued vehicle models. [In the Chinese regulations, continued vehicle models refer to existing vehicle models that continue to be produced at the effective date of the regulation.] and phase 2 of the standard which took effect in January 2008 for new models and in January 2009 for all vehicle models, average fuel consumption decreased to 8.06 L/100km.

This translates into a real reduction of 11.5 per cent: The goal was 15 per cent.


BTW, China ranks third in fuel economy standards - behind the Japanese and European standards.

In europe;


TT...China's track record is simply amazing. In a few decades, China will not only catch up with USA/EU but will surpass both in most fields.

Yes, go West young man, may mean something again if one goes far enough and cross the Pacific Ocean, all the way to China.

The country to mass produce the first 20,000,000+ electrified vehicles and build 160,000+ Km of very high speed e-trains and the highest number of Billionaires will certainly be China.

Will USA/EU eventually catch up again?


Just look at what you wrote;

"China's track record" and "In a few decades".

Muddled nonsense.

Go ahead, go West if you want.


China has the advantages and disadvantages of State run Capitalism- if they are right they will be right in a big way if they are wrong they will be wrong in a big way, one thing they can do that we can't is quickly achieve economies of scale. Could the Chinese for instance use enough carbon fiber to drive down the price- But for anyone who's fearful of China's rise remember America still has a lot of arrows in it's quiver- we have more R and D sitting on shelves collecting dust than the rest of the world combine- it's amazing how many things that come out now were created in the 1960s it's just they are deemed economically viable now.


Yes, China's State run Capitalism has produced amazing results in the last few decades. Will it do as well in the next few decades? Will China fall in the same inequalities dead end as did US/EU democracies?

Are US/EU Capitalist type Democracies due for a major overhaul to fix current and future inadequacies? Can the required major changes be done progressively, peacefully and democratically without historical uprisings? Will we have our North African/Middle East Spring?

Will the favored 3% accept to share a large portion of their accumulated wealth and pay much higher taxes or their growing huge revenues?

Will the 3% accept free elections in which they would play no important role, except to exercise their vote as anyone in the 97% group? No more turn-key elections paid by people/organisations who can afford to spend many $$M to buy elections/politicians?

The time for changes/corrections is near. EU is feeling the need more and more every day. USA/Canada should have a closer look at what is happening in many EU countries and start making appropriate changes.

Roger Pham

Good points, Harvey!
US/Canadian/EU Capitalist type Democracies are due for major overhaul to fix inherent inadequacies that rendered the Greek-invented democratic system inoperable for thousands of years. The so-called
democracies that exist today are in words only, while in reality, decisions are made by the richests and most powerful who are able to buy off the governments, both local and central.

By contrast, the top-down type of authoritarian-style of governance in most of Asia has survived thousands of years of continous civilization.

In reality, the one-person-one-vote system cannot possibly work. In share-holder-owned corporations, each share holder does not have just one vote, but voting weight of each share holder is based on the number of shares owned. In order to be fiscally solvent, the weight of each voter should be partially based proportionally to the amount of tax contribution. The more tax you pay, the more voice you should have in government, NOT the amount of bribe you are paying to lobbyist and office holders while paying very little tax.

Each elected officials should be paid 5 to 10 times what they are paid today, not the meager 400k and 100k that the President and Congressmen of the USA are paid today. These numbers are a joke!

In additional, yearly salary of elected officials should be tied to indices of their performance, for example, bonuses and deductions should be made for percentage changes in GDP, budget deficits, unemployment numbers, etc.

Finally, public fundings for public-office candidates should be expanded 5-10 folds to match or to overwhelm those that are offered privately today, in order to match the billions of private donations given to each parties and candidates. Credentials to qualify for public funding of campaign should be based on demonstrable leadership ability and test scores on the future GQ exam (Government Quotient, or knowledge of governmental systems and processes) similar to IQ).

We need smarter leaders and leaders who really work for the people and the nation, not those who can charm the public and then work for big interest groups instead of for public welfare.

we have more R and D sitting on shelves collecting dust than the rest of the world combine [sic]
And the Chinese have what's probably the best network of industrial spies in the world (if they don't, they're second only to Japan); if it's still worth anything, they'll have it soon enough.  Some of it we gave to them gratis (such as molten-salt reactors).  Much of the rest may be as obsolete as automated buggy-whips.

The whole charger business is ridiculous.  Put a 240 VAC 30 A plug under a cover on the car and use an extension cord; let the manufacturers sort it out from there.  The multiple incompatible standards are obviously an effort to make EVs more expensive and less desirable.


Interesting comments RP. Many of them could be used in future corrections to the current failing system. The ideal system may not exist but the current one has to be fixed soon.

Who should identify what should be changed and how? Certainly not today's politicians and their major financial supporters. A few possibilities could be:

1) One hundred wise men/women from Universities, to consult the public and identify and select changes required?

2) A system over haul commission composed of 97% non-millionaires and 3% others to consult the public during 12 months and identify and select changes required?

3) Certain changes may require general public approval.

4) A progressive implementation period of 5 to 10 years may be required.


I would like to see a weighted voting system based on some measure of intelligence. I'm just sick of policy being set for me by people who claim stupid things inspite of the known facts. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts." There are men in the US gov that say things like 'we do not have to worry about climate change because God promised in the Bible not to destroy the world again after Noah's flood.' --- And they got voted in by people who think the world is only 10,000 years old and the only reason the dinosaurs aren't still with us is that they missed the boat.


ai_vin...discrimination based on perceived or measured intelligence levels would not sell any better than current discrimination based on wealth.

With today's and future improved communication facilities, many of the Administration, Congress and Supreme Court responsibilities could be delegated to the general public, i.e. where it should be.

That could be one of the major change to improve the current failing/corrupted system.


I said I'd LIKE TO see it. Never said I thought it would happen. And BTW . . . "responsibilities could be delegated to the general public" wtf??? . . . They're going to need a much better education system in place before that would work.

Roger Pham


Great idea! Leadership requires a great deal of intelligence and dedication for the common causes. Most common people are not good at choosing the right leader, for "it takes one to know one." The common people prefer leaders who say what they want to hear and to promise unsustainable agendas that provide immediate gratificatin! A smart and dedicated person who talks at level or issues that the common people cannot comprehend won't get elected. I think H. Ross Perot was such a person. Remember the warning of a "giant sucking sound south of US border?" Now the sucking sound extend to overseas and decimating American industries and scientific and research base...all outsourced overseas to please the capitalists in search of quick profits.

Remember the phrase: "No taxation without representation?" that was the basis for the American Revolution?
Now I'd say: "No taxation without proportional representation!!!" This means that the more a person pay in taxes, the more representation (votes) a person should get in all levels of government!
This is not any kind of discrimination based on wealth. It is simple, basic, and common fairness that lead to the American Revolution of 1776!


Remember that when Americans first started voting in 1776 only property owners could vote. And at that time property taxes were the main way of collecting taxes. (that's Roger's proportional representation right there)

In 1820 the property laws are taken off the books and people could vote even if they did not own property. But they had to pay a poll tax or be able to read. (and that's my intelligence test right there)

The opposite way to go that I could get behind is to not just let everyone vote but to actually REQUIRE that everyone does so! Voter turnout these days is deplorable. If we could do that at least the stupid vote would be out weighted by a larger number of people who aren't idiots.

Edward Son

China at a much subsidized prices. This type of subsidization cost the Chinese government a lot of money, so they are seeking ways to lower petroleum consumption by mandating very highly efficient vehicles and fast-pace the adoption of BEV's.  buy from china

Tom Watson

Materials were revised for the electricity-generating stacks, a key device, and for the fuel processor, which produces hydrogen from city gas, while the size of hot water storage tank was also reduced. Matawan income tax preparation services

The comments to this entry are closed.