The ZENN car will be the first commercial application of EEStor's new energy storage system. The company is expecting delivery of the systems later this year.
ZENN Cars
A Texas company says it can make a new ultracapacitor power system to replace the electrochemical batteries in everything from cars to laptops.
A secretive Texas startup developing what some are calling a "game changing" energy-storage technology broke its silence this week. It announced that it has reached two production milestones and is on track to ship systems this year for use in electric vehicles.
EEStor's ambitious goal, according to patent documents, is to "replace the electrochemical battery" in almost every application, from hybrid-electric and pure-electric vehicles to laptop computers to utility-scale electricity storage.
The company boldly claims that its system, a kind of battery-ultracapacitor hybrid based on barium-titanate powders, will dramatically outperform the best lithium-ion batteries on the market in terms of energy density, price, charge time, and safety. Pound for pound, it will also pack 10 times the punch of lead-acid batteries at half the cost and without the need for toxic materials or chemicals, according to the company.
The implications are enormous and, for many, unbelievable. Such a breakthrough has the potential to radically transform a transportation sector already flirting with an electric renaissance, improve the performance of intermittent energy sources such as wind and sun, and increase the efficiency and stability of power grids--all while fulfilling an oil-addicted America's quest for energy security.
The breakthrough could also pose a threat to next-generation lithium-ion makers such as Watertown, MA-based A123Systems, which is working on a plug-in hybrid storage system for General Motors, and Reno, NV-based Altair Nanotechnologies, a supplier to all-electric vehicle maker Phoenix Motorcars.
"I get a little skeptical when somebody thinks they've got a silver bullet for every application, because that's just not consistent with reality," says Andrew Burke, an expert on energy systems for transportation at University of California at Davis.
That said, Burke hopes to be proved wrong. "If [the] technology turns out to be better than I think, that doesn't make me sad: it makes me happy."
Richard Weir, EEStor's cofounder and chief executive, says he would prefer to keep a low profile and let the results of his company's innovation speak for themselves. "We're well on our way to doing everything we said," Weir told Technology Review in a rare interview. He has also worked as an electrical engineer at computing giant IBM and at Michigan-based automotive-systems leader TRW.
Much like capacitors, ultracapacitors store energy in an electrical field between two closely spaced conductors, or plates. When voltage is applied, an electric charge builds up on each plate.
Ultracapacitors have many advantages over traditional electrochemical batteries. Unlike batteries, "ultracaps" can completely absorb and release a charge at high rates and in a virtually endless cycle with little degradation.
Where they're weak, however, is with energy storage. Compared with lithium-ion batteries, high-end ultracapacitors on the market today store 25 times less energy per pound.
This is why ultracapacitors, with their ability to release quick jolts of electricity and to absorb this energy just as fast, are ideal today as a complement to batteries or fuel cells in electric-drive vehicles. The power burst that ultracaps provide can assist with stop-start acceleration, and the energy is more efficiently recaptured through regenerative braking--an area in which ultracap maker Maxwell Technologies has seen significant results.
Rechargeable zinc-air batteries can store three times the energy of a lithium-ion battery.
Recent studies point to the potential of ultracapacitors to augment conventional batteries.
Advances could at last make the high-energy batteries practical.
Big surprise, the Ford guy says it's not applicable and goes out of his way to make it look like a toy calling it suitable for Ray guns.
As far as this working or not working I'll leave that up to the Engineers and scientists. Moskolov's post doesn't mention the increased permitivity due to purity of materials.
I couldn't invest if I wanted to so I'm not losing any money letting them try and hoping they succeed.
Re: Ford putting down electric?
Has anyone told Ford about GM's chevy Volt (Chevolt?)? Or the Tesla? Maybe a 'hotrod' 1916 Detroit?
Perpeutal Motion and othe Hypes
I note this compnay is from Texas.
If they work out of a small building south of Waco it would not surprise me. In the 70's a company in that location bilked investors out of millions with their "Perpeutal Motion" machine which they proudly demonstrated to investors and the media. They were busted when someone finally uncovered the hidden wires which were hooked to the local electric company and provided the "Perpetual" motion.
The free lunch is always tomorrow.
Re: Perpeutal Motion and othe Hypes
Too much speculation and no experience. This, as with all ground breaking ideas, needs the space to breath before it gets shot down. In our society, new innovations that "break" the rules are often judged before they can be released and tested. This one sounds great and should be tested on its merits (and will be) once the product is available to the general public. A little bit of knowledge does not an expert make. I can't wait to see what happens next.
Re: Perpeutal Motion and othe Hypes
I completely agree, of course any time someone NOT affiliated to big business has a daring new idea or concept, he is going to be 'squashed' after of course having had the idea or concept completely stolen right from under their noses IF POSSIBLE - there is major money at stake in the race for new energy sources, and we will all be the better off if we let the wild ideas unfold !!!
go at it boys (or girls who knows! ) - I'm waiting with bated breath and watching that space !!
Re: Perpeutal Motion and othe Hypes
watching from your empty SUV but you inthe drivers seat? Just curious.....
Re: Perpeutal Motion and othe Hypes
Doubt it helps much, but I'm definitely cheering for these guys. What a game changer!! Since the article makes no mention of them looking for outside money, it doesn't sound like a bilking attempt. Unless by some e-car company investors using this to artificially boost the perceived viability of that business long enough to get out ahead. Lots of grassy knolls in Texas....
San Antonio is not spelled San Antonia.
Dielectric is not spelled dialectric.
etc.
hopefully they will put one in my'66 ev porcshe that i am converting! contact me at harmoniousmobility@yahoo.com
are you interested in a great idea? i need a battery man. currently everyone is concentrating on this idea of replacing the gas guzzlers saturating our highways,and long term its the right idea. but Harry isn't ready to junk his new s.u.v. because he'll take a financial loss, he needs to get to the office ,but there's no monorail.to make things harder yet gas is eating away his mad money and his toys are more expensive every day. I have a right now solution that needs a little technical expertise, and it needs the right hands. so can we talk? sleeper365@yahoo.com
Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
In his patent #7033406, Richard Weir, EEstor CEO, cited data published WAY BACK in 1985 from the Japan's Journal of Applied Physics, as basis for the high dielectric property of Barium Titanate (BaTiO3)powder, when coated with aluminum oxide and calcium magnesium aluminosilicated glass. If BaTiO3 capacitor was so good way back in the 1985, the likes of the GM EV1 would be around evey street corners since 1996, or the Prius would have been a PHEV way back in 1997!
What held back coated BaTiO3 powder from becoming a SuperCapacitor was the fact that BaTiO3 has dielectric property that varies by nearly ten folds with just typical seasonal swing in ambient temperature, and the fact that its dielectric property drops by as much with high electrical field strength, as Emosson has brought up!
Apparently Richard Weir didn't know that, since nowhere in his patent did he mention this property of BaTiO3, nor any way to deal with this greatly varying dielectric property of BaTiO3. EEstor's claim of 100x increase in electrical energy storage of ceremic capacitor reflects his unwareness of this knowledge that has barred others from even considering using BaTiO3 as SuperCap.
The following is a verbatim quote from Richard Dean Weir's US patent # 7033406 to illustrate my above point:
"Yet another aspect of the present invention is that the coating of aluminum oxide and calcium magnesium aluminosilicate glass on calcined composition-modified barium titanate powder provides many enhancement features and manufacturing capabilities to the basis material. These coating materials have exceptional high voltage breakdown and when coated onto the above material will increase the breakdown voltage of ceramics comprised of the coated particles from 3.times.10.sup.6 V/cm of the uncoated basis material to around 5.times.10.sup.6 V/cm or higher. The following reference indicates the dielectirc breakdown strength in V/cm of such materials: J. Kuwata et al., "Electrical Properties of Perovskite-Type Oxide Thin-Films Prepared by RF Sputtering", Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1, 1985, 24(Suppl. 24-2, Proc. Int. Meet. Ferroelectr., 6.sup.th), 413-15. This very high voltage breakdown assists in allowing the ceramic EESU to store a large amount of energy due to the following: Stored energy E=CV.sup.2/2, Formula 1, as indicated in F. Sears et al., "Capacitance-Properties of Dielectrics", University Physics, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.: Dec. 1957: pp 468-486, where C is the capacitance, V is the voltage across the EESU terminals, and E is the stored energy. This indicates that the energy of the EESU increases with the square of the voltage. FIG. 1 indicates that a double array of 2230 energy storage components 9 in a parallel configuration that contain the calcined composition-modified barium titanate powder. Fully densified ceramic components of this powder coated with 100 .ANG. of aluminum oxide as the first coating 8 and a 100 .ANG. of calcium magnesium aluminosilicate glass as the second coating 8 can be safely charged to 3500 V. The number of components used in the double array depends on the electrical energy storage requirements of the application. The components used in the array can vary from 2 to 10,000 or more. The total capacitance of this particular array 9 is 31 F which will allow 52,220 Wh of energy to be stored as derived by Formula 1. "
The storage capacity of EEstor's EESU is just a theoretical projection from data by J. Kuwata et al in Jpn Journal of Applied Physics published WAY BACK in 1985. There was no mention of any actual construction nor testing of any of the coated BaTiO3 superCap that was described in the patent! Little did he know...that he may be able to pull a fast one on the venture capitalists, but he has not fooled neither all the scientists nor engineers!
If they have a secret solution to this problem but do not want to disclose it in the patent(s), then legally, by not mentioning this problem in the patent application(s) and hence without a proposed solution to deal with it, this would render their patent(s) worthless due to failure to disclose sufficient information to make the invention operable as claimed. You can confirm this with any patent attorney!
If EEstor would only demonstrate to the world one small capacitor cell of their superduper Cap that support their claim, instead of making us wait for them to complete a whole 15-52kwh car battery...(Just as A123 Battery Firm demonstrated their nanotech Li-phosphate cells in power tools and afterward winning 15 millions from USABC consortium (Battery for Auto's Big 3) and other contracts and other big investments)...then EEstor would have gotten all the millions of dollars research grants and contracts that have gone to A123 instead!!!...How long would it take to build just one capacitor cell to demonstrate the high 330wh/kg energy density that they are claiming?
Perhaps the USABC consortium (Battery for Auto's Big 3) and other energy storage research facilities have hired all the high-caliber electromagnetic physicists to work for them already, leaving venture capital firm Kleiner & Perkins et al with less qualified experts?
Re: Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
I must repeat: the reason why cars were first made with gas engines was NOT because all makers of cars were evil, mean, greedy, cruel, patriarchal oppressors of nature (no matter what my idiot cousin Al Gore says), but because gas engines WORKED! Gas was a by-product, actually a waste product, of oil refining, and thus cheap. Thousands of machine shops existed to tend the simple engines. They stopped making electric cars because the gas ones did better as speeds increased and cities grew broader. Most big car makers today are rightly suspicious of the flashy news about electric car possibilities--remember, they have lost loads of money making electric cars that don't sell, and have not worked well enough to compete.
I pray for the day they will, but I have read right here just too many glossy stories of electric car solutions. Prove it, then the auto world is yours. I hope you can.
Re: Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
There is no proof or even support of proof in the statement or reference to past technology.
I'm not a believer, but all you've shown me with the reference to Weir is that he's done research. I applaud your research, but that's hardly proof of any wrongdoing.
I'll leave his patent concerns to his legal staff.
Why so much effort to discredit EESTOR, time will discredit EESTOR if they deserve it.
They are actually building something, they have 3rd party verification for the purification of materials in a production setting and they have a contract to deliver.
If they fail to deliver that's all the proof I need for scam. If they're vindicated and do deliver, then that's the proof I need for believing.
Re: Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
it's not that car makers/oil companies are EVIL, but we all know that any big business with entrenched interests WILL do all it can to keep it's hold on the market, and protect it's own interests, and because they ARE big they have the resources to do just that - hence the fury from the little guy that HIS/OUR interests are not the priority - ie nothing is happening for the right reasons when the lobbyists get active !! and we need things to happen for the BEST of reasons if possible - so we bitch and moan to try to prevent this pattern and try to sway the outcome - that's all we can do - vote and complain LOUDLY (:>)
Guest (karn)
Re: Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
See the movie "Who Killed The Electric Car?" As an EV1 driver for 5 years, I can say that the movie was completely accurate. Battery technology did *not* kill the EV1. Improved batteries would always be nice to have, but the fact is that EVs are practical *now* for a very large fraction of the population, even with current batteries (especially Li-ion).
It seems that everyone "just knows" that EVs need ranges comparable to gasoline cars to ever be practical. Everybody except those who actually drive them, that is. The ability to charge at home or work without ever going to a gasoline station is a convenience you have to experience to fully appreciate. And actual experience with an EV will also demonstrate that high ranges just aren't all that important.
If anything, faster *chargers* are more important in practice than bigger batteries, though existing medium-power chargers are enough to top off an EV battery overnight.
Re: Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
if the patent makes only a theoretical projection without mentioning well known limitations then why was it accepted to start with. Does the microstructure of the cells somehow prevent breakdown under high electrical fields??
purification of raw material is a far cry from a working prototype. So I wonder how they are going to stick to schedule. Either they are really operating in stealth or maybe its hype. If they are really close to a working prototype then stealth would be counter productive.
Guest (Neilzero)
Re: Further evidences of EEstor's hype!
Roger Pharm typed, BaTiO3 has dielectric property that varies by nearly ten folds with just typical seasonal swing in ambient temperature
Does that mean we can charge the ultra capacitor to 360 volts at minus 20 f and the capacitor voltage increases to 3500 volts if the ultra cap warms to 140 f? That should have some great applications, but not so good for an electric car, if the watthour capacity is lots lower hot than EEStore hopes. Neil
I'm not saying they are the holy grail in storage. They may not be able to actually produce anything useful.
But, for the doubters quoting other's research that it won't work, or that this kind of innovation can only come from large companies, that argument doesn't fly. One of the biggest technology breakthroughs in recent history, the Blue LED flys in the face of both these arguments. It was perfected by Shuji Nakamura while working at Nichia (A small, pretty much unknown Japanese chemical company). Nakamura took a path most scientists in the field had discounted as unworkable. But this lone researcher and his hunch payed off.
---"Meanwhile, back in November 1993, Nichia announced its blue LED, promising at the same time that a blue laser was under development. Nichia's devices are made from an entirely different compound material, gallium nitride. The announcement caught the rest of the industry with its pants down. Gallium nitride had long been written off as fatally flawed. Making a diode requires both positive and negative types of material, and no one had been able to make positive-type gallium nitride."---
Back to EEstor... Nano-processing of materials has changed the playing field. Carbon is a pretty common and not teribly exciting, but carbon nanotubes have some totally unforseen properties. It is entirely possible that using modern processing technology, the properties of BaTiO3 are different than those published in the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics in 1985. Nakamura proved this quite dramatically in GaN.
EEstor may be the next Nichia/blue laser, or they may just be the next 100mpg magnetic fuel-ionization carburator. Time will tell.
Here's a hypothetical for everyone to ponder:
Let's say you are a technology journalist and write a popular "clean technology" blog that people use to inform their investing. You notice that every time you have news to pass on about EEstor, through your own writing or by posting stories on your blog, the stock of the only EEstor-affiliated company offering stock jogs up at least 50% for a few days, and then glides slowly back down to close to its previous level. It does that because EEstor's claims are so radical and paradigm changing (if true) that people keep nervously jumping in and out of the related stock, hoping to be ahead of the Big, Official Proof of Concept announcement, hoping to make a killing when the stock zooms up like Google did in august 2004.
If you knew when to buy and always got back out in time, several of these little pre-proof "bounces" could add up to a lot of profit. After all, for people who bought Google shares at the start of 2006, they only increased in value 22% - not 50%.
Would you consider doing any of the following?
Buying on the low, then posting an article, and selling at the 50% high? Rinse and repeat?
Posting favorable analysis anonymously on your own and other technology blogs to keep the game going when some of the physics majors out there start pointing out a huge hole in EEstor's patent reasoning?
I'm really starting to wonder.
I guess that's always possible with any journalist or blogger. But the story comes across as balanced - you've got two engineers dissing the technology. EEStor's claims are interesting, despite being controversial.
And after a quick search on Hamilton's blog, I see nothing overly boosterish about EEStor; aside from some genuine interest in the company's progress. You're a pretty skeptical dude JRIP. You should chill out.
Interesting hypothesis, but I don't think there's a way to profit by attempting to "influence" the stock in this case. Isn't EESTOR a private company? There's no way to buy or sell stock.
On the other hand, putting out a hype article about a company that's been closed-lipped as a way to spike your website traffic. So it's not totally beyond suspicion that the whole things a fraud.
Certainly the ZENN guys that are building electric cars in Canada are for real.
It's not exactly like they've said they'll be ready in 10 years, this is stuff they're promising in less than 6 months. Why not give them a chance to deliver?
The EEstor-affiliated company is Zenn Motor Company. ZNN on the Toronto Stock Exchange <URL:http://www.tsx.com/>
why knock a possible great advance in American ingenuity? Get behind it and build off of it for the betterment of us all!!as for the stock cheaters, 3 letters should come to mind...S.E.C.
Guest (Neilzero)
Corporations typically exaggerate, and projection typically exceeds reality. Let's assume EEStor produces a 102 pound, low cost, reliable, 29 farrad instead of 31 at 3000 volts instead of 3500 volts that stores 11 kilowatt hours for a few hours, which drops to 9 kilowatt hours in 72 hours due to leakage. It is still twice as good as the battery pack for the Tesla roadster, in nearly all respects.
Since the competition is likely also exagerating, EEStor "batteries" may enjoy the top for several years, even if they make only slight improvements during the mass production years. Of course it is possible EEStor will forever remain insignificant. I wish them success as a good battery is important to reducing our dependence on Arab oil.
An electric car can use a separate motor for each of the 4 wheels, the motors can be in series, so operation at 3000 volts = 750 volts per motor is not a big problem. Some of the auxillary systems can operate at 750 volts and be bridged across the motors that need less torque, briefly. Neil
Except doesn't the voltage go down as its discharged, what will that do to the system?
This sadly points out another of the many areas where our current president and administration have utterly failed. One of the most effective ways to win the “war on terror” is to cut the terrorist's funds. Most of the terror money comes directly or indirectly from oil. Getting off oil really means to stop using oil for transportation. Developing a good battery would do exactly this.
We should be in about year 4 of a huge federal research effort to develop alternate sources of energy storage (energy generation is an easier problem, lots of possibilities: solar, wind, geothermal, nuclear…). What is lacking are good ways to store energy. We need this just from looking at the war on terror, the fact that it also would solve other pressing problems such as climate change, geopolitical instability of oil sources, and the end of cheap oil (not end of oil, but end of cheap oil extraction) are just further incentives.
Where is the “do or die” pull out all the stops national emergency research program(s) to address this? Bush’s biography can be summed up: “Asleep at the wheel”.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
I agree completely. Bush was smart enough to work with Carl Rove to get himself elected via relgious right and most of the conservatives in corporate business. What he forgot about is that the country belongs to Joe Sixpack, and now after 6 years, Joe Sixpack has finally educated himself about the presidents weaknesses. I am ashamed the European Community figured him out correctly in the beginning, ie. not a statesman like his father, who actually put his life on the line in a war, but more of a Texas big ego cowboy, who felt presidential and military power was the answer to all the problems of the world. I never met a Texan who didn't have trouble controlling his big state ego. What a shame to have that ego in our lands highest public office ? If offered the choice, I will never again vote for a presidential candidate who has not been active on our militarys front lines, and understands from that experience, military strengths and weaknesses in carrying out American foreign policy. Geez, I miss those days of Ike in the 50's. But....without control of congress I am hoping Prez Bush will finally get a few things right in next couple of years.
I believe in using tax incentives sparingly and wisely. Battery research and development incentives I would strongly support, ethanol incentives I would not support (and I was raised on a midwest farm). Well, rethinking that, if Detroit would ever increase the compression ratio to effectively make use of the high octane number in ethanol, and thereby get ethanols effeciency improved, I might support it. Flex vehicles are a joke, dropped on the American public by congressional commitee chairs from Detroit and Houston in my opinion ? Well OK, ethanol is greener and safer than the now discontinued former high octane additives.
I think batteries have a better future for a green automotive energy source than fuel cells. Why spend all the $ to set up hydrogen storage and distribution systems when you already have the needed electricty destribution systems almost ready and now in place ?
Nuclear is only a short term answer, but it may be the only short term answer we have if we want to get off oil in a really major way.
I voted for and strongly supported John Kennedy in my youth, but now believe we should have stopped funding NASA years ago, and used those monies to work on the real problems present here on earth. There should be time in the future, after we get this worlds health, terrorism, wars, global warming etc. things taken care of here, to once again satisfy human curiosity by exploring the universe and space.
Re the capacitor claims by this small company, hope they have something, but at this point I doubt it. I tend to agree there may be a significant weakness based the analysis of the patent provided earlier re negative temperature effects. If they had the problem solved, it needed to be in the patent. But this is not an area where I have any technical expertise......
Does anyone know a way I could invest a few dollars in 123A ? I once had a college class in electrochemistry, maybe thats one reason their approach seems more appealing ?
Re: Batteries and energy policy
First things first, pull your head out. Not everything is about politics, and the more people like you try to make it about politics, the more screwed up it gets. Besides that, you're obviously not educated enough to speak on the subject.
I find the number of naysaysers who attack something are directly related to the importance of a development, and usually an indicator of how possible something is. I hope this is a viable product, and will suspend my disbelief until such time as this company produces something.
I'm constantly reminded of the lack of foresight when I read the Western Union quote to Alexander Graham Bell concerning the telephone....
"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." --Western Union internal memo, 1876.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
naturlm was correct in the assessment of politics becoming involved in technology advancement. Part of the reason for the EV-1 getting killed was the administration pushing fuel cells. That was a smoke screen to get attention away from a very good EV. It was interesting that Pres. Bush mentioned getting America off foreign oil when he pushed and got a huge tax incentive passed to drive Gas Hog Suu-Veeee's. A much larger incentive than the one to drive Hybrids.
The Eestor does sound too good to be true but we should only have a short time to wait and find out. I also hope it works.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
You make a lot of good points. I have some corrections/clarifications:
• Although G.W. Bush was governor of TX, and acts like a Texan, it is just that - an act - he grew up and went to college in New England
• NASA projects led to crucial improvements in solar cells, fuel cells, and many other technologies; they have more than paid back what was invested
• 123A is a private company; contact them via
http://www.a123systems.com/html/contact.html
if you want to invest.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
naturlm says he believes "we should have stopped funding NASA years ago, and used those monies to work on the real problems present here on earth. There should be time in the future, after we get this worlds health, terrorism, wars, global warming etc. things taken care of here, to once again satisfy human curiosity by exploring the universe and space."
Facts are:
- NASA gets pennies compared the dollars that other government organizations get and waste, and NASA returns more on the money it spends, than many of those others. NASA works in many scientific areas that most people know nothing about--they don't just launch spacecraft, probes, etc., but even the spacecraft and probes contribute to knowledge that can be applied to Earth.
- Exactly when in the future do you believe that we'll "get this worlds health, terrorism, wars, global warming etc. things taken care of"? If we waited till then to fund NASA, NASA would never get funded, especially when you throw in "etc". Besides, you don't wait to satisfy human curiosity as basic as that which NASA explores.
- Why single out NASA? Why not cut off funding for a lot of other, more expensive, less productive programs until we get all our problems straightened out?
First I want to mention that I really hope that EEStor isn't vapor, since nuclear power wasn't the topic of this blog.
Tyler, I want you to investigate the real cost of nuclear power. What exactly does it cost to store radioactive material (practically) forever? By my calculations, that’s quite a bit more than any other form of energy. This kind of short sightedness will mortgage our nations future and make a very few people really rich.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
Agrree, mostly.
But the crash program should have begun about 34 years ago, not 4 years ago... ;-b
Re: Batteries and energy policy
It's not that it wasn't started 30 years ago, it's that it was ended 27 years ago. Look at Carter's speech: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_energy.html
He even installed photovoltaic panels on the white house, which Reagan had removed. Clinton proposed a similar and much more explicit energy policy early in his first term. Imagine where we would be if Carter had been listened too. He has clearly been vindicated.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
Yeah, but then they couldn't blame George. And they have an overriding need to do that.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
You're right. Thank everybody's imaginary friend in the sky that we have an anti-science, data-hiding, Incurious George presidunce to blame. That is SO much more important than getting research done that might help make us less dependent on the Bush family's Saudi cronies.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
State of the Union, Bush proposed Congress authorize doubling the US strategic reserve. IIRC, that will be to two billion barrels. I think that speaks volumes.
Re: Batteries and energy policy
Wow. A government buy that large will make a really nice windfall subsidy for the oil industry. It'll help prop prices up, too. Wait - wasn't one purpose of that reserve to help discourage price run-ups like what we've just gone through?
Re: Batteries and energy policy
Such views are idiotic. The President is not a "King" who can shape things to his will.
Why don't we have clean nuclear fusion??
I know, let's blame it all on Dubbya! If he hadn't invaded Iraq, all the worlds' ills would be solved!
Grow up.
How do you deliver 15KWH into an energy storage unit in a vehicle at home in 10 minutes?
You need a peak energy capacity of 90KWH to achieve a 10 minute charge.
Even if the owner installed a 3 phase hookup the device would, with 100% efficiency in conversion from AC to DC, consume 187.5 amps of current for 10 minutes.
That seems a bit impractical to me even ignoring how one would achieve 100% efficiency.
Perhaps they are going to sell you two ESU's? One in the vehicle and the other slowly charging up at a more practical charge rate and then use some 3500V DC transfer process to dump 15KWH into the vehicle in 10 minutes? Even that would involve handling a peak current of 26 amps at 3500V.
I think the point of the "10 minutes" number was that an ultracapacitor doesn't intrinsically have a long charge time; if you can pump the power in at 187 amps, it can absorb it.
However, if you assume a 1 hour charge time, it's under 32 amps; similar to an electric range.
On another topic: sensitivity to low temperatures is a non-issue. As a practical matter, people who live in climates where -40º C occurs - maybe 1 in a million car owners? - generally have garages and plug-in engine heaters, because lubricants are too viscous to work properly at those temperatures. The vast majority of cars never experience even -25ºC.
I'm sorry, but that projection is not at all accurate. As an example, Calgary, AB, CA reached a temerature of -30.6 degrees Celcius on November 28th of this year. that's a city of just over one MILLION people, not to mention the surrounding cities of Banff, Lake Louise, and even Edmonton, another large city. And while many residents have garages, few are heated. All cars sold also come with block heaters up there, but that's only handy if you've got a plug, meaning anyone living in an apartment or townhouse or condo that doesn't have that available with their parking can't use it.
There are many additional cities in Canada and the northern US that see temps in the -20 to -30 range. not to mention European and eurasian cities. They drive too, you know.
So I've got to point out that many cars do indeed regularly see lower temps than -25C. It helps to think globally instead of nationally when dealing with a potential technology that would (if it works) absolutely havea global impact.
Guest (karn)
There are three more-or-less "standard" power classes of EV chargers.
Class 1 uses what you can pull from an ordinary 120V convenience outlet, about 1800W @ 15A. The portable "convenience charger" carried in the Gen 1 EV1's trunk was a class 1 charger. Most home "conversion" EVs also use Class 1 chargers.
Class 2 is about 6 kW, roughly what an electric clothes dryer takes, and requires hard-wiring to a 240V supply. The EV1, Honda EV+ and several other EVs all used Class 2 chargers consuming about 30A @ 240V.
Class 3 is about 50 kW. GM built a prototype class 3 inductive charger for the EV1, but they never put it into production. Obviously such a load is difficult to handle in a residence, so it would normally be a public recharging station fed with 3-phase 480V.
The Tesla proposes a fast charger that draws 70A @ 240V (16.8kW). This is still within the capability of most homes, especially at night when other large loads are off. Based on my 5 years of experience driving the EV1, this increase in charging speed over the 6kW EV1 charger would be very nice to have.
I'm a machine learning dude, quite useless here.
Could one of you EE majors discuss the potential and problems of inductive charging?
Couldn't you make roadways with sections of underground inductive charging where you get an electrical boost from driving over it while your monetary charge account gets a dent? Sort of like gas stations on the go. Using this, maybe your battery/hyper-capacitor wouldn't need to have such a large range.
How fast could you pragmatically transfer energy this way?
Guest (Neilzero)
I hope scotty will forgive me for copy, paste and edit of his post. scotty1024 01/23/2007 4:07 PM
How do you deliver 15KWH into an energy storage unit in a vehicle at home in 10 minutes?
Me: Your utilty has several thousand volts, single phase, on a pole about one hundred feet from your house. They will run this into your house for about $1000, and they will charge you a higher rate if you use 90 kw a few minutes per day. This is called use of demand. They will also charge you extra because your charger will distort their sine wave significantly. If you want even faster charging they will likely charge you more than $1000 for the hookup. If you use a second ultra capacitor to limit the charge rate they may give you a reduced rate as you will be doing power factor correction, and less sine wave distortion. With good luck you won't need a transformer. You may also get a reduced rate if you charge slower after midnight.
scotty: You need a peak energy capacity of 90KW to achieve a 10 minute charge.
scotty: Even if the owner installed a 3 phase hookup, the device would, with 100% efficiency in conversion from AC to DC, consume 187.5 amps of current for 10 minutes.
Me: That is high for average, I think. Perhaps somewhat more when you first start charging the discharged ultra capacitor, unless you add a costly constant current device. The electric utility will likely charge you $10,000 for a three phase hook up in a typical residential neigborhood.
scotty: That seems a bit impractical to me even ignoring how one would achieve 100% efficiency.
Me: 98% efficiency is possible if you can avoid using a transformer. If the power company voltage is a bit low, you can cool the ultra capacitor perhaps as cold as minus 20 f until the charge is complete. The capacitor voltage will rise as the ultra capacitor warms, assuming the ultra capacitor has a negative temperature coefficient of capacitance.
scotty: Perhaps they are going to sell you two ESU's? One in the vehicle and the other slowly charging up at a more practical charge rate and then use some 3500V DC transfer process to dump 15KWH into the vehicle in 10 minutes? Even that would involve handling a peak current of 26 amps times 6 = 156 amps at 3500V.
Me: 26 amps is average for a 60 minute transfer time. Perhaps 200 amps the first minute of 6 minutes, unless you add a costly constant current device.
Things get really difficult if you want to put 100 KWH in your big SUV in ten minutes. The Tesla roadster uses a 53 KWH battery for a 200 mile range, so EE must be thinking a tiny car. Your extra ESU can power your house if the utility is blacked out, but you need 3 or 4 special design inverters with inputs in series for 3500 volts.
I'm wondering how EE will switch 3500 volts to provide a near constant output voltage to the load as the ESU nears discharged? 3500 volt solid state relays are costly even at low current. Neil
Hi all, one question for you.
Isn't barium a radioactive isotope?
Seems to be if and when this device fails your are going to have major waste disposal problems down the road.
If it is discharged with a wire across both terminals it should heat up and radiate, or at a full maximum charge it should heat up and radiate due to extra electrons bouncing around.
Not sure which way it goes.
Can someone test it for me with a dosimeter?
Thanks
Sincerely;
Draq Wraith
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
Radioactive isotopes are not a problem in any way. ENRITCHED radioactive isotopes are, as well as artificial radioactive isotopes.
Why would there be a problem with disposing of an element taken from nature? If you take material X from a mine, use it and then dispose it in an environment similar to the one you took it from, it wouldn't produce any damage to the environment.
If you take a material that has an extremely low concentration of a cetain isotope and concentrate it thousands of times, that's a more difficult waste to dispose of, but still feasible without impact. The real problem comes from artificial isotopes. If you take an isotope with a half life of a billion years and transform it into an isotope with a half life of a thousand years, significantly more radioactive, THAT's a thing that's difficult to dispose of.
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
No, barium has lots of stable isotopes. In fact, (according to Wikipedia) all of its radioactive isotopes are synthetic. Natural barium isn't radioactive at all.
Possibly you are thinking of radium, which is one row under barium on the periodic table, and is indeed extremely radioactive?
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
Dear zwol; No, I am thinking of Hospitals use of barium enema's for radiology to get a picture of the rectum. I guess it could be made to preform for just that purpose.
And It also states all "All water or acid soluble barium compounds are extremely poisonous"
That is the part that gets me thinking this is not a very green (By green I mean cradle to cradle recycling) technology. Everyone who has had a radio or player of some kind has had a capacitor fail or a resistor fail. These devices will fail at some point in the life cycle and when they do it will more than likely be thrown away in a landfill. This technology is a good start but lets hope they find a more earth friendly way to do it.
D~W
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
The barium compound (a suspension of barium sulfate) used in radiography isn't radioactive. Quite the opposite, it is opaque to X-rays (gamma rays) and is used to add contrast to radiographs of the intestines and urinary tract, enabling the radiologist to better see tissues that would otherwise lack detail.
Even though barium is toxic, barium sulfate can be used safely because it is so insoluble in gastric juices and is completely eliminated by the digestive tract.
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
Sodium and Chlorine are extremely dangerous and poisonous, yet common salt, NaCl, in small amounts is an essential mineral in our diet
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
environmentally friendly?
compared to what? Lead-acid batteries lasting a mere 500-700 cycles?
ICEs producing countless dangerous substances during it's hot and inefficient short lifetime?
for everybody's sake i hope EEStor delivers and be the enabler to go electric and change our mobility for ever.
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
Green would refer to it's collateral impact not it's owner/users/customers/etc. aspect.
Toxic is not the antonym especially if it rendered people extinct. The polar bears etc. would have less of a challenge surviving global warming for that then if we manage to hang around.
AM I wrong about this? I thought 'green' referred to the earth and future days beyond our mortality or even that of our species. It's the external aspects of gadget or conduct that matter most. Bring poisons and hazards closer to people is not relevent to assessing greeness.......
Re: Hum doesn't sound very green
Just in case anyone is confused by the original (very poorly informed) comment in this thread, barium (like every other element up to lead, except technetium) exists as stable isotopes under natural conditions. Like every other element (including carbon, hydrogen and oxygen), it has radioactive isotopes which only occur naturally at very low levels.
And the barium used in hospitals is, indeed, non-radioactive.
Interesting topic and conversation. I was just reading about the GM EV1 program and how they destroyed all the the vehichles that were being driven. I use to see them here in Scottsdale and all of the sudden they were gone. After a bit of research, it reeks of big oil & auto companies squashing innovation because it is a threat to their bottom line. Now it seems that the bottom line is the ability to keep our air clean and our future free of global warming. Since this forum seems to be of an educated mind-set, I was hoping I could know your thoughts. Cheers..
Joe:
Electric vehicles alone can’t preserve us from a climate disaster, as long as electricity is produced by burning coal. However, the technology to produce clean electricity at a competitive price exists. With concentrated solar power (CSP) the entire primary energy consumption of North-America could be covered by only a fraction of the available desert areas:
http://www.ez2c.de/ml/solar_land_area
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_Solar_Power
CSP plants in California have been working reliably for 20 years and produced more electricity than all photovoltaic panels combined. Each km2 of desert receives corresponding to 1.5 million barrels of oil annually, or a layer 24 cm deep. Already now “solar fuel” can compete with oil at 50$/barrel.
http://www.trecers.net/index.html
http://www.trecers.net/downloads/GCREADER.pdf
European governments have started to invest in clean, sustainable energy, while the Bush administration is still wasting your money to defend black oil. In order to tackle climate change and fossil fuel depletion, we need an immediate (inter)national program, comparable in its dimensions to the Apollo project. The suffering automobile industry could find an honorable and profitable enterprise in building thousands of km2 of thermal solar power plants from steel and glass. An investment that would provide us and our children with clean energy as long as the sun shines on earth…
http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/index.htm
Very well said. Stopping Global warming should be our # 1, 2 and 3 priority. If we could get away from using so much oil many of our other problems would take care of themselves.
Some advances in solar panels make them cost effective for use on private homes. The holy grail of $1 per watt is in sight and at that point a private setup would pay for itself in 5 years.
Do you realize what you sound like when you are driven to try and blame George Bush for every problem? I don't like practically anything he does but get real and stop trying to lay the blame for every problem at his feet. He has been President for 6 years. Any CSP plant that is not operating today is not his fault. How long do you think it takes to come up with the plan, find and educate investors and secure financing, find a location, buy the land (or negotiate leases,) design, and build a large CSP plant. Come on. We have many problems but they all did not start 6 years ago. 60 years ago? Who knows. If you do not like the president, then give some money to somebody, campaign for them, be sure and vote for them (unlike all the celebrities that mouth off and oops forget to register) and your problem is solved. (If a few other people agree with you)
You're right. We're all acting like Bush is responsible for executive dept. agencies like the EPA distorting data and sitting for years on reports that disagree with the Republican agenda and then, when the Dems got into a majority in congress, actually shredding those reports and the supporting data that came with them. I mean, it's not as if Bush didn't pay for all that research, not the American people. Oh, wait - the American people DID pay for that research. But never mind. We shouldn't blame Bush for what his agencies do. Six years is not NEARLY long enough to initiate new and actually innovative programs. Shame on us.
Yes, madmarty is right. We can't blame George, after all he did what any Oil Executive would do. We can however blame anyone that did not have the insight to see that and voted for him. The tree huggers are being proven correct and it is hard for the neo-right-wingers to admit they were wrong. They wanted so much to believe that it is OK to drive gas hog Suuu-Veee's and ignore the environment because Rapture was coming. But wait, that was last June. Still here?
Let’s not forget that it was the tree huggers that killed the nuclear industry. Wind and Solar are great but have no where near the energy density required to provide us the quality of life we (not to mention the rest of the world) want to enjoy. If we had been building nuclear plants as opposed coal and natural gas plants it would make more of a difference than if all the cars on the planet were removed. Tree huggers are a major part of the problem!
I don't think the small minority of tree huggers could kill the nuclear industry, a couple of accidents along with disposing of the waste and quantity of resources available did. Texas has enough wind power to power the nation and a small portion of the California Desert has enough solar power to power the country. Bush spent enough money on Iraq to build a large number of Wind Generators and Solar collectors (much more cost effective than PV's). I believe it is better to collect solar energy than dump nuclear waste.
I need to make a correction. According to the study completed by the Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, North Dakota could supply 1/4 the U.S. electricity demand. Texas is slightly less. Transmission capacity would not allow this however. We would have needed to expand the clean air act starting in late 1970's when scientists first realized global warming was a problem. Instead the newly elected president in 1981 cut funding, cut CAFE standards and removed the solar panels from the white house. It is in all likely hood it is too late to stop the caps from melting but that does not mean we bury our heads in the sand. Developing products like this ultracap making EV’s feasible would be a start.
If you bury your head in the sand while the caps melt, won't you get water up your nose?
I say, let the place warm up. Then we can clone the dinosaurs, discover the cancer-saving properties of pre-Cambrian vegetation, and move to Antarctica to play checkers with Cthulhu.
Sorry, that was off-topic: I am fully confident in the ability of this Jew to produce a working flux-capacitator.
Ran: ReAd the meSSage backWards using the secret IlluminAti decoDer on a $1 biLl tO find my meSsagE to youR mom.
"Transmission capacity would not allow this, however"
$500 billion would buy a LOT of transmission capacity. Too bad it's been flushed down an Iraqi toilet.
Small company from TX vs. the scientific community
Let's see on one hand we have a small company nobody has ever heard of from TX that claims a 10x improvement on battery technology on the other hand we have thousands of scientists with peer reviewed research and publications that have been working on this for years...Hmm, let's see, who do we believe..?
Then there is also the fact that in the President's address he mentions a need for reducing gas consumption and surprise! just around that time some no-name company from TX has just the solution for the problem...Coincidence? - I think not.
This trick has been played many times and it is sort of a high level "get rich quick" scheme targeted at rich investors who are not very technologically savvy _but_ who think they are. These are the kind of people who would also invest in "free energy" machines as long as the "inventor" manages to carefully use some scientific sounding terminology -- like "flux capacitors" ;) for example. Then the investors think they found the next Google or Microsoft and give them the cash.
Later on the company cites some minor technical difficulty and that their product is "just around the corner" until it is liquidated. Then company owners get lots of money. (It is more complicated than that but that is the basic ideas).
Re: Small company from TX vs. the scientific community -smell like Nichia...
Again, take a look at Nichia, Nakamura and the blue LED. Small company, single engineer, and a compound (GaN) that other scientists, peer review, and large companies had discounted as 'impossible'. But we have blue LEDs white LED's , and blue laser diodes made from an 'unworkable' material, due to this one man and a small chemical company that only made phosphors at the time.
Sometimes the scientific community is wrong. the scientific community once thought that disease killed of the dinosaurs, and not an asteroid. Scientists and engineers thought the "Sound Barrier" was unbreakable by a manned aircraft until Chuck Yeager did it. They aren't always right.
Re: Small company from TX vs. the scientific community -smell like Nichia...
Alright, so you found 3 examples.. Ok, maybe 4. That is against thousands of counterexamples of fake companies claiming that they've solved the world's energy problems just so they can pocket some cash.
Going by your logic playing, the lottery is also profitable and everyone should do it, because "look! so and so won a $100M!"
Re: Small company from TX vs. the scientific community -smell like Nichia...
Gonzo your point though is that you made by analogy which you seem to abandon in reply going to poorly to lottery/lightning striking cliche.
I had not considered the Chomskian basis of skepticisim here; that what's endangered is the flow of oil if people are not hustled into believing that it won't be need in the future.
Flush out your argument by assessing the politics and/or gullibility of the Angel. He's well known for this company. He could hear the merit of your observations implication. But then that MIGHT BE THE REASON THEY have been so modest even now. That ride IN not ON bike is far more GRAND and much more widely respected to boot.
The walrus stretcheed out from arm to arm on our couch though is with technoology almost able to power cars, and the step being well before that obsolescing them altogether, why is this news at all? Why would anyone want a car if a bike frame using what's available now can do far better for us in every way then any car size contraption could ever do regardless of what's under the hood? WHY?
Re: Small company from TX vs. the scientific community -smell like Nichia...
Please stop doing whatever you are to your mind. I read your post numerous times and am lost. What are you trying to say?
Re: Small company from TX vs. the scientific community
Oh oh - are you saying flux capacitors don't actually deliver free unlimited power from that place where quantum, uh, you know, weird stuff happens? My wife is gonna be SO mad...
This may or may not work out. But something like this eventually will. When it does, I believe it's potential is as revolutionary as any revolution that humans have yet experienced. The pure opportunity of it is wonderful. Although militaries are always looking for new ways to kill people, I hope that this type of change can make the world a better place.
Hype + Secretive = Wait and See
I'm always in favor of any R & D in the direction of green technologies. Still, I tend to take a wait and see approach whenever I see heavy publicity and flat-out hype combined with secret projects. A recent case in point was the Segway scooter which fell way short of the life-altering hype. I'd be really love to be pleasantly surprised in this instance though.
http://ecotalityblog.com
Re: Hype + Secretive = Wait and See
Hype + Secretive = Sell some stock. Alt energy is a very hot market, and there's way more hype than substantive technology or real plans for production. I couldn't agree with you more...we'll just see what happens after Zenn gets a stock boost and Altair and A123 take a nasty hit.
A Fundamental Flaw That Leads To More-than-100-times-overly Estimated Permittivity
Like many of the readers I got very excited when I first glanced over the article. Who wouldn’t? After all, if the company can truly deliver what it promised for, who isn’t able to recognize its potential and enormous impact to the society and to our daily lives?
However, the more details I read into it, the more skeptical I became about the ultracapacitor’s estimated performance and the company’s approach to achieving it. In fact, I started to feel so strongly about something fundamentally wrong about it, that I studied the relevant patent documents mentioned in the article, and confirmed the existence of a fundamental flaw in the company’s patented technology. And, my findings about it are explained below in as much plain English as it allows.
Details about the company’s key technology and approach to the ultracapacitor-based power system can be found in US patent #7,033,406. In essence, it relies on the wrapping of the conventional high-permittivity barium-titanate-based grains (each is about 1 micron in size, with a permittivity as high as 33,5000) with two insulative coatings (each is about 10 nm in thickness, including alumina, with a permittivity of only about 10), hoping to improve the stability and performance of the capacitor by reducing potential current leakage in and/or through the conventional high-permittivity barium-titanate-based grains.
A fundamental flaw is found regarding it’s way to calculate the reduction in effective permittivity of the entirety of the grains wrapped with the coatings. The calculation was based on the assumption that the coatings would only cause a reduction of 12% in permittivity from that of the barium-titanate-based grains, and concluded that the entirety of the grains wrapped with the coatings could still have an overall permittivity as high as 29,480.
Unfortunately, such assumption is fundamentally wrong, because the reduction in permittivity in the entirety of the grain wrapped with the two insulativecoatings is mainly determined by the nature of the series connection between the grain and the coated films along the electrical field direction. It is equivalent to the case of two series-connected capacitors, one with its capacitor dielectric layer being formed of the barium-titanate grain and the other with its capacitor dielectric layer being formed of the two insulative coatings.
And, the correct calculation about the effective permittivity for the entirety of the grain wrapped with the two insulative coatings should be based on the equation:
Kgc = (Dg + Dc)x(Kg x Kc)/(Kg x Dc + Kc x Dg)
Here, Kg, Kc and Kgc denote the permittivities for the grain, the two insulating coatings, and, the entirety of the grain wrapped with the two insulating coatings, respectively; while Dg and Dc refer to the thicknesses of the grain and the two insulating coatings, respectively.
Accordingly, it is always true that:
Kgc < (Dg + Dc)x(Kg x Kc)/(Kg x Dc );
i.e.,
Kgc < (Dg + Dc) x Kc / Dc;
or,
Kgc < 260,
given that the size of the barium-titanate-based grain Dg is about 1 micron, the total thickness of the two coatings is about 40 nm for each grain, and the permittivity of the coatings is about 10, regardless how purified barium-titanate-based powders has or will have been achieved by the company.
So, the effective permittivity of the entirety of the grain and its two coatings is always less than about 250, which is less than one percent of the permittivity of 29,480 as what was originally estimated by the company.
As a result, the correctly estimated achievable energy density in the ultracapacitor based on the company’s technology should also be correspondingly less than one percent of what the company originally promised for.
Of course, in reality, not every grain can be coated with the insulative coatings exactly in the manner as originally intended by the company. It may results in some minor fluctuation in the maximum achievable effective permittivity through the company’s technology; but, nothing appears to be able to substantially offset the significant reduction in the effective permittivity inherently caused by the two low-permittivity insulating coatings in the technology.
Given what I have found here, can anyone still call the company’s technology a “game-changing” breakthrough?
For those who would like to know more details of my finds, you are welcome to contact me for further discussion.
What is your assumption about what happens to the coatings during the sintering and hot-isostatic pressing? I have the impression that one of the purposes of the coatings is to reduce or eliminate the porosity of the solidified ceramic. What would be the effect of replacing air-filled pores with the coating material?
Have you looked at patents 6,078,494 and 6,268,054, cited as references in the EEStor patent? Do you think that they shed any light on this subject?
Although it seems that the Electrical Engineering community is willing to duke this one out, not unlike the debate between Tesla and Edison over AC or DC power production (and everyone thought Tesla was wrong then too -- however, jokes on Edison) I have some very simple questions:
Assuming this new battery works - can it survive an electrical magnetic pulse from a nuclear bomb detonation, extreme desert heat, cold artic air or even daily wear and tear? Having a breakthrough in a stifled area of science is one thing -- knowing the short and long term dependability and implementations of that technology is something completely different.
One of the main reasons for the current battery technology (from a military perspective) is that they can survive on the shelf for years and can be used in shielded equipment long after the delicate generators and electrical grid are toast. I would seriously like to see (still assuming this is a real discovery) the EMP impact, flow weather survivability and long-term durability numbers on this product with possibility some real numbers on its shelf life during and after storage.
To many “breakthroughs” in science are rushed to market for a quick buck due to the advent of “eureka science” and multi-billion dollar contracts. It may be a great battery, but if I can pour a glass of water on it and kill it, it does not do me, or the world at large, any real good.
Cheers
Yeah, I was totally going to buy a Toyota Camry, but then I thought, 'Wait, can it survive the electrical magnetic impulse from a nuclear detonation?' Sorry, Toyota: pass.
And then I was going to buy a Dell laptop, but I thought, 'If I can pour a glass of water on it and kill it, it does not do me any good.' Sorry, Dell: no sale.
So I bought a titanium spork.
Re: A Fundamental Flaw That Leads To More-than-100-times-overly Estimated Permittivity
Hello MIT2918,
I am a patent attorney and would like to work with you in an reexamination of EEstor's patent. No attorney's fees, I just need you to provide more technical information on the inoperability of their invention. please respond to michael @ googlef.com
Re: A Fundamental Flaw That Leads To More-than-100-times-overly Estimated Permittivity
I am impressed with your knowledge. I am curious, what do you think of Altair's NanoSafe battery?
Thanks.
Dave
it's -> its, illiterate shitheads
The "effective permittivity" is the junctional average, not the element's.
Re: A Fundamental Flaw That Leads To More-than-100-times-overly Estimated Permittivity
Do you know why the particles have to be (double) coated in the first place? If barium titanate is an insulation, what does the coating achieve?
Re: A Fundamental Flaw That Leads To More-than-100-times-overly Estimated Permittivity
According to the patent, the coatings:
1. assist in removing voids from the dielectric
ensure that the dielectric layer will be uniform and homogeneous
2. increase the breakdown voltage of the dielectric
3. reduce the leakage and aging of the dielectric
4. lower temperature required for sintering and hot isostatic pressing allowing nickel to be used for electrodes rather than more expensive metal
Re: A Fundamental Flaw That Leads To More-than-100-times-overly Estimated Permittivity
Many thanks for the in-depth review. I checked it myself to find the two classical, almost high-school-type physical mistakes:
[1] Assumption of linear permittivity for high fields, which is not true for high-permittivity insulators, in particular, this Barium Titanate powder.
[2] The alleged 12% reduction in permittivity due to the coating.
Obviously, from the capacitance point of view, the barium titanate balls could have been just replaced by a conductor or removed completely with only the coating material left between the plates.
(Also, if it leaks current, replacing it by a coated conductor appears to be the same thing. No point in coating it anyway IMHO).
Of course, we are though not after the capacity but the total energy, Energy=CVmax^2/2, but then making a layered structure of greater volume would still produce better result than the maximum that can be achieved with their model.
To estimate the maximum energy storage to be ever offered by capacitors, one can consider the field energy density formula - Edensity=epsilon0*E^2/2.
(E is the maximum electric field)
I even neglect the permittivity here, which is strictly speaking not okay, but for high fields it falls down to 1 anyway. The maximum field would then be determined by the breakdown field of an insulator, 1e8 Volts/meter is okay for EEstor's coating, yielding density of 40KJ/m^2 - negligible compared to any type of a chemical battery. Toyota Prius'es 1.2MJ battery would be a medium truck size at such energy density.
About EEstor - I guess this is a typical fate for a company that is keeping absolute radio silence and is getting scared by the idea of sharing information with sufficient number of experts and the community.
I understand and agree with your numbers, but I'll still wait and see what they deliver.
It may be that the people that are making the claims actually made a discovery and can keep the permitivity high.
They've certainly got EE's working for them.
As far as scamming through Zenn, well I'm not buying Zenn, even if EESTOR is 100% legit Zenn still only has slow small cars and for a limited time.
Like someone posted earlier, they're not saying they'll have this technology in 10 years, they're saying they'll deliver later this year. That's not a long time as far as these things go and I can certainly suspend my natural skepticism that long.
This tome of the "science priests" better not save these comments from American scientific cannon law. You'll be looking silly it somebody but you invents something.
Everyone knows how deep you're into the pockets of big physics and business (even it seems, petrochemical investers).
zrski
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
I'm not sure I know exactly what's meant but the tone is needed.
It has been a while since an invention changed everything like how to use wires to move energy, generate light, and ultimately pipe light to move information.
A reasonable question to ask though is; Is this breakthrough really needed to do what people believe it won't be able to do?
The answer is simple; it's NOPE.
Delivering energy far more optimally then by storing it moving along with a moving vehicle is possible in MANY OBVIOUS ways other then having it collect it from the sun when it's shining.
In fact the vehicles that move in locations and times at which this is not the most efficient way to go, far more efficient even then the claims for supercapacitors so far, are unimportant in aggragated consumption compared to those that use paths well traveled.
When necessary we did this. We did it ages before catalytic converters in hilly cities with cables that transfered kinetic energy to 'cars' to increase there potential gravitational harvestable energy, AND THEN harvested it when they rolled back down hill.
It is after all in generating energy where cost matters almost as much as efficiency in use. Michael J Fox appearing in film only fans even learned decades ago that a few scraps of food could accelerate a lot of mass to incredible speeds if the mass of some of it itself could be converted to energy to do that, and the only reason that is not the exclusive way we push things around now has to do with politics. With people making decisions to not do that- at least not yet.
It is the one activity that only nations engage in to this day. There is no market for nuclear powered 'mobile homes' or even yachts. No surplus market for aircraft carriers with plant intact- not even for the basically countless number of just geeks in America who can easally afford to buy one for themselves- one custom made.
So projecting the consequence of storing energy no longer being expensive, or heavy, or wasteful, is not trivial.
THose who say this or that above and at the energy blog, or at there outlet be they segway or military inspired cop ebike owners, ignore this fact... that we AS A RULE, are not, have not, and ALMOST CERTAINLY WILL NOT COLLECTIVELY RESPOND RATIONALLY TO OPPORTUNITY in the way we so reflexively suggest would [impliedly] 'obviously' occur.
Or else we would have cars that 'ran' mainly -surfed not- on not waves of power but ''merely'' accelerated from intersections inductively or even mechanically coupled to flywheels perhaps just buried under a few in many cities that likewise 'breaked' traffic to regain there 'spin'-- not to adequately (for anyone perpaps but myself) mention that most intersections in terms of "breaking-energy-wasting", and that's most of the oil used for transit IMMEDIATELY (just dozens of yards)in 'front' of them alone, should not be at all but should have underpasses etc. as part of there design with payback CERTAIN even if financed with venture/angel/martyr capital costing.
So yeah we can enjoy this for months. Pretend to hope. Ignore the fact that it's NOW that we have to stop building more insane roads, tolerating crazier and crazier practices on them, and what.... as I've personally grinned at witnessing Nader reveling over.... 'begging for more and more juice in the "collander"' so we can sip peacefully when the colander (strainer, think porous which is the argument of Ford lol) has been flushed almost completey away and we would have to dive faster then light itself to get even a taste of what's being dumped down that drain we call the GNP as currently measured.
IF YOU DON'T believe energy will be very cheap in the future, if you don't believe storing it will have almost no value terrestially (surface wise) in the ... present.... then why are you not cashing out real estate to increase efficiency in heating the water you swim etc. in already? Pumping heat has coefficients in the dozens right now, but rare is the heater that gets within a fifth of even one to one.
"A123" ''batteries'' --if sold profitably by a benevolent 'mart-- are already a threat to "national security" if you define that as MAINTAING having most people behave against there own interest and that of most other people (and most assuming continuing to perpetuity) at all costs or else! If you care only about getting a piece of the pie that only exists if almost all progress continues to be denied to almost all-- even though that pie pales in comparison with what PEACE/pieces we would all share if we could just get something as simple as counting votes done reasonable well.
I'm not cynical at all. I've never considered buying a car and driving it back and forth over and over again as if to torture my "first and only son" before even meeting someone to 'raise' a family with. To stop deceiving ourselves is not a pipe dream. This dialogue reads like Sci-fi and seems to function pathalogically just as it too often does these days for it's victim readers. More shameful then never having registered to vote should be having considered getting a drivers license for more then a heartbeat. First -in our living history!- after all we gave up enjoying having someone do that for us, then we gave up having someone fill up our tanks for us, now we routinely give up being noble for it (GM as USa) itself.
The car is a poor God. Could there be a realer Devil? A greater hell then that we now suffer to pay the taxes to impose upon entire continents? So we collect our checks, brag about our tenure, and bury our heads pretending this sand about that strand could matter as long as we continue to ignore the fact that the PERSONAL IS POLITICS.
Sierra talks about Green Cars. A little pregnant in other words. More lethal in fact. Crueler and crueler we will become until a revolution in how we regulate OUR paths, not those of electrons, is the topic of those reading or skipping this note.
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
Um... You may find that you have alot more time if you don't share all your thoughts with us. That rant was very revealing though. You keep fightin' the good fight. I need to get back to my planet now. Good luck to ya.
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
You might try writing your thoughts out, editing them, revising them, and thinking a little about what others will get from them. We have no clue what is whirring around in your mind (thank goodness.) But ranting, and then repeating it doesn't bode well for people taking you seriously.
Especially with all the mistakes you make which make it very hard to read (not comprehend, that isn't possible)
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
I wish I could speak that language, whatever it is.
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
I thought that long post was annoying... but it got funny when I remembered the subject of this thread :)
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
Isn't it obvious that it was a computer generated response? AI gone bad ;-)
Re: MIT Readers Use Word Hype!
I wanna be a part of "Big Physics" Do you guys hold meetings? Or is it all in back rooms and dark alleys? Do I get to learn a secret handshake?
I was looking around to see if there was other work been done on creating high energy ceramic patents and I am interested in seeing comments on this one.
This is a patent from BASF regarding a Barium Titanate Capacitor that can be charged to 200v and have an energy density of 5.5kwh/liter!. This sounds somewhat superior to the eestor though they dont specifically outline the energy density per kg.
It configuration is a somewhat different from EEstor version it seems have a first a conductive layer then a layer of Barium Titanate and then another conductive layer, as opposed to the insulating layers that eestor is using.
BASF research into ceramic capacitors is mentioned on its future business pages but without any details.
http://www.basf-fb.de/en/futurebusiness/themen/energiemanagement/projekte.htm?id=V00-X7Cow9w.2bw21d0#2
Anyway I have not seen the BASF patent mentioned in discussions of eestor and would like to see what others think of its potential, particularly as BASF is a fairly substantial company.
The energy density (kwh/liter) of the capacitor described in the BASF patent seems to be about twice that of the EEStor capacitor. However the patent does not provide an estimate of the size of the largest individual capacitor cell that can be manufactured or discuss the feasibility of connecting large numbers of cells in parallel. The ability to achieve a high energy density in a capacitor charged to 200 volts rather than 3500 volts would be an advantage for some uses but 200 volts might not be enough for an electric vehicle. The motor voltage must be considerably less than the fully charged voltage to allow for the reduction in capacitor voltage as the stored energy is used.
I'm a power electronics design engineer, and I did a Dodge Neon EV conversion with a friend in college.
I think that operating at 200V max is quite reasonable. Since the energy in a capacitor is proportional to V^2, 3/4 of the energy is between 100V and 200V. Some power topologies (direct i.e. not flyback) can either boost or buck, so the motor drive could still run at ~150V.
The fact that BASF also patented this technology means there is probably be something to it. I was skeptical, but now I'm really excited.
Electric chargers at existing gas stations could have their own ultracaps in the "pump" along with the power electronics to deliver a high constant current. ***Rough*** numbers here, 100F at 500Vpk in the car would need 300Adc for a 2 minute quick charge from 100 to 500V. 300Adc is very reasonable for a fixed installation. In fact, the EV itself could draw this much current during acceleration at low charge voltage. Your home charger would only need 5-20Adc (constant power output) for a 1.5 hour charge, running off of a clothes dryer plug.
I agree that capacitive energy storage at 200V is feasible for EV use, but I think a little higher voltage would be preferable and it would be preferable not to boost the voltage.
Your charge time example only provides 3300 watt hours. That is only enough to deliver 10 Hp at the motor shaft for about a half hour.
I have a home converted Honda Civic running on 120v DC, and would be happy to replace 800lb lead acid with capacitors at 200v. Roll on the tape capacitors!
You're right - not enough energy in my charge time calculations - I had 12.5MJ (3.5kW/hr) in the pack, but this is only about a 20 mile range. So x10 and you have a 200 mile range with 1kF at 500V peak charge (1kF - is that possible - I guess that's the question) and to charge it from 100V to 500V in 5 minutes would take 1300A. This is too much current for any reasonable charger cable.
Maybe this is why EEstor went with 3.5kV peak cap charge. Now for the same energy storage as above (35kW/hr, which costs $5, or about $1 per equivalent gallon), to charge 20F from 0.5kV to 3.5kV in 5 minutes takes only 200A. This has 42.5 times lower loss in the charger cable and internal series resistance.
That patent does not seem real either. They do not claim having made any real part, but simply say that if their part were made, the calculations show that the capacitance would be 10FARADS and the voltage could be 200 volts on a 0.1 micron dielectric.
This is crazy...again, the voltage is way beyond what the dielectric can take, and that high a field, if it did not short the capacitor, which it would, the net capacitance would be about 5% of what they claim.
When a patent admits not making a real part, I would be suspicious if I knew nothing of the system, which I do.
Sorry, thats not the answer either
I read almost every post on this, including the long one. Scary thing is I understood most of that one, I wonder what that means, either I am insane or I guess nutts. I see a lot of "claims" in many areas (not only here), and I had a strange, radical idea of my own. Build something that works, test it, record the data, get a patent, then produce it. I know its a revolutionary process, and will be met with critism, but what the hay. BTW about the patent filings, there are many patents on things that don't work, and many things that work with no patents. I wish people would stop trying to secure their "rights" so much and just build their damn ideas.
It would be great if this works but were are they going to get the power to charge all of these caps? I live in Seattle and we have a lot of cheap power but I know of a lot of commercial property that is available in completed business parks that can not be sold because the electric company can not supply the power they would need.
What is proposed in the EEStor patent is that charging stations would have banks of ultracapacitors that would be charged at night at a steady rate when usage is lower and transfer the charge to vehicles whenever needed. That would help, but it is only part of a solution to one of the problems involved in developing the infrastructure needed to support widespread use of electric vehicles.
Charging time will not be an issue for people with garages. That a significant chunk of the market. charging does not need to be instantaneous when parked in a garage.
This was posted Jan 23, 2007
"Feel Good Cars Corporation ("Feel Good Cars") (TSX VENTURE:ZNN) today announced that it has filed a preliminary short-form prospectus with the securities regulatory authorities in the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario in connection with a best efforts equity financing. The offering will be led by Paradigm Capital Inc. Final pricing and determination of the number of common shares to be sold under the offering will occur immediately prior to the filing of the (final) short form prospectus in respect of the offering.
Feel Good Cars expects to use the net proceeds from the Offering to repay $270,000 in unsecured short-term loans and interest thereon, approximately $2,100,000 to fund the payment of all future milestone payments to EEStor, Inc., $500,000 to fund product development and the balance for working capital and general corporate purposes.
Closing of the offering is subject to certain conditions, including but not limited to, receipt of all necessary securities regulatory approvals, including the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange.
This press release does not constitute an offer of the securities described herein in any jurisdiction. The securities described herein have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the securities laws of any state and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent an exemption from registration."
Guess what then happened to their stock price?
Assuming the technology is what EEStor says it is, the US government would never allow public access to such a highly charged, portable ultra-capacitor.
This device is more powerful than C4 explosive. Protective mechanisms can be dismantled by terrorists, and a $40 rental car can become a rather potent WMD.
The military may use this technology, along with electric utility companies, and possibly Canadian "golf cart" corporations (Zenn), however something much less dangerous is needed to power cars in the US.
Re: Sorry, It'll never happen!
I disagree, ultra-capacitors can release energy faster than a chemical battery but not so fast as an explosive. Internal resistance and inductance limit the rate that energy can be released. Gasoline can actually be made to release energy much faster.
However, I do see a major issue with Ultra Capacitors as an energy storage medium. A chemical battery maintains a relatively constant voltage across it's discharge curve. Not so for a capacitor, it's voltage continuously decreases as it is discharged. Let's say it's at 100% capacity at 10v, at 75% discharge it will be at 5v.
This means the whole system must be capable of operating over a broad range of voltages, and when you get to 75% discharge at half voltage, now the whole system has to be capable of double the current to get the same power at that voltage.
As a practical consequence, ultra capacitors will never achieve in practical terms the energy densities that they are theoretically capable of.
Re: Sorry, It'll never happen!
The EEStor capacitor is intended to be charged to 3500 volts and discharged through a switch mode power supply. That still sounds like a tall order, but it may be feasable. A patent referenced in the EEStor patent describes the electronic control. The EEStor device as described doesn't sound practicable for low power applications.
The technical, financial, and social aspects of eforts to reduce dependance on fossil fuels is fascinating. The technical part has been well discussed here, but the other parts are just as important.
I own and drive a model year 2000 Honda Insight. As a contractor to national level companies, I travel extensively. I have driven this car from my home in Ohio to San Francisco and back, to Denver and back a half a dozen times, to Baton Rouge, New orleans, Wisconsin, West Virgina, and all over Indiana and Illinois. It is capable of cruising indefinitely as speeds well in excess of any posted limits. I currently have 157,000 miles on the car, and as nearly as I can tell, I have averaged 49.3 mpg for this whole time, based on the dashboard mileage indicator as corroborated by careful actual measurements.
The argument has been made that the incremental addiional cost for the hybrid system over a similar but otherwise conventional small car would buy a lot of gas. That's true, but I would rather put the money into the technology than the gas tank and the car has returned the investment handsomely. Gas at $2.00 per gallon divided by 50 miles per gallon equals $0.04/mile.
This significally reduces my carbon footprint from what it would otherwise be, to say nothing of reducing my cost of mobility. Honda's integration of the elctric and gasoline engines is clever, no where's near as complex or untried as ultracapacitors, but extremely functional. And yet, Honda no longer makes the Insight for lack of market demand. They now make larger cars with hybrid technolgy that don't get nearly the mileage that my Insight gets. These larger models get reasonably good gas mileage and use the hybrid as a power assist perhaps akin to a turbocharger, but without the strain on the engine.
I'm not married to Honda or to hybrids. I would be glad to purchase any technology that would deliver, say, 75 mpg. But until then, I'm very happy with the performance of the Insight and intend to drive it into the ground. I figure that's nother 3-5 years, and I hope there's something better by then (even if it is an ultracapacitor).
John Saggese
419-346-5920
You know, you can get excellent MPG from a diesel, and runningo on what a deisel engine was built to run on - rapesead oil - you can mix it neat with either a 70% diesel 30% rapesead or, in older engines you can run 100% rapesead. Anyway, I digress, you are able to get an easy 60 mpg from either a VW Passat or any other manufacturer who uses VW engines, like the Skoda Octavia Ambiant that I own and am on my 2nd one in five years! Enjoy what you can at such a cheap rate for fuel in the states, as in England its equal to $8.16 per gallon, if you see what I mean. Peter
Pete, I tried to send this before and I don't think it went through. I apologize in advance if you get it twice.
I agree that diesels or diesel/hybrids can do the same as my Insight, and possibly better. Here in the States we keep hearing about European diesels but they never seem to arrive. We had a bad eperience back in the 80's when GM offered a diesel version of their large cars. Didn't get particularly good mileage, the cars themselves weren't very good, and when the price of diesel went up it destroyed any economic justification for the cars.
Ouch, sorry to hear about the price of gas in the UK. Those kind of prices would kill us over here. How much of that is taxes and how much is for the gasoline/diesel? There are people in this country that would like to see significantly higher taxes on petroleum, and consequently higher prices, to encourage conservation, reduce dependence on foreign oil, slow global warming, etc. They're generally called Democrats. But that gets into the social aspects of gsoline mileage, which is at least as interesting as the technical side of it.
Congrats on your highe mileage.
John Saggese
Guest (Richee)
I want an Insight! I drive a Honda Civic Hybrid, but I think Honda is going in the wrong direction. If Toyota is going to bring out a 90 mpg Prius in '09, WHAT is Honda waiting for?
Phillips and Panasonic Patents
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6078494.html
apparently, phillps has a patent as well. the poetically titled:
Multilayer capacitor comprising barium-titanate doped with silver and rare earth metal
if someone with a little more knowledge would translate that would be appreciated.
and Panasonic (less important, but show business interest in these types of products.)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6947276.html
Titled: Process for producing laminated ceramic capacitor
Re: Phillips and Panasonic Patents
The Phillips patent describes various compositions of doped barium titanate powder one of which is the basic material that the EEStor patent uses as its starting point.
The Phillips patent states that a capacitor including any of their ceramic compositions "...is characterized by a high dielectric constant K and a long service life, a low loss factor, a high insulation resistance and a capacitance with a low voltage dependence. The temperature dependence of its dielectric constant K corresponds to the EIA-standard Y5V."
We at Ampmobile Conversions already convert gas cars to total electric. Our concern is this would not work in our application due to the high operating voltages needed. We use lead acid batteries now to keep our cost down, so our cars are much like the first EV1s. If we could just get the nickel metal hydride batteries we would basically have the EV1 in range. So, until that happens, we wait, since we do not research money, like a lot of these companies. We are about actually converting to electric, not raising money to just study converting or to just study batteries. We are about doing now with what we have available. If we had the money that is thrown around by all of this RESEARCH, we could and would have so many useable electrics on the road it would make your head spin. We are FOR REAL, not hype.
if you are wanting better batteries why are you not using automotive size li-ion batteries?
Where can I find 'automotive size' lith-ion batteries? Do you know?
You are right. At the other end, we are developing high energy storage capacitors, for real. But EEStors CLAIMS are way,way out there. I fear they are poisoning the water for all of us. So many people believe the outlandish.
Oh,well, back to the bench.
starting Larrys turbine engine
Can this technology help larry at Pfranc.com start-up his small 85hp gas turbine jet engine on his amphibous ultralight aircraft? The 1.7HP 28VDC starter motor needs hundreds of amps for about 10 seconds - and weight is very important because to be a legal FAA Part 103 ultralight the empty weight must not exceed 254 pounds. I'm currently using 3 sets of 28 cell packs of Nicads at 1500mA,
and have tried two 7.5AH gell cells (like used in computer UPS's) which work - but just a few times before going bad. And the NiCads don't last many cycles either. I suspect I'm abusing them.
thanks,
mybest, larry,
Pfranc.com
Re: starting Larrys turbine engine
If EEStor can make capacitors that can meet the specs in their patent, a 3 pound capacitor bank could store the equivalent energy of 15 amp hours at 28 volts. That would mean charging the capacitors to their 3500 volt rating. Some pretty substantial electronics would be required to regulate the current and voltage to the motor. Reduucing the voltage would solve some of the design problems, but charging to only 280 volts would increase the capacitors required to over 400 pounds. There are probably a lot of ways to do it, but it looks like a pretty difficult problem.
Re: starting Larrys turbine engine
heres a thought Larry, milwaukee tools makes a 28v battery, its li-ion it wieghs only a couple pounds each is 3.0 amp hours, they recharge in 30 mins, a bank of 4 should handle your load easily
Re: starting Larrys turbine engine
Great idea so I bought a couple of the V28 tools that each came with two batteries and a charger. At first they worked great but then something went wrong, maybe the spark ignitor had some nasty feedback but they burned out. I opened 'em up and discovered a couple of IC's in the circuit that fired so bypassed them. Then I discovered LiPo. Wow, man, I bought a 30V pack that can handle 185AMPS for 15 seconds (enough to start my engine about 5 times) and weighs only 26 ounces!!!
The only down side is, it cost $330.
I find that the naysayer’s sometimes have a hidden agenda, such as an interest of some kind in oil. But if this does turn out to be practical I see it being bought out by oil interests because controlling energy is control of the country. They will not relinquish this power. Kind of negative, but years ago I bought a book with over 200 patents for the "100 Mile Per Gallon carburetor". All were owned by oil companies, very interesting.
That is something less than believable...can you give a proper reference? Or was this a mimeographed and hand-stapled "Report"?
What would be the motive, in this day and age of a company who is being beaten down by foreign competition to hold back?
Just for fun, I did a search of US patents on "100 mpg carburetors". Guess how many I found?
NONE!
Try it yourself
http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html
Get real or get lost.
on the carbs actually there are a ton of patents on them, look up numbers 2,026,798 or 4,177,779 or 4,972,821 I would suggest you do a little more diligent job of patent searching.
Sorry, I stand corrected. There are of course, hundreds of patents on carbureators out there, the previous writer claimed "a couple hundred" that revealed 100mpg capability assigned, naturally, to oil companies.
None of the three patents you revealed fit that criteria...so I dont have to be embarrased for our patent search, yet.
It just doesn't make sense...if there was a workable carbureator out there, why wouldn't it be commercialized?
Now watch the conspiracy theorists come out!
I noticed that the Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers web site does not mention EEStor. Odd, as their involvement has been mentioned in the press since September of 2005. See http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/dealflow/archives/2005/09/kleiner_perkins_1.html
The publicity shunning thing seems to have been going on since same time last year.
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/01/eestor_ultracap.html
Now their web site is "under construction".
Maybe I've missed something, but it seems to me if Kleiner Perkins put money in, they'd have listed it amongst their deals, but you can't even find mention of EEStor in their site's search engine. Hmmmm...
It is so sad to see so much time...
tearing apart what this company is trying to do. Maybe if as much effort was put into helping to insure that it is a success, then we all would have a better place to live. We could let the Middle East nations live their lives the way they want without us interfering because we want their oil and stop spending our tax dollars for unnecessary wars.
Who gives a dime if EESTOR's CEO becomes the next Bill Gates? I wouldn't as long as I knew that future generations of my offspring might have a better world to live in.
I only wish I was as smart as some of the people who have tried to tear this apart on this blog. I'd call him up and offer my services - for free. What greater legacy could one have than to have particpated, success or failure, in something that has so much potential to improve the lives of everyone on the entire planet.
Stop telling us what he's done wrong. Tell him how to do it right!
Bill - A typical Texan with a big ego.
5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
1) Kleiner Perkins - Two other ventures wish to remain “stealth”.
http://www.kpcb.com/news/articles/2006_02_16a.html
A- We know the Kleiner Perkins has invested in EEstor but you can not find it on their WEB Site.
B- Patents clearly indicate the magnatude of the invention.
So it is not a huge leap to think EEstor is one of the Stealth.
c- EEstor Kleiner has done a lot of due dilegence on this (page 3 lst col)
http://www.zenncars.com/media/images_media/TorontoStar_EEStor.pdf
d- Consider who management on the borad and running the company.
2) Well past the prototype Stage:
EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15 kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units
I trust that the information given is accurate. Now I think we can all agree, if we are talking assemply line and producing it for commercial application, we are past a prototype stage. Translation we can mass produce it and Stealth is the word, we not goint to talk about prototypes.
http://www.zenncars.com/investor/releases/Certification_EEStor_01_16_2007.pdf
3) Demo the storage device, in an application to show it's potential
First application in a glorified golf cart called a LSV car, Why this little startup company called Zenn
- Looks like a car
- Feels like a car
- 25 MPH
- No federal Regulation hurdles
- Slow speed, utracapacitor of 15K
- Low entry risk
http://www.zenncars.com/specifications/specs_index.html
4) EEstor is not a manufacturer - it only wants to prove it can be massed produced.
- Once EEstor proves the utracapacitor works according to specs, they plan on licencing manufactors to produce it.
- If the claims are as stated, the infrastructure and times to create the utracapacitor is much bigger than the compamy can grow, answer license the technolgy.
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/dealflow/archives/2005/09/kleiner_perkins_1.html
5) EEstor backs up their claims
Weir maintains that his company will meet all of its claims, and then some. "We're not trying to hype this. This is the first time we've ever talked about it. And we will continue to meet all of the production requirements."
Re: 5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
What is not clear are the implications of the january press release.
have they validated the dielectric mfg process or the properties of the material. If its the latter then it would mean they dont have a working prototype and have made a theoretical projection. if its the former well.. we have something of a sensation.
Re: 5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
The announcement states that automated production line has been proven to meet requirements for precise chemical delivery, purity control, and stability. So we are strictly talking about manufacturing to create the desire outcome of the purity… I have never heard of a product that is going to be manufactured that has not gone through a working prototype. Base on "Kleiner has done a lot of due diligence" and have allocated 3 million for the project. You wouldn't be skipping the prototype and going to the manufacturing and setting the target date of 2007.
Let just look at this logically, you create a automated production line, get all the materials, turn it on, get the first capacitor down the assembly line, put it into the zenn, cross your fingers, turn the key and presto, we did it or it didn't work. Clearly the have a prototype. If you want a investor like Kleiner to be on board, you better have the real thing.
Stealth is the word because it exist, and the risks they take on, is to be able to manufactured it, and the real world applications in their environment. Also eestor would not be allowed to talk about a prototype when they can attract other investors, no mum is the word here until it manufactured, and tested off the assembly line, there will be little news. In fact the only reason you heard this much information is because Zenn had an agreement (before Kleiner got involved) they had an licensing payment based on this milestone which they were allowed to published. Once they met that milestone, notice how fast they got $10 million funding less than a month.
Now assuming I am correct, how much would it cost to create a small manufacturing facility to achieve the objective of proving it can mnaufuactor the product in the purity, consistently in a manufacturing facility. Well I say about $3 million. After you prove that, you need to have an application to demonstrate the potential and then license it to the manufacturing world. This is where Zenn LSV car comes in. Looks like a car but really is a gloried golfcart with only one 15k capacitor, not too much for the real world problems and enough to get the attention of what eestor can do.
Guest (topon)
Re: 5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
EEStor is scheduled to be commercialized later this year. And I agree at that point it WILL be on the front page of every newspaper.
this is the reply i got from rich weir when i asked about eestor
One factor that y'all may want to consider is the military applications of this technology may be the actual reason for the low profile of EESTOR with the web site going down, etc. Having spent 40 years in the Military Intelligence world, I can assure you security classification of various Military/space applications of the Eestor tech are probably Top Secret SCI.
As a matter of fact the tech may already be operational in DoD. Is Kliner Perkins a covert front for a USG customer? Nahhh couldn't be! Are there covert customers?
I think it has just as much application in the Static energy storage area as it does in automotive. In static sites all the qualms about the fragile ceramics go away. I am waiting patiently for a good electric storage capability for my home 20KW wind generator which is now dumping about 100KWH/day of juice onto the local REC lines free of charge as the $$#@%^ bastards will not net meter. If it works in vehicles all the better. Then I will have static and mobile capability. I think they should have fielded a static product first and mobile second. Sigh.
Re: 5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
I of course hope eestore is real and that the "bet" Kleiner Perkins made pays off for
both parties. Dense energy store in a battery would go a long way towards solving our
energy and global warming problems. One also hopes, but I wouldn't be certain that
Kleiner Perkins brought along their physics texts when doing due dilligence.
However, eestore's release claims a quick recharge time of:
"and will have the ability to be recharged in a matter of minutes."
Whereas Zeen's spec claims a much slower recharge
"8-9 hours (120 VAC), 80% rechargeable in 4 hours"
Is this difference just the fact of the 120 VAC supply? Even so, it seems very slow to be the same
battery eestore is talking about.
What gives?
Re: 5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
The current that can reasonably be drawn from a 120 volt circuit is not enough for a fast charge. To deliver 15,000 watt hours at 100% efficiency in 6 minutes (1/10 hour) 150,000 watts must be delivered for 6 minutes. The required current would be 150,000 watts divided by by 120 volts or 1,250 amperes, more than 60 times what you can get from an ordinary 120 volt circuit.
Re: 5 reasons why EEStor is the real deal
Gary,
You're not comparing apples to apples. The current Zenn vehicles use standard lead acid batteries, and have standard recharging times for lead acid technology. Since capacitors are solid state and don't depend on a chemical reaction like batteries, the charging limits are based on your electron source and the electrical resistance of the components involved.
Kitk, on a point of accuracy. I was always taught that the EV whent the way of the dinosaur simply because their main advantage over gas/steam, the ability to charge from the public supply, was lost with the transition from Edison's DC to Westinghouse's AC. Clearly gas engines soon developed to better EVs but initially I don't think performance was the cause of the demise as EV were clearly equal or better !
Bob Bangkok
The company is claiming 1MJ/kg energy density. To put this in perspective, this would be enough energy to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by around 240 degrees centigrade, or to raise 1kg by 100 km vertically! Admittedly, still a few times less energy dense than chemical fuels, but allowing for the much greater efficiency converting electrical energy to mechanical energy, this is really highly competitive.
Oh well can it help in hoverboards? please comment i am very curious to know what do u all think about it?
Wonder if EESTOR is doing something similar?
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/04/new_nanocomposi.html#more
I dont see this thing as anything fundamentally breakthru as I have been working on this thing myself and I can confirm that if you google "high dielectric constant polymer ceramic" (or breakingdowns of this phrase) you will find many scientific papers on this phenomena. Similar research on different materials have been investigated by many other groups in the past years.
Their inspiration for this research may be as follow:
BaTiO3 is very high dielectric constant material but not highest in terms of dielectric strength
Coat it with some material with better dielectric strength
mix in polymer for better coating/pasting ability on different electrodes
It is something like material A has very good property a
B has good property b
C has good property c
combine A, B, C and expect to have good properties a,b,c of the composite.
But in most of the cases, you cannot get the best of all properties a, b, c.
So G.A tech group is very reserved in claiming their finding as most scientists and engineers do. They do not say anything about "product" yet. i believe their capacitor will work for few volts potential, not thoudsands of V as for the case of EEstor
For the case of EEstor, they need to show more evidences to support their case at patent office.
their material consists of 3 layers, 1 BaTiO3 (dielectric constant 33,000) and 2 coating layers (dielectric constant 10). If somebody studies Electrodynamic will know that the equivalent dielectric constant will drop far lower than what they claimed (somebody explained it in one the posts above). if some special effect happen here they need to show it by experimental evidences to the patent office. I am amazed how they got the claim patented.
not counting the fact that dielectric constant is not really a constant when you apply very large voltage as it normally drop as higher voltage
Let us think about ways it might work rather than trying to constantly prove it does not. The patent never said this was a single capacitor. I can imagine several ways EESTOR might work. First, assume their store is divided into trays of say 1 Farad. So 31 trays are needed for 52KWh or 10 for 15KWh. Very scalable.
Each tray might be arranged in a series/parallel matrix of say 1020x1024 elements.
The dielectric strength would only need to support 3.4 volts per element.
We know these guys are from the semiconductor industry. Why should they not use that manufacturing technology, why do they have to use a legacy capacitor approach.?
Bob Bangkok
The 4 volt device would not be a sub-micron memory element that would fit into a IC-like matrix. Even with EEStor's claimed (unbelievable) characteristics, they would be large, something like an inch cube.
If you decrease the voltage by a 1000, you have to increase the capacitance by a million ( E=0.5 CV^2)...which means a net part that would fill an average bedroom, weigh tens of tons, and cost over a million dollars.
Now, go in the other direction, increase the voltage rating by a thousand fold, and you can fit it all into a C size flashlight cell! You could power a third world village with a single cell!
Oops, wait a minute, you can't keep the terminals far enough apart to not arc over...oh well, maybe eestor has a way around that too.
Y'know...there's not a lot of point in insisting this can't be done. This is a stealth-mode company that is not asking you to buy products or shares. If and when they ship a 15 Kwh unit, and it lets a little ZENN car go twice as far, we'll know. Kleiner et al says this is a high-risk investment. Fair enough.
I'm wondering why ZENN? That is, why have an exclusive agreement with ZENN for curb weights of below 1400 Kg? My guess is either, 1)The agreement doesn't apply to Plug-in Hybrids, or 2)It's only exclusive for long enough to prove the technology, and license new manufacturine OEMs, or 3)It's only exclusive for the cells that eestor themselves produce. Anybody else got any suggestions?
how about;
4)Real engineers at real car companies recognized the promise as a pipe dream? or
5)It's kinda hard to pump up GM's stock with silly announcements
Capacitor man, I was trying to keep within EESTOR's patent dimentions. In my model, each 1F x 3500v tray (1024x1024 elements) would need to fit within approx 4000 cm3 and weigh 12 kg. Why is this not possible if the BT permittivity is 18000 as claimed. Surely 4 volt elements would overcome the dielectric saturation issue ?
I am an electrical engineer, although I do not have specific expertise with ultracapacitors.
Based on my semi-educated opinion, I must say I am very skeptical about the ultracapacitor because it seems likely to me that at least one if not more of these alleged flaws is indeed a show-stopper:
1). reduction in permittivity with increased voltage
2). reduction in permittivity with increased temperature
3). dire consequences if a short circuit develops at a spot within the capacitor
That being said, I would love to see their product to turn out to be for real.
But if I were betting on future electric car technology I'd put my money on the A123 and Altairnano lithium batteries.
dchemist said:
I find that the naysayer’s sometimes have a hidden agenda, such as an interest of some kind in oil. But if this does turn out to be practical I see it being bought out by oil interests because controlling energy is control of the country. They will not relinquish this power. Kind of negative, but years ago I bought a book with over 200 patents for the "100 Mile Per Gallon carburetor". All were owned by oil companies, very interesting.
-----
Well, if I tell you I am a skeptic and I tell you that I own quite a bit of stock in oil and natural gas companies, I guess that will confirm your suspicions.
But let's look at the matter in a bit more depth:
You bet that new energy technologies that may have potential are liable to be bought out by the oil companies.
After all, oil is running out. If they want to stay in business they need to either develop or buy out the new sources of energy. Then they can continue to be the major players in the energy business.
If your point is that they would buy them out to suppress them (like the mythical 100 mile per gallon carburetor), I would point out, if they know full well that oil is running out, so that the oil business is a dying business, why would they want to hang onto a dying business rather than go into something new that could provide them with a means to make money in the future?
When you say "they will not relinquish this power". Why in the heck would they want to relinquish the power of being the dominant energy companies?
In fact, the oil companies are the most logical entities to run the energy businesses of the future, because they have the money to fund the new sources.
Only problem is, all of the new energy sources that are out there are pretty pisspoor energy sources compared to oil.
So, the oil companies have understandably had a strategy of continuing to drill for that last drop of oil.
But there's not much more oil left to find.
So, whether they like it or not, the oil companies are going to have to get involved bigtime in alternative energy development. And why should one be against that, for God's sake?
Do you think the government, whose idea of energy research is to give corporate welfare to agribusiness to ludicrously produce ethanol from corn?
(If you have not followed the debate about corn ethanol, the problem is that it takes virtually as much energy to produce it as you get out of it. It is like if you have two glasses of water, one full, and one empty, and you pour one into the other, and you claim you have "created" a glass of water. And the government pays Archer Daniels Midland and the rest of them a pretty penny for creating these "glasses of water".
OK, I'm rambling. Where was I. Oh yes, the oil companies.
So anyway, I own some stock in oil companies. But I also hope to see these new electric car technologies be successful, and as soon as possible.
Because the oil is running out. I don't care how fast electric car technology advances, the price of oil is going to be high and the oil companies will make good profits. Actually, the bigger threat to the oil companies is if the demand outstrips the supply so fast that the price of oil skyrockets and the the government loots all the profits from the oil companies, so that they turn out to be a rotten investment.
So, in my opinion, it is actually in the best interest of the oil companies for electric car technology to advance as fast as possible.
And I am very encouraged by what A123 and Altairnano have been coming up with as far as advanced lithium batteries, that sound like they are now at the point where they will render electric cars truly a viable replacement for the internal combustion automobile.
And if ultracapacitors can achieve that too, I'm all for it. But on technical grounds, I am very skeptical.
Bot_feeder. Take a look at Tavrima.com to see production ultracapacitors powering a drag racer and also starting heavy duty diesel engines. Tavrima's units are single medium voltage devices (300v), unlike more conventional Maxwell stacked low voltage supercapitor assemblies. Their performance is quite an eye opener though Capacitorman is likely to point out they are an order of magnitude lower voltage than EEstor claim.
Bob Bangkok
I'm really curious why more haven't looked at their background as a clue to how they might have done it.
From what I gathered Weir comes from the world of hard drive technology.
Imagine this for a moment: millions and millions of small barium titanate capacitors layered on many hard disk like platters. They look like thousands of extremely thin compact discs spaced just a few millimeters apart. A special device which resembles a hard drive head retrieves or stores charge by making contact with many of the capacitors at once. This might explain the high voltages described -- the reading device connects the capacitors in series for discharging thereby increasing the voltage.
A microprocessor keeps track of all areas of the capacitor filled discs which have been charged or discharged and just like a hard drive retrieves or stores charge as needed by moving the "head" to the appropriate area of a platter which needs charge (if recharging) or contains charge (if discharging).
Doesn't that seem reasonable given their background in hard drive technology?
I wonder if some of the big ultracapacitor companies have considered taking that route as a way of increasing the output voltage of their devices.
I still have my doubts about whether they could reach the charge densities (i.e., KWH of energy stored for the weight they've claimed), but I tend to think people don't invent things out of thin air. They often make connections from previous ideas which have been used in a different way. And this seemed like such a logical use of hard drive technology -- to keep track of and logically organize charge on an extremely capacitor dense barium titanate disc platter.
Ralph
Re: Re: Re: Barium Titanate breakthru
This whole chain of responses is pathetic !
Not one of you have the intelligence to design, let alone comprehend, a technology so vastly different to the present day understanding. So just go back to sitting in your dream-no-comprehension chair in your plain jane, no accomplishment life, and wait to see if you can buy this sophisticated work of art when it comes to a store near you! But remember … since you’ve not achieved any special status in life, to-date, you’ll have to be patient until the successful people drive the cost of this technology down for you to your acquisition capability level. The next time you respond to such foolish rhetoric, in the quest to impress each other with what you don’t know AND can’t understand, do it on the telephone so that others don’t have to be subjected to such nauseous writings !!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Barium Titanate breakthru
I did some calculations:
Energy Density (100% efficiency) of Gasoline = 47 MJ/kg
Inverse Specific Fuel Useage for (25 mpg) Gasoline Engine = 12 MJ/kg (or a typical car is 26% efficient in extracting chemical energy)
This equals 9.3 kWhr per gallon of gasoline (of extracted energy). If we assume that we drive around 50 miles per day (18k miles per year) - we will use 19 kWhr of energy per day. An equivalent electrical motor with 100% efficiency (using brake momentum recovery) will need to charge 3000 watts for 6 hours (overnight). This will cost around $1.30 per day to drive (or equivalent to 65 cents per gallon). Not too bad in terms of cost vs. the current cost of gasoline. If you want to drive farther then you have to charge at a higher rate (e.g. 6000 watts - most likely the highest household charge rate) or for longer time periods (plus you have to have a high capacity electrical energy storage device).
Bottom Line: You cannot charge an ultra-capacitor (to drive all day) for 5 to 10 minutes (this would require 100,000 watts of power!). At least not from a standard house. This would burn up any current housing electrical wiring.
It is going to take all night to charge any kind of electrical storage device (battery or ultra-capacitor) from current home circuitry to drive a vehicle all day. One will have to charge overnight each night. The limiting factor is going to be the electrical wiring capacity.
Unless we have a different way of charging (i.e. different home wiring but then safety becomes an issue) we will be limited to about 100 miles for an average electrical vehicle daily range independent of electrical storage device based on our capability to charge it.
Let me know if my math is wrong. I don't think there is any magic here - it takes a lot of energy to move a car (electrical or chemical).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Barium Titanate breakthru
The math looks correct to me, good analysis. Perhaps some cap to cap transfer could aid in the buffering (e.g. 100 recharge paths rather than just one.)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Barium Titanate breakthru
There are a couple of actions to take to mitigate the problem. For example if one had four ultracapacitors in the auto that could store a days drive each (so you have four days of electrical energy or 400 miles) stored then one has plenty of capability to skip a charge cycle or handle a failure of one of the capacitors. Additionally quick charge (say 100 KW) stations could be built (commercial units) to give you a 5 minute charge to allow for another couple of hours on the road.
I was only speaking to the problem of quick charging at home. Even a parallel path eventually has to come down to a single wire. Check out the largest draw at your home (say your dryer) - it has a 40 amp breaker or around 9 KW at 220 volts.
The main breaker is 200 amps or 40 KW so the line running to the house is capable (of quick charging) but it would take shutting down all other electrical users.
I don't see quick charging at home as a necessity.
Slow charging overnight while sleeping is fine for 90% of what we do in terms of driving. Long trips can be handled with commercial charging stations.
I've thought about this. You have a point. Same point made in IEEE Spectrum, (even for commercial stations), a couple of months back. But what if the 'charge' station had several banks of ultracaps, batteries, or other storage medium, even a flywheel. The station could easily average out it's power needs over a 24 hour period and make rapid charging very feasible.
Re: Re: Re: Barium Titanate breakthru
Buck_wheat doesn't understand what is going on.
Re: Re: Re: Barium Titanate breakthru
Dude - the message about the hard drive being the impetus of this new technology was using the hard drive as an analogy. The author talked about hard-drive-like things and processes possibly being utilized in these new capacitors. He makes a good point about understanding the background of the inventors to guess how this new technology might work.
Re-read it.
And you might wanna think about not being so condescending in the future because now it's twice as funny.
I just checked with Geico and they will NOT insure the Zenn electric car except for use on a golf course. I will not buy one under that restriction! So the discussion of batteries seems like a moot point for now.
Simply amazing. The naysayers, especially ones with advanced degrees and experience in the fields related to EEStor technology, make me want to weep. You come up with elaborate responses to prove that the EEStor technology will never work, yet you don't really know what they have discovered or created. Why waste such bright minds on debunking something before you have all the information.
It's like arguing with me about what I have in a small box. I say it's lion and you tell me that's impossible, the box is too small. It's a small ceramic figurine of a lion. I wasn't lying, you just didn't have enough information to disbelieve me.
Of all these posts, there was one that smelled like it might be true. EEStor's site went down about the same time that news was being released about the breakthrough's and installation of rail guns on naval ships. They had to go on ships because the capacitors were so large. Then, a possible breakthrough in size and storage rears up. Maybe that makes it possible to build smaller rail guns, portable, maybe even hand held. Serious warfare advantage. Serious security risks. Would you want Billy-Bob and his white supremest buddies toting around a rail gun, or even worse, Ahmed Sherif Mohamed and his cell of virgin Muslims.
I saw the same thing happen in 2003 when personal VTOL for the masses was very close. Companies disapeared, changed names, toned down their info, Web Sites changed, etc. Almost overnight.
I'm not saying it's true, because I just don't have enough information.
Le Petomane
You have some good points.
However, when someone raises a (perceived) outlandish claim, are those of us with a background to understand the problems supposed to keep quiet? Who will rein in the charletons, or do we let innocent people invest without adequate information?
Capman, no, I don't think knowledgeable people should keep quiet. That benefits no one. I was addressing the posts that basically begin with 'IMPOSSIBLE, A SCAM, etc.' without considering the knowledge that is not being told.
A123, or the M1 was kept very secretive and under the radar, yet they proved to have something.
BY all means, debate, question, question, and question some more. But also take in what we do know. EEStor has been passing each milestone with verified, third-party, oversight. They are on to something and what kind of stupidity would it take to show all of their cards. There is also the realm of nano-tech, but more on that below.
I wasn't kidding about the use of super-capacitors being the key to portable rail-guns, and that would be a huge military advantage. The government, especially our current administration, has historically shown that they place more value on a military advantage over oil, global warming, economic and medical benefits to civilians.
I'm not an X-Files nut seeing conspiracy around every corner (well, not completely), but I'm not naive either.
One last question/note. Have you heard or read Ray Kurzwell's 'The Singularity'? If scientific datum and facts are so important-and they are-then Kurzwell has laid out some astonishing claims that are highly backed up. On of the most important things in the coming breakthroughs all require nano-tech that is becoming a reality. I'm not a scientist, and I have only been able to make it 1/3rd of the way through his book, but it's a masterpiece.
Keep the dialouge flowing.
Thanks for the lead, I had heard of that book, I will look it up.
My main concern with the EEStor thing is that of the six "showstoppers" the easiest one for Zenn and EESTor to comment on would be the voltage effect on permittivity. In every known instance of dielectrics in that region, the cap will drop to 10%. The patent is silent on that aspect, and their next milestone is only to measure it, not its behaviour with voltage. (which is 20 times higher then usual)
Thier earlier milestone was equally trivial. To get a lab to analyze Barium Nitrate, which is available by the ton. Why are they bothering to make it? There are 20 or more steps beyond that to making the device. Shouldn't they get to their new aspects, which is 10 steps away yet.
I am a stockholder in Zenn, and was invited by them to state my concerns, which I did. I did not get a reply, which means what, I wonder?
Oh, well, a few months may tell.
Thanks, that makes sense. But wasn't the purity of the Barium the key point? I may be wrong.
BTW, the full name of that book is 'The Singularity is Near, by Ray Kurzwell". I guarantee you'll enjoy it
Official Response from Zenn on delay of eestor
If you read between the lines, development is done, so they must have a prototype (in fact sounds like a long time now), it looks like this is the real deal, now can they commercialize it? So in my opinion this is where Kleiner Perkins and Zenn came in after they prove the prototype and they took on the risk of commercializing it's not easy to put together a 1,000 layers of defect free material, hundred of thousands of untracapacitors a day, but we see in a few months.
Dear Mr. Jerry,
There has been no official delay communicated directly to ZENN Motor
Company. This particular is in fact misleading in its story title.
EEStor is quoted as stating that the EESU is on schedule for delivery
to
ZMC within the next ten months. That is not to say that they won't
deliver before then - merely announcing the possibility that additional
time may be required in the commercialization phase - not development
time of the ultracapacitor.
The next milestone involves permittivity testing and no official 'due
date' has been announced.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any additional questions
or concerns.
Catherine Scrimgeour
Public Affairs Specialist
ZENN Motor Company
Tel: 416.535.8395 x 201
Fax: 416.535.4043
www.ZENNcars.com
Re: Official Response from Zenn on delay of eestor
Good work, Mr Jerry.
Curious though, I read something else "between the lines" If they had a prototype, the permittivity would already have been measured, it takes only seconds.
That is the key parameter, and does it or does it not deteriorate when they put the high voltage on.
Why can't they answer that very simple question? I asked it a year ago, and they were mute.
Re: Official Response from Zenn on delay of eestor
Does this response from this spokeswoman require clarification? The device or capacitor may refer to a device in the lab. I am not sure that the device has actually been prototyped. This is the problem of a secret in that the hopeful read this as a sign of something but it was deliberately stated vaguely thus it still is likely a secret.
Rail gun technology has made EEStor go stealthy
Rail guns require huge capacitors and are only deployed, recently, on military ships. EEStor technology could potentially put a rail gun on a tank, mobile infantry unit, or smaller platforms. Think about what the DoD would do if they could put a device on a tank/truck that could shoot small payloads at 13,000 miles p/hour. Or, from a plane or drone. They would covet the technology and bury it for as long as they could from public commercialization.
No, my name is not Fox Mulder and this is just a guess. Maybe wrong, maybe not, but worth considering.
Maybe the only reason they can deploy them on ships is Newton's law, for every action there is....
Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
Much of the talk and dissent is above my head. One thing stands out when I research PURE Barium Titanate. It has dielctricl properties that are/were unexpected and the research is in it's infancy. We are dealing with nano-technology in regards to EEStor claims. The world is mighty different at that scale.
Have any of the naysayers worked with Pure Barium Titanate? I'm not saying your wrong, just wondering if there's more going on than some of you may be privy too.
Re: Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
Yes, the availablity of really pure BT has improved over the last few years, and it does have interesting properties. As a very pure material it has a higher permittivity then normal purity (99.99%).
But, heres the thing. It is a lousy commercial dielectric because it has a peak capacitance at about 100°C,similar to "normal" BT. Other oxides are added to reduce the K, and make it more stable with temperature and voltage. So when you have to add 15-20% of other oxides to it, it makes mute the difference between 99.999 and 99.9999% purity, not worth the order of magnitude increase in price.
There is some improvement that carry over, so it demands the BT be a reasonable purity, which varies with the end use.
On your "rail gun" discussion, the patent office is required to have the defense department (and now probably homeland security) review any patents related to high energy phenomena. They actually have special rules that kick in, and the patent, if real, will not be published.
Kind of gives you a warm feeling doesn't it?
Good questions!
Re: Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
Really! That does not give me a warm an fuzzy. That should be VERY public knowledge.
Re: Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
From the Patent Office Manual:
“…35 U.S.C. 181 which provides, in part:
Whenever the publication or disclosure of an invention by the publication of an application or by the granting of a patent, in which the Government does not have a property interest, might, in the opinion of the Commissioner of Patents, be detrimental to the national security, he shall make the application for patent in which such invention is disclosed available for inspection to the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of Defense, and the chief officer of any other department or agency of the Govern¬ment designated by the President as a defense agency of the United States.
If the agency concludes that disclosure of the invention would be detrimental to the national security, a secrecy order is recommended to the Commissioner for Patents. The Commissioner then issues a Secrecy Order and withholds the publication of the application or the grant of a patent for such period as the national interest requires.”
Re: Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
I can't know how to say it elegantly, but that's messed up.
Okay, I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist and that just adds fuel to my fire. There's so much DoD is hiding.
And I forgot to add one of my favorite quotes. Conspiracy is not a theory, its a crime.
Re: Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
A little paranoid?
Humping 16lbs of batteries in 120 degree temperatures is not a way to make soldiers small targets, it slows you down-a lot. The military has no interest in giving tech a back seat to the 10's of millions of dollars already given to solve this problem.
If you think differently then you really need to have the experience of humping them around. A rail gun is a cool tool, but not as effective as a SOGer with a grid and help from his friends at 35,000 feet.
Rail guns are a 140,000 ft plus tech, held within heavy lift hydrogen envelopes, shooting ceramic pellets aimed by capsuled forces with real time high def optics and laser/radar targeting.
Get a grip and a clue!
Re: Okay, I did a little research on Pure Barium Titanate
You apak only of rail guns mounted on ships, which this technology is appropriate for. I have seen small scale rail gus that are almot portable.
Energy Density is the bottom line
Getting a high dieletric constant is about a third of the battle. The rest is dieletric breakdown. The energy stored in a capacitor is
e=(cv^2)/2.
We can double the maximum v by doubling the spacing between plates. But, this cuts c to a quarter of its original value. We can fit only half as many plates in a given volume. In the formula for capacitance, the area is cut in half and the height is doubled.
With a relative permitivity of 18500, I get a field strength of about 700 volts/micron to match the energy density of gasoline. This sounds like a lot. To get this between the plates, it will be much higher at the edges where the flux lines are not parallel.
Eight gallons of gasoline represents about a gigajoule or 278 Kwh. They are proposing to store only 15 kWh. Since the break we get is the square root of the ratio, We are down to about 1/4 of the field strength or 175 v/um. Does anyone out there know what the conventional ceramics can withstand?
On an atomic level, the field pushes the electrons to one side of the atomic nuclei. Breakdown occurs when they are pushed so hard that they break free. If the voltage is across the particle coating, the barium titanate inside is not storing the energy.
Re: Energy Density is the bottom line
O.K. I have been reading just about all the comments and opinions on this subject . But I have not forgotten that Pres. Weir said he would deliver the first working system to the Canada based electric car co . this year - and its running out ! Has the DOD stepped in and sat on it ? Whats going on . Give us a clue Mr. Weir ...
Re: Energy Density is the bottom line
It is not some conspiracy by the DOD or anyone else. It is another attempt to overrule the laws of physics, with the usual results. VC's are essentially high rolling gamblers. This guy would improve his odds if he extended his mathematics beyond accounting. He needs to actually calculate energy before he spends his money.
2 New Eestor Update - Sounds Encouraging
Eestor has filed a new patent on their purification process for barium titanate powder that was certified back in Jan..
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20070148065.html
Kleiner, Perkins indirectly validates eestor claims (From my research I think Joy got the liters mixed up with Kilogram as 100 kg not liters for Lithium Ion "Li Ion") - now the timeframe is interesting as it does not support eestor starting next year to deliver but it does support they believe in what they are doing and the timeframe they are talking about could be at mass distribution levels after working out all of the tech issues along the way.
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9798043-7.html?tag=tb
The key stumbling block to plug-in hybrid cars are electric vehicles is batteries. But Joy is again optimistic there.
"There's a range of new chemistries coming so that you can imagine, say five to ten years from now, instead of 100 watt-hours per liter we're at today, that a break-out company will have a 500 or thousand watt-hours--a five to 10 times (increase in) the energy density," he said.
Re: 2 New Eestor Update - Sounds Encouraging
Sorry, but there are a couple key errors here:
1. That is a published application, not a patent. The PTO has not ruled on it yet. All applications are now published about a year after filing.
2. The process that they "certified" last year was for purifying Barium Nitrate. That is one of the precursers for the Barium Titanate that you see in the application.
3. The patent application discusses making a dielectric, not purifying a material.
As you can see from that, there are many more steps before BN becomes BT and even more before they have a capacitor.
AND, most important, their next milestone is to verify the permittivity, WHICH THEY HAVE NOT YET DONE and cannot do, until they have made and tested the dielectric. We all hope that they not only do that, but verify it is stable with the high voltage they need. Any currently available BT dielectric with that permittivity will drop about 75%, sometimes more with a couple hundred volts over the 13 micron thickness they need. The ability to withstand 3000 volts is the surprising and breakthrough parameter.
Re: 2 New Eestor Update - Sounds Encouraging
Edge effects should be quite a challenge too.
I want to clarify your stand on EESOR's technology. I read your posting in Clean Break:
by CapacitorMan on Sat 20 Jan 2007 02:04 PM EST "Any neutral knowledgable person, beyond reproach, would label the EEStor capacitor for what it probably is, a vehicle to make at best a poor investment, at worst a scheme to make dishonest people rich. "
Yet in above postings in TechReview you say you own shares in Zenn. What has happened to change your view, or are you just hedging your bets?
Good point.
I owned shares in Zenn before they announced their funding of EEStor. I wrote the officers of Zenn with a detailed report, expressing my concern.
And, I may have been a little harsh. It may be that EEStor simply did not know of the potential problems, they are not obvious.
It is still curious though, things don't add up. The recent patent was the third configuration of a dielectric, they have not yet measured the permittivity; etc, etc.
Furthermore, I think Zenn itself is a good company. There are other ways to increase thier range and speed, and that will improve the stock value.
Forgive my ignorance, but in a patent application, don't they require a WORKING prototype?
No.
The patent office does not require a prototype or any model. That requirement stopped in the early 1900's. Hence, there are patents on carburetors that get 100 mpg, and other "impossible" items.
On
0/08/07 I asked for further info on the roll-out of EEStors to the Zenn co . I have October 29th 2007 . President Weir said the " System " would be ramped out in this year . Not much time left .
If the public is being " Stroked " on this deal its a sad commentary for American scientists . I even have the feeling that some of the contributors to these articles are Shills . Just leading us down the garden path .
Redemtion : Article in popular Magazine . The DOD is offering a $1,000,000.00 Prize to someone who comes up with a wearable power supply that will produce 20W average power continuously for 96 hours while weighing less than 4 kilograms
So what say you Pres . Weir ?? The web site is ;www.dod.mil/ddre/prize/ kd4ukex
eestor announced a purity goal earlier this year. I think they grossly underestimated how long it takes to make a production line not to mention working out performance issues with the product that would (or will, is?) roll down that line. Capacitorman is correct that a prototype that performs as predicted is the next bit of information that is needed otherwise this likely is a scam. No sane person would ever start a production line without a working prototype. I can understand secrecy because of a military dual use scenario and I think that "letting the device speak for itself" is also great. But announcing production without mentioning a working prototype is bizarre.
By the " Clock on my wrist " I copy the 18TH of November . That leaves 1-1/2 months to the end of this year .
Dr. Weir made the statement that the EEStors system would be incorporated in the Canadian based electric cars .. Before the end of this year . Once again I hope this is not a hugh push to rip off the investors .And give hope to a lot of people reading this text , hoping for that star in the sky .
If it is a hoax I hope they fry his hind side !
But I am wishing it is not .
Give us a clue Dr. Weir .. Is it ? Or isnt' it ?? Throw us a line ....
KD4UKEX
Tyler has started a new thread at:
http://tyler.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2007/11/1/3328442.html?message
which seems to have attracted some knowledgeable people. The concensus does not seem optimistic.
Lockheed-Martin makes Deal with EESTOR
Check out the interview at
http://www.gm-volt.com/2008/01/10/lockheed-martin-signs-agreement-with-eestor/
Since we have gone philosophical, let me return us to the discussion at hand - One thing I am always looking for but never see is what is the Q factor, or leakage? How long will the capacitor hold the charge. Never seen any data. Curious. -- Regarding the theorists and hopefuls out there, there is a place for theory. Yes it changes. We are all hopeful that EEStores capacitor is for real but unless new physics is discovered, theory stands as a bedrock upon which all our technology stands. Until the theorists are proven wrong I won't be running to my stock broker!
Most theories are idealizations and are not infallible.
The bulk of the discussions here have centered around bulk barium titanate powder. What about its properties as a constituent in a heterogenous ordered(??) nanostructure.
I don't know what everyone gets so worked up about. If they found a way around the supposed "theory", great! Sometimes it takes an innovator to go beyond what some have called a law or rule of thumb to prove the law or rules can change because the "innovator" explores other realms where the rules don't apply. Myself as a hobby, I jump out of planes and by manipulation change in body form I can exceed the old world rule of terminal velocity,,,hmm ,just figure..
It could be true, stranger things are happening out there.
As they say in Maine, It's hard tellin, not knowin.
from wikipedia:
Critics have argued that measurements of the permittivity of the EEStor components were made only at low voltage and that permittivity would have been much lower due to the phenomenon of dielectric saturation which lowers the effective permittivity during high voltage/micron conditions. However, the WIPO (world patent) filed by EEStor in August 2005[12] contains permittivity data averaging 19,818 at 85°C and 5,000 V at 9.81 microns in thickness (over 500 V/micron). No other researchers have reported such a high permittivity at such a high voltage/micron. The EEStor patents do not give an explanation for how this was achieved. The EEStor U.S. patent references a patent[13] that uses similar coatings on various sub-micron particles of modified barium titanate. Under one set of conditions, they achieved a permittivity of only 2400 and did not report the permittivity at high voltages. Their breakdown voltage was 4 times less, a little over 100 V/micron.
The EEStor patents cite a 1993 article [14] and a 2000 Philips Corporation patent[15] as exact descriptions of its "calcined composition-modified barium titanate powder". The Philips patent discusses "doped barium-calcium-zirconium-titanate." Therefore the EEStor dielectric consists of sub-micron particles of calcined doped barium-calcium-zirconium-titanate coated in 10 nm aluminum oxide and in a plastic (PET) matrix. The Philips patent reports a permittivity of up to 33,500 at 1.8 V/micron for the material in bulk, 200 times lower than the voltages being used by EEStor. The Philips patent does not use small coated particles in a plastic matrix and it does not report the permittivity at the very high voltages that EEStor is using, but it reports the permittivity has "a low voltage-dependence."
I think this is the most comments I have ever seen on any TechReview post. Keep up the conversation, I like reading the comments they are interesting and insightful.
Brian
www.TechRd.com
Commercialization
Innovation Management
To all of you in the know naysayers:
Hey Wright Brothers, your nuts, man can't fly!
Boy were those idiots wrong!!!
Be careful what you slam as can't be done, or guess what people will call you in the future!!!
Sweet! See thats perfect for the Goss132 EV. I can buy the goss132, and exchange the batteries as I see fit! Glad to know about this stuff. Would love to order them both right now!! Finally, what a relief to know this exists, and goss exists. Sounds like those 2 might have a great future together. Consumers buying both goss132 & those batteries.
Micro Bubble Technologies has a battery that will fully charge in less than 10 minutes and out perform any battery on the market today.
http://microbubbletech.com/CNTbattery.html
Recognizing the speed of the recharge for the CNT battery, my question is how many miles will the battery provide?
i ran into this site while searching for a battery design for a prototype vehicle.small weight for big storage is needed. looks like my solution will have to be lithium,at least for now. pray these guys in tx turn out to be for real,we seem in dire straights with so many gas guzzlers moving to and from work all week long and one to a car.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
Emosson
4 Comments
EEStor hype
Unfortunately EEStor never made and will never make the supercapacitor described in the patent
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT7033406&id=cjx3AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=eestor#PPA3,M1)
because they ignore a well known physical effect, called “dielectric saturation”.
Barium titanate has been used in capacitors for decades, due to its high dielectric constant:
http://www.avxcorp.com/docs/techinfo/mlcmat.pdf
However, the dielectric constant drops as the electric field strength increases:
http://www.nap.edu/books/NI000488/html/49.html
http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v71/i12/p890_1
At a hypothetical field of 3500 Volts over a thickness of 12.76 micrometers, as proposed in the patent, the dielectric constant of barium titanate would be orders of magnitude lower than the claimed 18500, reducing capacity and energy density by the same factor…
This has been discussed in more detail by Prof. Anatoly Moskalev on December 24th and 26th, 2006 in
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog1/index.php?p=43
with an update on January 20th, 2007:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog1/?p=46
Reply
theBike45
15 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
Well, on the one hand we have some professor claiming that some theory prevents EEStor from acomplishing what it says. On the other hand we have a real company apparently making real devices that apparently work as designed. I'll believe the guys actually working on the devices first, until they fail to produce what they say they they will. Theories and laws generally follow innovations to explain what happened.
Reply
hamid
11 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
AFAIK, EEStor has not built a capacitor with the characteristics required for an EV (3500 volt field with high capacity as claimed). They seem to only have produced the powder, but not a capacitor that can be subjected to the high field strengths.
Can you provide a link to "apparently making real devices that apparently work as designed."?
thanks
Reply
newstemp1
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
Nov/16/2009 report: "EEStor has publicly indicated an objective of delivering functional technology to ZMC by the end of the calendar year," said Zenn spokesperson Catherine Scrimgeour. "ZMC is confident in their ability to meet that objective."
"According to the EEStor enthusiast blog which follows the story very closely, a permit was issued in August to allow EEStor to expand at least into the 2800 square foot adjoining store."
Oct/23/2009 report: "Priya L. Tabaddor, of UL's Global Energy Services, told Dennis [Lyle Dennis in allcarselectric.com] that they "have received a request to certify EEStor's product."
It sounds as though we are about to find out what product they can initially deliver. Note that the properties of Barium titanate may not be the properties of the product that EEStor have in mind, even if it is in part related to Barium titanate.
Reply
run
7 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
Having read your words on more then one day I want to emphasize them:
Theory is theory. It's never perfect, never what it says it is is. F NEVER EQUALED MA. The 'other' one might not be the best we can do either, but EVEN IF IT IS, it's NOT reality. It's just talk. Those who have to have things proven have faith in fantasy to begin with.
Theory to accomplish things, not to discourage innovation. Not to spare brain cells. Smart people don't need 'principles' to understand what they closely observe. The brain has a nack at combining observations and phenonemon so often much better when not confused by generalities and analogy. But we differ widely in our ability to do that and no amount of silver spooned or coaching makes much of a difference despite so much progress in didactic theory.
Those who teach need them. Those who don't need to teach don't.
Reply
johnsawyercjs
8 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
run, that's an interesting collection of confusing, self-canceling platitudes, which could mean you're either trying to emphasize the benefits of theory, or the benefits of practical implementation, but we have no real way of telling from your post. "Those who have to have things proven have faith in fantasy to begin with"--what is that supposed to mean?
Reply
Elroch
56 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
F does equal MA
with an accuracy adequate for almost all purposes.
Even quantum mechanics and general relativity merely produced new laws which make very small corrections to Newton except under at very high speed, very small scales or extremely powerful gravitational fields.
Reply
wriskit
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
Much research is trial and error. But theories provide an understanding of how accumulated successful results occur and provide a basis for further progress. Capacitance is well studied and the theories behind it are pretty solid. This allows researchers to avoid paths of inquiry unlikely to produce positive results. Capacitor systems can be useful adjuncts to battery-powered vehicles by replacing mechanical flywheel designs that have been built to recapture brake energy. Until EEstore demonstrates its capacitor system's ability to power a vehicle without a battery as well as a vehicle using a battery, scepticism is justified.
Reply
hartles99him
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
I agree, let the company prove itself. Maybe someday in the near future they and others can combine these altra capacitors with the new nano lithium battery technology develped by Stanford university. This silicon nano technology is supposed to increase storage by 10 fold. Then we really might have something.
Reply
CJC_PE
13 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
The EEStor patent indicates that the ceramic material that they are using is a doped barium-titanate covered by US patent 6078494 assigned to U.S. Phillips Corp. That patent claims that the material has a capacitance with a low voltage dependence. The patent does not quantify the voltage dependence. The accelerated life test was performed at 1800 V/mm. The EEStor patent indicates the selected ceramic formulation has a dielectric constant of 33500 before further modification.
Reply
wizwom
11 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
The patent that I am sure they are using is 7144655, which is a hybrid DLC/LiIon Cell. That is, the charge is held partially in a chemical cell, and partly in a dielectric-separation. As I understand it, the charging cycle is a quick capacitance sequence, which then naturally trickles the charge to the Integrated Cell.
Reply
silvertrailer
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
Break-through technologies only seem that way to non tech types,
Technology evolves. For example every aspect of the apple iphone has been around for quite some time. So this ultracapacitor is hype like the anti-gravity Segway...remember that. I'd be happy to get ultracapacitors to run 4 LED lights : A project I have been working on for a decade. Since the storage of energy with Ucap's is macro molecular you aren't gonna get the energy density to power a motor but as motor starters well that been done since the invention of the electric motor and could use improvement in hardware, software and aplication finesse
Reply
run
7 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
what's the point of your project? For a grand you can buy a thousand LED flash controllers right now. Most camcorders still use incandescent though for VIDEO! MOST DVD players, and an incredible fraction of current models, can't handle standardardised common formats or anything other then pressed discs.
Brush motors are for Kirby vacum cleaner types. A bike one just failed to get a quarter grand on ebay. Almost all energy products seem to be coming out of an anticompetetive market be they what most people use.
The fact is that the 'phone' you speak of will suck at being used as a phone in comparison with what mobile phone users enjoyed a decade or two ago. SNL made fun of it on battery life. It will drop calls when plugged into the grid. It might sell some wireless routers "turning air into gold"; it will further destroy the conversations of those it infects.
Reply
Techno Eng
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
Looking for a cap to power 4 LED's?
ComDial Telecom used a 3"dia x 4"lngth Cap in their Phone KSU's as a backup to operate the System for up to 12 hours duing Power Failure. It works beautifully. Sure, It has to be recharged.
We have the X-43A Aircraft, Top speed: 7000 mph. Technology "grows." (I could say "RULES.) But I won't.
Reply
CapacitorMan
26 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
Good point. As someone who has worked in this field for decades, there are several areas that have been overlooked, in addition to the dielectric saturation:
1. The first, and greatest is the temperature coefficient on these kind of dielectrics, it drops 80% at the high temperature end,
2. The voltage stress will be 3 times what is typically allowed.
3. The failure mode for these types of capacitors is shorting, and that energy, if real, would release the equivalent of 100 sticks of dynamite.
4. To make the capacitor using low cost electrodes means firing in reducing atmospheres, which this type BT can't take
5. They cannot get the characteristics they claim with one micron grain size.
6. They ignore the law of mixtures-when they mix the two glasses, they will drop the K dramatically.
Just for fun, check out the "freedom car" initiative...the contributing universities and companies are not dummies. They rule BT dielectrics out mainly because of the energy possible, and the lack of a "benign failure mode".
I wonder what they will accomplish with the next $2 million they are about to get. For the first set of funding, they came up with pure Barium Nitrate. Imaging what a good graduate program could do with that funding.
Reply
kalexander
2 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
Grad program?
How many idiot PhDs would that produced, compared to competent ones?
That's like saying state planning works better than free enterprise.
Reply
DabRetroper
2 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
All technological knowledge and prowess aside, I am struck by how quickly those who consider themselves "in the know" rush to discredit or shout "impossible" at an idea simply because they have been unable to do it themselves.
EEStor has thus far been quite secretive, presumably because they do not want their work duplicated, but admittedly possibly because the whole thing is bunk.
However, without the benefit of the knowledge of what their solutions are to the problems so many of you bring up here, it is both asinine and inerudite to use words like "never," "cannot," "impossible," or "hype." The information simply doesn't exist to draw these conclusions.
I'd expect better argumentative logic from a group of people allegedly so learned. How many great discoveries led to things we use on a daily basis that take advantage of an elegant solution to a problem that was "impossible" to solve? Let's be honest; most of you are immensely concerned that your own education and intellect are insufficient to solve the problem you see before you, which might well have been solved by someone else.
Reply
CapacitorMan
26 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
I understand your point that we should not be a bunch of "nay-sayers". But what would you have those of us familiar with the technology do? Shut up and let the dreamers have a field day with no testing?
This is not a new formulation, it is virtually identical to commercially available materials that behave very differently from the claims, just as others have said. The most recent patent is the third formulation that EEStor has come up with and claimed astounding properties. Do you wonder what happened to the first two?
Reply
electronicsman
2 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
Caps have been around for a long time. Improvements came a long way. The one farad, the ten farad and so on came with new materials while theory still the same. When I graduated in 1973 with a graduate degree I thought I knew it all. It took many years after that for my development. Theory is just that, it does not conflict with inventions or new ideas. Degrees sometimes get in the way, but they are (if they are remmembered) helpful to explain things. Many times simple ideas can take the state of the art a long leap forward. Ideas should be explainable unless they are secret to protect the hard work and the amount of dollars spent to perfect them. To have an idea, prototype it, improve it, and get it to market is something professors, Ph.D.'s never got into it. It is hardwork, loving what you do, investigation, reading, looking up others work, and so on until a viable product is out meeting minimum specifications.
Reply
electronicsman
2 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
We are discussing the new cap and the validity of claims made by EEStor. Some are trying to get EEStor to prove it, while others based on known physics rejecting it. The global view of this is to look at the application and where would fit an save humanity a lot of grief. Improvements come in small doses most of the time and if you hit the jackpot once in a life time it becomes unbelievable and most poeple are skeptical. Oher factors may play a major roll. For example, the Prius, a hybrid car been around for a while, until gas prices skyrocketted, it did not have that much share of the market, actually it left Detroit in the dust or it rendered all gas guzlers obsolete. The idea of combining gas, gearbox, electric motor/generator, battery technology together, a system, turnkey product. You may argue today one component, it may replace the battery in the Prius or other application. At the end it is the economics, the convenience and the acceptance by the user what is going to make the difference.
Reply
jiggys
3 Comments
What I can Buy Today
Today I can buy a 3000F,2.7V ultracapacitor from Maxwell with an energy density of 5-6 WH/kg. This is a mass produced product with extensive sales. JEOL in Japan says they have an improved nanocarbon ultracapacitor with an energy density of 50-75 WH/kg but I believe this still under development.
The EESTOR patent claims 31F at 3500V in 336 lbs of about 342 Wh/kg but looks to be a long way from production, probably 3-5 years judging from the time EESTOR's competitors took.
I personally think the 3500V is a red herring since a lower voltage at a bigger capacitance is more usefull for running motors etc and avoids additional weight of voltage conversion equipment.
By the time EESTOR gets up to speed these other companies will probably be there too.
Reply
CJC_PE
13 Comments
Re: What I can Buy Today
The higher voltage is the key to the EEStor approach to obtaining high energy density. Energy stored in a capacitor is proportional to the square of the charge voltage. Given two capacitors of the same capacitance value with one charged to one thousand times the voltage of the other, the one charged to the higher voltage contains one million times as much energy as the one charged to the lower voltage.
Reply
jiggys
3 Comments
Re: What I can Buy Today
What counts is how much energy is stored. This is not necessarily a function of V squared, since we dont know how capacitance varies with voltage.
EESTOR's 31F at 3500V capacitor energy is the same as one with 3100F at 350V.
Based on some of the other comments on this board I think they will find 3500V is a tough nut to crack, and that a larger capacitance, lower voltage system is easier to develope.
Reply
CJC_PE
13 Comments
Re: What I can Buy Today
The voltage rating may indeed turn out to be a tough nut to crack along with preventing the high voltage from reducing the relative permittivity. However, that is what EEStor has evidently selected as their target. The ceramic dielectric itself and the ways they are modifying the dielectric are components that are best suited to developing high voltage capability in a small package as opposed to developing high capacitance value.
Reply
vincent52
1 Comment
Re: What I can Buy Today
when there is crises electric cars became very popular, but scientist never discover ,a very simple solution to e.v. what does the battery needs,( a charger). why they concentrate
on batteries,capacitors etc. they know the problem, but they dont have solution. base on our research, on board charger is the answear.
Reply
ingocar
2 Comments
Re: EEStor hype
Looks like they would be using doped barium-titanate, specifics unknownt to me. In any case, yuo are entitle not to invest in the company of course, even to feel jelous if they turn out to be right. But what I find obscene is tu acuse them of dishonestly so blumtly in public. They may be wrong and they may fail, but you are telling us that they are asking for money knowing they will fail because the wel known facts you point out.
You wrote here as you are the smart one, the only one who knows, and that thee cann't even read. You will grow older, eventually.
Reply
nhsatguy
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
I was impressed with the message posted by EMosson until I realized that it is referencing data from 1947. I realize the properties of physics are relatively constant, but the technology available to us today opens doors that simply weren't there 60 years ago. My understanding is that Ga. Tech recently announced success in improving the performance of Barium Titanate, which leads me to believe that Eestor may have something after all. My hope is tha they succeed.
Reply
simon2341
1 Comment
Re: EEStor hype
Business is a different from all kind of fields. As it requires talent and communication skills. So that people can be well attracted towards our products. Now people are well concentrating on businesses rather than doing jobs. As this is due to global economy crisis. So people who lost their jobs in this process can get suggestions from business forum. As it could well them with out facing any kind of risk.
-------
Simon
Business Forums
Reply