Regulations to use all KERS energy to supercharge engine?

[g-force_addict]

It would be a nice in between step to 2014 turbo.

Unlike 2014 turbo there would be no exhaust turbine.
It's simple. When braking KERS would recover energy to be stored in batteries (or supercaps in the future) to power an electrical supercharger in the next straight.

Of course you get a net increase in power as the power used to turn the supercharger produces more engine power than it consumes.
i.e. Although conventional belt driven superchargers require engine power to turn, they make the engine make more power than they used. Thus they are net power producers.
In other words you get more power supercharging the engine than using stored KERS power to move the car directly by an electric motor.

If allowed,
- Would they use front wheel KERS?
- How much KERS capacity would they use if unrestricted?
- Would they use a separate alternator and supercharger electric motor, or would use the same one to save weight? thus switching between alternator and motor modes with some kind of clutch to switch from KERS (in generator mode) being connected to the wheels, to (motor mode) only connected to the supercharger.
- Would FIA mandate a lower displacement limit?, if so how much? I guess 2.2L or even 2L

Yet another thought exercise.
But this one unlike many of my previous posts, I admit, its completely realistic and road car transferable technology.

[Harv]

Interesting idea, but the turbocharger they're using is the best of both worlds - with the MGU-H attached to the turbine you can effectively turn it into a supercharger at low revs (instead of needing fuel-wasting anti-lag to keep up boost pressures), but the convenience of a turbo once the engine is higher up the rev range.

Not only that, but the extra energy needed would increase the battery weight significantly, and is less relevant to road-car applications (which is supposedly behind this drive to turbocharging again).