Federal Car Fleet to Become Test Bed for High-Tech Safety Gear

As reported by Network World: Future autos leased by the federal government will be equipped with some advanced high-tech safety technology in an effort to test the equipment in real-life situations.

The General Services Administration (GSA) and the Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said they would team up on the program to further develop high-tech driver and vehicle safety technology.

The GSA and NHTSA said they will work to:

• Develop a process to learn about the most beneficial vehicle safety technologies.
• Create a research program to pilot and evaluate safety technologies/approaches for the federal vehicle fleet.
• Improve the way information on potential defects, problems and issues are coordinated between the agencies.
• Ensure that federal vehicles subject to recalls are repaired as quickly and comprehensively as possible.
• Incorporate the most current understanding of safety technologies and approaches into the government-wide fleet policy.

Most of the car crash avoidance and safety equipment development is known collectively as vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) technologies.  According to the Department of Transportation, "research indicates that safety applications using V2V technology can address a large majority of crashes involving two or more motor vehicles. With safety data such as speed and location flowing from nearby vehicles, vehicles can identify risks and provide drivers with warnings to avoid other vehicles in common crash types such as rear-end, lane change, and intersection crashes. These safety applications have been demonstrated with everyday drivers under both real-world and controlled test conditions."

The safety applications currently being developed provide warnings to drivers so that they can prevent imminent collisions, but do not automatically operate any vehicle systems, such as braking or steering. NHTSA is also considering future actions on active safety technologies that rely on on-board sensors. Those technologies are eventually expected to blend with the V2V technology. NHTSA issued an Interim Statement of Policy in 2013 explaining its approach to these various streams of innovation. In addition to enhancing safety, these future applications and technologies could help drivers to conserve fuel and save time.


In August 2012, DOT launched the Safety Pilot "model deployment" in Ann Arbor, Mich., where nearly 3,000 vehicles were deployed in the largest-ever road test of V2V technology. DOT testing is indicating interoperability of V2V technology among products from different vehicle manufacturers and suppliers and has demonstrated that they work in real-world environments.

The DOT says if widely deployed, V2V technologies could provide warnings to drivers in as much as 76% of potential multi-vehicle collisions involving at least one light vehicle, such as a passenger car.

While the technology obviously has it upside, the  Government Accountability Office said last year efforts by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the automobile industry have focused on developing: 1) in-vehicle components such as hardware to facilitate communications among vehicles, 2) safety software applications to analyze data and identify potential collisions, 3) vehicle features that warn drivers, and 4) a national communication security system to ensure trust in the data transmitted among vehicles.

The GAO said defined a number of challenges to these high-tech tools for cars.  A few of the issues raised by the GAO include:

Security: A security system capable of detecting, reporting, and revoking the credentials of vehicles found to be sharing inaccurate  information will be needed to ensure trust in the V2V data transmitted  among vehicles. Final plans and policies for the V2V communication security system - including its technical framework and management structure - have not yet been developed and will need to be finalized prior to V2V technology deployment.  The GAO said 12 of the 21c experts it interviewed said the technical development of a V2V communication security system as a great or very great challenge to the deployment of V2V technologies.

Deployment Levels: According to DOT, the safety benefits of V2V technologies will be maximized with near full deployment across the U.S. vehicle fleet. However, even if NHTSA pursues a rules requiring installation of these technologies in new vehicles, it could take a number of years until benefits are fully realized due to the rate of turnover of the fleet. According to one automobile manufacturer the GAO interviewed, given the rate of new vehicle sales, it can take up to 20 years for the entire U.S. vehicle fleet to turn over.



Driver response: The benefits of V2V technologies will also depend on how well drivers respond to warning messages. If drivers do not take appropriate action in response to warnings, then the benefits of V2V technologies could be reduced. For example, if drivers do not respond to warnings quickly enough due to distraction, impairment, or other reasons they may not be able to avoid a collision. Furthermore, if safety applications offer too many false warnings when no imminent threat exists, drivers could begin to ignore valid warnings.

Deployment of other safety technologies: The potential benefits solely attributable to V2V technologies will also depend on the market penetration and effectiveness of sensor-based crash avoidance technologies. These existing technologies are able to address some of the same crash scenarios as V2V safety applications and their market penetration is likely to increase in the future. While there are cases where V2V technologies can provide safety benefits where sensor-based crash avoidance technologies cannot such as around a curve or when detecting an unseen stopped car there are some V2V technology collision scenarios that sensor-based crash avoidance technologies can also address.  For example, cameras and radar can be used to provide drivers with forward collision warnings or lane change warnings when another vehicle is in a blind spot.

Connectivity Cars: A New Generation With Built-in WiFi Hot-Spots

As reported by NBC News: We live in a connected world. It’s rare to go anywhere without finding people staring into their smartphones. So, it should seem only natural that automakers are getting set to launch a new era of connected automobiles that can serve up their own WiFi hot-spots.

General Motors will join the club next month when it officially launches 4G LTE service for the new Chevrolet Malibu sedan, adding a wide range of additional models before the end of the year. It joins a growing list of manufacturers –including Audi and Chrysler’s Ram brand -- who currently offer, or will soon add, 4G connectivity in their own products.

“We’re excited to give millions of customers an opportunity to explore the technology,” said Mary Chan, president of GM’s OnStar subsidiary operating the maker’s 4G service and which will initially offer a three-month free trial.

Some observers question precisely whom the technology will appeal to, and it’s perhaps no surprise that initial OnStar marketing illustrates the potential benefits for parents with children who can now be kept happy in the back seat watching online movies, texting or playing online games with friends.

The new GM service was, perhaps not surprisingly, initiated under former GM CEO Dan Akerson, a long-time telecomm industry executive, who announced a partnership with AT&T.

The communications giant will allow its existing customers to bundle the in-car service with their existing accounts, and non-AT&T users will be allowed to subscribe separately.

The OnStar service will be offered with varying levels of data, monthly fees running from $10 to $50 a month, though motorists can alternately opt to buy a set amount of data usage over a 12-month period, ranging from $5 to $200.

Skeptics question the appeal of establishing a fixed WiFi hot-spot in a vehicle when anyone can alternately sign up for mobile 4G service with a range of vendors, including Sprint, TMobile, Verizon, as well as AT&T, using card-sized devices that can be taken anywhere. And many new smartphones, including the Apple iPhone, can be turned into WiFi hot-spots for an additional fee.

GM and other makers contend they have an advantage in that their built-in 4G systems will utilize an external antenna that ensures improved signal strength when compared to a portable hot-spot that might be sitting in the cup-holder or a pocket inside a largely steel vehicle.

But a similar claim didn't do much to enhance the appeal of built-in cellphone systems that were pitched as the latest-and-greatest technology two decades ago. Fixed, in-car phones also had significantly stronger radio signals, meaning greater range and fewer dropped connections, but eventually lost out to handheld phones.

Makers like GM are still betting that consumers will be happy to have a built-in data connection while they travel – something that could also appeal to commuters, especially those carpooling who want to get work done on the way to the office.

But while access to e-mail, news, music and movies may be the marketing pitch, the technology eventually will offer automakers, as much as auto buyers, some big benefits.

Tesla, for example, has an in-car data link it can use to update the extensive software systems in its vehicle – which boasts a laptop computer-sized LCD display atop the center console that handles virtually all vehicle functions.

The ability to remotely reprogram a car’s software could be a big plus in the event of a recall, for example, like the one Ford just announced due to a mis-programmed rollover airbag system. Using such a remote link would cost next to nothing, especially when compared to having to pay dealers to handle the recall, as is now the case. That would also help boost the number of vehicles that actually get the fix. Today, as much as a third or more of motorists fail to take their cars in for such repairs.

The new OnStar 4G system will eventually be offered on the vast majority of products GM’s four U.S. brands offer, from the Chevrolet Corvette sports car to the Cadillac XTS luxury sedan.

Chrysler was one of the first to introduce in-car WiFi capabilities on its Ram pickup line, anticipating an appeal for truckers who want the ability to stay connected at a work site.

Audi has also been rolling out the technology on a variety of models, including its new A3 compact luxury line. The A3 will adopt another concept from the consumer electronics world, meanwhile. A number of key components in its infotainment system, including the critical video driver hardware, has been made plug-n-play. That means that in years ahead, a motorist won’t be saddled with outdated technology but will be able to purchase an update, much like consumers can do today with an older computer.

Mobile Subscriptions are at 100% of the World Population - 7.1 Billion

As reported by Tomi Ahonen's Almanac: Where are we in mobile stats in 2014?

The mobile subscription rate is at or very very nearly at 100%. For 7.1 Billion people alive that means 7.1 Billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide. Not everyone has a mobile account or number - babies don't have mobile phones so some of us have two or more accounts. Hong Kong is past 200% penetration rate for example. But globally yes, we are now at 100%. 7.1 Billion mobile phone accounts in use worldwide.

THE SIZE IS HUGE
So first, some context. The PC: Take every type of PC, including desktops, laptops, net-books and tablet PCs and add them together. What do we have? 1.5 Billion in use worldwide. Mobile is nearly 5 times larger. Televisions: Sure - We are now at 2 Billion TV sets in use globally. But mobile has 3.5 times users. What of 'paid' TV viewers - i.e. cable and satellite TV accounts? That's only 1 Billion. Mobile has 7 times more paying customers. Land-line phones? There are only 1.1 Billion of those left. Mobile is more than six times bigger.

Then lets talk about those numbers. 7.1 Billion mobile subscriptions doesn't mean 'unique users' and not all represent 'handsets in use'. The number of unique users is now 4.5 Billion or 63% of all humans alive are actually users of mobile phones. The remaining 2.6 Billion accounts are second or third accounts for the same user. And many of us have two phones. What is the number of phones in use? We are at 5.4 Billion mobile handsets in use around the world. So out of the unique user number (4.5 Billion) 900 million carry two phones. So 20% of us, one in five who has a mobile subscription or account, actually walks around with two phones (and at least two accounts).

MOBILE SUBSCRIBERS END OF 2013
Total active mobile subscriptions or accounts . . .  7.1 B (was 6.7 B in 2011, growth 6%)
Unique mobile users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . 4.5 B (was 4.3 B in 2011, growth 5%)
Actual mobile phones in use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 B (was 5.2 B in 2011, growth 4%)

THE MONEY IS ALSO HUGE
The industry grew 7% in total revenues last year and the global mobile industry is now worth $1.56 Trillion dollars annually. That breaks down so, that $1.15 Trillion is service revenues (our phone calls, messages, internet access, music, games, advertising, apps etc). $280 Billion is handset sales (mostly smartphones) and another $125 Billion is 'other hardware' that includes a wide range from networking equipment to accessories.

Of the service revenues those highly hyped smartphone apps are still only a tiny corner of the opportunity. The mobile operators/carriers still make the majority of the service revenues and two giants dominate that space - voice calls and messaging. Voice calls were worth $673 Billion dollars in 2013 while messaging was worth $199 Billion dollars. And no, most of that was not 'OTT services' like Whatsapp. SMS text messaging was worth $130 Billion dollars and MMS another $46 Billion dollars in 2013, for the lion's share of messaging revenue worldwide. Please note that an increasing portion of both SMS and MMS is now content (like voting for TV shows), advertising and commerce revenues (coupons etc).

HANDSETS
So lets talk phones. 5.4 Billion mobile phones in use worldwide. The industry sold 1.8 Billion new mobile phones just last year alone. And more than half of the new sales are now smartphones (990 million were in 2013). In the installed base, already 31% of all mobile phones in use are smartphones (1.7 Billion units) and this year will sell about 1.2 Billion more with roughly half going to replace older smartphones and half going to first-time smartphone owners. But before you lament those 'dumbphones' they aren't that dumb these days. 44% of all phones in use have WiFi capability. 67% can install apps via Java. Four out of five has a memory card slot. Nine out of ten phones in the world can receive MMS multimedia messages (And 100% can do SMS text messaging obviously).

The migration to smartphones continues at rapid pace. Three regions - advanced Asia-Pacific, Europe and North America have passed the mid-point so there are smartphones for more than half of the population. The Middle East is nearing the mid-point. Lagging in the migration rate come Latin America, developing parts of Asia, and Africa. Monitoring the market share wars on a quarterly basis, Android has now utterly won the smartphone platform war with over 80% of new sales. Apple's iPhone has peaked and is in gradual decline at about 15% with the remnant few percent split among Windows, Blackberry and miscellaneous others. In the installed base the past large sales of Symbian and Blackberry still place them ahead of Windows, with Windows lingering in fifth ranking among smartphone operating systems by actual devices in use. Android and iPhone obviously dominate the installed base as well.

MOBILE INTERNET
An easily-muddled statistic, the internet or 'browsing' user base and which platform they use is prone to very wild swings of legitimate reporting of the statistics. It depends on whether you count primary use or all use (many of us will access web content from several device types, our laptops, our tablets, our smartphones etc). And the reporting is often coming from systems which do not measure all use, or which miscalculate part of the use (often iOS measurements cannot differentiate between iPhones - ie smartphones vs iPads ie tablets and iPod Touch ie PDA uses). But when we allow multiple uses, and look at all 'browser' type of access to 'internet content' such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, YouTube, Amazon etc - then the usage in 2013 was like this:

There are 2.9 Billion users of the internet when any device and type is allowed including accessing from internet cafe and other shared devices.

48% of the internet users will use both a PC of some kind (which includes tablets) and a mobile phone
42% will not use a PC and will only access the internet on a mobile phone (smartphone or dumbphone)
and 10% will not use a mobile phone and only access the internet on some type of PC (including tablet)

Of mobile phones used to access internet content, the numbers build like this. 1.6 Billion use a smartphone. 2.2 Billion use an HTML based mobile browser (including smartphones and dumbphones). And 2.6 Billion use any type of mobile browser including WAP and HTML (this of course therefore includes smartphones too). You can see there is a lot of chance to offer confusing and 'disagreeing' numbers just by browsing before we consider say app downloads.

MESSAGING OVER-THE-TOP (OTT) AND PEAK SMS
So the OTT content revolution has really taken off led by Whatsapp. But still the total user base is modest. OTT services across all OTT types have only 1.4 Billion users. That compares with 5.8 Billion users of SMS and 3.3 Billion users of MMS. The total traffic, user count and even revenues of SMS still grew in 2013 while OTT services grabbed the majority of total mobile messaging traffic. The heavy users who send more than 100 messages per day will shift most of that traffic rather rapidly to more cost-effective (and user-friendly) messaging platforms. But even heavy Whatsapp users will usually not abandon SMS they only greatly diminish its use. For advertisers and brands, obviously, SMS is the only way to reach every economically viable person on the planet, with MMS a near-universal second choice.

MEDIA CONTENT
The total non-voice 'data' opportunity in mobile is now nearing 500 Billion dollars in value. 40% of that is now from messaging and 60% from 'value-add data' which includes media content, apps and many other elements like the sales commission from m-commerce. 290 Billion dollars is the total value of mobile media content. The big media opportunities in mobile are social media, TV and video, gaming, search, news and virtual goods. Music has passed its peak and mobile music revenues are now in decline. Several areas of smaller size are growing fast led by m-health and m-education. Smartphone apps are only a tiny slice of this space with most income earned by apps built for gaming.

MOBILE ADVERTISING
Then we have advertising. Mobile ads keep growing at rates of nearly 100% per year and across all mobile ad income types passed 30 Billion dollars in value in 2013. This includes the often-reported banner ad revenues and the less-often included messaging revenues and the in-app advertising. 

DIGITAL DIVIDE
And finally a few words about the so-called 'Rich World' vs the 'Emerging World'. The spoils of the digital miracle are not spread evenly. But even here the 'best story' in digital for the Emerging World is of course mobile. Of the 7.1 Billion mobile subscriptions, we in the 'West' have 2.1 Billion mobile subscriptions for a 175% mobile penetration rate. The Emerging World with 5.9 Billion people have 5.0 Billion subscriptions for an 85% penetration rate. In the Industrialized World 97% of all phones in use are camera-phones vs 76% in the Emerging World. 82% of the mobile subscriptions in the Industrialized Countries have migrated to 3G while only 18% of the accounts in the Emerging World have done so. 53% of handsets in the West are smartphones while only 21% in the rest of the world are so. And did you know many actually buy used handsets? Only 3% of mobile phones in the Industrialized World are second-hand phones (these tend to be hand-me-down phones we give to our young kids). But in the Emerging World 17% of all phones in use are second-hand phones (often shipped from more affluent countries).

SO WHO ARE THE BIG DOGS
Then lets do the 'if measured only by their mobile business' chart of the biggest players. So for example Apple we remove the Macs and iPads and iPods and iTunes, only the iPhone and its app store revenues. For Samsung we remove the flat screen TVs and PCs and all sorts of consumer electronics. For Vodafone we remove the fixed land-line telecoms business etc. When we measure the largest companies on the planet by purely their mobile income we get this chart:

BIGGEST COMPANIES WHEN ONLY COUNTING THEIR MOBILE BUSINESS IN 2013
1 (3) Apple iPhone, USA, smartphones . . . .  $ 112 B
2 (4) Samsung Galaxy, S Korea, handsets . . $ 103 B
3 (1) China Mobile, China, operator . . . . . . .  $ 91 B
4 (2) Verizon Wireless, USA, operator  . . . . . $ 82 B
5 (5) AT&T Wireless, USA, operator . . . . . . . $ 65 B
6 (6) Vodafone Mobile, UK, operator . . . . . .  $ 58 B
7 (7) Telefonica Movil, Spain, operator . . . . . $ 52 B
8 (9) T-Mobile, Germany, operator . . . . . . . . . $ 50 B
9 (8) NTT DoCoMo, Japan, operator . . . . . . . $ 49 B
10 (10) Orange Mobile, France, operator . . . .$ 44 B
Note: All except China Mobile in the above chart are 'virtual companies' with different names to reflect their mobile businesses and their mobile branding.

So the two big smartphone makers Apple and Samsung have kicked the big mobile operators from the top slots. No big surprise here, as the trend was clearly forming for the past few years. Meanwhile operators struggle with flat revenues or even declining revenues as voice calls and messaging revenues are under increasing threats from OTT services like Skype and Whatsapp.

Russia Pulls GPS/Space Cooperation in Response to Ukraine Sanctions

The Soyuz TMA-11M spacecraft.

As reported by Newsweek: Russia will bar the United States from using Russian-made rocket engines for military satellite launches, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Tuesday, retaliating for sanctions on high-tech equipment which Washington has imposed over the Ukraine crisis.

He also said Russia would reject a U.S. request to prolong the use of the International Space Station beyond 2020.

Russia pledged to respond in kind when the United States said last month that it would deny export licenses for any high-technology items that could aid Russian military capabilities and would revoke existing licenses.

Moscow's measures would affect MK-33 and RD-180 engines which Russia supplies to the United States, Rogozin told a news conference. "We are ready to deliver these engines but on one condition that they will not be used to launch military satellites," he said.

Washington wants to keep the International Space Station, a $100 billion orbital outpost that is a project of 15 nations and a showcase of Russian-U.S. cooperation, flying until at least 2024, four years beyond the previous target.

In spite of differences on foreign policy and security matters, Washington and Moscow have cooperated extensively on space exploration. Russian Soyuz spacecraft are the only way astronauts can get to the space station, whose crews include both Americans and Russians.

Rogozin also said Russia will suspend the operation of GPS satellite navigation system sites in Russia from June and seek talks with Washington on opening similar sites in the United States for Russia's own system, Glonass.

He threatened the permanent closure of the GPS sites in Russia if that is not agreed by September.

Seeing Future in Fuel Cells, Toyota Ends Tesla Deal

As reported by the NY Times: Toyota said on Monday that it would allow a battery-supply deal with Tesla Motors to expire this year and would focus instead on building cars running on hydrogen fuel cells, a next-generation technology that rivals Tesla’s all-electric systems.

Toyota Motor invested $50 million in Tesla to acquire a 3 percent stake in the Silicon Valley upstart in 2010, and signed a $100 million joint-development deal in 2011 for a version of Toyota’s RAV4 crossover sport utility vehicle that carried Tesla’s electric powertrains. At the time, the two automakers suggested that the RAV4 electric vehicle could be the start of a wider collaboration.

But the electric RAV4 has sold poorly, despite low-cost lease and loan offers Toyota introduced last year to promote sales. And Toyota has increasingly signaled that it sees fuel cells as the most viable zero-emissions technology, putting it at odds with Tesla, an evangelist for electric-vehicle technology. Toyota is also the world’s biggest manufacturer of gas-electric hybrids.

Toyota said in an emailed statement that it was “re-evaluating” its RAV4 electric vehicle, and that Tesla’s supply agreement for the model would “conclude this year.” Toyota said that its contract had called for Tesla to supply 2,500 battery-electric powertrains for the RAV4.

The Japanese automaker said its focus this year would instead be on its four-door sedan powered by hydrogen fuel cells, which it plans to introduce in California next year. The automaker will also focus on developing hydrogen refueling stations to support fuel-cell technology, it said.

Tesla said Friday in a regulatory filing that it expected the supply deal to end this year. Toyota said it would keep its stake in Tesla for now.

“It’s obvious Toyota doesn’t see a market for electric vehicles,” said John O’Dell, green-car analyst at the auto-research site Edmunds.com. “They really see the future of the zero-emission vehicle as the hydrogen vehicle,” he said.

“In partnering with Tesla, there might have been a message there that Toyota was looking at the possibility” of a wider partnership with the Silicon Valley manufacturer, he said. “But they can’t even give these cars away. Why continue doing this?”

The winding down of the supply deal comes just four years after the two automakers announced their partnership to much fanfare, in May 2010, when Tesla bought an assembly plant in Fremont, Calif., that Toyota had closed.

The plant had been the site of a joint venture between General Motors and Toyota. But G.M. ceased production there during its bankruptcy and restructuring in 2009, and Toyota closed the factory a year later.

In return, Toyota agreed to buy $50 million of Tesla common stock and said the companies intended to cooperate on the development of “electric vehicles, parts and production-system and engineering support.”

That came as a surprise to analysts, as Toyota executives had long talked down the all-electric car in favor of the company’s own gas-electric hybrid technology, which cost the automaker millions of dollars to develop.

And yet as momentum built in recent years around all-electric powertrains, Toyota was increasingly criticized for lagging behind in a crucial automotive technology. In 2010, Nissan released the Leaf, which it billed as the world’s first mass-produced all-electric car. General Motors followed with its plug-in Chevrolet Volt.

Toyota, for a time, appeared to be hedging its bets. In a joint news conference with Tesla in 2010, Toyota’s chief executive, Akio Toyoda, said the market had not yet chosen the best low-emissions technology. He said the company was preparing for all options.

“When customers do give us their answer,” Mr. Toyoda said, “I want the company to be ready.”

Toyota introduced its own all-electric vehicle in 2012, a car based on its iQ ultra-mini compact that the automaker developed independently. But Toyota has limited sales of that car to fleet customers. At the same time, electric vehicles have struggled to reach the mass market, hindered by consumer concerns over their range and high cost.

Alec Gutierrez, senior analyst for Kelley Blue Book, said he did not see the deal’s end as a tremendous blow to Tesla. The boutique automaker would just shift its attention to the Model X sport utility vehicle, he said, which it is set to sell next year. Still, it came as a disappointment, he said.

“There was a hope that this would have taken off and that Toyota would plan a mass-market vehicle,” he said. “But now they’re heading in two different directions.”

Nanotechnology to the Rescue: A New Fuel Cell Catalyst is a Game Changer for Hydrogen Vehicles

As reported by The Motley Fool: Fuel cell electric vehicles, or FCEVs, may have just taken a giant step closer to widespread adoption. Why? Researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy's Argonne National Laboratory and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory have jointly developed a new type of fuel cell catalyst that has more than 30 times the catalytic activity than conventional catalysts and uses 85% less platinum.
 

Nanotechnology to the rescue
One of the main barriers to widespread FCEV adoption is the high cost of fuel cell catalysts. This is because they rely on platinum. In fact, the Energy Department estimates that platinum can account for 50% of a fuel cell's cost. Luckily, the new class of catalysts being developed by Argonne and Lawrence Berkeley help solve this problem. Here's how.

Uniform polyhedron.

Fuel cell catalyst researchers conventionally use polyhedra, or small, solid nanoparticles of pure platinum. However, when scientists at the labs combined platinum and nickel nanoparticles to make an alloy -- and then exposed that solution to air for two weeks -- it reacted with oxygen and dissolved the particle's nickel interior. The result was a dodecahedron nanoframe, which is a three-dimensional, 12-sided, hollow structure a thousand times smaller in diameter than a human hair.  

Further, the Energy Department states: "The research team then took the nanoframes a few steps further -- applying heat to form a thin topmost skin of platinum atoms over the remaining nickel and encapsulating an ionic liquid in the nanoframe to allow more oxygen to access the platinum atoms during the fuel cell's electrochemical reaction." 

To put the above in layman's terms, what researchers did is create a hollow frame of the original polyhedron so, instead of a solid particle of pure platinum, what's left is just a frame with platinum-rich edges. Thus, the amount of platinum needed is greatly reduced. Moreover doing this makes the catalyst more efficient because the surface area is increased, and the catalyzed molecules can contact the structure from more directions.

Future promise
Right now, the new catalysts are still in the early stages of research, but scientists at the labs believe they hold strong promise for fuel cell vehicles. Furthermore, the nanoframes have already been lab-tested with conditions associated with vehicle use, and the result was that after 10,000 cycles, the nanoframes showed no decrease in activity -- that's pretty impressive. 

2015 Hyundai Tucson Fuel Cell.

The above is especially great news for Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai because all three are betting on a hydrogen fuel cell future. Plus, they are actively pursuing ways to make their vehicles more cost-competitive and thus, widely adopted. In fact, Reuters reports that Toyota is willing to sell its FCV at a loss just to popularize the new technology. This is the same strategy Toyota used with its Prius, which Reuters states, "with other hybrids, now accounts for 14 percent of Toyota's annual sales, excluding group companies, of around 9 million vehicles." 

What to watch
Currently, there are still barriers to widespread FCEV adoption. However, these barriers are becoming smaller by the day. Furthermore, a fuel cell that uses 85% less platinum and has 30 times more catalytic activity is a great step toward furthering an FCEV future. 

NTT DOCOMO to Trial Ericsson 10Gbps 5G Mobile Broadband Technology in Japan

As reported by ISPreview: The standard for the next generation of 5G mobile communications technology is still being debated, yet that hasn't stopped telecom giant Ericsson from teaming up with Japanese mobile firm NTT DOCOMO to test its own 10Gbps+ (Gigabits per second) capable solution in Yokosuka; albeit using the 15GHz radio frequency band.

NTT DOCOMO has always been one of the first pioneers of new mobile communication technologies and thus their plan to achieve “ultra-high bit rates” of more than 10Gbps as part of a 5G trial should thus come as no surprise.

Meanwhile Ericsson claims to have developed advanced antenna technologies with wider bandwidths, higher frequencies and shorter transmission time intervals, as well as radio base stations built with base-band units and radio units developed specifically for the 5G trial.

Seizo Onoe, NTT DOCOMO’s Executive Vice President and CTO, said:
“5G studies are starting to gain real momentum as we point toward 2020. We appreciate that 5G will provide significant performance enhancements to support future new applications that will impact both users and industry. We look forward to showing the potential of 5G radio access technologies via this experimental trial.”

A quick glance at one of Ericsson’s 5G white papers suggests that their technology would be designed to operate in all sorts of different frequency bands, although it’s unclear why 15GHz has been chosen for the trial. This might be more difficult to implement in the UK / Europe where such frequencies are often already allocated to Satellite, military, point-to-point communications and maritime systems.

Ofcom’s recently published radio spectrum strategy (here) also seems to be focused on much lower frequency bands, which are generally better for coverage but not so good if you want to deliver a lot of capacity (note: high frequency but shorter range gives you the best speeds).

At any rate we've already seen various different so-called “5G” trials from companies like Samsung and Huawei, although as yet these are all just possibilities and the various political or regulator forces will still need to make the ultimate decision about which direction the future technology takes.

Clearly any solution will need to operate at both a lower frequency, to help coverage, and a higher frequency for more capacity, such as in urban areas. But at least everybody seems to agree on the 2018-2020 time frame for introduction. In the meantime, USA/UK based 4G networks are still a long way from reaching their maximum potential of 1Gbps+ via LTE Advanced technology, with only EE currently looking at the next step via summer 2014 trials of 300Mbps+ planned.

In related news the Government of South Korea has committed around £940m ($1.59 Billion) to roll-out its own 5G service, with trials due by December 2017 and a commercial deployment set for 2020. No specific technology choice is mentioned, although local Smartphone giant Samsung has been testing its own unique twist on 5G connectivity using some high frequency bands.

Previously the developed Asian countries have led the way with new mobile services but this time around the UK and Europe have also been trying to steal a march on their rivals. But sooner or later somebody is going to have to choose which standard to use and as before it looks like we might end up with different approaches for different parts of the world.