Monday, July 28, 2008

New Blog Search

Need to reread something on the blog?  Try the new search box  -->

53 comments:

Marcus said...

Excellent addition!

mrjerry said...

lookie, lookie, lookie what I found,

High-density barium titanate of high permittivity

This backs up mr weir's already knows, if your into the tech, you got to read this one. backs up everything eestor is saying.. permiitivity above 7,000....

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=6905649&OS=6905649&RS=6905649

Dielectric constants higher than 2,000 have been achieved by the use of spark plasma sintering to densify the barium titanate compacts. Two studies by Takeuchi report dielectric constants of about 7,000 obtained in this manner. Takeuchi, T., Y. Suyama, D. Sinclair, and H. Kageyama, "Spark-plasma-sintering of fine BaTiO.sub.3 powder prepared by a sol-crystal method," J. Mater. Sci. 36 (2001), pages 2329-2334; Takeuchi, T., M. Tabuchi, and H. Kageyama, "Preparation of dense BaTiO.sub.3 ceramics with submicrometer grains by spark plasma sintering," J. Am. Chem. Soc. 82 [4] 939-943 (1999). In both cases, the density of the sintered product was about 98% of theoretical density. Spark plasma sintering is a means of densification, which might suggest that further densification would lead to an even higher dielectric constant.

nekote said...

Thank you, very, very much.

Waiting to see if it also seraches the comments.

Marcus said...

Interesting. No mention of any effect on saturation voltages. This is still the big question mark...

Marcus said...

One more thought on the scam hypothesis. It just struck me that with all the critical commentary on the web by quite a few technically clued in people pointing out the various flaws of the patents including the most blatant one, no mention of any solution to dielectric saturation, surely someone from KP or even Zenn would have brought these points up with EEStor if they hadn't been aware of them previously. If EEStor has no answer for these concerns you'd think there might have been some rumblings by now...

steve said...

Marcus wrote,

surely someone from KP or even Zenn would have brought these points up with EEStor if they hadn't been aware of them previously. If EEStor has no answer for these concerns you'd think there might have been some rumblings by now...

How about Lionel Liebman from Lockheed Martin, an inventor and engineer who has multiple tech patents pending... out of all the parties involved with EESTOR, the tech nerds at Lockheed Martin would certainly be aware of the historical science involved.

I can't believe the sentiments in your post just kicked in for you Marcus. I just can't believe that. I think you were the first person to leave a comment on B's blog so you've been watching EESTOR a long time.

Tell the truth, did you buy some shares yesterday, Marcus? 'Fess up.

richterm said...

marcus - that's part of my reasoning I've used in taking my position in Zenn.

There just are enough indications from reputable people, and common sense indicates that if they didn't answer the major questions with a working product by now, it would have blown up already. They wouldn't be talking building production lines, and refining/committing to near term delivery dates.

Marcus said...

I still haven't bought any shares. I may or may not in the near future. I am not a gambler, and still find it overall unlikely they have the real thing. Yes there is circumstantial evidence supporting them but also scientific evidence that shows it is unlikely. I am not so much interested in all this because of the potential investment opportunity. Its more the curious nature of the conflicting evidence. Its an interesting story in itself. Stoern were much less convincing scientifically and yet they were very confident in themselves and convincing to many people. People WANT to believe in this stuff, including investors. We have only b's story as to how scrutinizing EEStor's investors are. Such hearsay still leaves a lot of uncertainty in my mind. Apparently we have independent confirmation that b exists. Well that's a start.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marcus said...

Did you guys hear about Firepower in Australia? Weir et al have a much better record than this guy BUT, it is truly astounding how far you can go without a working product.

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&p=131883

steve said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
steve said...

Marcus said,

We have only b's story as to how scrutinizing EEStor's investors are. .

That's not a fair comment at all.

Sorry Marcus, but I've posted my DD on Lionel Liebman, an inventor, patent expert, engineer and rising star at Lockheed Martin.

You don't think that bad ass tech mofo didn't have motive and means to, as you say, "scrutinize" EESTOR?

Whatever legitimate concerns you may have, certainly, whether Lionel Liebman heavily scrutinized EESTOR's technology cannot be one of them.

Oh, please do respond.

steve said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marcus said...

Steve, I agree he seems to have a good background. But I also agree with others that the wording of his response to certain questions was ambiguous. This is the clinker.

Q:Do they have something that they’ve tested that you’ve seen which makes you want to work with them?

LL:We haven’t personally tested their prototypes yet...

Lets rearrrange this question.

"Even if their prototypes weren't tested by you, HAVE YOU SEEN THEM?

The answer is negative

Raki said...

Earlier this month, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., announced that a Senate committee had approved a bill that includes $1.5 million for Sandia National Laboratories to work with Custom Electronics on developing ultracapacitors for military and industrial uses.

http://www.thedailystar.com/local/local_story_211094137.html

weird_science said...

an interesting comment in an article about the mostly clueless Nancy Pelosi

much as today’s world seeks answers such as an electric car battery in the energy debate that now consumes both Pelosi and Congress.

“Whoever makes that discovery, rules,” she says.

steve said...

Marcus,

Geez, how circular do you want to get? What part of "their prototypes" do you not understand?

You said:

LL:We haven’t personally tested their prototypes yet...

Lets rearrrange this question.

"Even if their prototypes weren't tested by you, HAVE YOU SEEN THEM?

The answer is negative


BULLSHIT!

You're putting words in his mouth which he didn't even come close to saying. Why do we have to "rearrrange this question"???

Take the answer to the question in the context of the other answers and the picture is quite clear.

The man NEVER said he hasn't "seen prototypes". Give the professional engineer credit for understanding the implications of his choosing to say "their prototypes".

Perhaps if we were talking about a moron, we could sit here and jump through hoops wondering if he meant what he said, but we don't have a moron here, we have a BAD ASS TECH MOFO ON A RISING STAR CAREER PATH AT LOCKHEED MARTIN.

And you can bet your sweet ass his career path will be effected by his decision to get Lockheed involved with EESTOR.

You're starting to get me mad, dude.

As I said above, what part of "their prototypes" don't you understand.

Taken in the context of his other answers, your circular twisting of his words makes no sense at all:

FROM THE GM-VOLT INTERVIEW:

Q:Are you confident that their technology will offer a greater amount of energy and power density than batteries?

LL:Yes, and at a fraction of the cost.


What part of "confident" don't you understand, Marcus?

Q:Do their caps hold 10x the energy at 1/10th the weight of a lead acid battery?

LL:Yes...


What part of "yes" do you not understand?


Q:Is there a production plan for 2008?

LL:Yes for EEStor. Their approach is when they start manufacturing these batteries, not just the cells, but also the package assembly, they will be in production. If you can get a visit to EEStor they’ll show you their process and everything they’ve got in place to support that.


http://gm-volt.com/2008/01/10/lockheed-martin-signs-agreement-with-eestor/

Give me a freakin break, like you, or any of us has something over this cat.

Please, this is just silly.

nekote said...

my 2¢ guess - EEStor / EESU is real.

BUT, THE CRITICAL QUESTION.
COMMERCIAL / INDUSTRIAL SCALE.

Can their manufacturing process actually make vast quantities of these suckers, in the real world?

Without significant (undetected) defects?
Nor yields so low as to be uneconomic for everybody but the highest value military and aerospace applications?

Plus, I still hold a reservation on safety for vehicular applications. I wanna' "see" that crashes with 52.2 KWH in the "tank" are "always" "safe".

steve said...

To make a long story short ( no pun intended), we can both agree that Lionel Liebman would have scrutinized the EESTOR technology as part of his due diligence for his boss Lockheed martin, right?

You're not going to argue that there was no due diligence on Lockheed's part, right?

Lionel Liebman was in charge of the due diligence, aka "scrutiny". From his bio, patent applications and career arc, it's obvious this guy isn't going to be fooled by anybody anytime soon.

ApplewoodCourt said...

I'll just throw this out there for fodder. I work for an R&D company - our "museum" has a number of different prototype specimens which worked in the lab and where basically assembled by hand - but we could never quite get into mass production. Just outside of my office, we have a rather large "relic" that nearly put us out of business when we tried to ramp into mass production. Our yields were low and each widget that we made, cost us more to produce than what we could sell it for.

There is another company just down the street that we make a widget for. They have breakthrough technology ... in the lab, but after 6 months of struggling - they have cut their staff in half because they cannot get their product into mass production despite their efforts.

steve said...

Applewood,

Thanks, good thing EEstor isn't selling "widgets".

Marcus said...

From the answer to that question, Lionel is on track to personally test those prototypes this year. We still haven't heard squat either about this testing or ANY financial commitment by LM. Rant and rave all you like Steve but it doesn't make your case any stronger.

richterm said...

I think the mass production question is fair even if you believe they have a working EESU prototype.

However, it's have to say anything that can be made in a lab can be mass produced given enough capital/time.

steve said...

Marcus said:

Lionel is on track to personally test those prototypes this year. We still haven't heard squat either about this testing...

Future prototypes of military applications which use EESTOR technology will not be shown to the general public, get freakin real, Marcus.

No way are they going to show advance prototype weapon systems to the general public, that would almost be treason.

Liebman never promised to update the public with military prototypes, he said they would be "working" on them this year. And unless you want to call the man a liar, there's nothing to indicate he isn't doing just that.

You just can't admit that Liebman had to have done extensive due diligence. You can't admit it, but you know it.

Marcus said...

You can speculate all you want Steve. Your dreaming isn't going to convince me of anything. As far as we know LM haven't even given them a dime yet.

steve said...

Marcus said:

We still haven't heard squat either about... ANY financial commitment by LM...

We know Lockheed and EEstor entered into a legally binding "contract".

By law, a contract is only legally binding if both sides receive "consideration".

In that contract, the "consideration" Lockheed Martin received was an "exclusive rights license" to use EEstor technology for military applications.

We don't know exactly what "consideration" EEstor received for granting Lockheed Martin the exclusive rights license, but we know they received something or the press release would be a complete legal fabrication.

Rant and rave all you like Marcus but it just makes your case weaker.

steve said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marcus said...

Its sad that you can't seem to think of your own punch lines Steve, copying like you do reminds me of primary school.

Remember, the more you rant the less convincing you are. As I've stated before, there's nothing anyone can say on this blog that's going to change the ultimate fate of EEStor and ZENN. The only way to explain your ranting is a crazy attempt to keep ZNN stock up in the short term because you are afraid of an ultimate loss. Good luck.

steve said...

Marcus, I'm just turning your ranting words in on themselves to expose the fraud therein.

ie, The only way to explain your ranting is a crazy attempt to keep ZNN stock down in the short term because you are afraid of an ultimate loss. Good luck.

Marcus said...

Ouch! After everything I've posted Steve if you think I've shorted ZNN then you really have gone off the deep end. Your share purchase is on record.

steve said...

Read the post again, Marcus.

I never said you shorted Zenn, never said I bought Zenn, just turning your circular arguments around on you.

notice the "ie"...

Marcus said...

Perhaps its not on record. I couldn't be bothered looking for it. I think its pretty obvious to everyone in any case. My points still stand for all to read. Sorry about that Steve.

mrjerry said...

My two cents, two confirm sources of expanded facilities, tyler hamiton source/B - source here. To me, this is all the information i need to know to stay in the game, but i have small potatoes here, I certainly wouldn't be putting anything in here that would hurt. If it hits, you make out big, if not, you move on. No pain but lots to gain.

steve said...

Perhaps its not on record. I couldn't be bothered looking for it.

Just like you couldn't be bothered to do any DD on Lionel Liebman of Lockheed Martin?

You're not kidding anybody. If the facts agreed with you then you'd be bothered to find them. The facts don't agree, so you're not bothered. Self serving lack of due diligence? It's not a new concept.

I think its pretty obvious to everyone in any case. Sorry about that Marcus.

richterm said...

I'm with you mrjerry. It would be foolish to go in over your head on this. But the potential rewards are too great, and the actions of very respectable people/companies are too compelling not to play this out. If I lose my 10K I'll be pissed, but it's not going to change my retirement. If it hits however, it very well could.

Greg said...

I live in Cedar Park, TX and I've seen a Zenn car twice on the smae street (Anderson Mill Rd, west of 183) on my way home. It turned into one of the neighborhoods there. Total speculation, but I'm wondering if it could be a test vehicle for the EESU - or maybe they all drive Zenn vehicles over there. Has anyone else seen a Zenn car in Austin, TX?

BTW, I've been watching EEStor news for a while and just bought some ZNNMF stock.

richterm said...

BTW - we've all debated the issue here plenty. We all have the right and responsibility to make our own decisions based on the facts as we see them. In the end however debate will not decide this issue. Eestor will either deliver or they won't.

I'll say good luck to everyone. But really, good luck Eestor. If they can do this, it means more than the $$ I'll make. It will mean a much brighter future in general.

Marcus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
steve said...

BREAKING EESTOR NEWS!!!!

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/eestor-announces-certification-of-additional,485276.shtml

steve said...

EEStor Announces Certification of Additional Key Production Milestones and Enhancement of Chemical Purity

Posted : Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:28:06 GMT
Author : EEStor, Inc.
Category : Press Release
News Alerts by Email click here )
Create your own RSS
News | Home

CEDAR PARK, Texas, July 29 TX-EEStor-Announces


CEDAR PARK, Texas, July 29 /PRNewswire/ -- Edward D. Golla, PhD, Laboratory Director for Texas Research International (acting as an independent agent) has certified that EEStor, Inc. test equipment, procedures, and techniques are capable of providing the EEStor, Inc. required testing accuracy
for EEStor's chemicals and powder production processing analyses.


Since the beginning of 2007, EEStor, Inc. has been advancing its chemical purification and powder production processes. The decision to focus on these processes was made to help assure that EEStor, Inc. could meet the most
critical demands of business segments for production throughput, cost, and energy storage. The certification data described in this press release will assist in indicating the success EEStor, Inc. has had in completing its
objectives.


EEStor, Inc. has achieved success on one of its most critical technical milestones and that is the certification of the completeness of the powder
crystallization of the constituents utilized in producing its CMBT powders. The percent of the constituents crystallized in the CMBT powders ranged from
99.57% to 100.00% with the average being 99.92%. This level of crystallization provides the path for the possibility of EEStor, Inc. providing the published energy storage for present products and major advancements in energy storage for future products.


The purification of the EEStor, Inc. chemicals has been certified by the same chemical analysis company as EEStor's press release dated January 17, 2007 and now indicates that EEStor has improved its chemical purity to the
parts-per-billion range. The aluminum oxide particle coating material purification has been certified to be in the parts-per-trillion level.
Achieving these levels of purification are additional major factors in allowing EEStor, Inc. the potential to reach its target working voltage. EEStor, Inc. has certification data from outside sources that purified aluminum oxide, in the range that EEStor, Inc. has certified, can have a
voltage breakdown of 1,100 volts per micron. The target working voltage of EEStor's chemical processes is at 350 volts per micron. This provides the
potential for excellent protection from voltage breakdown.


It has also been certified by Mr. Ian Treviranus of HORIBA Instruments, Inc. and the LA-950 particle measurement system that EEStor, Inc. has achieved
their goal of producing powder particles in the range of 1 micron with a very narrow particle size distribution. EEStor, Inc. has certification data that indicates achieving powder particle of this size and distribution along with
the aluminum oxide particle coating assists EEStor, Inc. in meeting the energy storage stabilization over the temperature range of interest for key applications.


EEStor, Inc. published patent, application number 5812758, indicates the flexible matrix concept that could provide the potential of multiple technical
and production advantages. One of the technical advantages indicated is assisting in providing polarization of the ultra capacitors. Polarization along with other proprietary processing steps provides the potential of a
polarization saturation voltage required by EEStor, Inc.


These key certified production milestones of particle crystallization,
size, purity, and polarization are expected to assist EEStor in providing not only present and future energy storage requirements but also production
consistency.



ABOUT EEStor, Inc.


Headquartered in Cedar Park, Texas, EEStor, Inc. is dedicated to the
design, development, and manufacturing of high-density electrical energy
storage units.


Utilizing revolutionary ultra capacitor architecture and environmentally friendly materials the EEStor, Inc. EESU will have the capability to compete against all existing battery and capacitor technologies.


For additional information please email info@eestor.us



SOURCE EEStor, Inc.

Marcus said...

EEStor, Inc. published patent, application number 5812758

Which one is this?

Marcus said...

Thank god for something else. I'm sick of this bickering Steve. I agree with richterm.

Marcus said...

I cannot seem to find that patent application. As far as I can see this is not permittivity data.

nekote said...

"certified that EEStor, Inc. test equipment, procedures, and
techniques are capable of providing the EEStor, Inc. required testing accuracy
for EEStor's chemicals and powder production processing analyses"

not only are the powders / chemicals pure "enough", but the "test equipment, procedures, and techniques" ARE CAPABLE.

But not the current holy grail - permittivity certification - which is thought will silence the doubts about dielectric saturation?

Marcus said...

"But not the current holy grail - permittivity certification - which is thought will silence the doubts about dielectric saturation?"

Right. But there is that intriguing patent reference that talks about polarization and saturation. I can't find it though.

nekote said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
nekote said...

me thinks there's a typo or other issue with that Patent number.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5812758.pdf

System Level Aid for Troubleshooting (SLAT)

assignee: US via the Sec. of the Navy

on a quick scan, nothing (explicitly) to do with polarization nor permittivity

ackkk said...

Sheesh.

I just don't understand this. I've been following this story for a bit now, and this press release seems (without studying it) sooo similar to previous releases. I thought they had previous 'certification of the powders.'

"One of the technical advantages indicated is assisting in providing polarization of the ultra capacitors. Polarization along with other proprietary processing steps provides the potential of a
polarization saturation voltage required by EEStor, Inc." - come on! This tells us absolutely nothing, except they're asking us to have faith in the POTENTIAL of their proprietary methods.

Why even publish this? Who is the audience? Are they reaching for more private funding? Does it need to be published to meet additional funding milestones?


And Steve: why do you get so bent out of shape when anyone expresses skepticism? Seems only logical to be very skeptical given the scant clues towards a working prototype. If the strongest evidence is the quote from Lockheed, that leaves very little to go on no matter how brilliant/creative/clever Liebman is.

mrjerry said...

EEstor press release:
Can someone tell me what this means?

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eestor-announces-certification-additional-key/story.aspx?guid=%7BAB6D95CC-0C6B-4734-83CB-990B4451270C%7D&dist=hppr

richterm said...

In regard to patent application number 5812758, and not being able to find it..

Don't patents go through a period of 12 or 18 months where they're not viewable by the public? I thought someone posted that a while back. Looks like this is in "patent pending" status.

Marcus said...

richterm, the press release indicates its a published patent with application number bla bla.

If its published, I would hazard a guess that means we should be able to see it.

steve said...

ackkk,

I get bent out of shape when I perceive somebody be spinning a false interpretation of facts. If I feel that's what's going on, then Im going to speak my mind.

If you've got as problem with something I've said or the way I say it, feel free to quote.

I'm comfortable with the dialogue and happy to put my tag on it.