# EEStor Ultracapacitor Battery Replacement



## Efiero (Feb 7, 2009)

this company EEStor is in texas but no web site and word is they have a battery that can take the cars 500 miles less wieght and a few mintunt charge time pluse a super high cycle life they said about the same price as lead acid


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

Efiero said:


> this company EEStor is in texas but no web site and word is they have a battery that can take the cars 500 miles less wieght and a few mintunt charge time pluse a super high cycle life they said about the same price as lead acid


It's a scam... a well known one.


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

Technologic said:


> It's a scam... a well known one.


Did I miss a news story confirming it was a scam?

I'm not saying they'll have a product ready this year, in a decade, or ever, but they do have a commercial building and supposed partners.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

ClintK said:


> Did I miss a news story confirming it was a scam?
> 
> I'm not saying they'll have a product ready this year, in a decade, or ever, but they do have a commercial building and supposed partners.


Well I figured it was obvious to most it was a scam at this point.

Firstly, their only proof after 3 years is a permitivity test of ceramic dusts (which anyone from anywhere has access to), not to mention their entire concept of low temperature sintering to keep "costs down" doesn't seem possible in physics without some form of binding agent, not yet in existence. 

Also they lack even a single prototype after 3 years, yet constantly release press releases that claim something spectacular only to find out the had some lab verify their aluminum foil was really 10 microns (just like the stuff in my kitchen).

I would be extremely surprised if it isn't a scam.


----------



## Efiero (Feb 7, 2009)

before you start saying its a scam check out this screwdriver using the tech http://www.dealsdirect.com.au/p/gmc-4-6v-cordless-pistol-screwdriver-flash-cell/


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

Efiero said:


> before you start saying its a scam check out this screwdriver using the tech http://www.dealsdirect.com.au/p/gmc-4-6v-cordless-pistol-screwdriver-flash-cell/


Sorry what should I be convinced by with a cordless drill using a capacitor charging system?

You mean that ultracaps exist? well no crap they do. Production ones that have the energy density of gasoline while being cheaper than lead acid don't exist


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

Efiero said:


> before you start saying its a scam check out this screwdriver using the tech http://www.dealsdirect.com.au/p/gmc-4-6v-cordless-pistol-screwdriver-flash-cell/


Ultracapacitors definitely have promise... it's just we get a news article every month with some grand battery breakthrough that never comes to the market.

I don't think I'm as pessimistic as Technologic though . People would (and still do) take apart Lithium powered cordless drill batteries and wire a hundred of them together to power their car. Maybe someday we'll do that with capacitor powered products.


----------



## Efiero (Feb 7, 2009)

just saying its not complet BS there not perfect yet but none of the otheres are eithere


----------



## BWH (Sep 26, 2008)

Personally I'm hopeful, but I'm not running out to buy ZENN stock either. 



ClintK said:


> People would (and still do) take apart Lithium powered cordless drill batteries and wire a hundred of them together to power their car.


How well does that work? I have a box of these at work: http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/...ries_rechargers_adapters/4/accessories/C8263A

They are used but should be in serviceable condition. 1800mAh, 11.1v according to HP. I forget what it says on the battery itself.

I'm sure I would need more than what is available.


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I feel that its probably vaporware. Zenn did pay a few million for the right to be the exclusive recipient of the hypercaps, but in reality they will probably never see any return on their investment.

I'm not really a fan of Zenn for that matter either.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2009)

Yea, it's complete BS. They have been promoting and teasing but when we keep getting folks who have never seen it before they always come out saying well it can't be totally bull or you gotta give them a chance they will continue to promote the bull. We have been around for some time and know that the line they feed you and us is total bull. They are the type that will try to entice those that don't know or will always give a second or third chance. I give one chance because if your an adult or young adult you already know better and any thing more than one chance is garbage. eestor is garbage. The idea is cool but the hype is garbage. Unless they have something to show other than a few well worded web pages then it's crap. In three years they have shown nothing. CRAP CRAP and more CRAP

At least the others actually have a viable product. Sure lithium is not perfect but I would not expect it to be yet. But to say a manufacturer is not perfect when they produce nothing is stupid. They have nothing and are nothing. 

Pete : )




Efiero said:


> just saying its not complet BS there not perfect yet but none of the otheres are eithere


----------



## Efiero (Feb 7, 2009)

I know right now that the lithium polymer batteries are the best but way to much money then there is the zinc air battery cant seem to even buy one hydrogen fuel cell is a joke cant get the hydrogen easy and even if there was a good tech and i was a oil companie i would buy it up and hide it away till I sold all my product


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

BWH said:


> Personally I'm hopeful, but I'm not running out to buy ZENN stock either.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The items to check are its discharge capability and the number of cells it would take to make a worthwhile pack.

For simple math, let's say we want a 111V nominal 90Ah pack.
11.1v x 10 cells = 111v in series
90Ah / 1.8Ah = 50 cells in parallel
So 10 x 50 = 500 cells for the pack.
Retail of $80 and that's $40,000 for the pack plus wiring/BMS for the pack. Probably not worth it.

I think some DIYers were ripping the LiIons out of Dewalt 36v battery packs. I did the calculation before - I don't remember their AHrs, but making a decent pack was far less than 500 cells.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

ClintK said:


> The items to check are its discharge capability and the number of cells it would take to make a worthwhile pack.
> 
> For simple math, let's say we want a 111V nominal 90Ah pack.
> 11.1v x 10 cells = 111v in series
> ...


You can pick up identical spec'd cells in Cylinders for 4-5 dollars each


----------



## BWH (Sep 26, 2008)

Thank you very much for the info. These batteries are sitting unused on a shelf and I was just curious if they might have any use in an EV.

I wouldn't consider paying too much for them and if I asked nicely the company we are contracted with might just give them away to avoid paying a disposal fee. They no longer use the printers they came with.

Ah well, wishful thinking anyway. I'm fairly certain there aren't 500 of them and since they were used in portable printers the discharge rate is probably low.


----------



## speculawyer (Feb 10, 2009)

I don't know if EEstor is an intentional scam . . . but they have failed to show a working prototype to any independent 3rd party. Until they can do that, they are just chasing a dream. I'd love to see them pull it off but until we see some concrete results, they are just a vaporware factory.


----------



## B-Radley (Feb 23, 2009)

Hey everyone am new to the board this is my first post..... first I am glad to meet like minded people Thanks for such a valuable forum
I am an active member of other boards in different interests. 

My pet project is to build a small early model MG or triumph my background is in the auto customizing / restoration on a professional and recreational level. 

I have just stumbled across this news of the EEStor Ultracapacitor and was very excited to see this article so I googled this forum to see what you guys thought. 

I am still on a learning curve, but am somewhat dispirited to see many threads here dismissing this idea I have hope. Although still new to this and the luxury of me not watching for many years for this technology to slowly develop as you guys have maybe makes me a bit more optimistic. 

Yes I have dug up so far that they have promised to come to market with a prototype and have failed with a promise again this year but for a company like Lockheed Martin to invest in them speaks volumes, if they don’t have the complete package they have something worth while. 

And now the new Pres wants to toss money at the technology I think the future looks bright for energy storage.

A link to what Edison went through with his investors to get the electric grid going. 
http://books.google.com/books?id=eH...=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA30,M1

Brad


----------



## ClintK (Apr 27, 2008)

B-Radley said:


> Hey everyone am new to the board this is my first post..... first I am glad to meet like minded people Thanks for such a valuable forum
> I am an active member of other boards in different interests.
> 
> My pet project is to build a small early model MG or triumph my background is in the auto customizing / restoration on a professional and recreational level.
> ...


I definitely like the Triumph.  Don't hold your breath for EEStor, but LiFePO4 packs are available right now at fairly reasonable prices. The technology is already here if you want to go for it.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

B-Radley said:


> Yes I have dug up so far that they have promised to come to market with a prototype and have failed with a promise again this year but for a company like Lockheed Martin to invest in them speaks volumes, if they don’t have the complete package they have something worth while.


It could simply mean that Lockheed is taking a gamble just in case EESTOR might come up with something. I'm sure Lockheed has wasted money on unproven technology before and will do so again. EESTOR hasn't given us anything except empty promises so far, so don't hold your breath.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> It could simply mean that Lockheed is taking a gamble just in case EESTOR might come up with something. I'm sure Lockheed has wasted money on unproven technology before and will do so again. EESTOR hasn't given us anything except empty promises so far, so don't hold your breath.


Didn't the Vice President of Lockheed Martin say that Eestor was a "once in a blue moon shot"?

I think they're just worried about NOT having the license if it does pan out (no matter how incredibly unlikely).


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Lockheed bought into the idea when everybody still had money to burn. If LM doesn't have money to burn, I don't know who does. Just because they bought into the idea does not make EEstor or Zenn a more sound investment.


----------



## speculawyer (Feb 10, 2009)

B-Radley said:


> I have just stumbled across this news of the EEStor Ultracapacitor and was very excited to see this article so I googled this forum to see what you guys thought.


EEStor is an unproven, unverified potential technology at best . . . and pure snake oil at worst.

We are interested in seeing what they've got, but so far they've shown nothing. In the meantime, there are several other good Li-Ion technologies.


----------



## B-Radley (Feb 23, 2009)

Thanks for taking the wind out of my sails guys….. just kidding the info is invaluable here and I appreciate all your input. 

Sorry for the newbe question here and maybe the wrong place to ask but I don’t have all the calculators, knowledge or what not bookmarked to find out yet.

For existing technology (or maybe something just around the corner) and a $10,000 budget *excluding the car cost*. What would be my best range and speed for a car that weighs about 1600 lbs (I live in flat land Florida) 

Brad


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

There are a lot of variables to consider. What sort of driving, highway speeds, around town, mixed, what drag coefficient does the car have, what motor are you planning to use, etc. Generally the best bang for your buck for range right now is going to be Thunder Sky/Sky Energy type cells. You should be able to put together a 96-108 volt 30-40 mile pack for less than $6 grand in a lightweight aerodynamic vehicle.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

B-Radley said:


> Hey everyone am new to the board this is my first post..... first I am glad to meet like minded people Thanks for such a valuable forum
> ...
> And now the new Pres wants to toss money at the technology I think the future looks bright for energy storage.


Oh, no - up until that I thought this technology still had a chance.

The only thing this President will reside over is the fall of the American empire, casting Weapons of Wealth Destruction at every turn.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

PhantomPholly said:


> Oh, no - up until that I thought this technology still had a chance.
> 
> The only thing this President will reside over is the fall of the American empire, casting Weapons of Wealth Destruction at every turn.


That's funny considering they were launched during the last administration


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> That's funny considering they were launched during the last administration



Eestor could have launched on the moon, wouldn't have made their physics any more sound.


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

Subscribing. I'm hoping they'll come up with something like they say. 


Just for perspective for you nay-sayers...Only a few short years ago there wasn't anything even approaching a 1 farad cap. When I was in school I remember the instructor speaking of the possibilities if there were such a thing as a 1 farad cap, probably due to someone asking why they were sized in microfarads. 

Within 10 years (1991) I saw one and it was unbelievably small to boot. They were using it on a circuit board in place of a battery. Now they're using much larger ones for starting diesel trucks in extreme cold where batteries don't work so well. 

While I'm not saying these guys will or won't produce soon, I'm confident someone will make breakthroughs and sooner rather than later.


----------



## JonasMeyer (Feb 28, 2009)

Yeah, not to defend EEStor, and for the record I'm guessing we'll never see a hypercap based energy storage system out of them, but the basic physics says that the possible energy density of a capacitor system SHOULD be around the same as that of a chemical (battery) based system, which should be the same as the energy density of a fuel like hydrogen or gasoline. Of course this is the same kind of back of the napkin calculations that tell us that Moore's law can continue for another 150 years but that our laptops will have to be made out of high energy plasma denser than lead. LOL.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

ElectriCar said:


> Just for perspective for you nay-sayers...Only a few short years ago there wasn't anything even approaching a 1 farad cap. When I was in school I remember the instructor speaking of the possibilities if there were such a thing as a 1 farad cap, probably due to someone asking why they were sized in microfarads.
> .


I'm a nay-sayer because the company is clearly run by chimps after investor funding, not because of the product or the potential.

It's clear that super dense batteries and such can be made (and ultracaps), problem is it's not gonna happen by a company and management team like Eestor has.


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

Technologic said:


> I'm a nay-sayer because the company is clearly run by chimps after investor funding, not because of the product or the potential.
> 
> It's clear that super dense batteries and such can be made (and ultracaps), problem is it's not gonna happen by a company and management team like Eestor has.


Aren't all companies who sell stock after investor funding? Where is the problem with that and what is it that convinces you that they are a fraud?


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

ElectriCar said:


> Aren't all companies who sell stock after investor funding? Where is the problem with that and what is it that convinces you that they are a fraud?


Eestor *doesn't* sell stock.

They're seeking government and private subsidies without facing the potential law suits of investor fraud.

Likewise part of the deal with Lockheed has been only to give them licensing if it ever works... 

There's also a serious physics issue of low temperature sintering claiming to be CHEAP. Sintering is certainly _never_ cheap for ceramics, which barium titanite is. Also only a few ceramics can be low temperature sintered at all, and generally this requires binding agents and effects the purity in MASSIVE ways (99.95% purity of the material is needed for it to absorb electrons).

I'd absolutely love to see a "low temperature sintering" of barium titanite.


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

I didn't know they didn't sell stock. Oh well. I've been following Eestor a while now, 8-10 months since I first heard of it I think and there's been one or two press releases that I've got wind of. 

I'll keep following it to see what develops. I don't doubt what science can produce just like the new MIT discovery producing a 10 fold reduction in lithium cell charge times. That will be on the market within two years they say. Time will tell about Eestor.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

ElectriCar said:


> That will be on the market within two years they say.


"They say" doesn't mean much any more. So many of these lab breakthroughs don't pan out as well in the real world.


----------



## ElectriCar (Jun 15, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> "They say" doesn't mean much any more. So many of these lab breakthroughs don't pan out as well in the real world.


In this case the MIT guys already did it and have licensed the mfg rights to two entities. Since it was apparently a very simple thing to integrate into the current mfg process, further stating it wasn't really even considered another step, I don't see why it should take that long. It's not a major change where they have to rework the shipping packaging, labeling etc. You won't even be able to tell just by looking at the package. The only delay I can see is possibly further testing the OEM may want to do before releasing it.


----------



## Tony1M (Feb 21, 2009)

ElectriCar said:


> In this case the MIT guys already did it and have licensed the mfg rights to two entities. Since it was apparently a very simple thing to integrate into the current mfg process, further stating it wasn't really even considered another step, I don't see why it should take that long. It's not a major change where they have to rework the shipping packaging, labeling etc. You won't even be able to tell just by looking at the package. The only delay I can see is possibly further testing the OEM may want to do before releasing it.


I'm pretty excited by this breakthrough - far more than I am excited by eestor. I would not be a bit surprised if these new cells were available within two years ................ and I would not be a bit surprised if an eestor capacitor were still not available at the end of two another two years of "development". 

Speaking of capacitors, this link was posted on a popular eestor forum ( http://www.theeestory.com/topics ) today:
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22297/
Sounds promising and a small prototype actually exists.


----------

