Although the shape of the enclosure would determine whether the car would gain some sort of lift it would also severely affect the traction of the car to the road and make the car unstable and, if anything, certainly would not decrease the energy necessary to move the vehicle. Any device that works off the motion of the car through the air would add drag to the vehicle and require extra fuel input to motivate it and in no way is free energy.

2nd law of thermodynamics is a big drag in the minds of the scientists.It says the efficiency of a heat engine can never be 100%.And that using the huge energy trapped in the atmosphere and the occeans is forbidden.We measure the level of energy in atmosphere in degrees of centigrade etc.Also the occean water is mostly liquid,not ice.So from this one can have an idea of how huge the energy resorvoirs are,in front of our very nose and yet we are told it cannot be used,the forbidden fruit.As if energy never escapes the atmosphere,like from a blackhole.But there are cyclones,tornadoes,floods releasing huge amounts of energy causing destruction.Also we can harvest energy from wind or water using the turbines when the air or water move in their own sweet will.How does the 2nd law explain all these.This law requires more research,more understanding.

The weight of a moving vehicle really only contributes a very small amount to the amount of energy it uses when it is in a steady-state. If you cut the weight in half, the friction on the wheel bearings would decrease by say ten-percent, whereas the wheel bearings are only a small fraction of the total drag at highway speed.

Weight makes a big difference in acceleration and deceleration, but in many planes, they are only able to achieve their top speed when at gross weight.

The test of 'is this energy coming from 'wind' or is the engine really providing the energy?' is if the engine were shut off would the energy continue? I don't think so.

Now about the question whether the energy would come from the engine or air when wind turbine is fitted to a moving vehicle.Think about it in a vaccuum,the turbine will not move even if the vehicle moves.One can draw one`s own conclusions.

Conclusion: engine.

In a vacuum a vehicle would not have to overcome the resistance from the air and a one horsepower engine probably would be sufficient to attain high speeds.

another point of basic physics... lifting the car does not counteract drag in any way whatsoever. drag is a function of the shape and surface dynamics of the car. a lighter car takes less energy because it takes less energy to accelerate to cruising speed, and lifting the car does not effect this, only the actual mass of the car, not apparent weight will influence.

actually drewnahant, I think you've missed something. A car closer to it's maximum weight may actually present less frontal area than when it's lightly loaded. It may actually have less drag because it's squatting.

yes, fine, this idea is good. while the amphibians use to surf over land and water the technology can be used micro level which shall power the car when accelerated as the wind force shall turn in to mechanical and then to electrical and again into for driving the car. may be initially typical but viable if synchronised with the wind propel equipments into function. Dr V Kumar.

certainly it need lot of research. 1) wind power underneath the car - that will have lifting tendency. but if the car is lifted then will loose the road grip - it will then be of no use as friend SAND says. 2) turbines like things to propel the alternator pully - fine; again the drag cannot be ignored. 3) but again proper R&D works on this scenario, hope this shall be developed or dispensed. Dr. V Kumar