NILS, is a single-seat electric concept vehicle that offered a glimpse of a new form of minimalist mobility which was unveiled at the Frankfurt Motor Show this year.

The concept features an aluminium space frame, wing doors and free-standing wheels – is seeking to maintain the dynamic performance of a sports car while travelling silently and with zero emissions.

The NILS project is supported by the German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development, and is designed to be both technically realistic and economically supportable.

With an electric charge range of about 40 miles and a top speed of around 80 mph, NILS, would, theoretically, be the perfect commuter vehicle for the vaste majority of the German population.

According to the German Bureau of Statistics, 73.9 per cent of all commuters residing between Berlin and Munich cover less than 25 kilometres (15.5 miles) on their way to work. So, the theory goes, most of us could jump in our NILS to get to work silently and quickly, then plug it in all day, before shooting home in the futuristic manner in which you got there. And still have enough charge for a diversion to the gym, club or sausage shop.

But you couldn’t drop/pick up the kids could you? Well, the thinking goes, it doesn’t actually matter too much.

According to VW about 60 per cent of all commuters travel by car — and of these over 90 per cent travel alone. Zero-emissions vehicles like NILS, so goes the argument, will offer these frequent drivers a new eco-friendly way of getting round.

NILS requires extremely little space in traffic. It is only 3.04 metres long – making it about 50 cm shorter than the new Volkswagen up! – just 0.39 metres wide from wheel to wheel, and a mere 1.2 metres tall.

Ironically, the concept has the same basic layout as a Formula 1 race car, with the driver in the middle, the engine in back, and free-standing outboard wheels. The 17-inch alloys are equipped tyres optimised for low rolling resistance too. These aren’t exactly slicks, however.

It wouldn’t be stretching the imagination to greatly to suppose that Sebastian Vettel’s relentless success might have been the inspiration for the design. It was penned at Volkswagen’s Design Centre in Potsdam, Berlin. According to Designer Thomas Ingenlath, the centre’s director, the inclusion of the Gull wing doors was not only a reference to a supercar history. “[The Gull Wing doors] allowed us to create large transparent surfaces and simultaneously to make entering and exiting the vehicle very comfortable, even in the most cramped of parking spaces.”

With it’s compact design and it’s svelte kerb weight of 460 kg, it would probably be a lot of fun to drive. VW claim a pull-away time of 11 seconds. Not exactly Countach-like, but pretty swift and perky. The steering is purely mechanical , while the electric motor produces its maximum torque of 130 Nm from standstill, via a single speed transmission. Suspension is by double wishbones front and rear; while ESP (Electronic Stabilisation Programme) helps to tame any over-exuberance on the part of the driver. This is like a cross between a fixed gear bike and a go-kart in its handling characteristics.

The electric motor in the NILS has a relatively small 15 kW nominal power output which can spike to a short-term peak power of 25 kW. A lithium-ion battery supplies the electric motor with energy, and as it can be relatively small because of the vehicles dimensions, it is relatively inexpensive and can be charged from a conventional outlet in a little over two hours (much better than the epic eight hour charges of most of the current production Electric cars.

The centrepiece of the electric drive system an electric motor that weighs just 19KG. The energy is managed by a high-voltage pulse inverter, which – together with the 12-Volt DC/DC converter for the vehicle electrical system and the charger – forms an integral drive unit. All drive unit components are located compactly in an aluminium housing at the rear of the vehicle — and apparently there’s still some room for the briefcase.

The body-coloured area above the rear lighting module swings upward, revealing space suitable for items such as a case of drinks and a bag.

VW have always been at the cutting edge of visions of future motoring. And while the Japanese have been matching German innovations step by step — the combination of fun, flexibility and a quick electric charge may well be a viable vision of a future dominated by wishful thinking.

And the thing is, it still looks like a VW. All they have to do now is have the balls to actually produce it en-masse.

“I’d rather try crossing a river on a path of bobbing soap cakes than make predictions about the car of tomorrow. The footing would be far safer.” So said Harley Earl, head of General Motor’s famous ‘Art and Colour’ section and the man who created the first futuristic concept car, the sensational Buick Y-job of 1938. Earl had his ideas in an office called ‘the hatchery’ which had no windows or telephone and a fake name on the door so he wouldn’t be disturbed. He worked there for over twenty years and did more than anyone else to stimulate our obsession with the car of the future.

The Buick Y Job of 1938 not only had a silly name, but encapsulated an American vision of the future that was postponed only by the Nazis

But by the time he retired he plainly didn’t think much of his – or anyone else’s – ability to predict how cars would look or function in ten or twenty years’ time. He was right: the history of the future of the car is littered with hopeless or plain embarrassing predictions. We can have a chuckle at Ford’s mad fifties plans for a nuclear-powered runabout, but with the car currently undergoing its most radical transformation as we search for a replacement for the internal combustion engine, we’d be wise to be neither too sceptical nor too credulous about what we might be driving in a decade’s time.

The availability of Uranium refuelling proved to be a sticking point for the Ford Nucleon. Combined of course with the possibility of multiple roadside apocalypses

Predictions about the future of transport are usually wildly optimistic, but one early belief went the other way. In the 1820s the speed of steam locomotives such as Stephenson’s Rocket started to exceed that of a galloping horse, the fastest speed sustained by man by that time. Many believed that travelling any faster would cause us to turn to mush, and that trains would never be able exceed around 40mph. In Britain, of course, this prediction turned out to be largely accurate, but for very different reasons.

And what is it about flying cars? Half of the predictions about the future of transport seem to involve them. Over 30 patents for flying cars have been filed in the United States alone; the first was the Curtiss Autoplane of 1917. The most credible was probably the Convaircar of 1947, a lightweight, streamlined coupe with a detachable wing and propeller unit that could be left at the landing strip, allowing the car to be driven as normal. Built by an established aviation firm and the work of Henry Dreyfuss, one of America’s greatest industrial designers, the Convaircar completed several long test flights but later crashed. The bad publicity and high price — around $1500, plus wings — killed the project.

That radioactive Ford was called the Nucleon: revealed in 1958 it had its own on-board nuclear reactor and was good for 5000 miles between uranium fill-ups. Quite what would happen in the event of a heavy shunt was never really examined. Other examples of future-gazing Ford silliness include the ’61 Gyron, a two-wheel car balanced by a gyroscope, and the Leva Car, which was effectively a 500mph hovercraft with no brakes. Needless to say, neither actually functioned. The best-known Ford concept of the period is the ’55 Lincoln Futura. Built by Italian coachbuilder Ghia and fully driveable, it was sold to Californian ‘kustom-kar’ builder George Barris and rotted in his yard for years before he painted it black and turned it into the Batmobile in ’66.

Harley Earl’s explorations at GM were hugely influential

But despite his self-deprecation, Harley Earl regularly almost got it right. His greatest concepts were the three Firebirds, shown between 1954 and ’58. Like other designers of the jet-age Earl was obsessed with aircraft. Unlike the Convaircar the Firebirds couldn’t actually fly, but they looked like they might; all had jet-style fuselages, gas turbine engines and Firebird III had seven fins and separate bubble canopies for driver and passenger. But in some respects these concepts really did predict the cars we drive today, with lightweight titanium bodies, keyless entry, rear reversing cameras and features that bear a remarkable similarity to modern sat-nav, I-drive and collision-avoidance systems.

Mr Barris may have known how to pen a cool car, but his jackets rocked too

The latest attempt to predict the future is the Government-commissioned Foresight report on transport in 2055. It sets out a series of different scenarios, which include everything from self-driving mobile offices to driverless buses we summon by PDA. Its gloomier predictions see a dystopian world in which journeys are rationed by carbon credits, and ‘tribal’ communities compete for energy resources after oil runs out, the banking system fails and society collapses. Maybe you ought to switch off your computer and go out for a drive, while you still can.

But we’d rather look to the future with a little of that fifties optimism. There’s no question that the car will be forced to change quickly and radically, whether through excess carbon dioxide or insufficient oil. The race to find a replacement for petrol and diesel engines is being run right now, but it’s a marathon rather than a sprint, and the new technologies that seem to be in front now might not even make the finishing line.

Is the Tesla Roadster an exciting glimpse of a potentially sustainable automotive future – or little more than a rich man’s trifle?

But we have been able to test all these competing new technologies, if only in prototype form in some cases, and they’re mostly exciting. Take the Tesla Roadster, the all-electric supercar you can actually go out and buy now, albeit at an eye-watering six-figure price tag. It will out-drag some Ferraris and Lamborghinis to 60mph, its absurd, instant, warp-drive acceleration made to feel all the more Star-Trek by the silence in which it’s produced.

Or there’s the Honda FCX Clarity, the world’s first ‘commercially-available’ hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. It’s a sexy, streamlined four-seat hatchback with a decent boot and a useful 270-mile range. 200 lucky customers will get to lease them, though at a very heavily subsidized rate: the tech is still too expensive to go on sale.

But the cost is steadily declining, and when it comes down far enough for Honda to sell them alongside – or maybe instead of – its regular line-up by around 2020, we’ll all get to experience the entirely new kind of driving pleasure it offers. It doesn’t rely on noise or speed or image: it simply marries the same unconstrained mobility we enjoy now with the utterly guilt-free conscience that comes from emitting nothing but water from the tailpipe. And it’s as silent as the Tesla; inner and outer peace combined.

The future of motoring – or an ultra expensive dead-end?

Will hydrogen be the fuel of the future? We’ll heed Harley’s words, and won’t make that prediction. But we’ve been to the future, and can report back that it might not be as bad as some think.

Star Trek’s colourful imaginary inspired many an American vision of the automotive future

There were seismic changes to Formula 1 in 2009.

Bickering over the sport’s financial arrangements and governance led to FOTA (the Formula One Teams Association) announcing a breakaway championship at the British GP at Silverstone in June, then back-tracking once it became evident that Max Mosley’s reign as FISA/FIA president was truly over and that he would not stand for re-election in October’s election.

Despite the FOTA U-turn the fact is that in the last 12 months Formula 1 has witnessed the withdrawal of manufacturer entries from Honda, BMW and Toyota. And, at the time of writing, Renault is considering bids for its Enstone-based operation that was taken over from Benetton at the start of the decade.

Whether the desertions are purely the result of a catastrophic economic situation for the motor industry or more deeply entrenched dissatisfaction over the sport’s governance, is a moot point. Mosley certainly believed that Formula 1 was unviable in the current climate if it basically amounted to a spending contest.

Max argued that manufacturers have always used F1 for their own promotional purposes while it suited, but always follow their own agendas. To safeguard the sport, he said, it needed to be viable for commercially-funded private entrants. Events of the past few months seem to have vindicated his assessment. We have returned to a position of multiple private entrant ‘purist’ racing teams, plus Ferrari and Mercedes.

Back in the seventies, eighties and early nineties, that was basically the sport’s composition. Largely British private teams such as Lotus, Tyrrell, Brabham, McLaren and then Williams dominated with off-the-shelf Cosworth engines. Opposition came from Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Matra, then came Renault, BMW, TAG-Porsche and Honda as the turbo era dawned.

As Bernie Ecclestone’s vision developed Formula 1 into a world class global sport with unsurpassed reach – the Olympics and the soccer World Cup generate bigger audiences but only once every four years – it became an irresistible promotional platform for the world’s motor manufacturers. Mercedes, BMW, Jaguar, Ferrari, Honda, Toyota, Renault were all there at the same time – unprecedented for the sport.

For some, participation was enough to increase brand awareness but, for others, winning was essential. And they couldn’t all win. Team staffing levels approached four figures and budgets went through the roof. Collectively, the manufacturers were spending a billion dollars a year on engine development alone. Mosley, a man who witnessed the off-the-shelf Cosworth era first hand with his March company, thought it was both bonkers and unsustainable.

Suddenly the independents, including top class outfits like Williams, were struggling to be viable businesses without major manufacturer backing. And, whereas Max and Bernie had been able to control the privateers, often by divide and rule tactics, the presence of heavily backed corporate players threatened to take the sport out of their control. Politics started to dominate sport.

On the plus side, interest grew and competition became closer than ever. In 2009 we enjoyed entire grids covered by little more than one second — unthinkable just a decade ago.

On paper, all the factors that made F1 so attractive to the manufacturers still remain, albeit that as things stand you can’t go out and beat six or seven of your major rivals. The interesting time will come when the economy turns. We will see how many return. The regulatory path followed by new FIA president Jean Todt will also be influential, along with his success or failure in implementing a planned glide path of reduced expenditure aimed at reaching early nineties levels. Many have serious doubts about the viability of such a target.

The immediate future gives rise to some mouth-watering match-ups on track. None is quite so compelling as the prospect of Britain’s back-to-back champions, Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button, lining up as team mates in identical McLarens.

Button’s talks with McLaren were initially viewed as expedient for both parties – McLaren was surely turning the screw on Kimi Raikkonen’s negotiating team and Button was trying to eke out a bigger pay day from Brawn and Mercedes. Nobody quite believed it when the deal went through.

Some suspect that Button, with the pressure finally off, took temporary leave of his senses. To head into a McLaren environment where Lewis has been king for three years and take him on – is a big ask. Fernando Alonso couldn’t do it when Lewis was a rookie never mind a world champion.

While it’s fair to say that many don’t rate Jenson’s chances too highly, it’s not as simple as all that. Button started ’09 with an undoubted car advantage due to Brawn’s double diffuser and long development lead time. By the end of the season the team had been caught and arguably overtaken. McLaren initially didn’t cope with the new aero regulations but once it solved its problems became a potent force.

Jean Todt’ puckish of genius when running the Scuderia will be applied to the FIA

Next year with refuelling banned, it will become vitally important to look after your tyres, the rears particularly, over a race distance. That may play right into the hands of Button’s super-smooth style which is likely to take less out of the rubber that Hamilton’s more flamboyant oversteer-pronounced technique. On the other side of the coin, the change in handling characteristics over a race distance is more likely to favour the more adaptable driver, which is likely to be Hamilton. It will be fascinating to see how it pans out, not to mention whether or not McLaren can keep a lid on the potential tensions of two star drivers again – something it patently failed to do with Senna/Prost and Alonso/Hamilton.

The other great plus is that the future of the British Grand Prix seems assured after Bernie Ecclestone signed a recent 17-year deal with Silverstone following the collapse of Donington’s ambitious plan – another victim of the economic situation.

With potential EU competition issues clouding F1 rights ownership issues at the start of the decade, it was no surprise that F1’s new super-venues: Sepang, Shanghai, Istanbul, Bahrain, Abu Dhabi and, next year, South Korea, were all outside Europe. Now though, with those issues apparently resolved by the FIA divesting itself of the commercial rights, we’ve had Valencia and the new deal for Silverstone. That at least, is a blessing. While the new locations are spectacular – witness Yas Marina in particular – they must always be balanced with F1’s traditional core events.

In 1982, when the World Wide Web, Google Analytics and ubiquitous personal pixelage was just a glimmer in a handful of geeks’ fluoro Wayfarers a film maker called Steve Lisberger imagined a world called Tron.

The film, in which Jeff Bridges played a paranoid but prescient hacker who, determined to gain access to the mainframe of a society-controlling corporation, becomes physically captured in the machine itself – inspired a generation of Space-Invader-zapping teens. But it wasn’t just the nerds and the b-boys tripping out to Arcade Funk who were susceptible to Lisberger’s Neon happy vision of the future. The groms who became car designers dug the aesthetic too.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The rumour mill has been buzzing with dreams of a genuinely desirable Electric Vehicle for years, and while the four-door version of Mitsubishi’s MiEv has been doing the car show circuit for a couple of years, this sporty version looks to be in the lead of the race to produce an EV that will appeal to a broader market than your traditional Ethical Man.

Featuring the softly glowing neon blue of Lisberger’s imagination, a fleet of touch sensitive interfaces and pinlines, the interior can certainly convince that this Electric experience may be able to be, well electrifying from a driver’s perspective.

According to reports from mainstream automotive press as well as the blogophere, in Japan the car is hotly anticipated, and Mitsubishi plan to launch the four door version as early as 2010, with the sportier two door the year after.

Mitsubishi say that the MiEv’s motor can produce up to 169 lb/ft of torque, comes with rear wheel drive and has a kerb weight of just under a metric Tonne.

This may be an Electric Vehicle that you really want to own. Just don’t break out those fluoro Wayfarers just yet.

Design is all about evolution. In cars, the motorised carriage evolved into two, then three rectangular boxes. Following the process of natural selection in which the fittest designs survived, the three boxes where ironed out, organic forms replacing the angles and incidences of aesthetic whimsy. Our highways are now populated by an inbred menagerie boasting little but exterior drag coefficients and interior ergonomy. It follows then, that the trajectory of natural selection may move away from the friction and drag inherent in wheels and rubber. Of course, we’ve all dreamed with The Jetsons of hovering cars and personal spacecraft. We’ve all wondered at futuristic vistas of highways in the sky, and we’ve all realised that flight, as music is to the artist, is the ultimate aspirant of the car designer. But talented young Turk Kazim Doku has dreamed with his eyes wide open and his pen fully engaged. His shark concept, which takes Audi’s design elements and packages them in a chondrichthyan form, returns to the primordial soup and retreats to our acid oceans for inspiration. The Shark concept is the winning entry of a design competition co-sponsored by Audi and Milan’s Domus Academy. Kazim’s prize was 70 percent scholarship to take part in the sought-after Masters in Automotive Design run by the academy. Unfortunately, the talented pensmen had to withdraw from application because he couldn’t afford the remaining 30 percent of the tuition fee. Any philanthropic benefactors out there with a love of innovative car design contact us immediately and we’ll pass on the good news to the man himself!