Grab our RSS Feed

EEStor Rides Again, This Time on a Bike

September 30th, 2008 | Posted in: Battery

An interesting potentially revolutionary sideline to the Volt/electric car story is the secretive Texas company called EEStor. They have reportedly been working on a special low-cost, low-weight, super-high energy density electrical storage device similar to an ultracapacitor, called the EESU. As much of a breakthrough as this device seems on paper, no one has ever seen one in the flesh. If real, the device would offer several times the energy storage as lithium-ion batteries at a fraction of the cost and weight with an unlimited lifetime

I’ve interviewed the CEO of Zenn Motors who has an exclusivity agreement with EEStor for cars, and who assured us production EESUs would be delivered by the end of this year.

I also interviewed a director at Lockheed-Martin, the company that has signed a military contract with EEStor, who actually saw EEStor’s production facilities and too advised working EESUs would be delivered by year end.

Now a company called Light Electric Vehicles has also reportedly signed an exclusivity agreement with EEStor to use their storage devices in 2 and 3 wheel vehicles.

Per the company’s press release, which actually is its entire website, the EESU would provide “over 450 watt hours per kilogram and over 700 watt hours per liter, charge in minutes, and, for all practical vehicular purposes, last indefinitely.” As well the company said it expects to offer the EESU in “a variety of electric propulsion systems for use in electric bicycles, scooters, motorcycles, and three-wheeled vehicles.”

They say they plan to offer a bike with a 1 kwh EESU weighing less than 5 pounds that will propel the bike over 100 miles.

Popularity: 2%

(5 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

Loading ...

Posted by: Lyle

92 Responses to “EEStor Rides Again, This Time on a Bike”

bruce g Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

An electric bicycle! Very cool!
Exp_EngTech Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 8:44 pm

Woo Hoo !

A “Flux Capacitor” Update !
dennis Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

Fantastic, seeing as how bikes waste wayy to much gas
Mike D Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 8:53 pm

If proven, this technology NOT moving to 4 wheel 4 passenger 100+ MPH cars would be a waste and make me not really care how good it is. Hopefully major auto companies will buy some of these bikes and dissect and analyze the power train, and use them in cars that aren’t 3 wheeled crap.
MarkinWI Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 8:57 pm

Lyle, can you get these guys to show you a working prototype? If this is really going to be ready for prime-time in the next three months, then surely they have a working prototype. Right? Maybe? Or maybe not. Hard to believe that they could pull the wool over on Lockheed, or, if they do, that anything short of a Presidential pardon will save their bacon. But hey, that’s what lame-duck Presidents do: hand out pardons.
Arch Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:06 pm

I love it when stuff like this happens out here on the cutting edge. It will be neat to see if it is real or not. JMHO

Take Care
Arch
Eric C. Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:06 pm

I love the potential of electric bikes. They get people out of cars and onto bicycles who would otherwise be afraid of the exercise without the electric backup or assist when needed.

If we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil AND lower health costs by making America healthier, then Amen to that.
Mickey Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

A $360 electric bike may have to satisfy me until I can afford a Volt. Some ideas for Volt vanity license plates: HYGRID, MRVOLT, MSVOLT, MYVOLT, CHARGE, CHARGIT, PLUGIT, PLUGME, WATTSUP, WATTSNU, SOQUIET, PLUGIN, BIGAMPS, OHMSLAW, SHOCKER, EPOWER, NOGAS, NO-OIL, SHHHH, CORDLES, NOCORD, JUICE, JUICY, POWRFUL, ACDC, VOLTMAN, VOLTGAL, VOLTGUY, VOLTGRL, CURRENT, RECHARJ, VOLTER, ONGRID, HYTORK, BOLT, EXTCORD, HYVOLT, 110VOLT, GENR8TR, PWRSURJ, CHEVOLT, GMVOLT, ENERGM, GRIDPWR, ZAP, JOLT, BUZZ, 110220, LYTNING, SOGREEN, HYMPG, POS-NEG, HISVOLT, HERVOLT.
BillR Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:14 pm

EEStor…..

Sounds like a fancy name for Radio Shack, where the electrical engineers go to get components.
Dave K. Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:16 pm

This opens the door to a 50 HP electric Ninja motorcycle. My (fossil fuel) Kawasaki Ninja is 86 HP and rated to go 150 mph. I get about 40 MPG with normal use.

This may be the answer to many who feel $30,000 is too much for four wheels. I like it.

NSHEDESDNS

No super-high energy density electrical storage device, no sale!
jdsv Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:19 pm

Okay, the Volt is real and I can’t wait, but energetic ultralight tech makes me giddy. Thanks, Lyle!

NPNS! =D~~

NSHEDESDNS (emblem is explosive lightning!)
jdsv Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:34 pm

If my posts suddenly stop, it’s because I died piloting an EESU version of one of these bad boys:

http://earthfirst.com/18-year-old-invents-bad-ass-electric-bike-to-combat-pollution/

..btw, don’t bother searching for my body - I probably reached escape velocity.

NPNϟ!
statik Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:39 pm

Given the wild success of shipping all of those “15-kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles” (yeah…right that happend). I certainly believe this new article.

http://pesn.com/2007/01/17/9500448_EEStor_milestones/
———–
Then of course we also have the wildly successful prediction of “CEO Richard Weir on the phone in September ‘07, when he said that production (although previously delayed) would start sometime before the middle of 2008.

http://autoblognews.com/is-production-of-eestor-ultracapacitors-being-pushed-back-into-2008/

I just wish people drove something other than EEStor powered Zenn cars all over the place…the revolution has really gotten out of hand, and the automotive landscape is so bland with all cars looking the same now.
———-

It’s a scam until working working protype is on public display that proves otherwise. If they have it, and it works…what is with all the pissy little contracts? Light Electric Vehicles? What the heck is that?

If the tech is real, you would have monster deals with GE, Toyota, the US government, etc. If it is real, they wouldn’t even have to look for commercial acceptance/contracts at all. They would have venture capitalists would be throwing so much money at them they couldn’t find their building under the piles of hundred dollar bills.
Jackson Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:42 pm

This is starting to smell more like reality.

Is this bad news for Volt-ers, or will we be able to get giant, “T” shaped EESU’s down at the EE Store?
Jackson Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:44 pm

Could they be using quantum trapping for actual power storage? I haven’t read any of their literature. Their endless fascination with particle-purity suggests this idea. Each grain stores a charge, and passes it on to it’s neighbor bucket-brigade fashion as the cell charges or discharges. Question is, could you store a positive charge this way?
vincent Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:48 pm

It wouldn’t shock anyone if the “limit” of Lithium Ion batteries and their expensive price tag were intentional…as well as a big Oils “Gas Tank” to run the generator makes it into a car.

Then along comes technology that will knock out the greed and control of the Oil firms like a punch to a girl scout in the stomach.

I hope this is for real.
How we all doing on the 700 Billion Dollar bail out from our tax dollars for corporate greed and abuse.
Sounds just like big oil.
Lets hope these guys don’t sell out like all the others that have more efficient energy systems.
squat Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 9:49 pm

I’m pretty much in agreement with statik here. This stuff seems like vaporware, like duke nukem it’s hard to believe that it’ll get made.
jdsv Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:16 pm

I’m also afraid I have to go with statik here. I was excited to no end, seeing Lockheed onboard, then I stumbled onto the LEV ‘website’. Huh? I guess there’s no enormous electric scooter conglomerate to go to that would be easily humbled by the honor to have the tech, but if you have to go small, why the contract at all?

I think I should start up a fake laptop company and vie for that exclusive contract. The smaller the better, right?

I’ll be one of those venture capitalists (or at least investors) for them.. as soon as it isn’t a blind venture on my part.

BTW - he wants to deal into the USPS base, right? Well that’s been Grumman’s territory in the past.. that’d be some serious military sector clout for this little Canadian company to have!
Mark Bartosik Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:17 pm

EEStor’s and their partners’ prior statements seemed to indicate a delay of,
1 year, then 9 months, now 3 months.

When dealing with the unknown this is a typical pattern of homing in on a solution.

Some will point out that it is also a pattern with scams.

If this turns out to be real then we’ll be asking questions like, how long until this is available in a real vehicle, at a dealer near you? Why buy a Volt with a $10,000 battery, when you can wait for a vehicle with a $2000 EESU that will last as long as the rest of the vehicle (and then used in your home solar system).

I can think of a few reasons for EEStor not going to Uncle Sam or GM. As for GM maybe EEStor CEO saw Who Killed the Electric Car, and didn’t trust them.
demetrius Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:20 pm

Hey - Neil Young is creating his LincVolt car. An old Lincoln converted to Lithium with range extender generator and internet access. He has a website and video. Looks like he is throwing alot on money at this…

Checkout lincvolt dot com
Steve Phillips Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:28 pm

Until someone sees a working prototype I believe the whole EESTOR thing is a scam.

Lockheed Martin may have use for high performance ultra-capacitors, but there is a huge difference between something like that and a device that can hold its charge sufficiently to function as a battery.
canehdian Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:33 pm

“NSHEDESDNS

No super-high energy density electrical storage device, no sale”

Got a little chuckle out of that

And the Uno looks cool, but practically, I dont know how well it would go over.
I saw it a few (quite a few) months back and it’s basically a segway. It’s controls are lean forward/backward/side to side for it to move.
It may be fine for a low-speed vehicle, but a “real” motorcyle isn’t the best thing for that technology. The last thing you want is to need to stop fast and lean too far back and fall off. (though, i’m sure there’s extra brakes.. the principle can apply to many scenarios)
Mark Bartosik Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:38 pm

Why pissy little contracts (as Statik points out)….

Here’s a possible reason, all they need is enough to keep the venture capitalists happy. If they go for the big boys they could get distracted with requirements from the big boys. Whereas keeping it small until they have something working allows them to spring it on the market and watch the big boys fall over themselves bidding to license the technology - bidding to start at $X billion?

Of course there is another possible reason… their technology would not stand up to close inspection.

We’ll know when ZENN have a EESU powered car.
jefro Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:39 pm

Talked to EEStor in person about a year ago about a project.

They were in a small office not too far from a Radio Shack but little else was learned.

If we do see the product in real life it “could” make electric everything a good choice.

Still don’t know what happens during a crash on any of these while they possess a full charge.
jdsv Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:41 pm

canehdian : ‘The last thing you want is to need to stop fast and lean too far back and fall off. (though, i’m sure there’s extra brakes.. the principle can apply to many scenarios)’

I’ve always been under the impression that it does indeed involve a multi-stage redundant braking system. Something along the lines of foot, foot, face.
CTG Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:47 pm

Another license plate…

VOLT AGE
DonC Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:58 pm

For those who may be interested in EEStor, from time to time I check in on this website:

http://bariumtitanate.blogspot.com/
Grizzly Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 10:59 pm

Aren’t we about due for some prototypes…or finished products….ZENN? Or does anyone think this is any different than previous Eestor Vapor claims?

Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice…….SHAME ON ME!
jeremy Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:03 pm

Hope they’re for real, but I won’t be sold until I see results of some independent tests on an actual unit.
Dave G Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:15 pm

Four points to make here:

1) If you want an electric motorcycle, check out the Zero-S:
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s.php
Costs around $8000. 70MPH. 60 mile range.

2) If EEStor works out to be real, that would be great. But if not, Li/Ion isn’t so bad. I don’t think Lithium Ion is inherently expensive. Here’s a general rule-of-thumb; For new technologies, every time you increase the sales volume by a factor of ten, you decrease the cost by a factor of 2. So if the battery pack costs $10K at 10,000 units, then it should cost $5K at 100,000 units, and $2.5K at 1 million units.

3) Rapid charging scares me. Not only are there huge voltage and current safety considerations, but if it catches on, there is also the issue of trashing our grid. Slow charging at night won’t cause any problems with our grid.

4) A quick charging infrastructure doesn’t make sense to me. An E-REV with a 40-mile range will eliminate 85% of the gasoline used by a typical driver, and that’s only plugging in at night. The remaining 15% can be covered by E85. That leaves only 2% of a typical driver’s miles from the gasoline contained in E85. Note that gasoline is only 45% of our total oil consumption. So if everyone drove an E-REV-40 and always filled up with E85, the gasoline in the E85 would be less than 1% of our current total oil consumption. Is it really worth building a whole new infrastructure of quick charging stations, and rebuilding our grid to support them, just to save less than 1% of our total oil consumption?

So the EEStor quick charging feature doesn’t really interest me, but the size and weight of EEStor is very interesting. The cost is also a potential benefit.
DonC Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:25 pm

#30 Dave G - “I don’t think Lithium Ion is inherently expensive”

i did the cost comparison once and it was huge, like five to ten times less expensive. It would be a huge deal, assuming of course that EEStor could make them on a production line.
statik Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:25 pm

#27 DonC

For those who may be interested in EEStor, from time to time I check in on this website:

http://bariumtitanate.blogspot.com/

—————————————————-
I like to get all my EEStor updates from their official, registered homepage:
http://www.eestor.us/
hehe

——

Side note: I can hardly wait the next 12 months for my new EEStor/Zenn car that goes 80 mph and a 250 mile range…that charges in 5 minutes. Good news is I’m only minutes away from their HQ in North York…so I’m sure to get one of the first shiney new models in 2009.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/03/29/zenn-claims-they-will-launch-eestor-powered-ev-in-fall-2009/

Makes me wonder why GM is even producing the Volt in light of this clearly superior, new technology coming to market almost a full year ahead of them.
Grizzly Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:35 pm

Dave G. # 30

“That leaves only 2% of a typical driver’s miles from the gasoline contained in E85″

*** *** ***

That 15% gasoline contained in E85 is from US stocks, not OPEC. Is it any wonder that this practice is in effect when one of the most strategic users of E85 are our Army/Navy/Air Force/ Marine bases? This is not by accident.
Dave G Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:41 pm

#31 DonC Says: (on the cost of lithium vs EEStor) “i did the cost comparison once and it was huge, like five to ten times less expensive.”
————————————————————————————–
Did your comparison account for the decreasing cost of lithium as unit volumes rise?

Right now Li/Ion is only used in small things, like cell phones, digital cameras, and laptops. Each car battery is probably like 1000 laptop batteries. If GM sells 1 million E-REVs by 2015, that would be the equivalent of 1 billion laptops. I’m assuming that kind of production volume will make Li/Ion cost 1/4 of what it costs now.
Dave G Says:
September 30th, 2008 at 11:47 pm

#33 Grizzly Says: “That 15% gasoline contained in E85 is from US stocks, not OPEC.”
————————————————————————————-
Yes, good point.

Now if we could just get them to make ethanol from something other than corn…
Gordon Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 12:06 am

If the EEStor system is a huge capacitor storing an enormous charge, and capacitors can release all the stored energy all at once, if the car gets hit in an accident, wouldn’t that be like releasing a lightning bolt ? (I’m just thinking out loud…)
DonC Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 12:35 am

#35 Dave G - “Did your comparison account for the decreasing cost of lithium as unit volumes rise?”

Actually all I did was look at the raw cost of materials. EEStor gets it product from sintering barium carbonate (witherite) and titanium dioxide. Barium carbonate can be made from barites or mined directly. It costs about $25 a ton. Titanium dioxide may be the most common pigment in the world. It’s mined in many places and costs around $10 a ton.

Since we don’t know anything at all about EEStor production, the production costs, which would all be capital and labor, aren’t known either. So there isn’t any real way to compare costs. But the raw costs and claimed energy storage aren’t on the same planet.
DonC Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 12:40 am

#32 Statik - “I can hardly wait the next 12 months for my new EEStor/Zenn car that goes 80 mph and a 250 mile range…that charges in 5 minutes. Good news is I’m only minutes away from their HQ in North York…so I’m sure to get one of the first shiney new models in 2009.”

Yes, Zenn seems even less real than EEStor. But technology is a strange field filled with strange people so I’m not writing EEStor off. The Dubious Meter is, however, way up there.
ThombDbhomb Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 12:41 am

“production EESUs would be delivered by the end of this year”

In three months we’ll know if EESUs are real. That is not too far away.
Grizzly Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 1:12 am

T hombDbhomb #39

“In three months we’ll know if EESUs are real. That is not too far away.”

*** *** ***

We’ve definitely been around this block before. If memory serves, there was no pot of gold at the base of the last Eestor deadline rainbow. Why does it seem that history just repeats itself?
Mark Bartosik Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 1:42 am

Another application for EEStor….

and one that I’m sure Lockheed-Martin is interested in:
Weapons, like Star Trek style weapons.

Of course if we can eliminate our use of foreign oil we’ll have a lot less to fight about!
kubel Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 2:30 am

Vaporware. I have hopes that this will work out though. It has the potential to revolutionize our civilization.
NZDavid Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 2:39 am

Yeah right, show me the EESU.

NO plug, NO sale
Texas Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 4:34 am

Expect a delay announcement from EEscam within the next few months.

No major manufacturer of light vehicles could be convinced? Hummmm. Come-on people. You’ve been duped! Just laugh it off and get back to work.
Van Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:09 am

The effect of the EEStor myth is to inhibit investing millions in lithium battery production facilities, because if the myth is true, those millions would be lost. Is it possible EEStor is a misinformation tactic of big oil?
jdsv Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:11 am

Ugh.. ethanol.

By today’s practices, the harvest and _part_ of the transport alone consume more energy than the corn offers. Not to mention the water usage (current 3 gal H2O to 1 gal ethanol, can be slightly less).

There’s also the problem that ethanol production removes food from the supply chain. We have not (and will not) been able to compensate for this, but we do try, which means rotating in less soy to get more corn. This has been fluctuating and murdering the soy market, as well as using vastly more anhydrous ammonia. More energy down the drain.

Then there’s the fact that we STILL HAVE TO USE GASOLINE to make this stuff work, and it’s no longer cheaper than your standard 87 octane by any substantial amount.

As long as you’re okay with all of the above, then I suppose you’d also be okay with all of the extra coal and oil being burned to create a less efficient but cleaner fuel.

Hopefully EEstor is less of a hoax than E85.

NPNϟ!
jdsv Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:14 am

Van : I don’t think so, but that is a very interesting concept. What state do they hail from again?

NPNϟ!
Rashiid Amul Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:30 am

From the article:

I’ve interviewed the CEO of Zenn Motors who has an exclusivity agreement with EEStor for cars, and who assured us production EESUs would be delivered by the end of this year.

I also interviewed a director at Lockheed-Martin, the company that has signed a military contract with EEStor, who actually saw EEStor’s production facilities and too advised working EESUs would be delivered by year end.

—————–
Year end is 3 months away from today.
I am still not holding my breath with EEStor.
Call me a skeptic, but why they heck is EEStor selling/licensing their technology to ZENN and Light Electric Vehicles Company?
If this technology is everything that EEStor claims, this is a very huge leap. So why sell/license it to the little guys? Clearly the big guys will be tripping over each other to get a piece of this action.

I still remain hopeful, but I think EEStor is a scam.
RB Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:40 am

#15 Jackson asks “Could they be using quantum trapping for actual power storage?”
=================================

Yes, they trap the electrons and the protons, rearrange them, and turn lead into gold

They also move coins around from one pocket to another
RB Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:45 am

I’m waiting for the EESTOR pogo stick.

Three hops (oh so high) and you are anywhere you want to be, and all that energy is instantly recaptured. Oceans are no barrier, just bring your oxygen mask.

Real soon now there will be a production model.
Joe Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 7:12 am

I have to ask myself, why is EESTOR using smaller vehicles versus larger vehicles? Bikes and 3 wheelers are not popular in this country and will not catch on. Could it be that their invention will not work well in larger vehicles. If so,why?
Joshua Bretz Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 7:27 am

Joe:

EEStor caps make sense in bicycles because the smaller EESU can be quick charged from a residential circuit in minutes.
TCook Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 7:52 am

Thats all fine and dandy, but what happends to the capacity of the battery when it is having to power something that is 2500 lbs instead of 5 lbs?? It seems to me that a lot more research and development needs to be done before i get “excited” over this.
RLM Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 8:44 am

Those of you who are worried about the cost of the Volt should be aware that a Chinese company, BYD LTD. has announced that they will begin to import into the USA,in 2010, two plug in auto models. The F6DM a mid sized sedan is claimed to go 62 miles on a charge and then 205 miles on gas. The F3DM a small vehicle is claimed to go 100 miles on a charge. Warren Buffet just invested in the company. They are a manufacturer of LI/Ion Batteries as well as auto’s

http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/10/01/byd-berkshire/
RB Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 9:06 am

I think Lyle saves up EESTOR for slow news days.
James.T Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 9:16 am

Keep on dreaming guys! EESU = Cold fusion = Dreaming
Dave G Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 9:26 am

#46 jdsv Says: “Ugh.. ethanol. By today’s practices, the harvest and part of the transport alone consume more energy than the corn offers. Not to mention the water usage (current 3 gal H2O to 1 gal ethanol, can be slightly less).”
————————————————————————————–
I’ve heard this argument so many times now that it’s actually making me feel ill.

Yes, corn ethanol is a bad idea, but why does that make all ethanol bad? It’s like saying: “Making houses out of mud is a bad idea, so all houses are bad”.

The U.S. is the only country pushing corn ethanol. This is because farmers are used to growing corn here. That’s the only reason I can think of.

In Brazil they make ethanol very effectively from the leftovers of sugar cane. Ethanol accounts for 18% of their energy use, and they are the world’s largest ethanol exporter.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil
If the U.S. dropped import tariffs on Brazilian ethanol, it would be cheaper than gas. Why are there tariffs for this, and not for Middle-Eastern oil? It’s insane!

In the U.S., the most promising sources of ethanol are switchgrass and algae.

Switchgrass is native to the U.S. It grows like a weed up to 10 feet tall, requires very little if any fertilizer, and no pesticides. The roots grow fairly deep, so there’s much less water required. All this means that switchgrass can grow in places that are not farm-able, so there is little affect on the food supply.

Algae is probably the best source for bio-fuels. 95% of the crude oil that’s in the ground today came from ancient algae. Algae doesn’t grow leaves or stems, so it doesn’t need to produce cellulose. Instead, algae produces vegetable oil, and a lot of it. That’s why algae is so slimy. As a quick comparison:
• Corn produces 18 gallons of vegetable oil per acre per year.
• Palm produces 800 gallons of vegetable oil per acre per year.
• Algae produces 10,000 gallons of vegetable oil per acre per year.
More details here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ToojK_MJd0

Right now switchgrass and algae are just starting to ramp up. Once investment dollars start to flow in, it will become cheap and plentiful. But many investors are reluctant after OPEC dropped gas prices to $1/gallon in the late ninety’s. This is why I keep talking about oil import tariffs that would kick in if prices drop significantly. Otherwise, OPEC will kill bio-fuels and E-REVs, just like they killed American EVs and hybrids in the late 90s.
Jackson Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 9:32 am

Sorry about the length, but I think this bears saying:

I have not invested in, nor plan to invest in, EEStor. Odds are small that it is anything other than an investment scam, as many of you have said.

However, I’ll admit that _I WANT TO BELIEVE_, and given the consensus, there ought to be someone here asking “what if.”

First off, it really ought to be possible to use quantum phenomena to store electric charge. Several applications of this already exist in data memory schemes, where a layering of materials in a transistor creates a “band gap” which causes electrons to be stored in a “quantum well.” Of course, we’re talking power levels that would make a snowflake collision seem like a train wreck by comparison; but if it can happen at any scale the question must be asked: can it be exploited for use on a large scale?

First off, a quantum effect is very much dependant on a device’s actual size, so no one is going to create a single, giant “quantum well” that stores a kwh or more of electric charge.

The queston becomes how to exploit something ultra-tiny for ultra-large applications: and the correct answer may be the most obvious one: by using astronomical numbers of devices.

Consider the quantum dot. This is a sub-microscopic, precisely sized particle of solid state material physically tuned to produce a band gap associated with specific wavelengths of light. It only makes sense to think of using such devices by describing the aggregate behavior of many, many such particles; typically dispersed invisibly through a fluid. The most common use suggested for these dots is to act as a kind of flourescent dye which never degrades at high light levels (as a chemical dye would do).

Purity and size are critical for a quantum dot, and despite several years of research and many promising possibilities, they are still laboratory curiousities.

Now to EEStor. First off, they don’t claim to have made an ultracapacitor, just something analogous to one. What do you call something that stores large amounts of electricity without involving chemical changes? Especially if the only thing which answers that description today is a “capacitor.”

EEStor’s press releases often seem to obssess over precise particle-size and purity. The scientist responsible, I understand, did earlier work characterizing the behavior of magnetic fields on extremely tiny scales (in hard drives).

So if I’m right, the particle is the key; but also only the beginning. How do you exploit huge piles of nanoscale devices? How do you charge/discharge them? It’s tempting to imagine just pouring them into a metal box with a scoop; but I imagine that it wouldn’t be all that simple. Perhaps they would have to evenly coat a conductive surface in a layer. Fabrication could give the word “tricky” a whole new dimension.

If I’m right, it could explain why they’re starting so small. It may be a long time before enough nanodevices can be made to be meaningful to any manufacturer: if your lab can produce enough energy-storing quantum powder for one Volt-size battery, doesn’t that mean you could make thousands of cellphone batteries? Hundreds of electric bicycles?

I think Mark Bartosik is right; Lockheed is in it for the ray gun (and micro-spyplane) batteries; and they’ll keep the company alive as long as it takes for theory to catch up to reality.

It should be noted that this would be the first quantum-scale device to be used in a massively macro application. So the rest of you are also right when you say that we shouldn’t hold our collective breath for a Zenn-powered car: Even in the unlikely event that it’s more, rather than less than we imagine, there will still be plenty of time to exploit lithium ion; at least for larger applications.
Jp Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 9:36 am

The tech, regardless of it’s state of readiness, must have maor drawbacks … Even the published info only mentions bikes & 3 wheel vehilcles ….
There is a possibility that the device loses it’s charge quickly ….. You may charge it , & 24 hrs or so later it’s down to 20%, & you haven’t yet driven the vehicle …. Perhaps it can’t handle the high load draw of a “real” car, & will overheat or break down …. we’ll see…
Dave G Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 10:03 am

#58 Jackson Says: “Purity and size are critical for a quantum dot,
…
EEStor’s press releases often seem to obsess over precise particle-size and purity. …”
————————————————————————————-
Yes, the scenario you describe seems completely viable. This is why I don’t completely discount EEStor either.

Let’s compare this to something we already know, like silicon based semiconductors. The raw materials for silicon are cheap. It’s basically just sand. Why then are semiconductors so expensive? It’s because the manufacturing costs are high. Even when you take a simple silicon structure like a solar cell and scale it up, it’s still relatively expensive. And it’s been that way for 30 years, so I hold little hope for silicon solar cells getting cheap anytime soon.

So it may be that while the raw materials for EEStor are very cheap, the initial manufacturing costs may be prohibitively high for many applications. In this case, EEStor would probably start by going with a very small car company. This way, they can try to lower their production costs at a lower volume without losing too much money. In addition, military contracts would likely be cost plus, so they would be sure to make a little money with that route.

Does this make sense?
Joe OBrien Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 10:39 am

Put up or shut up eestor.

This company is starting to remind me of Carl Tilley’s claims.
noel park Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 11:10 am

#6 Arch:

I’m with you. If it works, wonderful. If it doesn’t, oh well. Any ink/buzz about ways to get off of oil is good ink/buzz, IMHO.

#36 Gordon:

Good thought. Maybe we can focus it into some sort of a beam. Next time some jerk chops me off in the LA traffic, he just magically disappears. Of course, somehow we need to save enough charge to make our getaway!
George K Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 11:18 am

#8 Mickey
“Some ideas for Volt vanity license plates: HYGRID, MRVOLT, MSVOLT, MYVOLT, CHARGE, CHARGIT, PLUGIT, PLUGME, WATTSUP, WATTSNU, SOQUIET, PLUGIN, BIGAMPS, OHMSLAW, SHOCKER, EPOWER, NOGAS, NO-OIL, SHHHH, CORDLES, NOCORD, JUICE, JUICY, POWRFUL, ACDC, VOLTMAN, VOLTGAL, VOLTGUY, VOLTGRL, CURRENT, RECHARJ, VOLTER, ONGRID, HYTORK, BOLT, EXTCORD, HYVOLT, 110VOLT, GENR8TR, PWRSURJ, CHEVOLT, GMVOLT, ENERGM, GRIDPWR, ZAP, JOLT, BUZZ, 110220, LYTNING, SOGREEN, HYMPG, POS-NEG, HISVOLT, HERVOLT.”

Hey, that’s a copyright violation! One of these is MY plate!
JimGalaxy Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 11:36 am

# 41 Mark Bartosik Says:
Weapons, like Star Trek style weapons.
===

Yes .. equipping the U.S. army with phasers? Or in Star Wars parlance, a blaster. Talk about quick discharge, lol.

Hmm .. or maybe a light saber? I’ll take mine in blue, please. =)
jdsv Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 11:51 am

Dave G : Good to know that you’re so well informed.

I guess I didn’t mention corn enough, but I was definitely only ripping on Corn ethanol. I can’t stand the concept, and led a class research project on its sustainability. Guess what we found? Yeah, not even close.

I am HUGELY jealous of the sugar cane ethanol, but don’t think importing it is the answer. Maybe short-term, but short-term energy sources lead to long-term energy sources leads to crap.

I REALLY hope algae takes off, but understand that it will take a while as there aren’t a whole lot of energy conversions systems optimized for its output yet.

Being from Illinois (and having gone to UI), I’m biased specifically toward miscanthus, but still have my doubts as to its true net energy gain. It’s much better than corn, yes, and it and switchgrass are looking to be in the 3x - 4x net gain, but there’s still quite a bit of work to be done. That’s just me being a doubter, though, there are good numbers out there and no real reason to think it’s not a beneficial avenue to continue exploring.

And you’re selling switchgrass short. 10 feet? Heck, corn is a grass that can grow 10+ feet. Miscanthus can go 12+, and will probably end up topping around 20, if you’ll allow me to be optimistic. I’m not a switchgrass expert, but I thought (assumed) it was already pushed to heights taller than corn.

My heart truly lies with biodiesel, though, and would LOVE to have a biodiesel Volt. Ah…

NPNS! =D~~
CDAVIS Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 11:58 am

_____________________________________________________
Fantastic Cheese…

Bob claims he has invented a cheese that is so unique and wonderful (the “Fantastic Cheese”) that his Fantastic Cheese will make all other traditional cheese options commercially obsolete.

Bob’s reputation is one of being a smart technical innovator. Bob previously worked as an engineer at a large company doing work that is related to how Fantastic Cheese will be manufactured.

Bob has received some financial backing from a respected venture capital firm called New Ideas Capital. New Ideas Capital states in their Investing Policy Statement that they are focusing on investing in cheese related companies because New Ideas Capital believes that cheese is a future growth sector however New Ideas Capital will not discuss their investment in Bob’s Fantastic Cheese.

A large respected military food packaging and catering company called War Food’s, Inc. has provided some funding to Bob to help Bob further develop Fantastic Cheese. Bob has agreed provide War Food’s Inc an exclusive for Fantastic Cheese for certain military food products.

Nobody has seen or tasted Bob’s Fantastic Cheese although Bob has started to build his Fantastic Cheese factory.

An independent company has certified that Bob’s factory is capable of propagating Bob’s proprietary baseline cheese starter bacterial culture. Bob claims his cheese starter bacterial culture contains a unique balance of enzymes that interact in the curdling process in such a way that the cheese becomes Fantastic Cheese.

An independent company has certified that Bob’s factory contains cooking vats capable of maintaining a constant temperature within one quarter of one degree centigrade. Bob claims it is critical to be able to maintain an exact temperature during the cooking process to manufacture Fantastic Cheese.

A very large portion of the cheese produced worldwide is used for pizza toppings. Therefore the potential worldwide market for Fantastic Cheese as a pizza topping is fantastic if Fantastic Cheese is as fantastic as Bob claims. Every pizza maker will want Fantastic Cheese because Fantastic Cheese will render all other cheeses obsolete.

Given all the above facts, why would Bob license his Fantastic Cheese to a small pizza operator under terms that allows the small pizza operator to be the only pizza operator to use Fantastic Cheese?
_____________________________________________________
Steve O Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 12:22 pm

For those of you interesting in more info about EEStor..
they actually have 2 sites.. here’s the other site:

http://theeestory.com/
Dave G Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 1:33 pm

#65 jdsv,

I see E85 as a simple supply and demand issue. The problem is that neither exists. The demand isn’t there. Most filling stations don’t supply E85. But once demand becomes clear, I think the market will find viable ways to satisfy that demand.

So in my mind, the first thing to do is concentrate on demand. Right now, my guess is less than 5% or the cars on the road are E85 capable. That’s a big problem. If you were a filling station owner, would you sell E85? Could you afford to?

Also, it’s clear to me that if you leave it up to the market, car makers will not add E85 to a majority of their models. Rather, they will add E85 to a few select models for green washing.

So it seems clear to me that converting to ethanol will require government intervention. Obama is pretty clear on this:
• Mandate All New Vehicles are Flexible Fuel Vehicles, by the end of his first term in office.
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/factsheet_energy_speech_080308.pdf
If McCain is elected, I hope he would do the same. It only costs car manufacturers $100 to add E85 capability.

If this happens, it will definitely create demand. By 2013 around 30% of the cars on the road would be E85 capable, and most gas station owners could afford to dedicate a pump or two to E85.

So then the question is: what crops will be used to supply that demand? Well, we know it won’t be corn. Maybe switchgrass, maybe miscanthus, maybe something else. The point is that there are many potentially viable options here. Let the scientists and investors figure out the details.

In the mean time, why not import ethanol from Brazil? It would be a perfect way to jump-start an E85 market in the U.S., and then when our ethanol production ramps up, we won’t have to buy theirs. In other words, it’s not like we only have 3% of the world’s ethanol reserves. Once E85 starts flowing, we can make our own.
Biodieseljeep Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 2:02 pm

How many times must a man throw down
To prove that free energy ain’t ffree?
How many times must these post go on
Until EEstor will not be…

A divergence from my normal Haiku format, but I have written SO MANY EEstor poems that I’ve run out of ideas and now I must plagiarize Bob.
jdsv Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 2:14 pm

Dave - That’s actually a great perspective on it! My only concern would be us importing a static amount of ethanol from Brazil every year, at the cost of energy and pollution.

Taking into account Obama’s ethanol mandate, demand would surely go up, thereby breaking our satisfaction with a relatively small and unchanging amount from Brazil.

We would then be forced to purchase more, find that it does not meet our needs, and finally bring our (consumer America’s) weight to bear in a call for domestic production. The key would be to get the GOOD ethanol tech off the ground (or out of it) and past corn in public perception.

Thanks for your thoughts on it.. it gives me hope!

NPNS! =D~~
Ed Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 3:29 pm

Can you say pump and dump?????
tom harwick Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 4:03 pm

3) Rapid charging scares me. Not only are there huge voltage and current safety considerations, but if it catches on, there is also the issue of trashing our grid. Slow charging at night won’t cause any problems with our grid.

I partially agree. Slow charging at night would utilize currently idle capacity, and not stress the existing grid. Rapid charging would challenge the existing grid, and necessitate in increase in capacity. But this increase can be met via emission free nuclear power.

E85 is not a viable option. It is much more expensive than gasoline, and requires subsidies which the economy could not sustain if it ever went mainstream.

Fast charge would make PHEVs more economical on medium length trips, and make BEVs much mor practical.
tom harwick Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 4:13 pm

#68 Dave G wrote:

So then the question is: what crops will be used to supply that demand? Well, we know it won’t be corn. Maybe switchgrass, maybe miscanthus, maybe something else. The point is that there are many potentially viable options here. Let the scientists and investors figure out the details.
——————————————————————————

It is important to push back on flawed posts like this, advocating E85.
You cannot dismiss the laws of chemistry and physics by saying “let the scientists figure it out”. The reality is that corn is not an economical feedstock for ethanol. There is no industrial scale process for making ethanol out of non-food crops like switchgrass, and people have been striving for one for years.

There is nothing wrong with funding more research in the increasingly faint hope that switchgrass to ethanol will become industrially viable, but we need to focus on energy technologies that have been demonstrated to work, like nuclear generated electricity, and PHEVs.
tom harwick Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 4:15 pm

Dave - That’s actually a great perspective on it! My only concern would be us importing a static amount of ethanol from Brazil every year, at the cost of energy and pollution.

Taking into account Obama’s ethanol mandate, demand would surely go up, thereby breaking our satisfaction with a relatively small and unchanging amount from Brazil.
———————————————————————————
Here is how they produce ethanol in Brazil.

1. Burn down the rainforest.
2. Plant cane
3. Harvest cane and make ethanol.

Sugar ethanol is very non-eco-friendly.

PS…is a new foreign source of energy really the answer?
g.r.r. Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 6:05 pm

Skip the bike. It is more cheap chinese garbage.
Dave G Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 7:27 pm

tom harwick Says: “It is important to push back on flawed posts like this, advocating E85. You cannot dismiss the laws of chemistry and physics by saying “let the scientists figure it out”.”
————————————————————————————-
We disagree.

What laws of chemistry and physics make cellulosic ethanol impossible? I don’t know of any.

Here are the facts:
• Corn ethanol wont work, no matter how much we subsidize it.
• Cellulosic ethanol has received very little investment and no subsidies.
• Algae bio-reactors are just now starting to be looked at seriously.
• Then there’s everything else… How many plants are there in the world? There are a lot of options to make ethanol. I’m sure one will work. We just have to find it.

By the way, as I understand it, Brazil makes ethanol from the stuff that’s left over after sugar cane has been processed into sugar. That’s the main cash crop. Ethanol is just one side benefit. The processing steps are:
1) Extract sugar
2) Ferment the leftovers into ethanol
3) Use the remaining bio-mass for soil remediation and/or burn it for electricity.
Dave G Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 7:35 pm

#74 tom harwick Says: “PS…is a new foreign source of energy really the answer?”
————————————————————————————–
Yes. I would rather buy ethanol from Brazil than oil from Saudi Arabia, Russia, or Venezuela.

But my main point is that importing ethanol would be temporary. It’s not like we only have 3% of the world’s ethanol reserves. We can make ethanol.
jdsv Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 8:57 pm

#74 tom : Sugar ethanol is very non-eco-friendly.

PS…is a new foreign source of energy really the answer?
——–
That was exactly my point. I am not a fan of importing ethanol from Brazil, and am vehemently against using it as an accepted source of energy.

The ONLY reason I would advocate a SHORT TERM trading of this fuel would be to whet our appetites for proper ethanol and get us producing ethanol in non-human habitable / generally non-arable areas like oceans and dry plains. If we were to domestically produce 50 billion barrels of ethanol a year, we would have no need to import whatever small amount (0.5 - 2 billion barrels?) we could get from Brazil. Their ports are already maxed out anyways - we would end that trade in a snap.
mikeinatl. Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 9:21 pm

This is my first exposure to EESTor and Ultracapacitors.
Remarkable. Sounds like science fiction.

At least until I ran across the Coleman rechargeable screwdriver that uses this type battery. Recharges in 90 seconds. $79.99.
http://www.colemanflashcellscrewdriver.com/#Coleman_Flashcell_Product_Information
You can buy it right now.

If they can do this, how far away are we from this type battery in cars or everything else for that matter? What if it could be utilized in solar energy storage in your house!

The US Department of Defense “Wearable Power” Competition will conclude on October 4th. Its all about the latest battery tech applied for used in a wearable vest for soldiers to wear in combat. Should be some interesting new battery tech ideas coming out of that in just a few days. Lockheed, General Dynamics, Rayovac and about 50 other companies competing for the MILLION DOLLAR prize.

We will just see how real this new stuff is in a few days.
Manny Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 10:19 pm

mikeinnatl, science fiction indeed.

EEstor has never shown a prototype, a concept, a model, or a mule. Nothing but words. Why are you all listening to them?
Grizzly Says:
October 1st, 2008 at 11:05 pm

tom harwick #72

“E85 is not a viable option. It is much more expensive than gasoline, and requires subsidies which the economy could not sustain if it ever went mainstream.”

*** *** ***

We are moving toward cellulosic ethanol. This can be made from garbage, any garbage, anything -that is- but metal. It is gassified into elements known as syngas and then fed to LONG LOST cousins of yeast who ferment this into ethanol. No subsidies, no corn, no sugar needed.

http://coskata.com/ProcessGasification.asp
Dave G Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:25 am

#81 Grizzly,

Thanks for the link! It looks like Coskata can do Ethanol from just about anything (switchgrass, wood chips, old tires, sewage), and potentially at less than $1/gallon. I can see why GM is investing in them:
http://www.portfolio.com/culture-lifestyle/goods/cars/2008/01/13/GM-Coskata-Alternative-Fuels

The most interesting thing for me is this:
http://coskata.com/EthanolFeedstockPotential.asp
where it shows how 35% of our gasoline consumption can be replaced with ethanol. This is a perfect fit for E-REVs, which easily have the potential to replace the remaining 65%.

So hypothetically, let’s say that Coskata has an IPO next year. Would you be willing to invest in them? What if OPEC turns on the spigots in 2010 and lowers gas prices to $1.50/gallon. Your investment just flew out the window. The Volt production launch would be hammered as well.

This is exacly what OPEC has been doing since the late 70’s, dramatically lowing prices temporarily to kill off alternative fuels and vehicles in the U.S.. It’s not really a free market. We are being manipulated. This is why I keep talking about oil import tariffs that would trigger if oil prices fall significantly. If these were in place, I would be a lot more willing to invest in companies like Coskata.
Jackson Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Dave G

Keep the faith. I was an ethanol skeptic, but you convinced me in earlier threads like this.

Facts are awkward things; opinions more graceful, and cheaper.

I will admit that I’m far more impressed with algae to biodiesel than algae to ethanol; but it should be remembered that much in our modern lives beyond fuel is enabled by cheap hydrocarbons from oil. The ability to transform sustainable biomass to feedstock chemicals of many kinds will also be crucial as the oil age draws to a close. What we learn making biodiesel and ethanol today may enable plastics and pharmaceuticals tomorrow.
Jeff M Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 2:25 pm

Honda may be interested… they are planning to make hybrid (yes HYBRID) gas-electric motorbikes starting in 2010… see http://www.electricpig.co.uk/2008/09/29/honda-to-sell-hybrid-motorbikes-by-2010/
jdsv Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 5:58 pm

..From last night.. It kept getting flagged as spam. Who knows.

Dave G says : • Cellulosic ethanol has received very little investment and no subsidies.

http://www.news.uiuc.edu/NEWS/07/0201bp.html

This is the largest investment initiative to date that I know of. Just a drop in the barrel of what COULD and SHOULD be happening in this field.

What really hurts with only a small lump of funds is that we cannot justify exploring the wide range of techs out there. With that flexibility, we (in conjunction with many other programs) could afford to get a much better feel for the sustainability and marketability of certain sources, and then set aside those which show the least promise. Right now all we can do is stick to what we know and hope that everything turns out alright.
Steve Says:
October 3rd, 2008 at 2:53 pm

Hmmmm. “Would provide” and “plan to offer” isn’t a very good argument for EEStor having even a working prototype or pre-production unit to show anyone yet.

Seems like it would be relatively easy to integrate a new storage device in a product like the Volt. Even if not large enough for the main storage, maybe it could enhance regenerative braking, etc.

I don’t have any vehicles that run on advertising.
Paul Says:
October 3rd, 2008 at 6:54 pm

Hey #8 Mickey,

You forgot “SPARKY” :o)
Craven Moorehead Says:
October 6th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

All of you really need to take a step back and realize what idiots you all are. None of you can make a difference, yet all of you feel that you are. You could all benefit by going out and getting LAID! I know that might be hard, but go to the bar really late and you might just get lucky… make sure you have enough battery power or E-85 to get her to your home though… LOL…
John Ellis Says:
October 7th, 2008 at 6:53 am

An ultracapicator would seeming work well in parallel with a battery in that it could soak up the energy from regenerative braking more efficiently and fill in the peaks and valleys of current flow. And of course, for night time charging, a regulator could parse out the electricity so as to not overheat the grid. It would charge instantly from the gas engine as well. I believe the best use is Li-on with capacitors to even out and regulate energy flow, keeping peak demands off the battery, extending its life and improving performance as well.
Jay Says:
October 7th, 2008 at 2:14 pm

How could they be receiving a production version of their battery when EEStor’s own website says they have a few major set backs and that the battery will not be ready till fall 2009?

Something fishy going on here?
Jay Says:
October 7th, 2008 at 2:22 pm

http://www.eestorbatteries.com/waiting_for_proof_eestor.html
Reality Check Says:
November 26th, 2008 at 8:33 am

Speculation. The same force at work here is the same force that gave us $4 a gallon gas. Maybe if we just all believe hard enough, it will make it come true.

I’m asking Santa for an Eestor battery to replace the NiMh battery in my hybrid. It’s about as likely a anything else being produced this year (or next). PT Barnum would have a field day with this!

EEStor Rides Again, This Time on a Bike

92 Responses to “EEStor Rides Again, This Time on a Bike”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts