NY Times Article on Batteries

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.

Another EEStor Skeptic Takes a Swipe

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. :-)

Why would DARPA fund EEStor? Businessweek Article Provides Insights

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."

Ian Clifford on Fox Business July 31, 2009

I cant seem to get the embed video to work on this. Here's a regular link to it.

I'm going to go ahead and say it. This was not the best interview Cheryl Casone ever conducted. Ummm.

Michael Dell Evades 2008 Question About EEStor Inc.?

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:

More Info on UL Certification for EEStor Inc.

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.

Waiting for EEStor by Bugging Steven Chu at the Department of Energy

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?

While I did use the word "bugging" in the blog post topic heading, I do not actually encourage you to bug the man literally. However, I do encourage you to utilize this medium of communication en masse to shine a light on energy storage for Dr. Chu. Who knows, he may actually have something interesting to say about it. (one can hope, right?)

.....aaaaaannd BEGIN!

Polarity Inc. Publishes Patent Referencing EEStor

TheEEStory.com regular GaryB, famous for finding EEStor related patents and trademarks, has done it again. This time, he has found a patent application from EEStor supplier Polarity Inc.

"0003] Emerging applications for DC-to-DC converters require high efficiency conversion of relatively high input voltages. For example, a high-energy storage device described in U.S. Patent No. 7,033,406 claims to safely store charge at 3,500 volts. This voltage will have to be down converted efficiently and regulated for use with equipment that requires relatively lower supply voltages. For example, conventional battery powered motor vehicles might benefit from a high-energy storage device, but the electric motors employed to drive them typically require input voltages of less than 100 volts. Voltage converters suitable for this task should be robust, inexpensive, and compact to ensure commercial viability. " 

EEStor Audio Follow Up

EEStor Inc. has requested that I delete the link to the unuathorised Dick Weir audio. I have agreed to do that.

Unknown Russian American Scientist says EEStor Energy Density "Possible in Principle"

Vehement EEStor denier, Y_Po, found himself in the hot seat this evening at TheEEStory.com fielding a barage of questions in the chat room. Despite rarely allowing himself to be nailed down to a specific position regarding his EEStor skepticism, Y_Po yielded to a flurry of questions I threw at him as well as several from the chat room audience.

The biggest revelation? Y_Po thinks the EEStor Energy Density (20,000J/cc) is possible in principle (but also, unlikely).

"You can do something in that range in principle."  -Y_Po

Despite being asked close to 23 times what the relevant ED mechanism might be, Y_Po refused to answer the question. What was interesting is that this revelation contrasts sharply with 2 other skeptics on TheEEStory: Zawy and ee-Tom.

Additionally, Y_Po maintained what he has always maintained which is that EEStor's Dick Weir is not competent and may be a fraudster. The fundamental problem which Y_Po believes Weir and team can not overcome is "saturation."

Catch the whole interview here. Also, if you can figure out what kind of nut I am for conducting that interview and posting this article, please let me know. I am curious.

UPDATE:  A rebuttal has been posted questioning my characterization of the interview.  Out of fairness, I will post it in it's entirely:

Y_Po EEluminated Registered: May, 2009 Last visit: 2 hours ago Posts: 568

B, you really have problems with hearing.  I have said "It is possible (in principle) but not the way Weir does it" MANY times. I also explained how one can get high energy density. "In principle" means "not practically possible" :) So your blog record is completely wrong and misleading. I did not admit anything you just finally heard what I have been saying for all this time.