The race is on between GM, Honda and Mercedes to perfect the Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition system. It differs from conventional Spark Ignition (Gasoline) and Compression Ignition (Diesel) in that it has multiple ignition points throughout combustion chamber, pressure transducers, variable valve train and sophisticated sensors. It uses a lean air/ fuel mixture to keep engine tempature low preventing the formation of Nitrogen Oxide.
The main drawback of low tempature combustion is that at present it can only be maintained at moderate speeds. It is fine for getting around town but not for the TransCanada Highway.
Paul Najt, Lab Manager for GM Research and Development Powertrain Systems predicts it will be several years before this new technology is perfected.

Other engine designs include Split Cycle Combustion designed by the Scuderi Group and the Camless Sturman Cycle combustion designed by Physicist Eddie Sturman.
www.popularmechanics.com/drivegreen for more infromation

GM already had a car 12 years ago they could have been selling a Bazillion of (is that a real number?) today. It was the EV-1. When GM goes belly up like a dead gold fish in a bowl we have all experienced; the only people I will lament will be those who labored hard as members of the UAW for a management of incredible STUPIDITY!

Like i say the race is on and if GM loses to Honda or Mercedes it could be the swan song of GM.

There are plenty of technologies that can increase ICE efficiency. They were planning on rolling this stuff into the fleet gradually. I am just not convinced they can turn on a dime and get this stuff out there. It seems like they can build a proof of concept overnight but it takes them 2-3 years at least to release a finished product. It's time they really don't have.

Also, if I were buying a car I'd feel a little uneasy if I knew for a fact that gas was going to get so expensive that by the time I finished paying the car off I would be right back where I was with the previous one in cost per mile. It's treading water up to the point of the diminishing returns. The ICE is dead man walking.

The ICE is definately a dead man walking as long as it uses petrolium for fuel. I predict you're going to see a lot more battery and human powered deviced on the roads in short order.

BTW, I've always heard that EU gas prices were so high. So why didn't the EU automakers take the time to make a more efficient engine?

Working for the auto industry myself, I had the opportunity to converse with an engineer who works for the advanced R&D of a Japanese auto manufacturer that actual studies and develops this. Whether people want to hear it, their conclusion is the ICE is the best for the return on energy consumption. They still did and now producing electric cars, hybrid cars, and look at hydrogen cars, but still the ICE is the winner. Not a pretty picture. This can help answer the question why EU OEMs aren't taking the time to make an more efficient engine. Work on the diesel technology is limited by the emissions issue.

To develop and then roll into production a new engine runs into the billions of $s and years to do. That is why the OEM's now work jointly on this since the cost is astronomical. This explains why GM buys transmissions from Honda and Honda sells diesel engines to GM. And there is hundreds of other examples.

What I predicted back in the early 90's has come true, that we will be down to just 6 major auto makers worldwide. At the time there were numerous Japanese, Korean, European companies. Look whose logo is on the side of their building today. A classic example is just outside of Bratislava, Slovakia is a plant that manufactures for 4 different OEMs, all in the same building.

The problem is in the way cars are used, not with cars themselves. Remember Honda CVCC? Back in '72, you could buy a Honda Civic that got about 40mpg. The problem is that people didn't want them, so the Civic grew and grew and grew until reaching it's present size which is about the same as a '90 Accord.

The one car per person highways that we have today will become a thing of the past. Put four people in a car and you get rid of three cars. Even if the combined mileage of those three cars is 30mpg, you realize a large gain in gas conservation even if the one car that those four people are in is only getting 20mpg. Add to that the fact that reduced traffic means less stopping and starting and your mpg goes up ever further.

I wouldn't want to be in the auto business right now or in the future. They are looking at reduced sales from now on. To make matters worse, there is a worldwide glut of auto manufacturing.

Yep, and this was a result of the late 80's into the 90's love fest of cheap gas. The cars just kept growing. Then the car got reclassified by the EPA standards from a "compact" to a "mid-size" due to the volume calculations thus messed up the CAFE ratings.

And capacity issues, I still kept the Ward's Auto Editorial that was writing on the way back in the mid to late 90's. It showed the auto industry had a 60M/year capacity worldwide, but only 45M/year in sales. You could shut all the US production down and still keep the worlds sales need. However, the US production was at 100%+ at that time due to demand and sales in the US and EU were "flat" (meaning it was high, but will not be "growing" once demands leveled off).

SO they targeted the Asian market heavily to keep the under-utilized plants going over there. All the OEMs did this whether they were US, EU or Asian based. On top of that, more plants were built for these "emerging markets" even though there was enough capacity.

What I questioned back then was, so now we target "emerging markets" and demand for petroleum will increase, there will be even more competition for the petro. A crazy cycle to disaster. Now the disaster is here. No one in the industry factored in the demand for petro into the equation.

So I am riding it out, saving money, and preparing for the "meltdown" and getting out of the industry. I was at a "dying" prototype shop up in Detroit last summer to evaluate them for a program I am doing. The shop owner sold out to some "suited" investors and retired to San Diego. One of the investors said "Yes, the industry will come back". I just looked at him in his suit, I did not bother to respond. We gave the work to another shop in town, a shop that was forward looking in the state of the auto industry by targeting other industries. That shop is riding through just fine.

FYI - ICE works fine on hydrogen (even as a 'duel fuel' H/gasoline or diesel vehicle. See the Bi Fuel Ford Focus link link.

The top level link for the company is http://www.itm-power.com/html/index.php

It may or may not be viable economically, but H is an ICE fuel (not just for fuel cells).

A problem with commercialising the Hydrogen fuel cell is it is much more expensive than an ICE. It will be several years before Hydrogen can begin to really compete at the retail level