Ford shares electric car technology with rival automakers. Why?

Ford is following Tesla Motors' and BMW's footsteps in sharing its electric car technology with automakers. What does Ford gain from sharing its portfolio of patents?

Alan Diaz/AP/File
Ford is sharing its electric car technology with rival automakers. Last year, automakers Tesla Motors and BMW made a similar move and opened up their patents, too.

In June of 2014, Tesla Motors' CEO Elon Musk did something highly unusual: he unlocked Tesla's patent box and offered to share the company's electric car technology with other automakers.

The following month, BMW did the same thing.

Now, Ford is following suit, giving rivals around the globe access to its portfolio of patents related to electric vehicle technology. Those patents cover a range of features, including battery charging (Method and Apparatus for Battery Charge Balancing, patent No. US5764027), regenerative braking (Temperature Dependent Regenerative Brake System for Electric Vehicle, patent No. US6275763), and even technology that monitors drivers and offers tips on improving performance (Driving Behavior Feedback Interface, patent No. US8880290).

Why would Ford do such a thing? According to Kevin Layden, director of Ford Electrification Programs: "Innovation is our goal. The way to provide the best technology is through constant development and progress. By sharing our research with other companies, we will accelerate the growth of electrified vehicle technology and deliver even better products to customers."

A slightly more cynical view would be that Ford wants other automakers to ramp up production of electric cars so that the auto market remains a level playing field and Ford isn't left holding the bag.

Consider this: the EPA has set some pretty lofty fuel economy and emissions goals for the auto industry to meet within the next 10 years. Hybrid and fully electric cars can play a big role in meeting those targets, as they already produce fewer emissions than their gas-powered siblings and they're becoming increasingly comparable in terms of range. Unfortunately, hybrid and electric vehicle sales only make up a tiny, tiny percentage of the global market. That's not because automakers can't keep up with demand, it's because consumers haven't warmed up to these high-tech rides. Why not?

  • Hybrids and EVs are still more expensive than vehicles that run on gas alone -- sometimes vastly more expensive, even after federal and state tax credits.
  • Fuel economy of gas-powered vehicles is increasing, slowly but surely, and it's a technology that people feel comfortable with.
  • Gas is cheap for now (even though many understand that prices will rise in the future), giving consumers fewer reasons to switch to hybrids and EVs.
  • The charging infrastructure for electrified vehicles isn't robust enough for many consumers' tastes, leaving them with range anxiety.

In other words, the auto industry needs to make electric cars to meet federal regulations, but few consumers are excited about buying them. By opening up its patents, Ford hopes to give its rivals the tools to build better electric vehicles -- the end result being that automakers around the globe will build more attractive, affordable EVs so that consumers begin buying them like hotcakes. Otherwise, Ford and other innovators could end up doing the right thing (in the EPA's eyes, anyway), but get shafted on the sales floor by reluctant consumers.

If you're part of a start-up and you'd like a peek at Ford's patents, you can contact the automakers commercialization and licensing office. You can also access the patents through AutoHarvest, an online community that "allows users of all types to showcase capabilities, technologies and needs system-wide and then privately connect with fellow inventors and commercializers to explore technology and business development opportunities of mutual interest". (Translation: it's a private kickstarter.) If you go that route, though, you'll need to pony up a fee.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.