Comments on: Hello, EEStor — are you there? http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/ Trends, happenings and innovations in the clean technology market Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:28:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1308 Anonymous Sat, 24 Nov 2007 16:17:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1308 The energy is not proportional to the voltage squared. That is EEStors problem. Energy is equal to 1/2CV2 only for linear dielectrics. Barium titanate is highly nonlinear, and the energy is approximately proportion to V, not V squared for a high field application like energy storage. EEStor only calculates energy storage -- never measures it, so they don't have to face this reality. By the way -- this creates a factor of several hundred difference between their calculated energy density, and the actual (which I have measured in the lab, and has been verified many times since) The energy is not proportional to the voltage squared. That is EEStors problem. Energy is equal to 1/2CV2 only for linear dielectrics. Barium titanate is highly nonlinear, and the energy is approximately proportion to V, not V squared for a high field application like energy storage. EEStor only calculates energy storage — never measures it, so they don’t have to face this reality. By the way — this creates a factor of several hundred difference between their calculated energy density, and the actual (which I have measured in the lab, and has been verified many times since)

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1301 Anonymous Sat, 24 Nov 2007 16:15:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1301 The energy is not proportional to the voltage squared. That is EEStors problem. Energy is equal to 1/2CV2 only for linear dielectrics. Barium titanate is highly nonlinear, and the energy is approximately proportion to V, not V squared for a high field application like energy storage. EEStor only calculates energy storage -- never measures it, so they don't have to face this reality. By the way -- this creates a factor of several hundred difference between their calculated energy density, and the actual (which I have measured in the lab, and has been verified many times since) The energy is not proportional to the voltage squared. That is EEStors problem. Energy is equal to 1/2CV2 only for linear dielectrics. Barium titanate is highly nonlinear, and the energy is approximately proportion to V, not V squared for a high field application like energy storage. EEStor only calculates energy storage — never measures it, so they don’t have to face this reality. By the way — this creates a factor of several hundred difference between their calculated energy density, and the actual (which I have measured in the lab, and has been verified many times since)

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1300 Anonymous Mon, 15 Oct 2007 02:00:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1300 The U of Arizona work had to do with double layer capacitors, whose rated voltage, according to a communication from the inventor, would be only a couple volts. Thats a long way from the 3000 needed. Remember the energy is related to the voltage squared. So if you want to get the same energy on a 3 volt part, you need a million times more capacitance. The Georgia Tech study was on using nano-sized barium titanate to mix into epoxy-like materials for embedding capacitance in circuit boards. It has a permittivity of about 50, quite good for that system, and a long ways away fromt the 20,000 claimed by the EEStor patent. I am not deminishing the importance of these efforts, they just are not in the same energy storage arena we are discussing. The U of Arizona work had to do with double layer capacitors, whose rated voltage, according to a communication from the inventor, would be only a couple volts. Thats a long way from the 3000 needed. Remember the energy is related to the voltage squared. So if you want to get the same energy on a 3 volt part, you need a million times more capacitance.

The Georgia Tech study was on using nano-sized barium titanate to mix into epoxy-like materials for embedding capacitance in circuit boards. It has a permittivity of about 50, quite good for that system, and a long ways away fromt the 20,000 claimed by the EEStor patent.

I am not deminishing the importance of these efforts, they just are not in the same energy storage arena we are discussing.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1307 Anonymous Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:44:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1307 There is a provision in the patent law (35 U.S.C. 181 ) which provides that if a patent application shows a potential for a weapon or other government security interest, it is sent to DOD and other agencies for review. If it is found to be sensitive, the application is withheld from publication or patent. That always gets the conspiracy people nuts. But IMHO, we dont need publicly available "doomsday bomb" plans. There is a provision in the patent law (35 U.S.C. 181 ) which provides that if a patent application shows a potential for a weapon or other government security interest, it is sent to DOD and other agencies for review. If it is found to be sensitive, the application is withheld from publication or patent.

That always gets the conspiracy people nuts. But IMHO, we dont need publicly available “doomsday bomb” plans.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1306 Anonymous Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:13:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1306 Visualize if you will a windmill slowly churning away in the back yard, your car with a removable battery pack, and another being charged overnight. This technology would make windmills and solar totally practical. Visualize if you will a windmill slowly churning away in the back yard, your car with a removable battery pack, and another being charged overnight.

This technology would make windmills and solar totally practical.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1305 Anonymous Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:58:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1305 The comment about DARPA at the top of this page may be more relevant than intended. Has it not occurred to anyone that the EEStor technology has huge military implications. For example - and EEStor capacitor could easily be used in a satellite - charged by solar energy - to power a massive directed energy weapon -- a little "death star" that could wipe out a whole village or military base. Or how about portable laser weapons? Etc-etc. Maybe there is a reason for all this secrecy. The comment about DARPA at the top of this page may be more relevant than intended. Has it not occurred to anyone that the EEStor technology has huge military implications. For example – and EEStor capacitor could easily be used in a satellite – charged by solar energy – to power a massive directed energy weapon — a little “death star” that could wipe out a whole village or military base. Or how about portable laser weapons? Etc-etc. Maybe there is a reason for all this secrecy.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1296 Anonymous Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:06:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1296 Pons and Fleischmans' results were independently reproduced many times over, so it's more likely MIT were the mad scientists than they were (controlling their on interests in Tomakak fusion). I'd go and read the information for yourself instead of believing scientific pop culture that there were no results. A lot of people are curious whether there was some unknown variable in the room that could have help cause the results they produced. Considering that there is now a resurgence of interest in cold fusion, I would keep my mouth shut about something so controversial if you're taking the mainstream view, because then you just make yourself look like a follower with no personal insight whatsoever. I really dislike arrogant flat-world thinkers. Ok, I'm done. Pons and Fleischmans’ results were independently reproduced many times over, so it’s more likely MIT were the mad scientists than they were (controlling their on interests in Tomakak fusion). I’d go and read the information for yourself instead of believing scientific pop culture that there were no results. A lot of people are curious whether there was some unknown variable in the room that could have help cause the results they produced. Considering that there is now a resurgence of interest in cold fusion, I would keep my mouth shut about something so controversial if you’re taking the mainstream view, because then you just make yourself look like a follower with no personal insight whatsoever.

I really dislike arrogant flat-world thinkers. Ok, I’m done.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1304 Anonymous Sun, 02 Sep 2007 18:39:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1304 Another article about EEstor. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295441,00.html Another article about EEstor.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295441,00.html

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1295 Anonymous Fri, 10 Aug 2007 21:00:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1295 I wish I could answer that. After speaking with EEStor for the piece I did for Technology Review, I got the impression they had a prototype internally, but I'm not so sure this is something that ZENN has seen and I'm not sure if it's a prototype of a final energy storage unit or a major component within. I'm just getting impatient. But the bottom line is, it doesn't matter how many skeptics or impatient people like me are out there complaining about the company, its delays or its lack of public profile. Fact is, if what they have works it works; if it doesn't it doesn't. All this chatter, which I admittedly contribute to, is just that and doesn't influence the final outcome. Just have to sit tight, I guess. I wish I could answer that. After speaking with EEStor for the piece I did for Technology Review, I got the impression they had a prototype internally, but I’m not so sure this is something that ZENN has seen and I’m not sure if it’s a prototype of a final energy storage unit or a major component within. I’m just getting impatient. But the bottom line is, it doesn’t matter how many skeptics or impatient people like me are out there complaining about the company, its delays or its lack of public profile. Fact is, if what they have works it works; if it doesn’t it doesn’t. All this chatter, which I admittedly contribute to, is just that and doesn’t influence the final outcome. Just have to sit tight, I guess.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/comment-page-1/#comment-1294 Anonymous Fri, 10 Aug 2007 20:54:00 +0000 http://www.cleanbreak.ca/2007/08/03/hello-eestor-are-you-there/#comment-1294 Tyler, Do you know if Zenn has evaluated a prototype? There seems to be quite a bit of skepticism about the ability of the material that's used as the dielectric in the EEStor device to live up to the performance that's described in the EEStor patent. Thanks Tyler,

Do you know if Zenn has evaluated a prototype? There seems to be quite a bit of skepticism about the ability of the material that’s used as the dielectric in the EEStor device to live up to the performance that’s described in the EEStor patent.

Thanks

]]>