There's been a bit of head scratching concerning whether or not EEStor ever applied for federal funding and if not, why not. Without attempting to resolve all those questions at once, it was pointed out to me that EEStor has what can fairly be described as pretty good counsel on the matter. Observe. I'm referring to Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's Clean tech practice which maintains a competency with important regulatory developments in the space. Their clients include Tesla, Smith Electric Vehicles, Proterra (the electric bus people), Bloom Energy, and energy storage firms Imara & ActaCell.
Here's an excerpt from WSGR's 2009 Cleantech Report:
According to a very well connected anonymous source, Bill Joy is the Kleiner Perkins partner who initiated the EEStor Inc. investment. Additionally, he is responsible for having recruited Mort Topfer to serve on the EEStor Board of Directors.
In the past, this has been a question relegated to rumor....(still will be for some. )But for me, I am highly confident it is the case based on a highly credible source who simply preferred not to be quoted. Joy co-founded Sun with recent EEStor commentator Vinod Khosla and a gaggle of other legendary nerds.
One of the challenges in seeking a comment from Kleiner Perkins on EEStor is trying to target the correct partner to talk about it. Knowing that Joy handled the EEStor investment at least makes that part of the puzzle easier to handle. To date, I've requested comments from Kleiner on most of EEStor's announcements and news items. But they have said that if an investment is not listed on their website, they do not comment on it. On another occasion, a spokesperson for Kleiner told me that they do not comment on investment companies if the company receiving the investment asks them to do so.
Former EEStor Board of Director member, Mort Topfer has stepped down from the AMD BoD on July 30, 2009. He is expected to now once again rejoin the EEStor Board of Directors for a 3rd time at which time, he will promptly resign and rejoin again and again. Just kidding. :-)
I found this tidbit searching the SEC website. Topfer as a search term....
Saqib Rahim and Jessica Lebers of ClimateWire made one mistake in their recent NY Times article: there's no mention of any skepticism regarding these DOE funds for batteries. It seems odd that all of this money is circulating and no one is asking any difficult questions about it. For example, I don't think I've read a single article on this battery funding that questioned the underlying supply of lithium ion or the fact that instead of obtaining oil from the middle east we will be gathering our lithium from Bolivia or China. Also, no reporter has examined the relationship between winners/losers of stimulus funding with basic lobbying/campaign donation funds at OpenSecrets.org.
I'm not saying anything is amiss for certain. But, it seems good journalism practices would at least lead one to inquire into some of these issues. It just feels like ever since the Obama administration began, all the tough questions have been set aside.
SeekingAlpha author John Peterson lays out the reasoning behind his EEStor skepticism in a blog post he emailed me about today. I think his points have been well covered at TheEEstory.com. It should come as no surprise to anyone just starting to learn about EEStor that there are many skeptics of EEStor. They have credibility. They understand material science and they don't think EEStor can deliver. Some will go to the next step and say what EEStor is attempting is impossible. If you believe in EEStor, you can't run and hide from that. It's not going to go away until EEStor does exactly what Peterson hopes they do, which is deliver some 3rd party confirmation.
In the meantime, in the absense of this confirmation, I'll simply restate my position: I believe EEStor has exactly what they claim and will deliver it as they promise. Everyone wants a time frame but I don't think that is quite as important. And skeptics have a point here regarding timeframes that, again, can't be ignored. But for me, based on all the information I have had the opportunity examine, I think EEStor has done it.
One final thing about John Peterson. I reached out to him via email a few weeks back because I learned he sat on a panel at Storageweek with a Kleiner partner. Did the Kleiner partner mention EEStor? No. Did Peterson ask? No. This brings me to rule #1 of anyone who would attempt to get to the truth about EEStor: when you get the opportunity to ask someone who owns 20% of EEStor a question about their prospects, you ask the question. :-)
Steve LeVine has written about some of new cleantech priorities of DARPA in this July 23, 2009 article as well as points about past achievements. A few months back, I tried unsuccessfully to speak with Robert J. Nowak, who is mentioned in this article. He has been involved with multiple energy storage initiatives for the DoD and someone who served on a National Academies committee with him recommended I seek him out. Alas, LeVine had better luck. Steve, if you read this blog post, shoot my email address over to Mr. Nowak: eestorblog@gmail.com
From the article:
"Typically, DARPA requires contractors to come up with solutions that are orders of magnitude superior to current technology. It pays companies—from startups to IBM—as well as top universities to meet a goal. Then, other than imposing strict reporting requirements, the agency gets out of the way of the researchers' work."
One of the enduring mysteries of the EEStory has been whether or not the tight connection between former Board Member Mort Topfer (see photo above) and Michael Dell would lead to any future business opportunities for EEStor Inc. Some have said that since Dell is an investor in some of the Kleiner Perkins funds, then maybe indirectly he has an investment in EEStor. One thing that is well known is the Weir's worked with the Topfer's at Dell, something that continues even today with EEStor Board of Director Greg Weir, a senior manager at Dell. But just because EEStor has ties to Dell doesn't mean that Michael Dell is personally aware of EEStor and it's battery pursuits. Or does it?
After extensive searching, I was somehow lucky enough today to find an interview of Michael Dell from February 27,2008 held at the University of Toronto (article hosted on Dell's website) in which he was asked about Mort Topfer joining the board of EEStor. Here's the exchange:
Question: It was announced on January 8th that Morton Topfer is joining the board of a mysterious
company out of Texas called E-store and a bit of background for no one who's ever heard of them, they
are claiming ultra capacitors with energy density -- 10 times the energy density of lead acid batteries at
a fraction of the cost, and charging time of five minutes. Do you think there is merit in this technology,
and where do you see it going?
MICHAEL DELL: Well, you know, I haven't studied the technology. Mort is a very bright guy and I
have a lot of respect for him. The area of energy storage is one where there is constant effort to create
the next innovation, but one also has to be very careful because energy storage is basically a way of
capturing energy so you release it very, very slowly. Of course if you get it wrong, it doesn't release as slowly, and that's not a good thing. (Laughter) So it sometimes takes a while to get these things right, and so I would just be cautious that there are a lot of these technologies -- claims like that have been made before and sometimes it takes a while for these
things to actually come to fruition. You know, most of the improvements in power have come not from
the power system itself, but from the reduction in power of the electronics.So we'd love to see
innovations and hopefully this company or others will be able to kind of break the curve that we've been
on with classical lithium, lithium ion, lithium polymer types of technologies.
--------------------
I think any ongoing observer of the EEStory has to acknowledge a few things about this statement by Michael Dell. First, he is definitely aware of EEStor. Second, he seems to be hinting at precisely the thing that Dick Weir has said which is that the reduction of the power electronics has made the EESU possible---which indicates in all likelihood that he heard via EEStor. Thirdly, he's not ready to really talk about EEStor...at least at this Feb 2008 event.
So what would Dell do with a contract with EEStor Inc.? Maybe acquire a phone company, ie, Palm? How else could it compete with the Apple iPhone? ....and not to mention regain a lead in the mobile computing market place. And who at Dell would lead that charge or take a product through UL Certification? Michael, how's that for a slow release?
UPDATE: It's been pointed out to me that the Dell response is referring specifically to the reduction in power consumption of the electronics and not the reduction in size of the power electronics vis a vis recent EEStor revelations concerning power electronics. I admit that's an eminently plausible interpretation. I'll mull it over.
Update #2: I found the video of this event. It's on YouTube now:
I had a chance to interview Jace Curtis from the company (PTI Inc.) that validated the EEStor permittivity re-testing performed by Ed Golla. We could not talk about Zenn/EEStor but instead focused on UL Certification in general.
Are you bored waiting for EEStor to make the big reveal? Not sure what to do with yourself or how to accelerate your own personal energy storage Christmas-like event? Maybe you could communicate your desire to see the Department of Energy take a greater interest in energy storage projects like EEStor's? (And no, there are no lithium ion projects that qualify for that distinction.) A great new way to do just that seems to have become available recently. I'm talking about Steven Chu's Facebook page.
I challenge you, the person reading this sentence (yes even you Dick McGraw), to go on to Facebook and ask Steven Chu as many battery-related questions as you can muster. My recommendations:
1) Can you please share your views on EEStor ultracapacitor technology and any efforts similar in potential impact?
2) Why should the USA invest so much money in lithium ion batteries for automotive applications when the quantity of lithium available for this purpose is disputed?
3) Why has the Dept of Energy chosen not to reveal an alphabetical list of every company who has applied for Stimulus funds in the Advanced Vehicle and Battery Manufacturing programs? Why do we have to wait for awards to be made before we can learn who has applied given that transparency is an important goal of the Obama administration?
There's been a bit of head scratching concerning whether or not EEStor ever applied for federal funding and if not, why not. Without attempting to resolve all those questions at once, it was pointed out to me that EEStor has what can fairly be described as pretty good counsel on the matter. Observe. I'm referring to Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's Clean tech practice which maintains a competency with important regulatory developments in the space. Their clients include Tesla, Smith Electric Vehicles, Proterra (the electric bus people), Bloom Energy, and energy storage firms Imara & ActaCell. 
