Jan 04

EEStor Gets a Trademark Patent on EESU and Provides Specs for a 24V EESU

 

Another chapter on the EEStor story has now unfolded, this time in the world of trademark patents.

In October, the secretive Texas company EEStor was granted a trademark for “EESU”, which stands for Electrical Energy Storage Unit and refers to their unique ceramic battery. The battery is purported to be low cost, lightweight, extremely energy dense, rapidly chargeable, and has a functionally infinite lifecycle. All these attributes are each many times superior to lithium-ion batteries.  Because of these remarkable properties it is hoped to be an ideal solution for electric cars, and is the reason Canadian Zenn Motors has an exclusivity agreement to build them.

Indeed the excitement generated by the potential for these devices is why they are followed here even though they are not directly slated for use in the Chevy Volt nor has GM rendered any opinion on the company. GM promotes an open-door policy for reviewing and testing any new cells companies want to offer. GM executives deny ever receiving an EEStor prototype.

Indeed the public has never seen a working prototype of these batteries yet, and there is debate as to whether one actually exists. EEStor CEO Dick Weir has declined to answer that question when I’ve posed it to him on multiple occasions. Nonetheless, military giant Lockheed Martin has obtained an exclusive agreement to use the technology in military applications.

In fact, earlier this week a patent was awarded to Lockheed Martin for a body armor vest with a built-in EESU compartment although it is also noted that lithium-ion cells could also be used.  A spokesperson from Lockheed Martin told GM-Volt.com “that product is separate from the rights agreement with EEStor… Not associated.”

In any event, the newly discovered EESU trademark patent discloses heretofore unseen preliminary specifications for an apparent EESU model called a 24V-BDHD as follows:

Thanks to EEStor blogger ‘B’ for the tip, his site is here.

Source (US Patent and Trademark Office)

This entry was posted on Sunday, January 4th, 2009 at 9:30 am and is filed under Battery, EEStor. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

COMMENTS: 107


  1. 1
    Kyle S.

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kyle S.
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (9:34 am)

    Looks too good to be true. However, I would love to be proven wrong. EESU, if it exists and works as advertised, would fix the weakest link in the electric car: the battery pack.


  2. 2
    Mike756

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike756
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (9:43 am)

    So, about 292 wh/kg. This is much better than Maxwell’s ultracaps at about 5.5 wh/kg. It would hold about 641 wh (0.641 kwh) in a 4 inch cube.


  3. 3
    Mike756

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike756
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (9:51 am)

    That’s about 16 kwh in 1 cubic foot. Sounds good, I’ll take one.


  4. 4
    Roger

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Roger
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (9:54 am)

    B has recently posted updated information on the trademark story. He has links to the trademark apps of all of EEStor’s partners except Lockheed at this posting:

    http://theeestory.com/articles/115


  5. 5
    Shawn Marshall

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Shawn Marshall
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:01 am)

    Wonder why EESTOR is going to give their battery pack away?

    20A-hr @ 24V in a lithium battery pack would cost over $500.

    They must be real nice people. Luckily they cannot ‘patent’ their approach to business. At least we’ve seen some pony Volts.


  6. 6
    dwayne

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    dwayne
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:15 am)

    It appears to me that this has all the earmarks of a classified development effort. If such a capicity existed within the government – it would be highly classified,


  7. 7
    Shawn Marshall

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Shawn Marshall
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:17 am)

    Now I know why it’s so cheap!!!!!


  8. 8
    Jean-Charles Jacquemin

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jean-Charles Jacquemin
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:23 am)

    Thanks Lyle,

    This sounds good, i hope it is not too good to be true.

    JC


  9. 9
    MikeFoxFL

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MikeFoxFL
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:28 am)

    @dwayne #6

    That’s the only thing I can think of. Most of me says investor scam but it is possible there is a reason they can’t talk. On the other hand if it was classified you would think that we would not have heard about it.


  10. 10
    dwayne

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    dwayne
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:33 am)

    If you had a program that needed to become classified – what plausible disinformation story would you create?


  11. 11
    statik

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    statik
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:37 am)

    A new year…a new EEStor sighting.

    /I’m still looking forward to my EEStor powered Zenn car this fall. I believe that it will not actually be powered by electricity…but rather by press releases and patents


  12. 12
    Tim

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tim
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:39 am)

    This will be another interesting year and the EESU is one of those pivotal inventions that would change the world as we know it.

    I will happily give EEStore the benefit of the doubt and wait patiently for the EESU to be released for consumer use.

    I will also brace myself for disappointment although I doubt that Lockheed Martin would publicly allow themselves to be duped.


  13. 13
    CDAVIS

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CDAVIS
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:02 am)

    ______________________________________________________
    Repost:

    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?
    _____________________________________________________


  14. 14
    Steve

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Steve
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:17 am)

    #13 CDAVIS,
    Bob stated in the United States Patent and Trademark Office application the “FIRST USE ANYWHERE DATE” of the “Fantastic Cheese” was “At least as early as 02/02/2001″. Wow it’s nine years and no independent Chef has tasted the “Fantastic Cheese” :) .


  15. 15
    Jim I

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jim I
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:30 am)

    I was going to post on this topic, but now I am hungry for a pizza!!

    Maybe after lunch………….

    :)


  16. 16
    kent beuchert

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kent beuchert
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:32 am)

    “Most of me says investor scam but it is possible there is a reason they can’t talk. ”

    I’ve got big news : neither A123 Systems nor LG Chem provides this kind of information about price, tc. So, now who’s the secretive company? And exactly how does one profit by an investor scam when all of the funds have been used for development? That would be one pointless scam. Agree? There are folks out there who think everything is a scam, when in fact, actual investor scams are very rare. Do the math – your odds of being struck by lightning are greater than the odds that you’ll be scammed. People see one or two companies out of 12,000 caught doing something wrong and stupidly assume they all are crooked. Then look at the percentage of citizens who cheat on their taxes. The number is staggering, yet these folks also assume the average Joe is honest. Their beliefs are pure dumb.


  17. 17
    frayadjacent

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    frayadjacent
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:40 am)

    It should be noted that the EESU is a capacitive device, not a battery.

    I’m kinda on the fence about them. Sure, seeing that Lockheed Martin thinks they have something is a very positive indicator. The ‘exclusive’ licensing with ZENN sounds a bit fishy, tho. If the technology is so good (like the cheese story above!), why would you limit it’s use to only one very small company?

    I hope they do pull it off. Their EESU can completely change the game.


  18. 18
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:50 am)

    Wait a minute!

    I just ran a quick spread sheet with some of these EESU 24V-BDHD numbers. 26.7 amp-hours per EESU @ 24 volts is 641 watt-hours per EESU. This implies that 25 EESUs are needed to make a 16 kWh battery pack. When you throw in the other pack hardware, this implies 1/5 the cost and 1/3 the weight of the Volt’s current Li/Ion pack. Looks good so far.

    But the EESU specs also call out 80 amps peak current, and for only 2 seconds. This equates to 1920 peak watts per EESU, or only 48 kW peak power for a 25 EESU pack, and for only 2 seconds. This would be inadequate to power the Volt’s 120 kw electric motor for acceleration and uphill driving.

    Since acceleration and uphill driving last a lot longer than 2 seconds, we are forced to use the 20 amps continuous figure, or 480 watts per EESU. This implies it would take 250 EESUs to fully power the Volt’s electric motor. When you throw in the other pack hardware, this implies 1.5 times the cost and 4 times the weight of the Volt’s current Li/Ion pack, assuming it would fit.

    I thought these EESU ultra-capacitor type devices were supposed to have more peak power than Li/Ion. There is an asterisk note about extending the peak power at the bottom of the specs, but not by much. Is this an intrinsic problem with EEStor?

    Am I missing something here?


  19. 19
    Rashiid Amul

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Rashiid Amul
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:51 am)

    With nothing positive to say about EEStor, I will just wish them good luck and hope they succeed in something more than being a scam.


  20. 20
    George K

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George K
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:52 am)

    #11 statik
    “I’m still looking forward to my EEStor powered Zenn car this fall. I believe that it will not actually be powered by electricity…but rather by press releases and patents”
    ————–

    So far statik has been right on many issues by assuming the down side.

    I’m temped to jump on his train and be right about this. But…as Tim says, Im still wondering why Lockheed would spend time on this, unless it were valid. Perhaps the military gets the “A” version, and statik will be driving the “C” version?

    =D~~~~


  21. 21
    Lurtz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Lurtz
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:57 am)

    #13 CDavis

    Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.


  22. 22
    KentT

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    KentT
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (12:09 pm)

    Thanks CDAVIS #13.

    All I have to say is, “Hey! Someone moved my cheese!”*

    *Thanks to authors, Spencer Johnson and Kenneth Blanchard for their book, “Who moved my cheese?”


  23. 23
    Mike756

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike756
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (12:19 pm)

    Dave G #18

    The current rating is most likely a function of time at current. You’re right, 25 wouldn’t do it, but I doubt you would need 250.


  24. 24
    JohnJ

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JohnJ
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (12:19 pm)

    Operating temp max of 49C = 120F. Except for far northern regions, I would think this would rule out vehicular usage. Living in the Chicago area my car’s internal temp can hit 127 on a sunny summer day. Sure, the batteries, sorry, EESUs, could be shielded or insulated but that temp will for the most part work it’s way throughout the car over enough hours. An EESU cooling system would only help when the vehicle is actually running unless you made it solar powered and had on-vehicle panels.

    Or have I been eating too much Fantastic Cheese?


  25. 25
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (12:33 pm)

    #23 Mike756 Says: “The current rating is most likely a function of time at current. You’re right, 25 wouldn’t do it, but I doubt you would need 250.”
    ————————————————————————————-
    OK, maybe you could get by with 100. Or perhaps a more likely approach would be to mix in some Li/Ion cells that are optimized for power density rather than energy density. Either way, it seems that the power limitations of EEStor will take away any cost, space, or weight savings.

    Or perhaps it just means that a EEStor based car will have very poor acceleration. Maybe that’s why they’re pairing up with Zenn Motors…


  26. 26
    Dave B

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave B
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (1:05 pm)

    Let’s talk Detroit ’09 already. We’re just days away.


  27. 27
    Casey

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Casey
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (1:23 pm)

    This all sounds kinda cheesy to me

    NO PLUG NO SALE, LJGTVWOTR, DBNGCMEMEV, (my house)=D~~~(my volt)

    (Don’t buy new gas cars make em make EVs)


  28. 28
    Jason M. Hendler

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jason M. Hendler
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (1:24 pm)

    #5, Shawn Marshall,

    Unfortunately, I have worked in far too many high tech start-ups so as to tell the sad tale of cost based pricing, as opposed to value based pricing.

    You hit on the fundamental objective of first identifying what technologies are currently used, and at what price, then determining how a disruptive tech can improve performance (or maintain performance in smaller / lighter / cheaper package), then determine what value that increased performance can bring.

    EEstor’s product, if it exists as specified, would enable EV’s to be a direct replacement to ICE vehicles. It really doesn’t matter that they are far more energy dense than Lithium Ion batteries at a lower price. It only matters that they are rapid recharge without degrading their product life.

    If EEstor recognized the simple but profound value of their product, then they would charge far more than a few dozen dollars. It seems they are intent on selling their products for some multiple of the product’s cost, and are completely ignoring their value.

    If these devices work as advertized, then the Shai Agassi Project Better Place will be rendered obsolete.


  29. 29
    Jason M. Hendler

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jason M. Hendler
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (1:26 pm)

    #18, Dave G,

    Perhaps a bank of capacitors working in conjunction with these devices could provide the longer duration current needed for vehicle acceleration.


  30. 30
    Gas Electric Volt

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Gas Electric Volt
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (1:45 pm)

    Though I’d prefer to see the use of MaxCaps over a Li Ion battery for regen braking and assisted acceleration (not to mention a $20k Volt price tag), I’d really like to see this EESU power an actual EV/EREV.

    Please prove us wrong and usher in the age of the prolific EV.


  31. 31
    Jerry

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jerry
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (2:56 pm)

    If History has taught us anything. If it sounds TOO good to be true, it probably is. I would love to be wrong though. Well I’m off to get a PIZZA, thanks CDAVIS…


  32. 32
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (2:57 pm)

    Jason M. Hendler Says: “Perhaps a bank of capacitors working in conjunction with these devices could provide the longer duration current needed for vehicle acceleration.”
    ————————————————————————————–
    What about driving a long uphill grade?


  33. 33
    Schmeltz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Schmeltz
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (3:01 pm)

    If EEStor is truly a charade/scam, then one has to still wonder how the alleged charade continues to live on? Also, I find it hard to believe Lockheed (the Father of Stealth planes) is being naieve about getting associated with a Company that is nothing more than a scam. As always, I guess time will tell.


  34. 34
    nuclearboy

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nuclearboy
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (3:05 pm)

    Some Real news that impacts the Volt

    Michigan lawmakers banded together late last month for a high-stakes gamble on the future of the automobile. Voting 31-3 in the Senate and 94-0 in the House, they agreed to offer up to $335 million in tax rebates for the development and manufacture of the world’s most advanced batteries to power the cars of the future.

    http://blog.mlive.com/bcopinion/2009/01/michigan_makes_an_expensive_bu.html

    The blog also mentions EEStor so somehow this is related to the topic.


  35. 35
    Mike756

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike756
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (3:08 pm)

    What about driving a long uphill grade?

    The 53 kw generator will be the limiting factor for long uphill climbs.


  36. 36
    Schmeltz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Schmeltz
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (3:15 pm)

    Jason said: “If these devices work as advertized, then the Shai Agassi Project Better Place will be rendered obsolete.”

    Not necessarily. People would still need places to charge the vehicles in the first place–just not as many charging ports. And the “battery swap stations” would probably as you said be rendered obsolete.


  37. 37
    kent beuchert

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kent beuchert
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (3:16 pm)

    Everything looks fine, but I wonder what the peak power output will be. Without that, it’s hard to determine whether an EESTor powered drivetrain will require staging to produce enough peak output.


  38. 38
    George B.

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George B.
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (3:39 pm)

    The comments about the projected price point for the EESU are interesting. The price does seem low…too low. But then, I believe that Mr. Wier doesn’t really intend to be in the business of actually making the products. He just wants to liscence the technology and let others deal with manufacturing and delivery. Smart guy… that’s where the real money is. I believe he has said all along that this was his plan.

    Once the technology is proven and manufacturing begins in earnest it will be a quick race to the bottom of the price curve and you will be able to get these things for 1/2 what they will be in release 1.0. I can’t wait to see this play out. Mr. Wier could be the next Bill Gates.


  39. 39
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (4:18 pm)

    #35 Mike756 Says: “The 53 kw generator will be the limiting factor for long uphill climbs.”
    ————————————————————————————–
    I disagree. Long constant uphill grades can last for several miles, but they can’t last forever.

    The Volt can go around 40 miles on 8kwh. Then when the ICE comes on, there’s still 4.8kwh of energy left in the battery. That’s enough to go up to 24 more miles over level ground with the battery alone. With the 4.8kwh of battery and ICE generator working together, (see pictures here: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/Volt_Electrical_Block_Diagram.jpg )
    The Volt should be able to go fast up a steep grade for around 20 miles or more before running out of battery.

    The worst mountain pass I know of is going west out of Death Valley. The valley is below sea level, and the mountains to the west are around 14,000 feet. I believe the pass the road goes through is around 6000 ft, and you drive around 12-15 miles out of the valley to get there. Even here, the road is not constantly uphill. There are some level and downhill spots every few miles, and there are lots of curves that slow you down as you get closer to the top.

    According to GM, you need to drive very fast (like 80 MPH) up a steep grade to overload the ICE. Show me a road that goes 20 miles constantly up a steep grade with no level or downhill spots and no curves or other things that force you to slow down. I’ve never heard of one…


  40. 40
    Van

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Van
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (4:49 pm)

    Yes, it would be nice to have a couple of drivers drive the Volt prototype and the new Prius west out of Death Valley and then swing over to I-5 and go over the Grapevine into LA. Now that would be an interesting read. :)


  41. 41
    MDDave

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MDDave
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (4:57 pm)

    Speaking of long constant uphill grades, I recently went to the Big Island of Hawaii and drove from the west coast up to the top of Mauna Kea (where the telescopes are); that’s sea level to 14,000 feet over a distance of about 55 miles. The last stretch goes from 6,000 feet to 14,000 feet in just 12 miles with no significant flat or downhill stretches. It was a fun drive. It would be more fun, of course, to try it in a Volt.

    EDIT: What would you do going down a grade like the one I just described in a Volt (i.e., 14,000 to 6,000 feet over 12 miles)? When I did it I was in low gear for most of the way. Because the Volt does not have a traditional transmission, I assume it does not have anything like a low gear. Would the regenerative brakes alone be capable of keeping the car under control on such a severe descent.


  42. 42
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (5:32 pm)

    #41 MDDave Says: “Speaking of long constant uphill grades, I recently went to the Big Island of Hawaii and drove from the west coast up to the top of Mauna Kea (where the telescopes are); that’s sea level to 14,000 feet over a distance of about 55 miles. The last stretch goes from 6,000 feet to 14,000 feet in just 12 miles with no significant flat or downhill stretches. It was a fun drive. It would be more fun, of course, to try it in a Volt.”
    ————————————————————————————–
    Sounds like a great trip!

    Question: What is the longest stretch of that road to the top of Mauna Kea that would allow you to drive 80 MPH?

    According to Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah, it’s only when you go very fast up a very long hill that you may have a problem, and the problem is that you have to slow down to maybe 50 MPH.
    http://gm-volt.com/2008/09/02/the-pikes-peak-question-chevy-volt-and-the-infinite-hill/

    Here’s a quote:
    “As I start up that hill, I’ll be going at 80 mph, no problem. I will be drawing roughly 50 kw of electrical energy from the generator and I’ll be drawing the additional energy required out of the battery. Lets say its another 10 or 15 kw out of the battery.”

    So at 80 MPH up a steep hill, you’re only pulling 15kw from the battery. We know the battery has around 4.8kwh when the ICE turns on. Let’s assume GM will leave 1kwh in there for safety, which leaves 3.8kwh for getting up the hill. With a constant power draw of 15kw, the 3.8kwh would last around 15 minutes. At 80MPH, 15 minutes is 20 miles.

    So here’s the question, was there any 20-mile uphill stretch on the road to the top of Mauna Kea that would allow you to drive 80 MPH without slowing down too much?


  43. 43
    Kaido

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kaido
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (5:40 pm)

    Just show the damned prototype already and let the hype be gone. Tired of this speculation sh*T..


  44. 44
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (5:41 pm)

    #41 MDDave Says: “Would the regenerative brakes alone be capable of keeping the car under control on such a severe descent.”
    ————————————————————————————–
    I believe GM has said the Volt will have both conventional brakes and regenerative brakes. I think regenerative brakes could absorb most of the descent power, minimizing brake wear, but I have no data to back that up.

    I’m not worried about this kind of stuff. I’m much more worried about the initial cost of the Volt…


  45. 45
    RB

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    RB
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (6:32 pm)

    When there is a device available to 3rd parties then EESU is worth discussing. Until then, it is not.


  46. 46
    BillR

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    BillR
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (6:51 pm)

    This article mentions a Trademark patent, not a utility patent.

    So therefore they have trademarked the name “EESU” for their device, but this patent will not describe nor protect the actual workings of the device, only the name.

    Its like Dolby stereo. The patents for this technology expired years ago, but the trademark name is still used because it is associated with a quality stereo system.

    Still a lot of proof required before I can be convinced these devices will work for EV’s.


  47. 47
    RB

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    RB
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (6:54 pm)

    The Ford Fusion seems to have models in the field being driven by journalists. The following comments are by a WSJ reporter:

    “Mr. Cherian [Ford rep] showed me how to take the Fusion’s electric drive capability to the next level. Driving the car at speeds below 47 miles per hour, you can ease off on the accelerator, and put the car in “EV” mode — I knew when this happened thanks to a display in the dashboard screen to the left of the speedometer.

    Once you get the car running in EV mode, a light touch to the accelerator can keep it cruising on batteries for several minutes. Another computer-generated virtual gauge will reward you by showing that the car’s mileage is above 60 miles per gallon, on a running basis.”

    There is a lot more to the WSJ review.


  48. 48
    ccombs

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    ccombs
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (7:07 pm)

    I still am inclined to think EEStor is not all it’s cracked up to be, but Lockheed Martin’s tacit endorsement makes me think twice. They are usually careful not to embarrass themselves.


  49. 49
    MDDave

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MDDave
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (7:11 pm)

    #42 Dave G: So here’s the question, was there any 20-mile uphill stretch on the road to the top of Mauna Kea that would allow you to drive 80 MPH without slowing down too much?

    ——————————

    The short answer to that question is “no.”

    Over the last 12 miles, from 6,000 to 14,000 feet, you wouldn’t be able to do 80 mph in any vehicle–the grade is too steep, most of it is a dirt road, and there are some serious switchbacks. From the coast up to 6,000 feet, the road is a pretty standard 2 lane road and you could probably manage 80 mph on parts of it, but it is not a highway, so it would not be safe to go that speed. Having said that, I probably did hit close to 80 on parts of the road. There is about a 10 mile stretch of road that is straight and fairly flat, gaining only about 2,000 feet of elevation over the 10 miles (the middle part of the Saddle Road for those of you that have been there).


  50. 50
    unni

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    unni
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (7:30 pm)

    #13 excellent cheese story – Let me know i can cut and paste in my blog :-) with proper regards ..

    #42
    Lot of times i wondered how much will be the output of if driven without battery.

    Again i was thinking Cruze is a config where there is not battery and rest all same as volt but now its only ice engine one ( else it will run only half speed :-) )


  51. 51
    Mark Bartosik

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Bartosik
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (7:33 pm)

    RE #18 peak power of EESU – good point.

    Maybe that’s why they teamed up with Zenn. Because the EESU will only power over sized golf carts, not main stream cars.

    If the EESU is real then it would be a great alternative to lead acid batteries for solar power homes and renewable energy where requirements are weighted more to energy storage than output power compared with vehicles. It is about $100 per KWh storage, and at 24V ready for replacement of lead acid batteries.


  52. 52
    Mike756

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike756
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (7:35 pm)

    Dave G

    If the engine is running, would the battery (EESU) current even be a problem? If it is sized to supply full current, then it shouldn’t have a problem supplying partial current. Without specific numbers, I guess we can’t really say whether or not there is a hill on which a driver would not be able to go as fast as they wanted to.


  53. 53
    MDDave

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MDDave
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (7:38 pm)

    #41 MDDave Says: “Would the regenerative brakes alone be capable of keeping the car under control on such a severe descent.”

    ————————————————————————————–

    #44 Dave G Says: “I believe GM has said the Volt will have both conventional brakes and regenerative brakes. I think regenerative brakes could absorb most of the descent power, minimizing brake wear, but I have no data to back that up.

    I’m not worried about this kind of stuff. I’m much more worried about the initial cost of the Volt…”

    ————————————————————————————–

    Agreed; It’s not a big concern for me either. But it is an interesting question. I would be concerned that conventional breaks would fail on such a steep and prolonged decline without a low gear to provide some resistance. It seems to me that regenerative breaks might be more durable in this scenario, but they would not provide enough resistance.


  54. 54
    Tim

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tim
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (8:17 pm)

    Dave G (#18)

    1) I believe that only 50% of the Volt’s current (pun intended) 16 kWh li-Ion battery pack will actually be used in order to keep from damaging the pack.

    100% of the EESU capacity can be used without damage therefore it will only NEED to hold 8 kWh for the 40-mile E-REV “sweet spot” range. This will HALF your weight, size and cost figures. Since the size and weight are half, then the new 8 kWh figure can be reduced still.

    2) This patent and trademark is for a very specific EESU and not one specifically for EVs. The base technology is protected under separate patents.

    3) I believe that the base technology (number of plates, controls, etc.) can be adjusted for specific requirements.

    4) I also believe that the Zenn exclusivity is for “Electric Cars” of a specific size and weight and does NOT include E-REVs. If I’m wrong, then I’m sure that some of those BILLIONS in taxpayer money that went to GM could be used to buy EESUs from Zenn and a fraction of the cost of the current Li-Ion volt packs.

    IF the base technology is real and IF it becomes available, I’m certain that GM and many others will happily take full advantage of it.

    We’ll just have to wait and see.


  55. 55
    galileo

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    galileo
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (8:22 pm)

    Buy local (American cars), and stop global warming.


  56. 56
    Cautious Fan

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Cautious Fan
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:09 pm)

    Could we just get past EEStor already. Until they have a working prototype, there is 0 credibility here. Anyone can make grand claims. If we’re going to talk future storage, why not new developments in LION’s, or the new Zinc-Air rechargeable’s. That has credibility.

    I could see this concept working in conjunction with a battery. You could reduce a lot of battery cycles by sending braking energy to the EEStor rather than battery. But standalone storage…..I’ll believe it when I see it.

    Body armor utilizes ceramic plates, and EEStor uses ceramic plates right? Seriously, that’s like saying since sand is made of silicon, and computer chips are silicon, adding sand will make your computer faster. I’m not an expert in either super capacitors or armor, though I have done some structural design work on tanks. The armor they use is HIGHLY optimized for threats. I can’t imagine a soldier willing to sacrifice armor to integrate a super capacitor with it. And what happens when that thing gets blasted. The electricity has to go somewhere. If I’m a soldier, no thank you.


  57. 57
    Cautious Fan

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Cautious Fan
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:22 pm)

    #53 MDDave

    #41 MDDave Says: “Would the regenerative brakes alone be capable of keeping the car under control on such a severe descent.”
    ————————————————————————————–
    I believe GM has said the Volt will have both conventional brakes and regenerative brakes. I think regenerative brakes could absorb most of the descent power, minimizing brake wear, but I have no data to back that up.
    __________________________________________________

    I never though about it really DaveG, but I think you’re right. My impression is that Volt will have the regenerative brake, as well as conventional. I’m not sure if you can use the serial drivetrain for braking or not (relying on engine backpressure). In theory you could (I think) , but I just don’t know. Since there’s a battery bypass in the electrical system it sounds possible though. That’d be a cool question for the GM engineers.

    Note that if you begin a descent with full battery, there’s not really anyplace to store the energy so you’d need the conventional brakes for the whole descent. Therefore, there aren’t any weight savings for the braks since they must still be sized for the same conditions as before.

    Since the energy is stored as electricity, there are some cool ways to dump the excess energy; insulated & ventilated arc chamber, water heater with associated fan, etc. If you can dump electrical energy easily, then you could just send all the excess energy to this.


  58. 58
    Master Yoda

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Master Yoda
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:22 pm)

    With EEStor the force will be.

    Believe it should you.


  59. 59
    CaptJackSparrow

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CaptJackSparrow
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:28 pm)

    Hmmm…..
    This EESU is supposed to be in the realm of a capacitor but why does it rate discharge at 20Ah? Maxwell capacitor as well as others are in the 2800Ah to 3200+ Ah discharge rate ranging from their 100F to 500F 16v products. This sounds more of a battery to me. Maybe they’re trying to come up with a new coined fancy name for a battery?
    I’m sure they have “something” there but I think it’s nothing more than a higher density “Battery”.


  60. 60
    Cautious Fan

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Cautious Fan
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:30 pm)

    Anybody see this. Low-cost oil from leftover coffee grounds. “The researchers report that the exhaust actually smells like coffee.” Not sure what Starbucks would think? For some reason a think sitting in traffic smelling all that coffee…just can’t be good for the brand. Hahaha.

    http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2009/01/04/coffee-beans-as-the-next-great-auto-fuel/


  61. 61
    Mike756

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mike756
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (10:51 pm)

    CaptJackSparrow

    I believe the actual capacitor operates at a higher voltage and the current rating is for the conversion devices.


  62. 62
    Redeye

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Redeye
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:18 pm)

    #43

    Yes ! Excellent, i agree.


  63. 63
    Jake

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jake
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:26 pm)

    I was wondering about the discharge rating as well. 20A continuous from a 26 Ah device is…not much. 80A burst is not much either. I’m not sure what Mike756 meant by “The current rating is most likely a function of time at current.” Of course it is a function of time…and for either “infinite” time or short bursts, this particular device falls far short of the Li-Ion batteries being considered for use in the Volt. The equivalent capacity Li-Ion battery could supply 20 or 30 times the continuous current.

    However, I’m not going to write off EEStor just for this reason. I just couldn’t help but notice the seemingly low current rating.


  64. 64
    Tom Harwick

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tom Harwick
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:37 pm)

    I’m temped to jump on his train and be right about this. But…as Tim says, Im still wondering why Lockheed would spend time on this, unless it were valid. Perhaps the military gets the “A” version, and statik will be driving the “C” version?

    =D~~~~

    We do not need to view the Lockheed Martin deal with EESTOR as proof of anything. LM is a diversified and decentralized company. I suspect a mid-level manager somewhere has some funds in his budget he was willing to take a chance with. No figure is given, so there is no reason to think the deal was scrutinized by the LM board.

    This is similar to the well known scam artist who is in the business of promoting licenses to mfgr compressed air driven cars. He has a deal with Tata Motors, part of Tata Industries, a well respected conglomerate out of India. Tata has held a lisence for 8 years now, but still no car.


  65. 65
    nataraj

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    nataraj
     Says

     

    Jan 4th, 2009 (11:41 pm)


    People see one or two companies out of 12,000 caught doing something wrong and stupidly assume they all are crooked.

    How many small companies have brought game changing technology to energy storage ? Esp. ones who behave like EEStor does ….


  66. 66
    Joshua Bretz

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Joshua Bretz
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (1:26 am)

    Many posts above noted the limited current specs (which should be much higher since this is a capacitor). My take on this is that the current specs come from the fusing alone. The electric vehicle EESU described in all their patents operates at a much higher voltage (up to 3500V), presumably to keep the current required for fast charging to a resonable number.


  67. 67
    Jeffhre

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jeffhre
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (1:30 am)

    kent beuchert #16
    “Do the math – your odds of being struck by lightning are greater than the odds that you’ll be scammed. People see one or two companies out of 12,000 caught doing something wrong and stupidly assume they all are crooked. Then look at the percentage of citizens who cheat on their taxes. The number is staggering, yet these folks also assume the average Joe is honest. Their beliefs are pure dumb.”
    ______________________________________________
    In the 1980′s I was at Ft. Leonard Wood, Mo learning to use US Army comm. equipment that had Li Ion batteries. The batteries had a tendency to overheat. Funny how the USA can get advanced tech going when folks are committed to it. Shortly there-after I went to Ft. Belvoir, Va to train to work on field erected bridges. I was walking out of the barracks area one day and a light rain started.

    Having been raised in Southern California I thought weather was a benign thing and wondered why everyone was running so deliberately to get out of a light sprinkle of a warm rain. Then about ten feet to my left a cypress tree crackled, exploded and dropped a limb from a lighting strike. Go figure. I guess getting hit by lightning is a lot more likely if I do dumb things based on my ignorance of what’s likely to occur next.


  68. 68
    Dick King

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dick King
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (1:48 am)

    #18, #37

    If EESTor’s 24V package is not a scam, the peak current constraints come from the DC-DC power conversion device that steps down 3200 volts to 24 volts.

    A Volt run on an eestor ultracap would have a different and more robust converter.

    -dk


  69. 69
    Jim

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jim
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (4:51 am)

    I hope that EEstor is for real. Why don’t they just put it in a car or in a static display? They wouldn’t have to give away any secrets.

    On another subject, how about some more info on the VOLT mules?
    Maybe GM could put another video on Utube. Better yet let Lyle drive one!


  70. 70
    Jay Wells

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jay Wells
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (6:44 am)

    There is no such thing as a “trademark patent.”


  71. 71
    Dick G.

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dick G.
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (7:52 am)

    Volume: 9.44 x 10 to the 5th mm cubed does not equal 106.6 mm cubed…..It equals 944,000 mm cubed…..a cube about 3 7/8″
    Did I convert correctly, if I did something seems to be way off.


  72. 72
    CDAVIS

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CDAVIS
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (9:35 am)

    ______________________________________________________

    Lurtz #21:
    Response: Sorry, I have no newsletter but I will be underwriting/publishing the http://www.powerhappy.com blog starting around end of March. The mission of the PowerHappy blog will be to help promote the concept of “The Power of One” relating to American Energy Independence. The blog will also attempt to expose the considerable misinformation and political rhetoric associated with current energy production and future energy options.

    Unni #50:
    Response: Yes, be my guest to cut & paste away. What is the url of your blog?

    ______________________________________________________
    Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!
    ______________________________________________________


  73. 73
    Shawn Marshall

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Shawn Marshall
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (10:41 am)

    C Davis #72

    Ditto That

    Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!

    This solution has been available to us since the 1970s. It’s astounding but Pogo said it, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

    Maybe EEstor is ‘green’ Cheese?


  74. 74
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (11:54 am)

    #54 Tim Says: “1) I believe that only 50% of the Volt’s current (pun intended) 16 kWh li-Ion battery pack will actually be used in order to keep from damaging the pack.

    100% of the EESU capacity can be used without damage therefore it will only NEED to hold 8 kWh for the 40-mile E-REV “sweet spot” range. ”
    ————————————————————————————–
    Not true!

    When the engine comes on, you still need significant charge in the battery to get up long uphill grades. This is a basic part of the series hybrid (a.k.a. EREV) design. 4.8kwh may be overkill, but you still probably need something like 3kwh for long uphill climbs.

    Also, if you happen to live on the top of a mountain, and you start your way down with a full charge, then you need somewhere for the regenerative braking energy to be stored, maybe another 2kwh for that. So even with a perfect electrical storage device, you’ll still need about 13kwh to make the Volt work well in all conditions.

    But this may be all mute, since the EESU specs in the article indicate you would need a 160 kwh pack to generate enough power for the Volt’s 120kw electric motor. See post #18 for details.


  75. 75
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (12:19 pm)

    #72 CDAVIS Says: “Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!”
    ————————————————————————————–
    #73 Shawn Marshall Says: “Ditto That
    Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!”
    ————————————————————————————–
    I disagree, for many reasons:

    1) Only 45% of oil consumed is gasoline. We import around 66% of our oil. Even if all gas engine cars changed to electric, we would still be importing around 20% of our oil.

    2) Most of the fuel sources for electricity in the U.S. are already domestic, so Nuclear isn’t mandatory for energy Independence. We could just burn more coal.

    3) Plug-in cars are not good for long distance travel. To make long distance travel without oil viable, you’ll need to either:
    a) EVs with huge batteries and trillions of dollars for a new fast charging infrastructure, or
    b) a combination of EREVs and ethanol for longer distance driving.

    4) Nuclear power plants are not great at meeting variable or peak demand. They tend to be best at providing a steady amount of electricity. For this reason, nuclear power plants are generally only used to supply base usage (i.e. the minimum amount of electricity used around 3am). Peak power will have to come from somewhere else. Solar is an excellent candidate to cover peak power usage.

    Bottom line: There is no magic bullet that will solve our energy problems. We’ll need a combination of Nuclear, Solar, Wind, Geo-Thermal, Cellulosic Ethanol, Bio-diesel from Algae, and Energy Conservation to become energy independent.


  76. 76
    N Riley

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    N Riley
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (1:07 pm)

    Sooner or later they have to put their product out there to be seen. If not, we can write them off pretty quickly. Time will tell. They seem not to be in any hurry to open up to the public. Maybe they have good reasons and maybe it is just an excuse to not let us know how unsuccessful they really are. Who knows at this point. Not me for sure.


  77. 77
    noel park

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    noel park
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (1:17 pm)

    #1 Kyle S.:

    You said it all right there, in three short, sweet, sentences. Good one.

    As Chck Hearn always said, “It’ll count if it goes!”

    #67 jeffhre:

    Yeah, can anyone say “Bernard Madoff”?


  78. 78
    Shawn Marshall

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Shawn Marshall
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (1:28 pm)

    75 Dave G

    France has 80% base load?

    Nuclear units only can be built in one size?

    You can’t move the control rods?

    I think we should surround the country with aircraft carriers and use their nukes for our energy needs. LOL

    Good luck with more coal – apparently we have a different perception of present political realities and physical surreality. We in Roanoke VA just had a 30% rate increase for pollution equipment on coal fired plants. I can breathe better already and the oceans are receding.


  79. 79
    Dietrich2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dietrich2
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (2:54 pm)

    Something I haven’t seen addressed is the very different discharge profile between chemical batteries and capacitors.

    A lithium ion cell starts out at about 3.9V at 100% charge, dropping to 3.4V or so at 10% charge.

    A capacitor’s discharge, however, is completely linear: a capacitor that starts out at 24V will have 50% of its energy left at 12V, 10% at 2.4V.

    Making power converters that have to deal with such a wide range of input voltages is far more complex that those that expect a very narrow window of voltages. It is possible that a significant fraction of the energy in the capacitor will be unusable, requiring additional capacitors to do the job.


  80. 80
    Tim

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Tim
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (3:14 pm)

    News, Reviews and Discussion of EEStor Inc.

    http://www.theeestory.com


  81. 81
    Seth

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Seth
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (3:30 pm)

    EESTOR has nothing to show for itself and therefore, does not deserve the attention it gets from this site or any other respectable news source.


  82. 82
    CDAVIS

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    CDAVIS
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (4:06 pm)

    _____________________________________________________
    Dave G #75

    Dave,
    You make several good points. I remain believing that:
    Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence.

    The full argument behind my conclusion will be detailed on http://www.powerhappy.com starting March 30th 2009.
    ___________________________________________


  83. 83
    Jake

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jake
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (6:13 pm)

    #79 Dietrich2 – good point regarding operating voltages.


  84. 84
    Dave G

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dave G
     Says

     

    Jan 5th, 2009 (8:06 pm)

    #78 Shawn Marshall Says: “I think we should surround the country with aircraft carriers and use their nukes for our energy needs. LOL”
    ————————————————————————————–
    Aircraft carriers have the ability to vary the output of their nuclear reactors, but low cost and fuel efficiency aren’t strong points of hardware that’s designed for the military. I suspect that varying the output of a nuclear power plant will have issues with cost and using the uranium fuel most efficiently. Do you have any data on this?

    I do believe we need more nuclear power plants. I just don’t think nuclear by itself will solve all of our problems. I believe we need to think more broadly.

    For example, what’s wrong with using solar thermal plants to help cover peak demand?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEGS


  85. 85
    Shawn Marshall

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Shawn Marshall
     Says

     

    Jan 6th, 2009 (9:43 am)

    Dave G. #84

    I’ve been waiting for some kind of economic solar generation since 35 years ago as an undergrad EE when solar was just around the corner. Energy storage has always been the Achilles heel of expensive solar installations. New battery technology may finally unlock some of the potential(pun intended) of solar apps.
    I’m no nuclear engineer but am Glad you are actually a nuke fan. If France is 80% nukes, how do they vary their output would you think? Did you consider that charging EVs off 2 daily peaks will level the load curve and make base load generation MORE efficient. Base load generation is the cheapest available naturally, that’s what utilities run first, then they add more expensive generators or purchases as they have to. A few years ago all the electric utilities were adding gas turbines(GE) to serve peaking load because it was an easy way to get some generation where you wanted it without confronting all the greenies. It is outrageously expensive but who cares, screw the customer; same same with excessive pollution control, far far beyond the point of diminishing return. All the extraneous an d uneconomic influence on power generation in this country robs us of our competitive advantages much to our own detriment.
    How do you feel about “Drill here Drill now”?


  86. 86
    Dietrich2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dietrich2
     Says

     

    Jan 6th, 2009 (1:52 pm)

    I erred in my characterization of capacitive discharge. I described the straight-line “constant current” slope, whereas the correct “constant power” slope is a downward curve of increasing steepness. Still a much wider range of input voltages than a battery, but not as bad as I described.

    On a different subject…
    Re the on-going discussion of nuclear power, you have to deal with the economic argument that it is, bar none, the most expensive form of electric power generation available. Many of the costs, like the insurance of the plants, are taxpayer subsidized and, therefore, “externalized”. And the huge costs are “back-loaded”, have to be paid AFTER the the plant stops generating revenue: plant dismantling & burial, and multi-hundred to multi-thousand year storage of nuclear wastes.

    Best economic case against nuclear I have seen:

    http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid504.php
    http://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Energy/E08-01_AmbioNuclIlusion.pdf


  87. 87
    xymox

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    xymox
     Says

     

    Jan 6th, 2009 (3:06 pm)

    eestor+zenn = scam


  88. [...] patente de EESTOR, la EESU de 24V. EEStor Gets a Trademark Patent on EESU and Provides Specs for a 24V EESU | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Elec… __________________ Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disl


  89. 89
    250volts

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    250volts
     Says

     

    Jan 6th, 2009 (6:52 pm)

    Just for edification. Pressurized water reactors such as those used in naval propulsion don’t change power via bumping control rods. The rods are only moved during power up (going critical) and shut down (scram) or when the exposed section of fuel is depleted. In which case the rods are bumpted to expose more fuel. Otherwise power is corrected by demand at the throttle. In a civilian power plant this would equate to electrical demand. It has to do with the density change in water and the cross section of neutrons (I won’t elaborate as it’s boring) but the denser the water (cooler) the more neutron flux, more power and as the moderator (water temperature) stabilizes so does power albeit at a higher or lower factor.(yeah, so I elaborated)
    Nucs can and do respond to grid flucuations. Yes, they are base load units however if you have enough of them to meet demand you don’t need peakers.
    One reader stated 80% of France’s power requirements are met by Nuc’s. Actaully as of 2008, nearly 88% of Frances power is met by nuc’s. They have enough excess to export power to other countries. I remember seeing a bumper sticker that stated, “No oil, no coal, no gas no choice”. That sums it up. France got smart while the rest of the world watched and criticized. I wonder who’s laughfing now?
    Another thing France did right and we in the US can’t seem to grasp it that they standardized on a reactgor design. As an operator you could walk out of a facility in southern France and walk into a facility in northern France and it would be like you turned around and walked back in the door of the southern facility, no difference. This kept cost reasonable, it made training easy in comparison to other countries with nuc’s (US) and it minimized the amount of beauracurcy they had to deal with in building and operating the units. Seems simple eh? It’s amazing what can be done when we set our minds to it. As the bumper sticker said, they really had no choice.
    As for nucs in the US. We need ‘em and we need look no further than to France as the example. Everytime I hear or read some moron state a their reason for not having nuc’s I cringe. People really suffer from rectal cranial inversion when it comes to being informed about power alternatibes and nuc’s in particular.

    “Electric Cars + Nuclear Power = American Energy Independence!” You bet. Let’s get it done and put those American hating SOB’s out of business!


  90. 90
    Dick King

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dick King
     Says

     

    Jan 6th, 2009 (7:47 pm)

    #79:

    Assuming the capacitance stays constant, the energy stored in a capacitor is proportional to the _square_ of the voltage, so 3/4 of the nameplace capacity of an EEStor would be available between 1.6KV and 3.2KV.

    That is, however, a big exception. One reason people are suspicious is that high permittivity substances tend to saturate, so the marginal permittivity decreases with increasing voltage.

    -dk


  91. 91
    steve321

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    steve321
     Says

     

    Jan 7th, 2009 (1:22 pm)

    [url=http://www.advancedcapacitorsws.com/]Advanced Capacitors World Summit 2009[/url]

    “Market Overview and industry developments:
    Bobby Maher of M Cubed Consulting will start off the program with a comprehensive overview of ultracapacitor market trends and technology advancement and David Alexander from IVUS Energy Solutions, creator of the patented FlashPoint Power Technology, will address serious challenges that arise when developing capacitors for the market. [b]Andy Burke[/b] of UC Davis will provide an engaging comparison of ultracapacitors and advanced battery technology in terms of performance, cost and versatility, while [b]John Miller[/b] of Maxwell Technologies will show how the two technologies can be best applied in tandem. A panel presentation from members of the investment community will conclude the morning session and will provide insight on how to secure funding in uncertain economic times.
    John Skibinski of Eaton Corporation will shed light on the growing demand for advanced energy storage technologies for wind and solar applications. Speakers from Volvo Technology Corporation, General Electric and NREL will discuss engineering energy storage systems for hybrid electric vehicles and heavy hybrids. Aerospace applications will be explored with presentations from [b]Lockheed Martin Aeronautics[/b] and company partner PC Krause and Associates and additional new and emerging applications will be covered by Jin Song of Nesscap.”

    [b]Where is EESTOR and Dick Weir?[/b]


  92. 92
    texas

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    texas
     Says

     

    Jan 7th, 2009 (2:01 pm)

    They get more hype over a trademark? Unbelievable! EEscam is going to be a great case study in future MBA programs.


  93. 93
    Steve

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Steve
     Says

     

    Jan 8th, 2009 (6:45 pm)

    Ultra-capacitors seem like a great way to improve the efficiency of regenerative braking schemes. But not if they’re an imaginary product.


  94. 94
    Jeffhre

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Jeffhre
     Says

     

    Jan 8th, 2009 (11:24 pm)

    Steve

    Maxwell has supercaps but has anyone spoken of applying them to EVs. I’d suspect they wouldn’t be of much use for normal driving and under hard or emergency braking they wouldn’t do much until vehicles are allowed to run without friction brakes. Trading for higher power from greater energy may not be worth the price and space considerations for just about any passenger car anyhow.


  95. 95
    Herman

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Herman
     Says

     

    Jan 9th, 2009 (6:20 am)

    Jason said: “If these devices work as advertized, then the Shai Agassi Project Better Place will be rendered obsolete.”

    Although as much as i love the ” project better place “.
    I don’t see this as the future…

    I see batty’s getting better and better. They will surpase the lifetime of a normal car maybe 3 times!

    Lithium batter’s started at 200 cycles.. look where we are now?
    We can get cheap ones that last atleast 2000 times from china.

    And what about proven battery’s from altairnano that could do 15 000 cycles with almost no damage. ( Disadvantige of this battery is that they have less energy dencity )

    As for EEstor.. i have one sentence: FIRST SEE THEN BELIEVE :)
    Same goes for all electric cars. This doesn’t sound optimistic. But i already waited to long and i get sick of it!

    If EEstor capacitors work like real capacitors.. It would be freaking dangerous!

    I have seen small capacitors explode.. we do that sometimes for fun on school. Seriously even if they could store that 16-50 kWh in such a small dencity! I would never drive with it. You are driving a bomb!
    Chemical battery’s can be controlled much better.
    Look how safe the newest lithium battery’s are…
    You can crush them without something happen. Or spike them ( a123).


  96. 96
    AnonAmerican

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    AnonAmerican
     Says

     

    Jan 17th, 2009 (7:51 pm)

    #79: Dietrich2.

    You’re not correct on capacitor energy storage vs voltage. Energy stored in a capacitor varies according to the SQUARE of the voltage, so at 1/2 the max voltage, it only has 1/4 of the total energy. At 1/10th the max voltage it only has 1/100 of the total energy.


  97. 97
    Rob

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Rob
     Says

     

    Jan 23rd, 2009 (3:43 pm)

    GM, with all of the resources they’ve dedicated to the Volt and A123 pack, won’t have a production vehicle until 2010. Zenn, later in 2009, thinks their going to plug in the EEStor like it’s a couple of AAA’s into a remote control.??? Something doesn’t add up here, but I’m sure this has been stated thousands of times before.


  98. 98
    JackM

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JackM
     Says

     

    Feb 18th, 2009 (3:29 pm)

    #68 Rick King
    Rick, I think the 24 volt EESU is for the electric bike they licensed with, not for an EV. If it was a step-down version of the 3500 volt unit it would cost a lot more than $62.50. So we go back to some of the original problems, like where do we get 3500 volts to charge it without impacting the grid, and what does the charging heat do to the bonded dissimilar materials. (Different coefficients of exapnsion). Will they bend like a bi-metal strip? (Thermostat). Ceramics don’t bend too well without cracking. I think it is possible that this is the problem they are presently facing. Anyone disagre?
    I’m open to be wrong about that.


  99. 99
    JackM

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JackM
     Says

     

    Feb 18th, 2009 (3:42 pm)

    #18 Dave G:
    Dave, you are right. But, I think the 24V model is for the electric bike they licensed to. Read my #98, please and give your comments. Thanks!


  100. 100
    kingfish

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    kingfish
     Says

     

    Feb 25th, 2009 (7:32 am)

    Hello everybody,
    Whats up, everythings gone silent?
    Has Eestor, sold out? Been bought out and shut up? Or have they hit the wall?
    Anybody – anything?


  101. 101
    JackM

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JackM
     Says

     

    Mar 6th, 2009 (5:56 pm)

    Has anyone seen the article about a new electrode technology on Ultracapacitors.org? If this works, it could maybe help EEStor not have to charge up as much. If that would be of any help?
    The Web manager, Greg Allen says that the author is going to be at the World Advanced Capacitor Summit at the end of the month.


  102. 102
    JackM

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    JackM
     Says

     

    Mar 6th, 2009 (6:09 pm)

    FYI to Everyone; I copied the pdf file for the new UC Electrode material. Wow!:Here are some excerpts from it. It looks to have 10-20 times more power density than Maxwell or NessCap. It coule work for the Chevy Volt because it is super light.
    \Here is the pdf:

    Reticle Carbon: Electrode Material for Ultracapacitors
    Dr. Carl C. Nesbitt Reticle Inc. 334 State Street; Suite 204 Los Altos, California 94022
    cnesbitt@mtu.edu Executive Summary: Reticle Inc. (a California-based company) has developed a unique electrode material (Reticle Carbon) which is ideally suited for electric double-layer (EDL) ultracapacitors. Reticle Carbon is simple to manufacture, yet has low electrical resistivities (0.04-0.130 -cm), demonstrated high surface areas (1,250-1,750 m2/g), and the highest reported specific capacitance (200-310 F/g). It is produced by consolidating granular activated carbon that has been selected for its properties. That is, only activated carbon is used to make Reticle Carbon—no binders, no fillers, no adhesives. The manufacturing process is single-stage, but flexible enough so that we can tailor the properties of the material for ultracapacitors. Most electrode materials are limited to thin layers or thin films by the manufacturing processes. Reticle Carbon is unique in being the only material that can be cut to any thickness to meet any capacitance needed. This paper emphasizes this difference and presents the wide range of properties with the underlying theory to store energy in the massive surface area of the material. A comparison of our preliminary capacitors with commercial capacitors is included.

    SUMMARY
    Reticle Carbon has unique properties that allow it to be an efficient electrode material in ultracapacitors. The material has surface areas in excess of 1,700 m2/g, which give the material a specific capacitance of 300 F/g. Ultracapacitors made with material with 1,240 m2/g have energy densities of 26 Wh/kg and power densities of 31 kW/kg at a 2-V potential. With modification and design optimization these levels will be exceeded in next generation Reticle ultracapacitors. The most significant contribution that Reticle Carbon provides is the flexibility of providing any thickness (hence any mass) of electrode to a capacitor. This simple distinction sets Reticle Carbon apart from other electrode materials which must be kept thin for efficiency or because of the restrictions to the steps to manufacture the material.


  103. 103
    BobbyRay

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    BobbyRay
     Says

     

    Mar 19th, 2009 (1:31 pm)

    All are Idiots that don’t think Lockheed Martin would make stupid move like this. I saw it happen firsthand (also in the name of homeland security) at NexGenCity. They are now defunct because their only product didn’t work after $13 million taxpayers dollars were spend.

    See for yourself: http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/75478/lockheed_martin_space_operations_successfully_deploys_nexgen_citys_public_safety/index.html


  104. 104
    carrottop

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    carrottop
     Says

     

    Mar 19th, 2009 (1:39 pm)

    Idiots – all of you that believe this crap.


  105. 105
    BertKu

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    BertKu
     Says

     

    May 18th, 2009 (3:35 pm)

    Lucky I am one of those idiots who do believe that this capacitor will one day be manufacturered. Siemens made 9 years ago a similar product, but the automotive industry squashed this product and production line. Siemens Regensburg sold the plant. Forced by the trillion dollar industry. It may happen again. If a person can make a very thin conductive layer on an etched very large surface and is able to keep the weight down, the automotive industry is forced to switch over to electric propulsion.


  106. 106
    Gentle Miant

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Gentle Miant
     Says

     

    Jun 6th, 2009 (11:43 am)

    I wish to comment on some of the posts here rather than the main subject:

    The subject of this thread involves world-changing technology and surely we have a right to discuss it even while we haven’t sufficient info to be certain that it’s real. That a respected company or companies have shown interest does not necessarily prove that it will be possible to develop a practical technology. Nor does the publication of the spec.s for one particular configuration invalidate the possibility of use of the technology in a different application with a different configuration. And it is natural for there to be a lot of emotion involved.

    It is natural for those with some degree of technical knowledge to wish to “show it off”. Unfortunately it is also fairly common for such persons to over-reach their knowledge in order to “be right” or have the “final answer”.

    Certainly such over-reaches can sometimes be correct. That doesn’t alter the fact that, until proven by some means, they were just so much hot air. No matter how arduous and clever any ridicule, if it is based on insufficient information, it adds nothing to our knowledge of the subject at hand. And accusations (rather than simply stating a possibility) of scamming or other unethical practice without proof amounts to bearing false witness.

    Such an emotion packed subject as this certainly makes one eager to “know” one way or the other, but objectivity requires facing uncertainty sometimes. Tech creators/developers do not have to prove their devices to the masses during development, and so do not have to spend their time convincing members of this blog for instance, of their veracity.

    In sum, I would say that it’s not important WHO is right, but only WHAT is right.


  107. 107
    joemama

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    joemama
     Says

     

    Jun 8th, 2009 (10:51 am)

    Breaking News :
    The Fantastic Cheese Co. gets a trademark patent on it’s Fantastic Cheese, and provides specs for 24 kinds of Fantastic Cheese. It’s a good thing too, because people all over the world love cheese. Therefore Fantastic Cheese needs to be protected and kept secret.
    More cheezy reports to follow in the future. Guarateed !

    There is reportedly great intrest in Fantstic Cheese, so much so, that rumors are starting that some have even smelt Fantastic Cheese in the air while flying over Texas ! It is reported to be quite intoxicating, though there are unconfirmed reports stating that may have been the ‘smellers’ themselves.

    Negotiations are under way between Fantastic Cheese and the cheeseheads of Wisconsin. Apparently, the cheezy hats that cheeseheads wear to Packer football games are somehow related to Fantastic Cheese. Though these hats are mostly foam, and not really cheese, executives at Fantastic Cheese are still concerned. No one really knows the connection.

    Recent reports indicate that Fantastic Cheese has decided not to apply for funding from the governments economic stimulus plan. Although there is money readily available for new kinds of cheese, executives at Fantastic Cheese have stated that they will not apply for funding because they could no longer remain secretive, and sneaky.

    Plans are under way for Fantatic Cheese to build really fantastic manufacturing facilities, even almost as fantastic as Fantastic Cheese itself. Reports indicate that they really do have fantastic plans, and fantastic investors are lining up right now, for this fantastic opportunity. Fantastic Cheese is sure to be a game changer in the cheese world, and rumor has it that many can’t wait to taste it. Sadly, no one has ever tasted it. But that will soon change according to fantastic reports from Fantastic Cheese. All it seems they need is a little more time, and a few more investment dollars, and soon someone will be finally able to taste Fantastic Cheese ! How great that day will be !

    Pizzu Huut has been in contact with Fantatic Cheese, and has negotiated an agreement that gives them the opportunity to hopefully someday, maybe never, but never-the-less maybe, be able to use Fantastic Cheese in the case of a national cheese emergency. Though company officials at Pizzu Huut have never smelt Fantastic Cheese, nor even tasted it, but they are certain they want to someday, and thus the contract.

    Many expert cheese makers have stated that it is impossible to make Fantastic Cheese. Simply put, they claim the highly complex mathematical computations necessary to make Fantastic Cheese are just not possible. They also claim the worlds best calculators, and computers are just not capable of those calculations, and thus Fantatic Cheese doesn’t really have anything. Officials at Fantastic Cheese have been very upset, and are really stirring their curds. There have been some reports of engineers spilling whey on each other too. The pressure is on at Fantastic Cheese, but so far all they have delivered is a little yeast. Before long the whole Fantastic Cheese story may be a little moldy.