Please lord, don't let it be another Segway

EEStor CEO says game-changing energy storage device coming by 2010 30

If the Texas company EEStor is running a scam, it’s a frakking brilliant one. For years the otherwise tight-lipped outfit has been promising a capacitor that can quickly charge, quickly discharge, and hold enormous amounts of energy—on all accounts, performance far beyond any battery on the market, or even contemplated. If it performs as promised, the EESU (Electrical Energy Storage Unit) will revolutionize the electric vehicle market. It will enable cost-effective, high-capacity storage for renewable electricity sources. It can radically increase the utility of portable electronics. It would be an honest-to-god game changer.

It sounds too good to be true, and quite a few people think it is. But the company has passed some initial tests; it has signed an exclusive contract with Lockheed Martin; electric car company ZENN is ready to put EESUs in vehicles and begin selling them in short order.

And now, there’s a leaked interview with EEStor CEO Dick Weir (who never talks to the media, and who doesn’t appear aware the interview will be published; journalist Tyler Hamilton, one of the few to have interviewed him, vouchsafes that it’s his voice) in which he claims that he’ll have a pre-production prototype EESU done by the end of the year.

If this is a bluff, it is one of the ballsier, more elaborate bluffs the cleantech world has ever seen.

Here are a few of the remarkable things Weir says, as related by Hamilton:

* On EEStor’s value: “If we make an EESU ... God only knows what we’ll be valued then.”

* He has two patents on grid-load levelling. “You can put 45 percent more electricity on the grid and do nothing more than put our batteries on there. ... that electricity could supply the electricity to the electric vehicle market as it emerges ... we make wind and solar real ... you can make a wind farm operate like a coal-fired plant and it’s really cost-effective.”

* On storage for PCs and handhelds. “We can take a battery for a cell phone and give you three to five times more energy storage that would never degrade on you and you can charge in seconds.”

* How quick to market for EESU electric car? “Need is always a wonderful thing, and the need is very high for our technology ... there’s nothing corrosive, harmful or explosive in our technology ... there’s nothing, there’s no chemistry part of our product. It’s all solid state ... I think also ZENN is going to happen very, very quickly ... people will want that electric car. They’ll be able to test it, don’t get me wrong, but they’ll be able to pass those tests quickly because we’ve got the UL.”

* On EESU status: “I’m already out there putting EESUs together and I’m still in June. I’m ahead of schedule.” Says ZENN will get pre-production prototypes by the end of this year. “Once I do that, all hell is going to break loose for ZENN as well as EEStor.”

* Ending note: “We’ve done our homework, and you’ll see the results when we get into 2010 ... you’ll see a very effective and constant ramp-up to our production capabilities.”

I wouldn’t invest in this company, but I can probably spare a little hope.

More on EEStor:

David Roberts is staff writer for Grist. You can follow his Twitter feed at twitter.com/drgrist.

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. veritone Posted 11:50 am
    31 Jul 2009

    Part of the hype about this uses the phrase "unlimited," when clearly it is limited. Just like nuclear power was supposed to be unlimited. If the hype is true it will help, but unlimited energy, as some of the press reports I've seen claim, just isn't true.

    Permalink

    1. David Roberts's avatar

      David Roberts Posted 11:57 am
      31 Jul 2009

      Who's saying "unlimited"? I haven't seen that. It's not even an energy source -- it's a storage device.Relative to existing batteries, though, it would be a quantum leap forward.

      Permalink

      1. veritone Posted 2:41 pm
        31 Jul 2009

        One of the clips I read had that in a headline.

        Permalink

  2. Christopher S. Johnson's avatar

    Christopher S. Johnson Posted 12:32 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    Keeping this on the watch-closely list.

    Permalink

  3. Max8806's avatar

    Max8806 Posted 12:33 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    A revolution in energy storage will certainly help expand supply of clean electricity by allowing the grid to integrate more variable resources like wind and solar, but it would also significantly increase demand for electricity. This budding market of having "cell/smart phones" that are becoming PC's in your pocket that constantly update online applications, play ever-cooler games, etc, will lead consumers to consume as much electricity with those devices as the batteries will be able to store on a charge. I never hear this mentioned and I'm afraid people who wait for energy storage to be some major silver bullet, or clump of silver buckshot or whatever, in the fight to overhaul our energy delivery system to where it doesn't require new construction of fossil fuel power will be sorely dissapointed. If it increases supply of clean electricity but increases demand for electricity more, it will mean more fossil fuel power. At least the reductions that people seem to be expecting are unlikely to materialize.

    Permalink

    1. eatkind Posted 2:04 pm
      31 Jul 2009

      Would be enlightening if someone were to do a full life-cycle analysis of the energy and resource use of the mobile wireless media, gaming and computing technologies vs the technologies they displace: print media, desktop and laptop PCs, TVs, radios, stereo systems, telephones, snail mail ... My bet is that mobile is and will continue to be a net resource and energy saver.

      Permalink

      1. Max8806's avatar

        Max8806 Posted 2:28 pm
        31 Jul 2009

        Good point Eatkind, and I generally agree with you, I think you are just forgetting one major activity that new media replaces: boredom. And while I'm not going to argue that replacing boredom with cool phone games is "bad," I do think it is likely to lead to more energy demand. I didn't use to carry around a gamecube or even a gameboy on the offchance I'd miss a bus and be stranded for 10 minutes, but now whenever I'm waiting for a metro or bus I have my handy dandy cell phone racing game. Its essentially Jevons' paradox, where being able to keep everything efficiently instantly accessible digitally will likely be welfare-enhancing, but not end up actually decreasing resource use. At least that's my prediction.

        Permalink

    2. scatter Posted 2:34 am
      01 Aug 2009

      I don't see that as a big problem, Max. Portable devices are always going to be very efficient, however much storage you have. And if they replace desktop and even laptop usage then more the better.

      Permalink

  4. Gar Lipow's avatar

    Gar Lipow Posted 12:50 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    1) If true, this will make clean energy cheap enough to compete with fossil fuels. Wind with cheap storage is cheaper than new coal plants.
    2) The problem is that I don't believe it is true. I think at this point the problem with EESTOR is self-deception. My hypothesis: they came up with a genuine, but not-ready-for-prime-time breakthrough, and have been talking themselves into believing they will have a commercial production model ready real-soon-now (RSN) ever since. So people who ought to know what they are doing make these claims in all sincerety. From far away we can see the flaws. Get too close and the odor of absolute sincerity from folks knowledgable in the field cover any scam smell. The EESTOR folk have scammed themselves throughly, something smart knowledgable people can do. If they prove me wrong, I will throw a huge party in celebration. If.

    Permalink

  5. sunflower's avatar

    sunflower Posted 12:54 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    If you hit with a hammer it will explode.  Sounds almost as good as cold fusion in a jar.  I do not believe the leak story.  It's like pretending to be asleep.

    Permalink

  6. adfasfdasfd Posted 3:51 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    Watch it be a flywheel. 

    Permalink

  7. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 4:38 pm
    31 Jul 2009

     BlackLight Power signs sixth utility deal to produce power from waterhttp://green.venturebeat.com/2009/07/30/blacklight-power-signs-sixth-utility-deal-to-produce-power-from-water/BlackLight Power,
    one of the more controversial and mysterious cleantech solutions on the
    market, announced today that it has landed a commercial licensing deal
    with Maryland-based utility Akridge Energy.
    This is the sixth such contract for the company, which claims to have
    technology capable of generating energy using only water.

    Permalink

  8. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 8:21 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    BTW, Grist -- thanks for helping someone's pump and dump scheme:http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2009/07/21/afx6680805.htmlZenn shares jumped almost 10 percent to C$5.15 on the TSX Venture Exchange, building on a 22 percent gain on Monday.Zenn has an exclusive license with EEStor, which is a privately owned Texas-based company that is working on developing a battery that it says will be able to power a four-door sedan for 400 kilometers (250 miles) without recharging.

    Permalink

  9. BlackbirdHighway Posted 9:38 pm
    31 Jul 2009

    They said the same thing in 2007. Never happened.They said the same thing in 2008. Never happened.Now they are saying it again in 2009.They still don't have a working prototype.Each time they pump up the hype, the stock goes up and the people behind it sell at a great profit. Then the stock price falls back as people realize it's no different than the last time.

    Permalink

  10. scatter Posted 2:32 am
    01 Aug 2009

    There's a pretty comprehensive run down on the technology on the Oil Drum (via Ecogeek)

    Permalink

  11. Gar Lipow's avatar

    Gar Lipow Posted 7:50 am
    01 Aug 2009

    Scatter, thanks for that link.  I think this  may hint at what's going on:Perovskite oxides (which includes barium titanates) have high
    permittivities because they can, in effect, store a lot of energy by
    distorting when an electric field is applied. But there are limits to
    the amount of distortion possible; with increases in voltage above a
    certain point, permittivity begins to decrease, with large changes in
    voltage moving less and less charge.     They found a way to reduce this effect, and thought that with a few minor changes they could eliminate it or reduce it further to the point they could get the high capacity they were looking for.  And they keeping finding ways to make improvements. And everytime the make an improvement they convince themselves it will take them all to way to a capacitor with storage capability comparble to a battery.  So they release information suggesting they are ready to release a commercial mode, convinced they will be able to make their lie come true in weeks or months. Unfortunately the improvements keep turning out to be minor, and they go back to development unitl the next "breakthrough".  I've deal with engineers for a  good part of my life, and the capacity for self-delusion in a team of smart educted engineer whose project is 90%  done is almost unlimited.  That last 10% is never more than weeks away from completion no matter how what obstacles are in the way.
    So I stand by my hypothesis. Its a scam, but the core development team is convinced they will deliver soon, and thus don't look on any minor deceptions needed to convey this as lies. They probably think of it as lossy information compression. 

    Permalink

  12. amazingdrx's avatar

    amazingdrx Posted 11:48 am
    01 Aug 2009

    I think a battery/supercapacitor hybrid would be best.  Like the flash in a camera.  The batteries charge up the capacitor and it provides a big current flow for a short time.Electric vehicles could use a 5 min super capacitor storage for hi-power acceleration/hill climbing.  But the main storage capacity would be in cheaper batteries.If EEstore announced that approach, maybe it would be real.  Do they really have UL approval?  This might be verifiable independently.  The lockheed connection means defense projects, and that means sececy.  If this device is being used to power the aircraft mounted laser for instance, that would classify a lot of the company's activities.  A convenient smokescreen for scammers, or it could be legitamate.There is another reason for secrecy, anyone leaking information who has stock in the company could be accused of insider trading. But here's a very bizzare possible(?) reason that this might be a scam, and explain the defense department secrecy.  As long as EEstore sits out there on the time horizon, always a year from mass production, any other storage company, battery makers for instance, will have a hard time raising capital.If real, EEstore's breakthrough could make battery companies worthless overnight.  A smart way to stop electric cars is to block battery investment, rumors of EEstore secret success do that.  Did cheney give EEstore their lockheed contract to put a monkeywrench into the green car business?  Hehehey, america loves a good conspircay.  Who killed the electric car?  Not GM?  The evil lord cheney of haliburton?  Mwhahahaha...

    Permalink

    1. scatter Posted 3:07 am
      02 Aug 2009

      Have you seen this one?http://www.csiro.au/science/Ultra-Battery.htmlhttp://www.csiro.au/news/UltraBattery.html A very elegant solution I think.

      Permalink

  13. amazingdrx's avatar

    amazingdrx Posted 11:57 am
    01 Aug 2009

    You know the military industrialists would love to have a laser that would shoot down missles, small enough to fit in a drone plane.  EEstore might make that possible, along with a solid oxide fuel cell turbine.  Boeing was working on a fuel cell drone powerplant.  the missle shooting laser they have now only fits in an airliner sized plane.How much useful green technology is suppressed by military secrecy?  How much of that is by design to prevent a new energy economy from replacing the old oil/coal military industrial monopolies? 

    Permalink

  14. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 10:49 pm
    01 Aug 2009

     Battery cars are hyped over and over and over again for one reason only.Power companies salivate at the thought of having giant wasteful batteries plugged into the grid for hours on end, draining current capacity and causing the price of electricity to go up. 

    Permalink

    1. scatter Posted 3:03 am
      02 Aug 2009

      Err no. In what way are they wasteful? And what would the electricity companies do with all that stored juice then? Storage capacity would make electriicty cheaper because it enables off-peak electricity to be dropped back in at peak times.

      Permalink

      1. Delay And Deny's avatar

        Delay And Deny Posted 10:03 am
        02 Aug 2009

        Storage capacity would make electriicty cheaper because it enables off-peak electricity to be dropped back in at peak times.
        Chemical batteries are leaky and inefficient for storage.  The typical lithium battery has to be kept on a charger to store 100% otherwise it quickly drains.That is why smart utilities are storing energy as hydrogen...which never loses a single joule of energy while stored. 

        Permalink

  15. Gar Lipow's avatar

    Gar Lipow Posted 8:28 am
    02 Aug 2009

    Delay and Deny is a troll. I'll wait a few posts before I say for sure whether it is the particular troll I think it is.

    Permalink

    1. amazingdrx's avatar

      amazingdrx Posted 9:18 am
      02 Aug 2009

      I guess that's why the new grist has an ignore function?  But who needs it?  it's better if readers see the general incompetence of the wing nut talking point crew.  In the grand tradition of palin, "joe the plumber", duuhbya, and reagan himself, no facts/no brains no problems.They live in a magical realm of imagination where gaawd speaks through them.  Their next big move?  Mega churches on militarty bases funded by taxpayers. Meanwhile chinese state owned industries take over manufacturing the new energy economy.  Turning US into the new UK, failed empire begging for loan extensions, selling off all our remaining assets to keep our consumptive lifestyle going. Mao is grinning over at tricky dick nixon as they basque in their molten lava hot tub in hell, hehey.

      Permalink

    2. Delay And Deny's avatar

      Delay And Deny Posted 9:59 am
      02 Aug 2009

      Ha, guess I spoke the truth, because once "Gar Liptow" runs out of salient arguments, he calls everyone a "troll"!
      Face it, the whole Gore "Green" movement is an effort by the battery and electricity companies to "charge" us more.
      Case in point, Warren Buffet has sunk 1 billion dollars of his own money into cheap Chinese plug in hybrids.   Do you think for a second there will be any kind of accurate reporting about the technology?  Or that all the blogs will be chirping about how great it all is.Chemical batteries of the sort needed for the type of cars being proposed don't exist.Hydrogen is here and now. 

      Permalink

      1. Christopher S. Johnson's avatar

        Christopher S. Johnson Posted 10:11 am
        02 Aug 2009

        Jabailo.  He's not even a challenging troll.Here was his M.O.1.) Before Obama and the Grist website change, he was one of the sillier deniers, switching between "its not real" to "its real but we're not causing it" in really bad ways.  Oh and he always talked about how cool the temps were in the Pacific Northwest (Tacoma). 2.) After the election and web site revamp he changed his tune and accepted AGW.  Fine. But then he got on this hydrogen kick like a tick on a junkyard dog, and wont let go.I think its the hideous design of the new Grist web site that drives him mad.

        Permalink

  16. scatter Posted 2:41 pm
    02 Aug 2009

    Not a very smart troll that's for sure."Chemical batteries are leaky and inefficient for storage.  The
    typical lithium battery has to be kept on a charger to store 100%
    otherwise it quickly drains.That is why smart utilities are storing energy as hydrogen...which never loses a single joule of energy while stored."That inane statement can be quickly disproven by the simple test of unplugging a laptop overnight and then seeing how the state of charge changes. Answer? really not very much. Electricity storage would be for a matter of hours so losses would be very low. Now, please let us all know what the efficiency of electrolysis of water is?

    Permalink

    1. Delay And Deny's avatar

      Delay And Deny Posted 8:22 pm
      02 Aug 2009

      That inane statement can be quickly disproven by the simple test of
      unplugging a laptop overnight and then seeing how the state of charge
      changes. Answer? really not very much.
      You go do that.   When comparing NiCad with Lithium, Lithiums lose charge when not kept plugged in.   NiCad have "memory" problems...which is why you must break them in and always fully charge them, or they remember, and thereafter, only store, the amount of the last partial charge.Other problems with lithium batteries include:
      batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm
      Aging of lithium-ion is an issue that is often ignored. A lithium-ion
      battery in use typically lasts between 2-3 years. The capacity loss
      manifests itself in increased internal resistance caused by oxidation.
      Eventually, the cell resistance reaches a point where the pack can
      no longer deliver the stored energy although the battery may still
      have ample charge. For this reason, an aged battery can be kept
      longer in applications that draw low current as opposed to a function
      that demands heavy loads.
      These types of problems with both batteries are known, and have little or no resolution since their introduction on the marketplace.   They are only being repackages with a lot of hoo-hah and marketing mumbo jumbo to disguise the fact that these cars are being sold with big, unusable batteries as something they are not.

      Permalink

  17. Delay And Deny's avatar

    Delay And Deny Posted 9:59 pm
    02 Aug 2009

    Chris Johnson intoned: I think its the hideous design of the new Grist web site that drives him mad.


    On this we can agree. Posting here reminds me of visits as a child with my family to the local Howard Johnson's. All that orange and blue...

    Permalink

  18. Gar Lipow's avatar

    Gar Lipow Posted 11:16 am
    05 Aug 2009

    John. Think you are being unfair to Howard Johnson's. Their color scheme was tasteful and restrained compared to the new Grist design.

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement