Nissan Motor is preparing to introduce a new hybrid system to the U.S. market that departs sharply from conventional designs, CNBC reports.

The move positions the automaker as a middle ground between gasoline vehicles and full electric cars at a time when consumer demand is shifting more cautiously than expected.

The system, branded “e-Power,” is a series hybrid—an architecture in which a gasoline engine never directly drives the wheels. Instead, the engine functions solely as a generator, producing electricity that powers electric motors responsible for propulsion. The result, according to company engineers, is a driving experience closer to a battery-electric vehicle, without the need for charging infrastructure.

“This is a unique powertrain for the U.S.,” said Kurt Rosolowsky, a vehicle evaluation and test engineer at Nissan North America. “This is an electrically driven vehicle, as far as what is powering the wheels, but it doesn’t have a plug, and you fill it up with gas like you do with a normal car.”

The technology differs from traditional hybrids, such as the Toyota Prius produced by Toyota Motor, where both the electric motor and the internal combustion engine can power the wheels. In Nissan’s configuration, the internal combustion engine is decoupled from the drivetrain, eliminating the need for a conventional transmission and driveshaft. That mechanical simplification reduces noise, vibration, and harshness, commonly referred to in the industry as NVH.

Nissan plans to roll out the system later this year in a redesigned version of its Rogue compact SUV, one of its best-selling models in the United States. The timing aligns with a broader recalibration across the auto industry. After heavy spending on electric vehicles yielded weaker-than-expected returns, manufacturers are pivoting toward hybrids as a more commercially viable near-term solution.

S&P Global Mobility forecasts hybrid vehicles will account for 18.4% of new U.S. vehicle sales this year, up from 12.6% last year and 7.3% in 2023. By contrast, fully electric vehicles are projected to decline to 7.1% of sales from 8% a year earlier.

The move is also expected to address a competitive gap for Nissan. The company has lagged rivals such as Honda Motor and Toyota in hybrid adoption, even as it was an early entrant in electric vehicles with the Leaf. The financial strain from EV investments has pushed the company to diversify its electrification strategy.

The e-Power system is not new globally. Nissan introduced it in Japan in 2016 and has since sold more than 1.6 million vehicles equipped with the technology across nearly 70 countries. What is new is its adaptation for U.S. consumer expectations, which have historically favored higher power output and sustained highway performance.

To address that, Nissan has developed a more powerful 1.5-liter, three-cylinder turbocharged engine specifically for the U.S. version.

“The turbo is only there to serve efficiency at higher speeds for the gas engine to deliver energy,” Rosolowsky said, acknowledging a known limitation of series hybrids: reduced efficiency at sustained high speeds compared with conventional hybrids.

Industry analysts say the approach could find traction if execution matches expectations. “I think it’s going to be a really good system. I think it’s going to be very popular for Nissan in the new Rogue when it arrives later this year,” said Sam Abuelsamid, vice president of market research at Telemetry.

Early driving impressions from European models equipped with e-Power suggest the system delivers strong low-speed acceleration and effective regenerative braking, hallmarks of electric vehicles, while maintaining the familiarity of a gasoline-powered car. Drivers hear the engine rev, but without gear shifts or the mechanical lag associated with traditional transmissions.

The absence of a plug may also prove decisive. While fully electric vehicles continue to face infrastructure and range concerns in parts of the U.S., e-Power offers a transitional model: electric drive characteristics without dependence on charging networks. That could appeal to buyers reluctant to commit to battery-only vehicles but seeking improved fuel efficiency.

Fuel economy remains a key selling point. A European version of the Rogue Sport equipped with e-Power has demonstrated more than 40 miles per gallon in heavy city driving, compared with just over 30 mpg for current U.S. Rogue models, based on data from the Environmental Protection Agency. Nissan has not yet released official figures for the upcoming U.S. variant.

The system’s modular design could allow broader deployment across Nissan’s lineup. “If we were to expand this to other vehicles, you can theoretically bolt this onto another gasoline engine of a different size and have more options for an e-Power system,” Rosolowsky said.

Rising fuel prices, partly driven by geopolitical tensions in energy-producing regions, are reshaping consumer priorities. At the same time, slower EV adoption is forcing automakers to reconsider timelines for full electrification.

In that environment, Nissan’s series hybrid enters the U.S. market as a calculated compromise.

The administration of Donald Trump has temporarily relaxed sanctions on Iran’s oil exports, allowing purchases at sea for 30 days in an effort to contain surging global energy prices driven by the ongoing U.S.-Israeli conflict.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the waiver could inject about 140 million barrels of crude into global markets, offering short-term supply relief after oil prices climbed roughly 50% since the war began on February 28.

“In essence, we will be using the Iranian barrels against Tehran to keep the price down as we continue Operation Epic Fury,” Bessent said, framing the move as a tactical adjustment rather than a shift in broader policy.

The license, posted by the Treasury Department, allows Iranian crude already loaded onto vessels to complete its sale or delivery, including potential import into the United States, though such imports remain unlikely given decades of sanctions dating back to the 1979 revolution. The waiver excludes jurisdictions such as Cuba, North Korea, and Crimea and will run until April 19.

It marks the third sanctions reprieve in just over two weeks, following similar steps to allow the movement of stranded Russian oil and earlier Iranian shipments. The administration has also eased domestic shipping restrictions under the Jones Act to allow foreign-flagged vessels to move fuel between U.S. ports, underscoring the urgency of containing price pressures.

The immediate impact is expected to be felt most in Asia, where refiners, particularly independent Chinese operators, have long been the primary buyers of discounted Iranian crude. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said supplies could reach Asian markets within days and filter into refined products over the next several weeks.

Still, the intervention highlights the limits of economic tools in a conflict-driven market. Much of the price surge has been tied not simply to supply constraints but to heightened geopolitical risk, including attacks on energy infrastructure and disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a corridor responsible for roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows.

Analysts say that unless those risks are removed, additional barrels alone are unlikely to produce sustained price relief. Brett Erickson of Obsidian Risk Advisors warned that loosening sanctions during an active conflict signals diminishing policy options.

“If we’ve reached the point of loosening sanctions on the country we are at war with, we’re really running out of options,” he said.

Economists broadly share that assessment. While the waiver may temper prices briefly, potentially for a window of 10 to 14 days, as Bessent suggested in earlier remarks, structural stability in energy markets depends on a cessation of hostilities. As long as the conflict continues, traders are likely to price in the risk of further supply disruptions, keeping crude elevated regardless of incremental supply increases.

The administration has attempted to balance two competing pressures: maintaining maximum economic pressure on Iran while shielding U.S. consumers from the inflationary fallout of the war. Bessent insisted Tehran would struggle to access any proceeds from the oil sales, saying Washington would continue to restrict Iran’s access to the international financial system.

Yet the policy carries contradictions since allowing Iranian oil to flow, even temporarily, introduces additional supply that indirectly benefits Tehran’s export position, even if revenues are constrained. At the same time, the move underscores growing concern within the White House about the domestic political cost of high energy prices ahead of the November midterm elections, when Republicans are seeking to maintain control of Congress.

The near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz, combined with repeated strikes on oil and gas facilities across Iran and neighboring Gulf states, continues to overshadow supply-side interventions. Insurance costs for tankers have risen sharply, and shipping disruptions have tightened available flows regardless of official policy changes.

Supporters of the waiver believe it is a pragmatic step. Mark Dubowitz said the move could help “win the fight against the regime” while easing price pressure. But even proponents acknowledge its limits in the absence of broader de-escalation.

The underlying dynamic remains unchanged. The war has introduced a risk premium into energy markets that cannot be legislated away. Until the conflict between the U.S., Israel, and Iran subsides, or a durable security arrangement restores confidence in supply routes, oil prices are likely to remain volatile.