AND 
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)
Popularity: 2% [?]
Related posts:
- EEStor is Granted a New Patent on the EESU Revealing Extensive Details
- EEStor Rides Again, This Time on a Bike
- Update From EEStor CEO Richard Weir: No EESU Delivery in 2008
- Zenn Says EEStor Ultracapacitor-Powered Car for Launch Fall 2009
- Breaking: EEStor Announces a ‘Huge Milestone’: Relative Permittivity Certified
(6 votes, average: 4.33 out of 5) 
Loading ...
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 9:51 am
That’s about 16 kwh in 1 cubic foot. Sounds good, I’ll take one.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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,
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 10:17 am
Now I know why it’s so cheap!!!!!
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 10:23 am
Thanks Lyle,
This sounds good, i hope it is not too good to be true.
JC
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 10:33 am
If you had a program that needed to become classified - what plausible disinformation story would you create?
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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?
_____________________________________________________
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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” :).
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 11:30 am
I was going to post on this topic, but now I am hungry for a pizza!!
Maybe after lunch………….
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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?
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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~~~~
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 11:57 am
#13 CDavis
Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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?”
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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?
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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…
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Let’s talk Detroit ‘09 already. We’re just days away.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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)
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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…
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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?
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
What about driving a long uphill grade?
The 53 kw generator will be the limiting factor for long uphill climbs.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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…
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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?
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Just show the damned prototype already and let the hype be gone. Tired of this speculation sh*T..
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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…
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
When there is a device available to 3rd parties then EESU is worth discussing. Until then, it is not.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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).
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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
)
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Buy local (American cars), and stop global warming.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
With EEStor the force will be.
Believe it should you.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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”.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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/
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
CaptJackSparrow
I believe the actual capacitor operates at a higher voltage and the current rating is for the conversion devices.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
#43
Yes ! Excellent, i agree.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 4th, 2009 at 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 ….
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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!
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 6:44 am
There is no such thing as a “trademark patent.”
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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!
______________________________________________________
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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?
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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.
[Reply]
January 5th, 2009 at 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 t