For a mainstream audience, the difference probably isn't that interesting. I certainly got the point they were trying to make.

They don't store energy physically. They trap electrons. They hold a static but still electrical energy differential. "Physically" sounds like they store mechanical energy. Either way, I'd hate to get into an accident in a car with capacitors build into its structure. Smash into a wall and there would be a bit of a lighting storm. Current carbon fiber cars burn like torches. With electrical energy stored in amongst that carbon, this car might go off like a bomb.

No they actually mean power. Supercapacitors can energy faster than lithium batteries can(more power). While batteries have power densities hundreds of watts per kilogram, supercapacitors can release thousands of watts per kilogram. Now if we ignore the bullshit with carbon fiber supercapacitors it sounds like what lambroghini really wants is an energy storage system with more energy density and power density than we have today.

Integrating something with a high power density into a vehicle frame might not be such a good idea. If we really do get capacitor level power densities, then the stored energy in the frame could be released really fast during a crash. If the stored energy is enough and released fast enough we essentially have a bomb. There is even the potential for the energy release to cause a relatively localized EMP.

> Supercapacitors can energy faster than lithium batteries can(more power).

You accidentally a verb.

This sentence no verb!