EEstor super-duper capacitor news

I think that if Lockheed has inked a deal there is probably something there that is worth the investment. Lockheed is a good company and is not likely to be frivolous with their investments.

It turns out there is no direct investment -- however, they will be helping to build a testable prototype this year.

FYI:

As one of the worlds leading forums for discussing the latest technical advances and market trends in the EC industry, IntetechPira's 7th annual Advanced Capacitors World Summit 2009 set for March 31 – April 2, 2009 at the Hilton Torrey Pines in La Jolla, CA, US will focus on advanced electrochemical capacitors and other complementary advanced energy storage and delivery technologies for electrical and electronic systems used in a wide variety of applications and industries.

www.advancedcapacitors.com

http://www.advancedcapacitorsws.com

They didn't invest anything. They simply acquired the right to do some testing of a prototype that they may build themselves.

3kv sounds iffy to me . Why put all the control electronics in a capacitor??? After all you may want to parallel up several? I'd expect a modular approach...but who wants to be connecting modules at 3kv?
Looks like the usual BS article...lots of words, no facts...

(Mind you what does a cat know about a cap?)

Del

If you want to expand 'iffy'... one word...'reliability'.... how would you think the reliability would be of a 3kv device with control circuitry and interconnections in an automotive environment...not to mention a battlefield environment?

(My fave quote from the Falklands war...'All the f'ing technology, but when the shit hits the fan, you can't get a message acroos the bay' ...the battlefield comms equipment failed so they resorted to sending runners!)

Del

Why put all the control electronics in a capacitor???

The idea, as explained to me, was to make the unit usable as a "battery" of 5-1500 V just by resetting the electronics. Any external terminals would be at whatever voltage you set, rather than having 3kv exposed terminals.

I asked, a while ago, these questions:

• Assuming it is charged to 3200 volts, if there is a breach of the internal insulation, what would prevent a chain reaction from developing in the capacitor, leading to explosion?
• What prevents a similar explosion in the event of a collision?
• Are there electronics, internal to the unit, that convert the voltage to something more easily applicable to a vehicle: 72 or 48 VDC, for example. The idea of any exposed terminal at 3200 volts is intimidating.
• Can you provide information on envisioned charge controllers and drives.

Dick Weir replied:

All of these concerns have been taken care of by our designs. The output voltage is set by the converter circuit so it can range from 5V to 1500V. The battery can be charged at the rate that the converter circuit allows. The energy storage units can be charged at any rate that a converter circuit can supply.

I've asked to see a prototype a couple times but have had no response.

I assume the unit is a bunch of capacitors in series, so the voltage across any one capacitor is (relatively) low.

If this thing works, I could certainly use a bunch of them, but they seem uninterested in selling me any.

Are you asking as a business or an individual? Also, if you are only going to buy small quantities, then don't expect much attention from them.

I would bet the electronics is pretty simplified and the cost is nil in huge quantities. Huge quantities of sales is what makes this work, so they are thinking millions of units. Lockheed has the pockets and the applications, so they are the 800 lb. gorilla in this zoo.

Are you asking as a business or an individual?

As a business. I was asking about getting 5000 per year from their eventual production, or producing them ourselves under license.

I'd been told all production was sold out and that "it will be many years before EEStor, Inc. will be selling our product on an individual bases."

I wrote to Dick with these questions, but received no response:

• Thanks for your response. Suppose we wanted to license the tech to produce 10,000 small units (20kWh) per year. Assuming we have an appropriate building, what would the expected cost of the production line be?

• Where would we go to see a prototype in operation?

I received no response.

I imagine Dick is overwhelmed with interest in the things. It seems odd, though, that they don't simply publish some real test data, a picture of a prototype, etc. etc. I can't see any need for secrecy, in that, especially in this sort of tech. a box is a box: showing it working gives away nothing re the technology involved. If it does work as advertised, then why not work with Johnson Controls or any of the other large battery companies who already have relationships with, and distribution to, users.

If the thing really works, all other batteries are toast. For practically every application, the ICE would also be toast. Why not use it in the Tesla? There is no other electric vehicle with anything remotely close to the press for the Tesla, and the EESU would double its range, while reducing its battery cost dramatically. Using it in a neighborhood vehicle (which are useless in most US neighborhoods outside the densest cities, because the speed limits are too high) seems like the worst place to start -- neighborhood vehicles are perfect for lead acid -- even 5 miles is adequate range for a neighborhood vehicle, and lead acid provides much more than that.

But who knows... Maybe Ian Clifford of Zenn has quick access to billions, and has a production line ready to churn out 100,000 fully electric real cars in the first year, starting with 2009. I think the last figures I read indicated 200 units of the Zenn neighborhood vehicle having been sold. What an improbably place to start, it seems.

But then there's Lockheed. I'll have to read up a little, but I'm not sure this really means anything. They have certain rights, but what did they put at risk to get those rights? Suppose Lockheed came to me and said "We'd like to use your vehicle for military applications, and would like exclusive rights to do so." For me, simply being able to say that I have a relationship with Lockheed would be valuable for my credibility. Would I make them pay for that in advance? Probably not. Suppose EEstor feels they need some credibility, given there is so much skepticism on the web re the EESU. It would make sense to pay Lockheed (rather than the other way around) to make them a licensee. Instant credibility. Instant Zenn stock jump.

"Specific terms of the agreement were not disclosed." Why not?

"The EEStor energy storage technology provides potential solutions for the demanding..."

"The potential of an even safer, smaller and more powerful EESU in BattPack™ would..."

"EESUs are planned as nontoxic, non-hazardous and non-explosive."

For something that was (in late 2006) to be in production in late 2007, these words seem to indicate that things are not going as planned.

The latest:

I just read an interview w/ a Lockheed guy. As I suspected, they have put no money into this. The have also not seen a prototype, and will be working together to build a testable one this year.

However, there is this:

• Are you confident that their technology will offer a greater amount of energy and power density than batteries?
  Yes, and at a fraction of the cost.
• Do their caps hold 10x the energy at 1/10th the weight of a lead acid battery?
  Yes.

(I assume this means 10x the energy density, not 100x.) You might ask how he can say this confidently, if he has not seen a prototype. (Many, after all, question the calculations in the patent.)

The source, which includes some good comments:

http://www.gm-volt.com/2008/01/10/lockheed-martin-signs-agreement-with-eestor/

Also, this next thread brings up some calculation issues -- one of which gets repeated far too many times, but which seems to have some merit.

http://tyler.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2007/11/1/3328442.html

The complete web page where I found the patent has additional info:

"ZENN Motor's public reports show that it so far has invested $3.8 million in and has promised another $1.2 million if the ultracapacitor company meets a third-party testing standard and then delivers a product."

I suspect the reason you aren't getting any product is that you haven't ponied up your $5 million yet.

"Using it in a neighborhood vehicle (which are useless in most US neighborhoods outside the densest cities, because the speed limits are too high) seems like the worst place to start -- neighborhood vehicles are perfect for lead acid -- even 5 miles is adequate range for a neighborhood vehicle, and lead acid provides much more than that."

Great point!

The whole thing should boil down to profit and what brings in the most money for a set investment.

However, didn't Zenn sign up to be a distributor of the batteries, too?

Zenn does have a highway vehicle planned. That's what the EESU will be going into, but they aren't starting production until they get a working prototype from EESTOR.

That's what the EESU will be going into, but they aren't starting production until they get a working prototype from EESTOR.

They have long had a no-prototype-straight-to-production "plan", as ludicrous as that may seem, for something with such high potential danger. As you can see from previous posts, in January they said they would be in production by mid year:

He's now expecting delivery of the energy-storage unit in mid-2008. And it won't be a prototype, he emphasizes: it will be a mass-produced commercial product.

In 2006 they said they'd be in production in late 2007.

ZENN and EESTOR seem more and more like nothing but hype (for pumping up stock, I assume). In a recent press release announcing a shareholder rights plan, ZENN characterize themselves as "dedicated to being the global leader in zero emission transportation solutions for markets around the world." They have never sold or even demonstrated a prototype of a highway legal vehicle. Reva, the Indian company, has been selling highway-capable electric vehicles for several years, and has sold far more of those than the glorified golf carts that ZENN sells: global leader?

ZENN tried to portray Transport Canada as bad guys for not allowing their vehicle to be driven on public roads. It seems unreasonable to expect the Cadadian government to quickly change their laws to fit the ZENN. In fact, the vehicle can not be driven on most roads in the US either -- it does not meet US standards for highway vehicles. About half the states here have a low speed vehicle classification that allows a ZENN to be driven on roads with a speed limit of 35 mph or less, but the vehicle must have a top speed of over 20 mph but less than or equal to 25. These seem like sitting ducks, and in impediment to the normal flow of traffic. At an intersection, they are just as likely to be T-boned as any other vehicle, but they have none of the side impact protection equipment that a car has. On golf courses and in gated communities they are fine, but they should not be allowed to mingle with ordinary traffic.

Then, of course there is the issue of "zero emission." In ordinary use in the US, these vehicles are plugged into the grid, which is anything but zero emission. There are now plug-in SUVs proposed (by other companies) which will cause higher CO2 emissions than a small sedan, but the "zero emission" label makes them seem green, when they are not.

The glowing promises of yesterday are the ephemeral NON-products of today.

A great idea gone astray to who knows where or when it becomes a reality.

Without any claims for accuracy, a 12 V, 45 Ah auto battery should be replaced with a battery of capacitors of about 0.3Farad at a voltage over 3,000 V. Are these super-duper capacitors super light and tiny?

Without knowing the terms of the lockheed agreement, any sort of judgement on the quality of the product is impossible. The reaction to Ken's legitimate inquires, casts further doubts.

Results talk, the silence is deafening.

"Mr. Topfer was Vice Chairman of Dell Computer Corporation". That's a pretty good indication, although there is still a part of my brain that is whispering "Enron".

I'm more interested in the other uses for this product than automotive. The use in solar electrical systems alone is phenomenal.

The longer the sales pitch and the more explanations needed for competent engineers to understand the pitch the less likely it will be a product worth investing in.

A 'projected' image is and image not a real solid product. Forget the projections, lets see the real thing, then we can make a realistic judgment.

No one will know if it is the real deal until they are in production.

I think it is a good sign that Lockheed Martin is partnering with EEstor, and the company is bringing on production expertise (ie: Martin Topher). The deal with Zenn was cut, because Zenn put up money when the risk was far higher a couple of years ago. Now, when the battery comes out, Zenn will take the lead roll in getting it into the hands of other auto manufacturers around the world. They are spending time on working with these folks to get the battery can be spec'd into products being designed now, so there won't be a big lag time between production commencing and Zennergy drive making into automotive products. Obviously, the testing ground for the products in immediate real application will be the Zenn Cars, and if all goes well, that is just a few months away.

• The primary reason for the high voltage appears to be energy density, the same reason for high voltage transmission lines. The article indicates that the "package unit" will include some type of voltage dividing system, such that the external connections will be at non-hazardous voltage.
• The patent for this device suggests some pretty amazing properties. See Table 1 below (excerpt from the patent). If their supercap comes anywhere near the performance they claim, it will be huge.
• Elsewhere in the patent is a statement that, since the unit does not degrade with charge/discharge cycles, it will last for the life of the product is serves. Even though it weighs 300-400 lbs, you could build it into the body of the vehicle, since it doesn't require periodic replacement. Removing the engine and fuel tank would more than make up for the weight.

This will be interesting to follow.

Discharge rate 0.1% caught my eye... compared with the others.

High volts makes sense with energy stored being proportional to V² but it's finding the point of most efficiency/reliability etc. The electronics to reduce/boost the voltage for discharge/charge has gotta be pretty clever too....

It is remarcable, indeed. I remember that a small car, running on a flat highway, no wind, at 60Km/h, require some 3KW. So, at a cruise speed, I can go to Dallas and return on a charge. At a cost of $7.7 (plus tax). Eat your heart out, Fordexon.

Thanks for keeping us informed Ken. EEstor's device has to be the most interesting (if not elusive) power storage development at the present time. It really all seems legit, I just wish they would keep us all in the loop as they are very secretive of their progress. I am wondering if the electrics are going to be the weakest link, greatly reducing the theoretical specifications when applied in the real world. I wait with baited breath for the chance to get my hands on some real data on a potentially major technological power storage development. I just hope that when it does come along, we are all not disappointed.

I wonder why these guys aren't considering application to automotive:-

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,39292139,00.htm

I suspect they are. One reason laptops are often mentioned is that there is both an existing market and a problem -- laptop battery life is a concern (Whereas, for example, call phone battery life is not, for most users.)

There is no established electric vehicle market, because there is a chicken and egg problem. We don't have highway-capable electric vehicles because we don't have high energy density batteries. We don't have high energy density batteries because there are no cars to put them in. For existing electric vehicles (golf carts, utility carts, fork lift trucks, neighborhood vehicles) lead acid works fine, and in the case of a fork lift, the weight is a plus rather than a minus because it aids vehicle stability when the load is high.

I am glad there are, however, companies thinking about automotive applications. Altair Nano's batteries are great, from all I've read. But the cost is very high -- again a chicken and egg problem. I could easily put $10,000 worth into my very small plug-in hybrid vehicle (or $40,000, even on my tiny vehicle if I wanted to make it elec only with a 200 mile range). But I'd like to be able to sell the entire vehicle for not much more than $10,000 -- it is intended to be fun, but nevertheless simple transportation -- a commuter car.

Hi Ken,

I can't help but throw this one into the mix. With a stated 220 miles per charge with a prototype vehicle.

-John

Good example. The Tesla actually uses zillions of laptop batteries... and might continue to do so, even in production. But imagine a Tesla powered by EEstor. The Tesla has 900 lb of batteries, for 56kWh. The equivalent weight in EEstor units would be more like 150kWh. 600 miles per charge. And if EEstor can delver on their promise of sub lead acid cost, the Tesla would (could) go from $98k to $40 K.

But imagine a Tesla powered by EEstor. The Tesla has 900 lb of batteries, for 56kWh. The equivalent weight in EEstor units would be more like 150kWh. 600 miles per charge. And if EEstor can delver on their promise of sub lead acid cost, the Tesla would (could) go from $98k to $40 K

That just goes to show quite simply how big an impact the EEstor capacitor development could be (even if the final production sample results are less than stated). If anyone is looking for the next great technological leap bandwagon to jump on this is one of them (still I am not getting my hopes up yet, I will just wait and see). Oh the products I could design when I get my hands on this technology .

This just in:

(From a Technology Review article)

• ZENN chief executive Ian Clifford remains optimistic. "Every restatement of delivery time has been for good reasons," he says, suggesting that the Lockheed announcement and the due diligence that led to it "add credibility to the technology." He's now expecting delivery of the energy-storage unit in mid-2008. And it won't be a prototype, he emphasizes: it will be a mass-produced commercial product. "This is about commercialization, not hitting technology roadblocks. We're in constant contact with EEStor, with regular visits to their site. We always come away from every meeting much more excited that this is going to happen."

This sounds fine until he says: "And it won't be a prototype." Doesn't it seem ludicrous to make anything without a prototype (other than tiny injection-molded plastic toys or trinkets)? Even a new engine that you "know" will work, but that might have some glitches to work out needs a prototype. Something brand new, offering order-of-magnitude improvements over the existing technology (which is already pretty advanced) running at dangerous voltages and storing huge amounts of energy just shouts for a prototype and extensive testing before going into production. Clearly, according to the Lockheed release, there is no prototype now. Full production by mid year??

Believability would be enhanced if they were saying something like: "By mid year we expect to have a proof-of-concept prototype, followed by a pre-production prototype by year end. Later, in mid 2009, after 6 months of testing the pre-production prototypes, we will begin to make final tooling for production, provided any issues uncovered in the testing can be overcome quickly. Production units could be available as early as third quarter 2009."

"This is about commercialization, not hitting technology roadblocks." Does any project intentionally hit technology roadblocks?

Hi Ken,

Youe said "This sounds fine until he says: "And it won't be a prototype." Doesn't it seem ludicrous to make anything without a prototype (other than tiny injection-molded plastic toys or trinkets)?"

Might it be that they have an in-house prototype that they believe to be a solid product and are therefore going straight to mass production?

Just a thought

-John

Might it be that they have an in-house prototype that they believe to be a solid product and are therefore going straight to mass production?

I suppose, although the fact that Lockheed has not seen a prototype, and will be working with them to develop one, seems to suggest otherwise. Given the delays and all the skepticism on the web, I'd think they would want to demonstrate a prototype.

Makes sense.

Zenn is probably just trying to say the right things & keep their stock from crashing. Lockheed has very little to lose & much to gain, Zenn is in deep & hopes no one actually pays attention to the implausibility of their public pronouncements. If there was a prototype you would be seeing it everywhere. From 0 to product @ this speed would be unheard of for the leaps EEstor is claiming.

Friend of mine mentioned this in passing...

Any new news? from March30th is the latest I saw.

I listened to the annual meeting of ZENN over the web, and in it they clearly said, when pressed, that even they had never seen a working prototype of the EEstor... even after all these years of hype. Lockheed Martin has also clearly said that they have not seen a prototype.

EEstor claimed to have overcome the hurdle of purity a long time ago, but prior to that, they claimed, once that milestone was achieved, getting the device into production was essentially a done deal - no need for a prototype (???!!!???!!!???). So why no production?

Why no prototype? There are always prototypes, even when the new product is just a revamp of an existing one. A game-changing product, advertising 100 fold improvements over existing tech, built on calculations (in the patent) with which many people disagree, and requiring a complicated charge-discharge controller (capable

I wonder if it is time for the SEC to get involved? This seems like stock pumping to me. I used to think that perhaps they (EEstor) were sincere (but had some errors in their patent), but I am no longer thinking that they are. I wonder how much ZENN knows... really.

I'm probably repeating myself, but why on earth would EEstor partner with a "car" company making glorified golf carts. If the hype were true, then wouldn't they want these things in real cars were there is a real market? If you want to sell (let's say) 100,000 units a year to bring the price to something close to their advertised (cheaper than lead acid) price, then what possible excuse would there be for aiming at the neighborhood vehicle market, in which there is no crying need for longer range, and which is demonstrably a tiny market. Most people in suburbia cannot drive for more than a mile or two before getting on a road with a speed limit over 35 (on which LSVs are illegal). There are loads of real vehicles (RV4, Ford Ranger, etc) that have operated in fleet use as electric vehicles. The only thing holding back a RAV 4 from huge distribution is a great battery. This EEstor (as hyped) would be beyond great, and would enable Toyota to not only sell zillions of RAV4 EVs but would make a Prius plug-in an essentially done deal too. I can only conclude, as others have, that this is mainly about pumping up ZENNs stock.

They talked, in the annual meeting, about the possibility of using other batteries for their "next" vehicle (if it comes to pass), so maybe they are hoping that keeping up investor interest will enable them to fund development of the real car, and that they can eventually get that on the market.

If ZENN were on track as a company, they should be solidly into profitability now, on sales of the existing ZENN, which has been well and thoroughly hyped and promoted. LSVs are old tech and essentially a commodity: golf carts have been around for many decades. I haven't seen their annual report, but I would not be surprised to see continuing losses -- but who knows, maybe the things are selling well in places I do not frequent.

ZENN's whining about their inability to the ZENN in Canada seems silly -- they knew going in that their market would be in the US. Personally, I think Canada's law makes more sense -- a 25 mph maximum vehicle does not belong on public roads. Typical speed on a 35 mph posted road is apt to be 40 mph, and that speed difference is too great for safety. Also, slowing up cars by clogging the roads with NV's does nothing good for acceptance of real electric cars. Unlike the EV1, which showed that electric cars can be fast, fun, and practical, the ZENN demonstrates just the opposite.

I hope ZENN and the EEstor are the real deals. But I'd hoped that ZAP was the real deal too -- the fairly recent Wired article makes it pretty clear that they are not.

Well its been another year and they just had the AGM meeting yesterday. Still the same old same old. Is the SEC going to get involved in this sham or will morons keep crawling out of the woodwork to say, "I believe"????

Is the SEC going to get involved in this sham or will morons keep crawling out of the woodwork to say, "I believe"????

I'd have to say that the level of gullibility is remarkable high at Theeestory.com. The news could be "ESU proven to have no utility whatsoever by Lockheed Martin tests." The spin would be this: 1. "This is proof certain that the device works even better than planned... they are saying this to throw off our enemies!" or 2. "This is great news! This opens up a whole new market area for the ESU as a boat anchor. This will have applications in the recreation, commercial and military sectors. An incredible 75% of the Earth's surface is covered with water!"

There are, however, a couple of rational thinkers at Theeestory.com.

I just like messing with them over at the theeestory.com boards. They are so paranoid. Just post something, ....anything dissing their fairy dust and hilarity ensues.

Yes... if it's a slow night on Saturday Night Live, I stop in at theeestory.com.

Gotta guess that this is just a scam...

Maybe it will fit into the Toxic Asset catagory and we can get a goverment guantee on it.