GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Scam Or the Geniune goods, here's an interesting read:

Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Better Batteries Charge Up

A startup reports progress on a battery that stores more energy than lithium-ion ones.

By Tyler Hamilton

A Texas startup says that it has taken a big step toward high-volume production of an ultracapacitor-based energy-storage system that, if claims hold true, would far outperform the best lithium-ion batteries on the market.

Dick Weir, founder and chief executive of EEStor, a startup based in Cedar Park, TX, says that the company has manufactured materials that have met all certification milestones for crystallization, chemical purity, and particle-size consistency. The results suggest that the materials can be made at a high-enough grade to meet the company's performance goals, as well as withstand the extreme voltages needed for high energy storage, the company said in a press release last week.

"These advancements provide the pathway to meeting our present requirements," Weir says. "This data says we hit the home run."

EEStor claims that its system, called an electrical energy storage unit (EESU), will have more than three times the energy density of the top lithium-ion batteries today. The company also says that the solid-state device will be safer and longer lasting, and will have the ability to recharge in less than five minutes. Toronto-based ZENN Motor, an EEStor investor and customer, says that it's developing an EESU-powered car with a top speed of 80 miles per hour and a 250-mile range. It hopes to launch the vehicle, which the company says will be inexpensive, in the fall of 2009.

But skepticism in the research community is high. At the EESU's core is a ceramic material consisting of a barium titanate powder that is coated with aluminum oxide and a type of glass material. At a materials-research conference earlier this year in San Francisco, it was asked whether such an energy-storage device was possible. "The response was not very positive," said one engineering professor who attended the conference....
Click for more:
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/21171/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
those who can't do TEACH

"The response was not very positive," said one engineering professor who attended the conference.... (talking about eestors potential for sucess or to even fucntion as promised.

but it does work in the lab, plus lockheed bought into it for the militray and zenn for automotice applications ... so GM should look at it definitely
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
That purity of materials and nano sized particles change material parameters significantly isn't news. The response of many people is to ignore that change since it can't be quantified before you have the materials in front of you. A lot of the 'facts' about capacitors are magic numbers based on decades worth of experience with current technology. EEStor claims to have changed the basic materials that those magic numbers are based on. We'll see - sooner or later anyway.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
3,689 Posts
but it does work in the lab, plus lockheed bought into it for the militray and zenn for automotice applications ... so GM should look at it definitely



It does work in the lab? I must have missed that news. I never heard of any prototype being shown to anyone! Including Zenn or Lockheed. Can you provide a reference? I would love to see one ugly looking prototype. Just one, even if it was held together with chewing gum. Come on EEscam, show us anything! You are supposed to be in volume production for Zenn this time next year. Yeah right. Expect another delay announcement soon. <Yawn>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
If I had to make a guess (hey - everybody else is:)) they got one or two single cells working. Demonstrated the capacitance and voltage for those cells, and combined those 'facts' with maybe a 'prototype system design' made with more mundane cap materials. Not an unreasonable approach actually. That explains their focus on demonstrating the ability to match the lab generated materials they used in the small cells for a demo. Again, it's a valid approach, but history is littered with products that used valid approaches that failed miserably. Just have to wait. Don't have to like that waiting though.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
EESTOR is a scam artist. There is no prototype. Never was.
Lockheed-Martin sure seems to think they have something:
http://www.theeestory.com/articles/29

Here is an excerpt:
Getting back: the Liebman interview has many interesting items. But to note a few:

1) Lockheed has visited EEStor and seen the pro-DUCK-shun line and "were impressed." (BTW, Do private investigators offer money back guarantees?)

2) If their previously stated plans are still valid, Lockheed will "be working with them very closely this year to develop prototypes in certain pursuits."

3) They see EEStor technology as both a POWER and an ENERGY solution including "extremely high pulse power applications."
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
3,689 Posts
Lockheed-Martin sure seems to think they have something:
http://www.theeestory.com/articles/29

Here is an excerpt:
Getting back: the Liebman interview has many interesting items. But to note a few:

1) Lockheed has visited EEStor and seen the pro-DUCK-shun line and "were impressed." (BTW, Do private investigators offer money back guarantees?)

2) If their previously stated plans are still valid, Lockheed will "be working with them very closely this year to develop prototypes in certain pursuits."

3) They see EEStor technology as both a POWER and an ENERGY solution including "extremely high pulse power applications."




Awe, how cute! EEscam has their own specialized fan site!

http://www.theeestory.com/

Too bad there is not a shred of proof of any lab prototype. The Lockheed article you mentioned was dated back in January and even they have still not seen any working device. Only the power purity. Poor Zenn sounds very worried but at least it might be helping to keep good hype and buzz for their company.

Even if EEscam never comes out with a product Zenn will at least sell a few more NEVs for all of their troubles. I hope they are not really working hard and spending too much money on the EEscam powered car. I'm guessing we will soon hear about another long delay. There is just no possible way they will be able to go from zero to high volume production in the time they committed to. No way! Additionally, they are not even at zero yet! Nothing. Nada. Please wake me up when there’s even one tiny working cap. When or if that happens let's call that zero time. Now just think about how long it will take after zero to reach volume production of Automobile-class, fully tested energy storage packs. Tick tock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,728 Posts
Nice hat, where's the rabbit?

So glad to hear that EEStor has a produckshun line, and that some folks from Lockheed were impressed. Any chance the Lockheed visitors were engineers, physicists, or suitably technical people? If not, then their opinions are largely irrelevant. "Oh, what a shiny piece of equipment! I bet it's expensive!"

How can you realistically evaluate a production line without having it actually produce something - i.e, a product. Whenever ANY product is moved into production, there are always prototype runs (usually hand-built), followed by pilot runs (where the production line is debugged), followed by . . . production. This is an over-simplification, and there may be more steps in a real-world situation, but you get the idea.

This is still vaporware until the end product is evaluated by a third-party lab. How can anyone be sucked in by this crap?

And . . . no one has explained to me the downside for EEStor to release details of their product - test runs, etc. - if they are protected up one side and down the other with patents. Still listening here . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
So glad to hear that EEStor has a produckshun line, and that some folks from Lockheed were impressed. Any chance the Lockheed visitors were engineers, physicists, or suitably technical people? If not, then their opinions are largely irrelevant. <snip>
Hard to see how how Lockheed's opinion is more irrelevant than posters on this list. :D

Yea or nay.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top