EXCLUSIVE: CEO of ZENN Motor Company on EEStor, EEStor Storage Units, cityZENN, and ZENNergy Drive Systems
ZENN Motor Company is a small Toronto based company currently building low speed lead-acid neighborhood electric vehicles. They have partnered with the secretive Texas company EEStor that supposedly has developed a breakthrough energy storage device. I had the chance for an interview with the CEO of ZENN, Ian Clifford, which follows.
What is the cityZENN?
We announced it at the end of March. We announced it in relation to the commercialization of EEstor’s energy storage technology. EEstor had made an announcement earlier in the year on their agreement with Lockheed Martin. We felt it was time then from a product development perspective to lay out our plans for a highway capable vehicle based on EEStors’ energy storage technology.
So you will use EEStors ultracaps as the sole energy source of the vehicle?
Thats correct. EEstor has these breakthrough energy and power densities, and so I think to call it an ultracapacitor is some respect is a disservice to the technology becasue it is such a breakthrough from existing ultracapacitor technologies. It is certainly a solid state energy storage device so it has the ability to store tremendous amounts of energy and power in a very compact footprint. The way that its designed allows for extremely rapid electronic charging times. If you have a charge situation where you have an EEStor device connected to another EEstor device in a charging station or even in a home, the ability to recharge in minutes as opposed to hours is entirely possible. cityZENN will have several several charging algorithms built into the car as its launched. You will be able to plug it into a regular 110 outlet and it will probably take about 4 hours to recharge or you could plug it into a 220 outlet and it will probably take about 2 hours to recharge.
The performance characteristics are such that we think that this vehicle specifically will meet the driving needs of probably 90% of people in North America, and even more people outside of North America in terms of driving habits. So we’re talking about a car with a 250 mile electric range between charges. You’ve got a highway capable vehicle so 80 mph is our target top speed with full gradability. So you’ve got a car that is absolutely usable in virtually any driving situation. Its not susceptible to cold or heat so you don’t have the technological limitation of chemical batteries. EEStors been testing to millions of cycles in their early cell prototypes so we basically have an energy storage device that is a permanent energy source that is distinct from something that has to be replaced every number of years.
So you’re saying millions of cycles as opposed to the typical 5000 cycles that is a goal for lithium-ion batteries. These devices could go millions of cycles without a decay in energy storage capability?
That’s correct. And that’s typical for capacitors. As a solid-state device they certainly will last and last and last and they’re known for that. So tha’ts one of the similarities that EEStor has definitely.
How did you form the relationship with EEStor, did they contact you, did you contact them. Most automakers are looking a lithium-ion, so how did that come about?
I founded ZENN in 2001 and we started creating a certain amount of profile for the company over 2001 and 2002. To such an extent that EEStor actually found us. I got a call from Dick Weir late in 2002 and he was at the point where he and his partner Carl Nelson were getting ready to commercialize the technology that they had developed 10 years previously. They were looking to find a industrial partner who would be entrusted in purchasing the technology right or rights to purchase their technology fro certain exclusive markets. That’s where the discussion started and we did extensive due-diligence on what they were doing back then. We were completely blown away by what we saw and what we saw the potential for their technology to be.
You felt that that was a superior route than going down the lithium-ion or nickel-metal hydride route?
For a number of different reasons. We were certainly compelled by what was happening in chemical battery technology and the advances that were happening, but they were quite incremental. So no significant breakthroughs and this is going back four or five years. We’ve certainly since seen continued incremental improvements in lithium-ion technology but to date we’ve yet to see a commercialized lithium-ion solution at even 20 kwh of storage. We’re still kind of waiting for that.
There were also other significant differentiators that compelled me to the EEStor technology, and a lot of the were the barrier things. The issue of being able to recharge in the same amount of time that it takes to fill a tank of gas, that was a big consumer barrier. How could you expect mass adoption if people were going to be inconvenienced by charging an electric car. So that was a very big motivator for me.
The volume and weight of the technology. We’re looking at a technology thats 1/4 to 1/3 the size, mass, and volume of a lithium-ion technology for the same energy storage. So suddenly you have an energy storage device that can store enough energy to give a useful range of an electric vehicle without having concerns about being able to crash-test. That always is a very very significant concern.
Are there risks of an electric short with the EEStor system?
That was the other thing I was going to get to, safety. The ability of the architecture that EEStor has developed allows for basically instant discharge to ground. So they’ve got becasue it is solid state the ability to dump that energy virtually instantly. If you look at any chemical battery what do you do with that energy thats caught in a medium that cannot discharge instantly? So that was an important consideration for us, its ability to act as a huge circuit breaker on itself.
I think perhaps the biggest thing and perhaps one of the things thats overlooked the most in the debate thats going on now in the search for energy storage is raw material availability. Its not until very recently that people have started to debate the availability of lithium, the global reserves of lithium. And the implications of potentially millions and millions of electric cars using pretty massive energy storage devices onboard and what that does to the existing global reserves of lithium which are limited. And that word limited I think is an understatement.
So as we we’re looking at technologies we were very very conscious of the scalability of the technology and what we saw with EEStor that was quite profound was their utilization of the raw material barite which has massive global reserves, over 2 billion tons of reserves. Enough if you put it in the context of automobiles, enough to build 10 billion automobiles. Hopefully we’ll never get there. The other implications for EEStor was that they play in a whole bunch of different markets so we saw in their design the ability to meet global energy demand. That was a huge consideration for us.
Do you guys have any working prototype vehicles?
No. Our expectation from EEStor and that’s always been our expectation is that they will deliver a commercial product to us. They will deliver and what they’ve told us is by the end of this calendar year was delivery of an early production commercial unit. I get asked that question all the time and my answer has remained consistent in that I’m not interested in a hand-built prototype from EEStor I’m interested in a commercial grade product that we can order 1 or 2 or 10 million of and not something that they’ve hand built. Thats not relevant to us. The only thing thats relevant is a mass commercialized product. Thats ultimately where the end game is for us.
So you see them doing all of the assembly work on their end and providing you with the packs for production?
Exactly. We have a great relationship with EEStor. We’re very very close to them, our engineering teams are integrated to the extent where we are specking final production product with them. We’ve worked through all the power electronic issues. Were very very comfortable with our costing. The discussions from our perspective are highly advanced. And what we see in terms of their build out, we are certainly one of the few companies and few people who have actually been behind the doors of what they are doing and its so compelling and truly thrilling. Just in terms of the impact that it has on global energy use and foreign fuel dependency and all the other issues that are related to petroleum. I see it as really a turning point.
Looking at the GM example, they get delivery of cells and they test them in their lab. They want to see things on the cell level. Have you seen examples of the EEStor cells behaving as they say they do?
Well the original patent is all based on the lab testing that EEStor did a decade previously. So absolutely as part of our due diligence with EEStor initially all that data was shared with us. So we have a very strong level of confidence that the science works but of course like anyone else the proof is in the final product and so becasue of that we’ve structured our agreement with EEStor based on milestones. So every payment milestone that we have on our technology agreement is based on third party verified data of EEStor achieving the specific milestone as they work towards commercialization. So we’ve been cautious as well. But certainly the build out that were seeing and the level of advancement that they’ve made in the last eighteen months gives us a great level of confidence.
So even though you don’t have a cell in hand you are seeing third party data along the way showing that they are achieving the milestones?
Exactly.
When do you expect to bring the vehicle to market?
We’ve stated that if EEStor stays on schedule to deliver early commercial units to us by the end of 2008 that we will have a fully certified highway vehicle powered by EEStor at the end of 09. We did state publicly that the initial launch for that vehicle will probably most likely be Europe and Asia as distinct from North America. That has mainly to do with the time it takes to certify a vehicle in the U.S. We are not going to engineer a car from the ground up. Were going to partner with a key global OEM on the chassis of the vehicle. So this will most likely be a vehicle that is already certified to certain global standards and then we will work together to integrate what we calla ZENNergy Drive System into the vehicle that would be powered by EEStor.
So have you shown any concept of what the exterior of the car will look like yet?
We haven’t shared that yet. We are still finalizing negotiations, very close to finishing negotiations related to what Ill call the initial cityZENN vehicle. So you can expect some more information on that in the near future from us.
Can you say how many people it will seat?
Yes were anticipating that it will be a five-passenger sedan. Our exclusivity with EEStor’s technology goes up to a 3100 pound curb-weight vehicle which is basically a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord-sized vehicle and smaller. Thats our exclusivity, our non-exclusivity goes to any size passenger vehicle as well. So I would anticipate that it would be a car thats pretty close to our maximum exclusive weight and it would have operating characteristics that you would expect out of a vehicle that size at a retail price that would certainly be competitive with an ICE version. Thats been our target all along.
Is your target less than $30,000?
Yes, exactly. You’ve got to remember that the GM Volt has an electric range of about 40 miles and we would be looking at a 250 mile electric range, without a range extender.
Is the EEStor technology less expensive than lithium-ion cells?
Dramatically. I cant go into specifics on that but suffice it to say that we feel quite comfortable in offering a vehicle with the characteristics I have defined with a price point of $30,000 or less. It is orders of magnitude less expensive than lithium-ion.
Lithium ion is costing $800-$1000 per kwh now and the USABCs goal is $200 per kwh and I guess you’re talking about values less than that?
I wont comment on the $200 per kwh becasue I don’t think thats realistic for any technology to be honest with you. But for lithium-ion I can only see the price going up. Just based on raw materials cost alone. Were going to get into a situation very quickly, the global reserves are such that were going to go into a serious price squeeze going forward if we get into serious large-format lithium ion battery production.
The people at A123 have advised me that there should be enough lithium out there to build more than 2 billion cars, you seem to have a different perspective than that.
Yes, very much so. The studies that we’ve seen and the understanding that we have that to meet capacity even with small scale adoption of plug-in hybrids the lithium reserves would be severely challenged to meet that demand. The lithium reserves are about 17 to 25 million tons. Thats not a lot of raw material. The price has already gone up in the last 8 years. Barite on the other hand which is the core ingredient of what EEStor is doing is incredibly plentiful and available throughout the world. Massive reserves in North America and very easy to get to and extract. This is part of the debate that has not really been articulated yet. Right now without EEStor yet being really commercialized it hasn’t really come to the forefront of the debate.
Why do you think the big companies like GM haven’t embraced this technology?
I think they are learning about it to different degrees, and I know that different companies have taken a look at the technology at different stages. I think ultimately and you see this with lithium technology, they say show us the product. They wont make a decision until they’ve got a commercial battery. And right now there isn’t a lithium ion battery out there at the scale thats required for a commercial product yet. Its very difficult to do. Its a huge challenge.
Is you long-range hope to become a major global player in the automotive market?
We see ourselves more as an enabler. We did announce the cityZENN as a ZENN branded product that we would distribute through large distribution networks. Once again partnering with other organizations. But ultimately we believe our most significant opportunity is the ZENNergy drive and that is an integrated drive system utilizing EEStor as the energy source that we would then joint-venture with any OEM around the world an then create a “powered by ZENN” drive for vehicles that fit within our market in exclusivity. Its kind of like the “Intel inside” model. We intend ZENN and ZENNergy to be synonymous with electric drive and thats the biggest role that we can play globally. And then every OEM is not our competitor, every OEM is our partner.
Is the city ZENN then more of a demonstration so other OEMs will become interested in purchasing the ZENNergy drivetrain system?
Exactly. We don’t need to re-invent the automotive industry, I think we need to re-define it. We don’t need to become a global OEM in order to demonstrate the viability of electric. I think judging from the response we get and certainly the response that you get on your site there is a huge pent up hunger for electrification. It’s remarkable. I think every major and minor automaker around the world appreciates and understands that. I think that ultimately the consumer and technology will drive us to that inevitability which is extremely exciting.
Are you guys planning to offer conversions when you have your ZENNergy system up and running?
We have worldwide exclusive rights to EEStor technology for the conversion of any 4-wheel vehicle on the planet. So absolutely the conversion market is something that is extremely compelling to us. Our plan is to start looking at some of the largest install bases for single platform use in fleet applications. So in NY you think of yellow cabs and black limos, in London taxi cabs, US postal service, you think of very very large install bases. So leveraging our ZENNergy drive we would create kits that would be specific to certain platforms. I think that will be an incredibly exciting market.
You would then be able to offer that to any 4-wheel vehicle?
Yes, any 4-wheel vehicle. Thats our exclusivity. To me thats the access to the 750 to 900 million cars that are on the planet. If you think about it we’ve got this huge investment in raw materials in every vehicle on the road. Depending on who you ask theres something between 20 and 40,000 gallons of water going into every car thats on the road. You think if all of the raw materials, and process materials, and energy that goes into creating this chassis and really the thing that fails in an internal combustion vehicle is the internal combustion system. You take a 5 year old vehicle that has whatever mileage and you create a replacement ZENNergy drive system for that platform, you certainly have another 10 years at least on the chassis.
This all sounds very exciting, but lets face it, it all depends on EEStor actually delivering a product. What is your confidence level that you are going to have a commercial grade EEStor product by the end of 2008?
Were expecting it by the end of the year and I cant state by what date specifically. Our level of confidence is extremely high based on what we are exposed to and certainly the involvement of others in this technology. The involvement of Kleiner Perkins is significant, the involvement of Lockheed Martin is significant. So we have a very very high level of confidence. To the extent that last year we became and equity investor in EEStor as well. So we put our money where our mouth is and invested in the common stock of EEStor as well, so no only do we have a technology agreement with them we also have participation in the other markets that they are developing product for. On the other hand, its not proven until its delivered. Ultimately the proof is in the commercial product. We are obviously making plans to develop solutions based on EEStor so that continues to show our level of confidence in our path.
How many employees does EEStor have?
Thats not publicly disclosed.
Have you guys spoken with GM at all?
Yes, we have. I wont get into any details and to what level we are at, but interestingly a Volt with a ZENNergy drive is a kind of a sexy product. You never know. It would certainly be something we’d love to explore. As I said earlier were a little tiny company and it takes more and more proof of the technology to get the attention of the bigger companies. We’re working at it
So you will tell the world when you get the product this year?
Oh you will know. Theres no question about it. For one thing were a public company and these are material advances in the company and they trigger payments. We intent to let the entire world know of the developments and the final commercializations.
Popularity: 10%
(21 votes, average: 5 out of 5) 
Loading ...
June 1st, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Wow, I wonder if you could retrofit a volt?
June 1st, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Nice interview Lyle. I noticed that the “5 minute” re-charge time we heard about before is gone. Is there an explanation for this? Was it a misquote? Also, do you have any reason now to be less skeptical than you were on the last post? I’m not seeing it.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Thats a good story. I am just not there yet. Big holes in the story. I am not saying that it will not happen but I have doubts. JMHO
Take Care
Arch
June 1st, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Great work Lyle. I was, and still am, rather convenced that the EEStor devices are for real. I’m very happy to hear that GM has been in contact with this technology. Potentially, this would be HUGE,
MONUMENTAL, and would sweep away all the current battery technologies instantly. I wouldn’t invest in any battery companies at this point. I think this fellow’s business plan is very sound - he realizes that the automotive industry already exists - simply changing powertrains is really not that big a deal - most modern cars are, after all, mainly electrically powered devices, whether they
have a gasoline powerplant or not. I’m sure the commonality of parts between the Volt and a gas powered job in a very large percentage. That’s why I laugh at these rather uninformed opinions
that claim electric cars to be so different from what’s out there now. They’re not.
Question : I wonder if GM would consider building a 250 mile ranged
EESTor powered Volt, but still with a range extender due to the current lack of public recharge stations? From the comments about how cheap EEStor EESUs will cost, I would think the Volt would
still have the same pricing.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:31 pm
MarkinWI
Agreed. It said 5 minutes, then mentioned recharging in the same amount of time as refueling, but then states 2 hrs on 110V and 4 hrs on 220V.
Which is it?
Reguardless, every concern I had with lithium ion batteries (life span, life cycle, temperture limitations, cost, supply, and size) are all addressed by EEStor.
However, my biggest concern is the part that only had 1 paragraph: discharge. You cannot throw away CRT TVs and monitors because of their capacitors that can explode vs litium ion which I think has a bigger chance of catching fire than exploding. And we are talking 250 miles worth of charge to explode. Self discharge? Really? And where is it discharging to? The fram in the middle of a crash? How is it discharging? When is the discharge activated? Upon crash sensors? If so, what if the sensor stops working in the middle of the freeway?
Way too many concerns with putting huge capacitors in cars with some of the drivers on the road today.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Sounds fantastic. Would be great to see it incorporated into the Volt.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I’ll summarize:
Do you guys have any working prototype vehicles?
“No”
Have you seen examples of the EEStor cells behaving as they say they do?
“we have a very strong level of confidence that the science works but of course like anyone else the proof is in the final product ”
How many employees does EEStor have?
Thats not publicly disclosed.
Thats all you need to know. The rest is smoke.
(I’m not saying it’s not a real technology–although there is zero disclosure, but there is alot of ‘non-developed real technology’ out there.)
If you could go less than zero…that is the chance they put a commercially available EEstor EV on the road. Even if they had working prototypes in the garage right now, it wouldn’t have a prayer of even getting through the regulatory hurdles (which would be massive on this tech) in time.
2009? 19 months? Production on the road?
/I have some magic beans for you to buy
June 1st, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Sorry that should have read:
If you could go less than zero…that is the chance they put a commercially available EEstor EV on the road IN 2009!
I missed the 2009 part. It could happen some day…but that day isn’t in 2009.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:40 pm
AMEN !
June 1st, 2008 at 9:40 pm
#3 I typed incorrect. Should read 4 hrs 110V and 2 hrs 220V.
We need an ability to edit
June 1st, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Nothing to do with this news:
Barron’s says GM shares could triple…or you could go broke (’A bet on General Motors would be risky ‘..in next 12-18 months), lol. Way to go out on a limb…and cover your butt, hehe.
http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/080601/generalmotors_shares.html?.v=1
Tuesday is going to be ex-ci-ting. We get the May autosales with the goodness of the annual meeting. Most people figure GM is going to have to come clean on future SUV outlook and US market share…along with their fancy new plans for a ‘bold future’
June 1st, 2008 at 9:48 pm
I’m skeptical. My guess is the first production units will perform under their initial goal and they will say they are “ramping up” capacity over time.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:49 pm
You sure can find an interesting angle toward what motivates the Volt fans.
I’m ever more optimistic about our American future with the impending break from Middle-East turmoil oi.
Thank you for driving the game in the right direction. Why this isn’t becoming a more ubiquitous point of conversation across the political spectrum is hard to imagine.
USAF Retired military veteran after fighting to protect Oil lanes for more than 20 years. Sounds as though the subsidy of American soldiers and tax dollars to protect oil at no cost to the rest of the world is coming to an end.
Thanks Lyle.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:50 pm
This sounds great! Sounds like this could be the game changing product we’ve all been waiting for.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Nobody from Texas would ever try to deceive the American Public….errrrr, wait a sec.
This all sounds too good to be true….and 99% of the time, when it is too good to be true, it IS to good to be true.
I would prefer that they prove me wrong, it would be like winning the lottery for us all.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Thanks for getting the interview, Lyle. Mr. Clifford sounds confident of EEStor storage units. If true, this will be a game changer. I noticed he hedged a little bit on the $200/Kwh, so apparently it will cost more than that. But still, it appears that the EEStor will be cheaper than lithium.
Interesting info.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:55 pm
I’ve been following the EEStor story for almost two years now, and they’re always “within months” of delivering a product. So far, however, they haven’t even built a prototype, much less a product. Even Lockheed Martin, which created a big story when they announced that they are working with EEStor, admitted that they haven’t actually seen anything yet.
I’d like to see the product work as much any anyone. If it works 1/10th as well as they claim, it would be a major breakthrough. However, so far they haven’t shown anything. Even worse, even if by some miracle the product does work, EEStor seems to have painted themselves in a corner with their exclusivity agreement with ZENN. If this were a real product, EEStor would be signing agreements with GM and Toyota, not ZENN. Even worse, ZENN is not only talking about putting them in unbuilt electric cars, but also retrofitting hundreds of millions of ICE-based cars. Dream on! Cars are amomg the most regulated and complex products built, and a simple replacement of the ICE with a battery and electric motor is a wild dream.
Finally, if the EEStor device even worked as advertised, why would we waste them by putting them into cars? These devices hold 53KWH of power (the equivalent of 106 sticks if dynamite) and run at 3500 volts. A car would be one of the least likely places to put one, since an accident could result in a disaster. Say what you want about the slow charge of batteries, but it’s the slow charge and discharge that adds to their safety. If this product really did exist, it would only go into places there the high voltage and fast discharge would be appreciated and handled - utility load levelers (especially for wind and solar power), uninterruptable power systems, and railroad systems (which already routinely and safely run on 25,000 volts).
I’m really hoping for the best, but my current thought is ZAP and EEStor is another ZAP Motors - promise everything, deliver nothing, and make it up in the stock sales.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Kent, you make a good point. An earlier posting mentioned Bob Lutz challenged ALL the other technologies if batteries could move a car 300 miles on one charge. I’d also have to agree with Jes. The ability to fully discharge all at once requires safety issues. There is another car company out there with a mix of ultracapacitors working with batteries. In that case the ultras only work when pushing the KWH load on fast starts or hard pushes. Probably a mix of battery storage and ultras will result. Nonetheless, all of this is better than oil addiction. Today, the NY Times said one hurricane this summer and $6.00 a gallon gas is here.
I’m fortunate, I’ve started telecommuting 2 of 5 days a week and joined a van pool for on of the remaining days. Anything to cut down on foreign oil at ridiculous prices to Americans.
June 1st, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Anatoly Moskalev wrote on January 20th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
About EEStore supercapacitor hype :
1. The company made claims about dielectric powder parameters - that is it. Claims themselves are likely correct. So they have powder with:
Eps = 18500, Eth = 3 * 10 ^ 6 V / sm, Density = ~ 6 g / sm^3 ( Eth - practical electric field intensity threshold )
For 12 um thickness of dielectric we get Uth = ~3500 V - top practical voltage. From a capacitor formula you could get
C = ~0.2 F / kg resulting to energy density ~1.15 MJ / kg = ~320 Wh / kg
For comparison Tesla Motors battery pack has 5 2 kWh / 450 kg = ~110 Wh / kg
Capacitors formulas from school text books appears well known so after powder parameters verified EEStore CHEMISTS feel safe to make bold claims.
—-
2. But good physicist like me knows very well that capacitors physics under extreme conditions is not textbook straightforward. The dielectric constant involved will stay at indicated value until approximately 30000 V / sm electric field strength. This value is pretty high so measurements unlikely exceed this so they give high Eps value OK.
But to get claimed energy density you need approximately 100 times higher field strength. Getting such field strenght is extremely unlikely in the Eps measurements. But the reality is that exactly in this field strenght region electrical induction gets saturation because it reaches the interatomic field strength. This is well know effect to physicysts but not very widely known phenomenon to general public. Resulted effect on the energy could be described as if dielectric constant gets reduced in the formula. My estimations demonstrates that actual energy density would be 25 - 50 times less than a claim.
Resulted EEStore capacitor would approximately match currently available ultracapacitors by energy density per unit of mass making ~5 times better energy density per unit of volume. As such it would be marginal improvement over existing ultracapacitors technology. It surely would be a order of magnitude improvement for ceramic capacitors so it would have some use. But it would be nothing as bold as EEStore claims.
In 1 - 2 years from now we will see what would be the outcome of EEStore activity. Judgement day for EEStore would come when somebody would build a capacitor and try to store expected energy into it. It would be discovered that above
~100 V voltage would grow with charge much faster than expected and finally instead of ~15 kWh it would be ~0.3 kWh at the highest possible voltage. But powder alone would match all the promises. Who knows - they might even think it is a big discovery of new phenomenon. So they would explain the failure by claiming they run into truly unpredictable effect unknown to science. Irony is that 1947 year physics knows it and today it is forgotten.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:03 pm
swimdad, I’m thinking the combination of batteries with ultras is the eventual path. I’m probably way off, but this is a new topic and has been entertained peripherally throughout. My guess is smaller ultras will be charged rapidly and discharged rapidly, perhaps to get those 40 miles in. Then the much slower, less efficient battery technology storage systems can plow along the rest of the way. Frankly, if in combination the car gets 250 miles, that would prove exciting. I still like the ICE concept with ultras or batteries too.
We’re on our way America to a world free of sending $400 billion dollars annually of money overseas for oil. What a great future if only half of all this comes true.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Lyle,
I wonder if you might have any contacts with lithium suppliers or anybody else that might be knowledgeable about lithium reserves that could be interviewed.
I have seen articles that state we won’t have enough, and I have seen others claiming there is much more out there that currently isn’t being utilized.
It would be nice to get some educated input on what the reality is.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Guess what!? I have an energy storage technology that provides a mechanism for instantaneous dissipation of 100% of the energy stored!!!!!
It’s call gasoline and the mechanism is called an explosion.
As far as recharge time, I think what he is talking about is that you are going to be limited by the capabilities of the delivery device. At 110V you just cannot provide enough amps to recharge faster than 4 hours, as 220 2 hours. At that rate if you were willing to ho0k up 5000 volts to your car you could recharge it in 5 minutes.
As much as I want to believe them, I am extremely skeptical.
Nathan
June 1st, 2008 at 10:08 pm
To more clear on my point. I’d come home in the evening needing a charge. Whoops, I forgot bread, but need that charge. In a few minutes I have enough juice in the ultras to go to the store and back easily. Replug and charge up the ultras (in a few minutes) while the Li-ION battery charges across a few hours.
Sounds like a mixed technology winner.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Lithium is ridiculously abundant. it is the lightest metal, and widely distributed, the only task is finding most concentrated deposits.
Here some real info.
Kings Valley, Nevada
The Company currently controls over 80,000 acres within the region of the
McDermitt Caldera through approximately 3800 Federal Lode mining claims.
The lithium resources are contained within a portion of these claims and
were defined by Chevron Resources in the early 1980’s during an extensive
drilling and metallurgical evaluation program focused on delineating the
lithium potential of the area concurrent with its ongoing uranium
exploration program. 173 holes that were a combination of auger,
conventional rotary and large diameter metallurgical diamond core holes
were drilled. The lithium averages a grade of 0.279% Li over an average
thickness of 40 meters. Using the data from this program and a cut off
grade of 3.0 meters over 0.1% Li, a resource of 8 billion pounds of lithium
metal or 42 billion pounds of lithium carbonate were estimated at the time.
This is a historical resource figure calculated by Chevron Resources. A
qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical
estimate as current mineral resources, the issuer is not treating the
historical estimate as current mineral resources and the historical
estimate should not be relied upon. The resource is not considered NI
43-101 compliant. Chevron conducted extensive metallurgical tests as part
of a scoping study and succeeded in achieving recoveries that averaged 85%.
Lithium carbonate is currently priced at approximately $2.00 per pound.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:13 pm
#15 swimdad623
I totally agree with the location for practiacl purposes. I was thinking the same thing while reading the interviiew.
#16 JBFALASKA
Yeah, I have seen ultracapacitors in busses (a few years back) to elieviate where on brakes and give added propulsion on acceleration, but I’s still worry about those as well. It never really took off.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:14 pm
I’m thinking a dryer plug in the garage for the car with the option to plug in at 110V for that “anywhere, anytime” plug-in refresh.
GM will deliver the right hit, or as the earlier posting said, go bankrupt over the last great development attempt at a breakthrough with this car.
Hope they make it and many others too. This is more important than even GM at this point.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Now, why don’t we get several PhDs, that deal with real physics on daily basis comment on EESTOR’s difficulties with fundamental physics constraints?
(those who’ll point to 2006 BASF patent, please note that even BASF did not claim construct of such capacitor is possible, only that the powder had such properties.)
June 1st, 2008 at 10:15 pm
#1, and #3, you should read the interview again. Here is the point specific to your questions:
“The way that its designed allows for extremely rapid electronic charging times. If you have a charge situation where you have an EEStor device connected to another EEstor device in a charging station or even in a home, the ability to recharge in minutes as opposed to hours is entirely possible.”
As has already been discussed, 5 minute charging seems impossible on 110 or 220, but a specialized charging station might do it. Imagine a capacitor station (at home or at the “gas” station) that charged over time, but charged an attached car within minutes.
Sounds exciting hopefully there is some truth to all of it. The lack of disclosure isn’t reassuring. If I wanted vague promises of future tech on the cheap I’d just buy into the Volt
Poor GM… are they wasting scarce billions on a vehicle that will be obsolete before it even hits market? Could any automaker pop in the Zenn powertrain into an existing car and have a superior product for less money?
June 1st, 2008 at 10:17 pm
#18 JBFALASKA
I agree that a combination of ultracaps and batteries would work better than batteries alone. It’s almost certain that GM is putting some sort of capacitor into the power controller on the Volt. The system needs something to handle the surges in charging and discharging that batteries don’t like to handle.
However, even today’s best ultracaps are not in the same category as a Li-ion battery. Capacitors have fantastic power characteristics (for quick acceleration and regenerative braking), but they only have a fourth or fifth of the energy capacity as the battery. Using ultracaps, the Volt would only go 10 miles or so without the ICE kicking in, and that wouldn’t meet the goal of driving 40 miles without using gasoline.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:24 pm
GXT
I read that. It is not clear and makes no sense as stated. Way too many inferences to be made and ambiguity to this interview.
I still stand pat by my #3 post.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:26 pm
add the prefixes to this so it doesn’t get taken off the website.
AFS Trinity built a mixed ultra and Li-Ion car.
metaefficient.com/cars/hybrid-uses-ultracapacitors-gets-150mpg.html
June 1st, 2008 at 10:29 pm
In the prior post, it appears the car uses regenerative braking to flush the ultras full of juice. I thought the batteries did this by an osmotic process to the ultras. Looks like the beginning of something big though.
The car again is a Saturn Vue by GM converted to hybrid.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:32 pm
GXT, good observation. That actually makes sense, utilize the recahrge to another ultra at home and when you come home, the charge is taken near instantly.
Good points by all. Lord, does make you wonder if GM’s electric approach will be obsolete almost upon launch of the vehicle. $20K lithium batteries to date is pretty tough math in this industry.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Between the complete design revamp, and now possibly the entire electrical approach in question, I’m not sure NOV 2010 will be what all of us here expected.
Still rooting for the General.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:36 pm
All energy to ground, in an isolated (tires) car? Yikes!
June 1st, 2008 at 10:43 pm
It is possible to construct a serial hybrid with ultracaps from maxwell for under 25k. a serial hybrid with current tech li-ion batts can also be done under 25k. amateur level of course, not counting own labour/time.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:43 pm
If EEstor is going to be what they are claiming now, they’ll be the new Henry Ford, change the entire industry!
June 1st, 2008 at 10:46 pm
I’m not sure what to believe from these guys.
First, they talk about a 250 mile AER. For the Volt, we know it is designed to go 40 miles on 8 kWh of energy. A 250 mile AER for the Volt would equate to 50 kWh.
Now comes the statement “You will be able to plug it into a regular 110 outlet and it will probably take about 4 hours to recharge or you could plug it into a 220 outlet and it will probably take about 2 hours to recharge.”
So assuming a 30 amp service for 110 volts, the energy input would be (110) (30) (4) = 13.2 kWh. So maybe I’m missing something on the amp limit (for 50 kWh we would need 120 amps) or maybe the Zenn can go 160 miles on 8 kWh of electricity (50 Wh per mile versus 200 Wh per mile for the Volt).
Anyway, I will take the same stance as many others - I’ll believe it when I see it.
June 1st, 2008 at 10:47 pm
I’m sorry, but I cannot believe for one second that any competent CEO would REFUSE delivery of a hand built prototype from a critical vendor of a new product technology. I wholeheartedly agree that a hand built prototype is NOT a guarentee that a high volume, low cost product can be developed based on the hand built configuration, but the corollary to that rule is - if they can’t even produce a hand built prototype, then they certainly can’t deliver a high volume, low cost product. A prudent CEO would ask for the hand built prototype in parallel to any development of a high volume, low cost product.
I too have been hearing EEStor promise prototypes of the capacitor and / or vehicle for years, so I just won’t believe their promises until they deliver. At this point, I ignore their press releases. I used to work for Lockheed Martin, so it is not unthinkable to me that they may have been duped. Rafael suggests a likely scenario, that investors are being sold on a material parameter, without understanding what other physical limitations there may be in constructing a product.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:01 pm
Please read Dr. Moskalev’s comments on EEStor tech here.
Very well thought out, and many issues pointed out.
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog2/?p=46
June 1st, 2008 at 11:07 pm
swimdad hit the nail on the head, #15:
“If this were a real product, EEStor would be signing agreements with GM and Toyota, not ZENN.”
So EEStor developed this technology over a decade ago, and none of the big OEMs have picked it up yet? And they sold it to ZENN?
To me, that is absolute proof that EEStor’s technology is complete BS. I smell another ZAP.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:10 pm
As far as safety, don’t forget the car you drive today has a 10-30 gallon tank of GAS strapped to to the bottom of the car. Anytime you have energy stored on the vehicle there is a danger. We’ve just come to accept it being there.
The 2009 date is for a vehicle outside the U.S, because of the safety requirements, or lack there of in other countries.
Regardless, it is very intriguing technology. I hope it works out.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Eestor = always over the horizon, just around the corner. It has all the hallmarks of a fraud.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:31 pm
1st thanks Lyle for a great interview! You seemed to ask all the right questions!
Like many others, I’m still a skeptic of EEStor as well. It sounds way too good to be true… a 3,100 curb weight 5 passenger EV with a range of 250 miles that could with the right setup be quick charged in 5 minutes, being sold for under $30k, and they could be on the road (though it sounds like not in North America at 1st) in Europe/Asia by the end of 2009! On top of that the energy storage system could out last not just 1 but 2 or more vehicles! As the old saying goes, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Would love to be proven wrong. I remember being told 20 or 30 years ago that we’d have nuclear fusion by now, and now it’s still 20 or 30 years away at least.
It also seems strange that a small company like ZENN has the exclusive up to such a high curb weight, as well as a complete exclusive on all conversions. Maybe ZENN was the only one willing to invest in EEStor when EEStor really needed the money and so didn’t have much choice?
Re to swimdad623 regarding conversions of ICE’s to EV’s… conversions are not really all that difficult. Lots of do it your selfer types have already done conversions world wide. It’s easier to convert a manual transmission however. You do rip out a lot more junk than you put back in. After watching the “Who killed the EV?” movie early last year I did lots of research and had considered doing one myself. GM’s Chevy S-10 (with manual transmission) is a prime candidate as you can pick up high milage ones (or ones with a blown engine) at a reasonable price, and you can put a fair amount of batteries under the bed (a lot of the ones I see the bed has also been converted to pivot up like a dump truck so you also have easy access for maint). Check out http://www.evalbum.com/ for more. There is also one company out there that sells conversions of brand new ICE vehicles (sorry, can’t recall the name right now).
With all the announcements of production mass produced EV’s, the Volt included, that I can sit it out and wait for one in the not so distant future, instead of starting another project that could take 6-12 months
June 1st, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I would also be interested in hearing some good information from a knowledgeable source regarding worldwide lithium reserves.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:50 pm
#1 and others. The “five minute recharge” claim is still there: have a charging station that has a similar capacitor charged up before you pull up and you can transfer it over in “a few minutes.” Of course that station would then take 2 hours to have that capacitor ready for the next car with a 220 line, but a higher power line could charge it faster if they had them.
I’m skeptical as well. If this product does come to pass as advertised then much of what I’ve invested in battery plays become big losses … and I’ll be thrilled to lose it.
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:00 am
a thought on 5 minute charging:
assume you are charging 50kWh in 5 minutes, and a 95% charging efficiency (pretty generous, it may be lower)
50kWh / 0.0833hrs * 0.05 = 30 kW
so 30kW of heat will have to be dissipated during the charging process. not entirely impossible of course, but that is a heck of a lot of heat in a small volume.
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:08 am
I see a man seeking attention and credibility and since GM Volt seems to become a reference in EV, it is only good press for him to talk about his projects here, but he doesn’t do much to back up what he is saying.
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:11 am
Regarding lithium supplies: EVWorld summarized the controversy from the two camps of “peak lithium” vs “lithium in abundance” here: http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1457
<<…a transition to electric propulsion will most likely take place gradually during the next 20 years or so.
Within this time frame, lithium reserves are likely to augment not only because some new (untapped) fields (e.g. Salar of Uyuni, Bolivia) will be put into production, but also due to high lithium prices resulting from an ever-increasing demand for the metal. …
… concerns about unavailability of lithium for the transition to electric propulsion at this point seem a little odd.”
So yes current supplies would have a hard time providing for the complete electrification of the transportation grid, but the demand will ramp up slowly enough to develop new sources. Lithium is also recoverable from used batteries and will very likely be recycled as EVs eventually go out of service. And a point of information to any who are interested, SQM is the world’s major supplier of lithium. - http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/SQM.aspx - and they are not at all worried: http://www.glgroup.com/News/There-is-and-will-be-no-lithium-supply-crisis-for-battery-makers-so-long-as-Chiles-SQM-is-in-business-15641.html
<>
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:32 am
I just found this off of Newsweek.com. I thought it was interesting and it echoes what I’ve been saying since I learned about the awesomeness that is the Volt.
“Nissan unveiled a $115 million new plant outside Tokyo designed to build lithium-ion fuel cells to power a new generation of battery cars.”
You see GM. I told you get off your collective asses and produce the car before someone else does. I’ve never bought a GM before, I wanted to real bad. I wanted a Volt, but it looks like someone else is gonna beat you to the punch, yet again. So sad…
June 2nd, 2008 at 1:03 am
Ian Clifford is wrong when he says lithium will run out.
http://lithiumabundance.blogspot.com/
Lithium is so cheap there is only one source in the USA at present.
Also lithium batteries are recyclable.
Raphael
I agree with you, there is a huge difference between a power in a beaker on a bench and a working capacitor. Still at a low enough price point with the same power density as a li battery it would be a huge advance, given the millions of recycles available. I assume they can avoid the discharge problem of capacitors. Think leaving your cabin light on all day!
BillR I agree with you as well. For the range talked about we are looking at a Tesla type battery, which, with a specialised 240 v 70amp charger takes about 4 hours to charge.
So if we have 240V * 70amp = 16.8kW/hour.
56 kW battery / 16.8kWh = ~3.4 hours
Finally, an instant discharge of 56KWh = fried bodies and dental record checking. Think lightning strike! A couple of those and bye bye certification.
June 2nd, 2008 at 1:06 am
Darn moderation, still can fix my typo. haha.
Ian Clifford is wrong when he says lithium will run out.
look up lithiumabundance DOT blogspot DOTcom/
Lithium is so cheap there is only one source in the USA at present.
Also lithium batteries are recyclable.
Raphael
I agree with you, there is a huge difference between a powder in a beaker on a bench (viewed by Lockeed Martin) and a working capacitor. Still at a low enough price point with the same power density as a li battery it would be a huge advance, given the millions of recycles available. I assume they can avoid the discharge problem of capacitors. Think leaving your cabin light on all day!
BillR I agree with you as well. For the range talked about we are looking at a Tesla type battery, which, with a specialised 240 v 70amp charger takes about 4 hours to charge.
So if we have 240V * 70amp = 16.8kW/hour.
56 kW battery / 16.8kWh = ~3.4 hours
Finally, an instant discharge of 56KWh = fried bodies and dental record checking. Think lightning strike! A couple of those and bye bye certification.
June 2nd, 2008 at 1:37 am
“…architecture that EEStor has developed allows for basically instant discharge to ground.” Quick - somebody call Reno911, there’s been an accident.
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:21 am
Post number 17 has the right answer although it is difficult to read the stilted English. Russian scientists are not known for literary skill. The basic issue is that EESTOR claims to be able to store an amount of energy in their in their capacitors that is more than sufficient to ionize the molecules in the dielectric. A battery stores its energy as ionized molecules. To get more energy density you need more ions per unit volume or per unit mass. Lithium has low mass, thus good battery. The volume issue relates to reducing unnecessary structures in relation to the amount of ions. But EESTOR claims to be able to store dramatically more energy but without ions. It won’t happen because when you try to store that much energy in a molecule by means of electrostatic stress, it will ionize. That is what post 17 was saying when they said that the field in the capacitor would have to be the same magnitude as intramolecular electrical fields. When you do that, you rip the molecule apart into ions. You simply will not be able to keep them from ionizing. Thus your capacitor will suffer a massive “punch through” and smoke and hot liquid metal will be the result.
Short answer, lithium batteries are real for well understood reasons of known physics and chemistry. That is why they have prototypes and why you can buy an a123 powered tool at your local Lowes store. Capacitors will not achieve the densities of energy storage available from ionized media because their dielectrics would destructively ionize in the process. Most likely GM’s consultants have said as much to them or you wouldn’t see GM
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:25 am
Statik #5 Jason C #13 J.M.H. # 37
My sentiments exactly. Folks I really smell a rat here.
Understand that GM has working protos and will need the effort of thousands of staff to make the Volt a reality by 2010. This company doesn’t even have a biscuit and Ian says this vehicle will be ready by late 2009? This is a company that has been in trouble from the beginning, and since they’re probably facing extinction, why not try for Venture Cap. by aligning themselves with Texas based vaporware? Ian also alludes to Lockheed Martin’s agreement for validity which is based on ……nothing whatsoever in terms of product or testing. If he had any first hand knowledge or proof he wouldn’t even need to mention L-M.
Do I have a unique nose(I have a very poor sense of smell
) or does anyone else smell the BIG, BIG fraud?
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:29 am
Sorry, I punched the wrong key and ended post 48 too soon.
Anyway GM would not be risking development of the Volt and a whole fleet of other electric vehicles without involving EESTOR in the process if they felt there was any chance of EESTORs ideas being valid. They could easily buy EESTOR and ZENN outright to get the rights to the tech or just to protect themselves from someone else getting the rights.
So, as much as I would also like to believe in the wonderful fantasy, it simply does not make sense from known laws of chemistry and physics.
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:50 am
I remember when a breakthrough in “cold fusion” was announced. The experiment could never be duplicated, and the research was discredited. So, I’ll believe it when I see it. Zenn is probably the only financial backer that EEStor could get.
If it proves to be correct, ZENN has the rights to it, a real gold mine. But that’s a pretty big IF.
I’ll just sit back and wait for delivery of my ultracap-powered riding lawn mower. EEStor says it should arrive any day now. LOL
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:53 am
Well, I can say that it would be nice not to have to rely on lithium. Most of the world’s supply comes from Australia and Chile, but there’s significant quantities coming from China, as well:
http://www.green-energy-news.com/arch/nrgs2008/20080024.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2004_Jan_22/ai_112444124
I see one of the biggest hurdles for EEStor is that the history of using ceramics in large quantities in automotive applications isn’t that good.
I think this quote from wikipedia covers the sentiment well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceramic#Other_applications_of_ceramics
“In the early 1980s, Toyota researched production of an adiabatic ceramic engine which can run at a temperature of over 6000 °F (3300 °C). Ceramic engines do not require a cooling system and hence allow a major weight reduction and therefore greater fuel efficiency. Fuel efficiency of the engine is also higher at high temperature, as shown by Carnot’s theorem. In a conventional metallic engine, much of the energy released from the fuel must be dissipated as waste heat in order to prevent a meltdown of the metallic parts. Despite all of these desirable properties, such engines are not in production because the manufacturing of ceramic parts in the requisite precision and durability is difficult. Imperfection in the ceramic leads to cracks, which can lead to potentially dangerous equipment failure. Such engines are possible in laboratory settings, but mass-production is unfeasible with current technology.”
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:04 am
#51 Randal and #17 Raphael
Thank You both. This may be why EESTOR hasn’t gone public with their capacitor - they would have to answer to people like you. As I understand it (in my feeble brain) you can’t put 10 gallons of water in a 5 gallon hat.
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:14 am
It’s either going to be the world’s greatest invention or the world’s greatest fraud. The CEO is not interested in having a hand built prototype for initial testing of all of the electrical systems? Not interested?! I don’t even work there and I’m very very interested. I would pay good money for an AAA sized hand licked (yes, as in made using someone’s tongue) test cell. My God man! Quit yanking our chains. Give us a hand built cell made of spit and bailing wire. Anything! Thankfully your hype machine is not stopping real product development. It’s just kind of creepy at this point. Zap, using water to extent car mileage, free energy… Yeah, that same kind of feeling. You’re going to have to produce a miracle to ever gain back peoples trust. If you produce what you have said then we will all bow in thanks. The world will be completely changed as though we experienced first contact.
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:24 am
Just to state the obvious, the effect of the EEStor story is to inhibit investment in Lithium Ion Battery production facilities, because if the EEStor story is true, the battery will be obsolete. And also note that the myth about a lithium shortage was included in the interview.
So the question we have to ask ourselves is who would want to inhibit the development of American owned lithium battery technology? Folks with a lot of fossil fuel to sell? Nah
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:40 am
It’s funny how people say this will be a game changer or that it will be a winner in the marketplace. Folks, if this product does that they claim it will immediately make obsolete all forms of currently known energy systems. From lithium-ion, to fossil fuels. It will be possible to have electric powered passenger aircraft, electric battle tanks, high capacity electrical storage making solar and wind viable, etc. In short, it will change everyone’s life in the most dramatic way. More so than the invention of the atomic bomb, nuclear energy, steam engine, airplane, etc. It will change all geopolitics and have people staring into the sky with deer-in-the-headlights expressions painted across their faces.
My prediction is that EEstor will not produce this product. The hype machine will build this up so much that every engineer, government official, CEO, tree hugger, etc. will know EEstor. They will claim some final problem found in the scaling but will have a new product that will fulfill some small niche market like an electrical capacitor used in TVs or something we here have no interest in whatsoever. They will then be able to sell their new product without ever having to spend a dime on advertising. They would not even have to have a one-page website made. Pure marketing genius!
Ok, I give. EEstor, you got us. Funny. Now let’s get back to work on real products that will help us find a substitute for dwindling oil reserves. Why have I come to this conclusion? It just does not make any sense to remain secretive anymore. It does not make any sense that they do not have a working prototype cell after having the purified material for so long. It does not make any sense not to be working with big companies to get them geared up for the day their product is ready. As we know from the Volt, things take time. Especially medical products and road worthy vehicles. Nothing EEstor is doing makes any sense so I have to cry foul.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:01 am
Woo Hoo !
So EESTOR / ZENN will have my FluxCapacitor powered car ready in 2009. This will give me ample time to extend my garage !
I want to park this baby right next to my COLD FUSION powered Ferrari. I’ll park my Special Edition Aptera (that folds up into a George Jetson briefcase) on the other side.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:10 am
Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk. That is all EEStor has done so far.
Now they have ZENN do the talking for them.
EEStor can do all of these things but without a lick of proof.
Kent is a big fan of EEStor. I understand the desire for them to be right and I hope that some day Kent can tell us all, “I told you so. I told you so”. I just think that day is a long way off, if ever.
Personally, I’m with Texas. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if EEStor was a complete fraud. But for all of us, I sincerely hope not.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:14 am
I really hope that EESTOR’s technology works out. This would be a game changer.
However, I don’t think ZENN has the right approach. It’s naive to think that the masses will buy pure BEVs with no electric charging station infrastructure. An infrastructure of electric charging stations will take 10-20 years to roll out, and that starts only after a significant number of people own fast charging cars. So ZENN is designing a 2009 product for 2024 market. For this reason, not many people will buy it, and the charging station infrastructure won’t materialize.
What we need is a car that allows the TRANSITION to a fast charging infrastructure. In other words, we need a car that can:
1) slow charge at home
2) fast charge at future electric filling stations
3) fill up with gas or E85 at existing filling stations
In other words, we need something like the Volt with the addition of a fast charging port. EESTOR’s technology could enable this. Such a car will allow people to use whatever filling station is available. If something like this was available now, at a reasonable price, a significant number of people would buy it. This will form a critical mass, which will motivate filling station owners to add fast charging ports.
Ian Clifford talks about barriers to adoption, but the real barrier is the missing infrastructure. The only way to solve this chicken-and-egg problem is with a car that fast charges and runs on gas.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:23 am
I wonder if that “instant discharge to ground” would look something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVF3iC_voyU