EEStor partners with Lockheed Martin; Topfer returns
Well, well, well… finally some news on the EEStor front. The Cedar Park, Texas-based energy storage startup announced today is has signed an agreement with defense contractor Lockheed Martin. The agreement gives Lockheed “exclusive international rights” to “integrate and market Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) from EEStor Inc. for military and homeland security applications.”
Cool. According to Glenn Miller, vice-president of technical operations and applied research at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, “The EEStor energy storage technology provides potential solutions for the demanding requirements for energy in military and homeland defense applications.”
I’ll compare notes later to see if EEStor is watering down the claims of its EESU units, but in the press release is described the technology as having “10 times the energy density of lead acid batteries at one-tenth the weight and volume.” That seems consistent. It also said it would be “half the price per stored watt-hour than traditional battery technologies.”
Now the kicker: “EESU qualification testing and mass production at EEStor’s facility in Cedar Park is planned for late 2008.”
It’s later than we all expected, but “late 2008″ at least gives us something new to measure the company by. Besides, it appears the late 2008 applies just to Lockheed, according to one source close to EEStor. ZENN Motors, according to the source, “expects delivery before Lockheed Martin as the existing plant is exclusively for ZENN production.”
In related news, the company announced that former Dell Computer vice-chair Morton Topfer has joined EEStor’s board of directors, which I find odd given he was previously on the board and then left.
But who cares. This news is important, just because of the credibility it brings to EEStor and what it’s trying to do. As many have commented on this blog and others, delays are expected when you’re trying to introduce a technology with such a disruptive potential. This exclusive agreement with Lockheed tells us there’s enough potential there that this defense contracting giant — and perhaps the U.S. government — doesn’t want the technology to fall into its competitors’ hands. What would be more interesting is to find out the terms of this deal, which were not disclosed. Has Lockheed made an investment in EEStor? Has Kleiners upped the ante? Who else is on the board?
Lots of unanswered questions, but increased confidence now that they’ll be answered over time.
UPDATE: Great interview here on the GM-Volt blog site. The author interviewed Lockheed’s Lionel Liebman, manager of program development related to missiles and fire control. I had a chance to interview Liebman as well, and the company appears quite committed to this partnership (though I should point out Lockheed has not yet seen a working prototype).
Tyler Hamilton is associate publisher and editor-in-chief of Corporate Knights magazine and former business columnist for the Toronto Star. This blog is a personal project started in April 2005.
January 9th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
That certainly changes the picture. Lockheed Martin is certainly knowledgable about capacitors, and would ask the right questions.
Others have turned optimistic as well, their stock closed up 18% on huge volume.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:45 am
18%! Not bad, Tyler, not bad at all! “not yet seen a working prototype,” you say? And still, 18%!
Stone Soup.
January 10th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
It’s unfortunately that we have heard nothing to moderate the concerns expressed here regarding the dielectric versus field strength argument. I’m still EXTREMELY skeptical.
January 10th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Hello Crew:
As much as I would love to think supercaps will save the day. The progress of this product is following the predictable path of too much hype, then sign on a legitimate partner (no product yet) then make predications of about one year to product (no product yet). If production is to occur in one year, then there should be demonstrable prototypes that people can poke around with. If that is not the case, then the nearest for a real production product would be maybe 3-5 years – the normal prototype – test – commercialize route.
I never say never, but one year to production, I don’t believe it, those are “investor” grade predictions.
Cheers
January 10th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
As a Zenn EV owner and a Lockheed retiree, I think this is very exciting and very significant news. Lockheed brings a measure of credibility to EESTOR, and, in my opinion, EESTOR has something viable in its capacitor battery development. If they didn’t, I don’t think Lockheed would have allied themselves with EESTOR.
Congratulations to EESTOR, Zenn, and, of course, Lockheed!
January 10th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
[i]The progress of this product is following the predictable path of too much hype, then sign on a legitimate partner (no product yet) then make predications of about one year to product[/i]
You mean like Nanosolar, about a month ago? Right before they announced delivery of their first paid products?
What you described is pretty much the standard for upstart tech companies. Think of what people must have thought back when Hall and Heroult started making plants to produce aluminum, something as valuable as silver at the time, at prices where it could compete with steel for a number of applications. Or that Bergman could bring solar cell costs down fivefold in a couple years and turn what was an esoteric NASA device into a practical way to supply power to remote locations. Or that, perhaps more famously, a couple guys named Wozniak and Jobs, operating out of their garage, could start a home computing revolution. In fact, the thing that’d odd about EEStor is *too little hype*.
All of that said, it’s important to note that most upstart tech companies utterly and completely fail. This same rule automatically applies to EEStor, too. But a good enough portion of these upstarts succeed that the world keeps progressing by leaps and bounds. And if EEStor fails, there’s always, say, Yi Cui’s team at Stanford with their silicon nanowire anode for li-ion batteries. Or any of the hundreds of teams whose energy storage research in the lab today could be a breakthrough published in Science tomorrow. We’re not anywhere close to fundamental limits on energy storage, the tech has been advancing swiftly, and it looks to continue doing so.
January 10th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
If EEstor has what they say they have, and that it will be ready in the time frame they say, then what do we make of last year’s January press release where they said, “The first commercial application of the EESU is intended to be used in electric vehicles under a technology agreement with ZENN Motors Company. EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15 kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles. ”
I have won and lost in tech investing, and of course we need to invest like crazy to get out of the carbon fueled pickle we are in. In EEstor’s case I think it is the fact that they talk about commerical product before they can answer the what if’s of road tests and durability over time. They may succeed, but it cannot be on the time basis they are forecasting. Think of the time it takes to bring a product to market, especially a product that will be potentially dangerous in an accident (we need road tests and collison testing), has a high enough cost that a manufacturer will require asurance of product durability (how do you prove 5 year life without 5 years in field testing?). So, to claim one year from now it will be commercial, is just not possible. So, that then makes me ask, why are they making these forecast for unreasonable times to market if they are a solid well financed company – rhetorical question.
My work at Fuel Cell Technolgies in Canada involved intimate design and marketing experience of the ALCAN funded alumium-air fuel cell development (lead engineer). We spent $35M over 8 years just to get to some good solid prototypes that could be put safely (sort of) in vehicles, so I am a believer in advanced technology, but when companies make claims that do not fit the technology development curve – I am suspicious of just what the reality is.
The world needs a better battery very badly, but it is a tough nut to crack – this leads to optimism in light of prudence. Fortunately there are people that can afford to invest in these very high risk ventures. But why all the secrecy and claims by EEstor – why don’t they get their patents in order and give us some information that will inspire confidence in their work? I would like to have the confidence to invest in them, but not with what they have given us to date.
cheers
January 10th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Hey Steve,
I see your point, but the blame may be misplaced. EEStor has never made any of these claims. It has been ZENN Motors, and as a publicly traded company I don’t have to remind you about their possible motives. In my discussions with ZENN, they fully acknowledge that EEStor is behind that schedule and I have been told it’s because Dick Weir is more concerned about getting it right than getting it out. The 2008 production target in the latest release with Lockheed is, I believe, specific to Lockheed and does not apply to ZENN. I’ve been told ZENN has already replaced the electric motor in its cars from DC to AC, and that this is a sign that they’re preparing to accept EESU delivery this year, and that this delivery will happen prior to the obligation under the Lockheed agreement. It stands to reason that any military-grade work done with Lockheed will have higher quality standards, and that a commercial-grade product will likely come out earlier.
Again, just what I’ve been told or heard. Nothing confirmed, but I’d target the skepticism at comments made by ZENN, not EEStor.
January 10th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I’ve been a strong supporter of the possiblility that EESTor is real. I’ve been heavily criticized for saying that Weir was real and not a scammer and that while it might not happen, I thought they had something real.
I’m not going to post yet, but I can’t wait to post up on a half dozen boards a big smile to some people that proclaimed they knew it couldn’t possibly be a real product and more than a few that said I was an idiot.
I’m not sure that I’m not missing something but in my reading of the Volt interview I took it that Lockheed had seen some prototypes. At one point in the intervieiw he talked about EESTor prototypes.
I think what he did say was that Lockheed didn’t get to test a prototype, or make a prototype of any specific system that had a military application.
If you saw something specific about never seeing any prototype I apologize. i think maybe it was just a confusing portion of the Volt interview that meant Lockheed had seen a prototype, but hadn’t been able to test it.
Here’s the quote I see that follows the part about not testing a unit.
Quote:
Do they have something that they’ve tested that you’ve seen which makes you want to work with them?
We haven’t personally tested their prototypes yet. Its something that we’ll work on together this year.
End Quote:
To me that says that EEStor has prototypes. EESTor is still more like a closed clam than a company, and their only press release mentions Topfer.
January 11th, 2008 at 8:00 am
To me that says he did not see prototypes…he did not answer the question, he dodged it!
January 11th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I think dodged is as good a word as any. I thought it sounded like he had seen more than just the powder.
How else could he answer yes so definitively to the tech being real, having 10X lead and being stackable.
January 11th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
I read the notes on the interview by “Lyle” (at gm-volt.com) of the Lockheed Martin project manager for the EEStor relationship. The guy at Lockheed Martin seems to know little about capacitors. He has taken EEStor’s presentation at face value, including the notion that the problem lies in “the purity of the powders.”
EEStor certainly has shown that they can produce pure powders. What they have not shown, however, is that they can produce a capacitor that does what they say it does. Unless and until EEStor does that, their claims should be treated very skeptically.
The philosopher David Hume had it right a couple of centuries ago. People who proclaim miracles must be held to a very high standard of proof. EEStor’s agreement with Lockheed Martin does not come close to meeting that kind of standard.
Maybe EEStor can build a capacitor that is so much better than anything else that it changes the world. I’ll believe it when I see it.
January 11th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
well, you know best, and the number one defense contractor in the world is a big group of morons. hurry, email them and stop this mistake!!!
January 12th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Annoys me to see a military contractor move in on this. I wonder how many such things are locked into the military and out of the general populations hands since they’re viewed as techno or strategic advantages too useful to have floating about in the open. For instance, I have a military telephone system that doesn’t require a power source; the energy in human speech is enough to operate it; but when bright green ideas are clothed in khaki, the required secrecy hides such technologies close to the chest; understandably, as they are considerate advantages. Dilop Hiro writes in Blood of the Earth that oil drew the US into WWII, and lack of oil forced the end to the Third Reich. This battery technology rivals oil in its potency, so has the potential to start, win, and end current and future wars. Isn’t that too much power to let loose, to allow to potentially disrupt? The fear-based response; lock it up in national security.
January 13th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
It annoys me too to see the militaries so interested. But I think it is too late for keeping Eestor’s invention hidden away from the public. If the militaries grab this invention under the pretext of national security, everyone will understand that there is a real invention there. Eestor has filed several patent applications which are now public and which should disclose their invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for a skilled person to carry out the invention. One can assume they have done so, because otherwise their patents will not be valid.
January 13th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
I wouldn’t worry too much about Lockheed’s role. For one, they are a private company, not the military, and don’t have the power to restrict usage of the EEStor device. In additional, they are not even investors, which would give them a say in usage, but just exclusive users. This doesn’t prohibit GM, Ford, etc. from using the device. Just Bechtel, Northrup Grumman, etc.
January 14th, 2008 at 4:23 am
According to FAS (http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/stats.html) there are just over 5000 Patent Secrecy orders applied to US Patents. Many of these are likely to be energy related. Once the Secrecy order is applied only the military get to use it and if the inventor discloses the technology to unauthorised people he can be jailed for 20 years. Other countries have bipartisan Patent agreements with the US so that Secrecy orders automatically apply in many other countries as well. I suspect the only way to get revolutionary energy technology into the hands of the Public is to use some kind of Open Public Licence that prevents anyone applying a Patent and subsequent Secrecy order.
January 14th, 2008 at 4:29 am
And if anyone seriously doubts that the Patent Secrecy orders would be used to supress super efficient energy systems consider what lengths the US Govt has gone too in the last few years to maintain an Oil economy. In summary – lied to the World about Iraq possessing WMD to justify an illegal invasion and occupation of one of the largest reserves of Oil in the world.
January 14th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Oh, please!
And its in Texas so Bush’s cronies can watch it!
This is not an energy creation, its energy storage.
January 14th, 2008 at 8:50 am
which is just as strategic in the arena of getting off fossils (in as well as outside office)
Emil M
January 14th, 2008 at 11:17 am
“Heaven have mercy,” he thought. “Can it be that I’m a fool? I’d have never guessed it, and not a soul must know. Am I unfit to be the minister? It would never do to let on that I can’t see the cloth.”
“Don’t hesitate to tell us what you think of it,” said one of the weavers.
“Oh, it’s beautiful -it’s enchanting.” The old minister peered through his spectacles. “Such a pattern, what colors!” I’ll be sure to tell the Emperor how delighted I am with it.”
“We’re pleased to hear that,” the swindlers said. They proceeded to name all the colors and to explain the intricate pattern. The old minister paid the closest attention, so that he could tell it all to the Emperor. And so he did.
January 14th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I do wish the blogger had pressed the Lockheed rep a bit more. “How can you be so sure, given the nature of the claim, that the products work as advertised if you’ve never seen a prototype?” would have been a good question.
Still hopeful though.
Stephen
January 15th, 2008 at 2:16 am
Lockheed is massive, so they could easily hand over a few million in seed money for the rights to military applications without even needing to be assured of its viablility considering the potential for say….troop portable rail guns, troop portable lasers, long term loitering surveilance drones …the potential is massive and I am sure Colon Powell is well aware of these.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:11 am
Another mysterious name like EEStor is EPOD based in Kelowna who claim to have found a similar magic formula for charge speed and capacity. Yet you don’t find their name anywhere on the cleantech sites.
February 3rd, 2008 at 12:12 am
I very much agree…
As someone who is familiar with the techniques and chemistry behind EEStor, I am very doubtful about their claims. I have been tracking them for some time and upon hearing the news that Lockheed-Martin was partnering with them would, on the surface, seem to give credibility. But as you read through the answers supplied by Mr. Liebman of Lockheed, the responses are the same party line from EEStor. The comments from Liebman reveal that Lockheed has not tested the materials, nor seen working prototypes. The sense is that Lockheed doesn’t want to miss out on a potential up-coming technology, which is very typical of big business.
The focus seems to be on programmatics, such as the possible applications and not the true functionality- quite a signicant difference. Also, there has been no mention of an exchange of money at this time. If Lockheed has actually put large funds into EEStor, rather than just a paper agreement, would clarify things. The limited “results” that EEStor has revealed (and that they say are in line with their scheduled development) are that the base powder, barium titanate, has been produced to high purity. The testing of the powder shows nothing about how it is combined with the other materials and that it demonstrates a high energy storage ability. The powders are part of a “balloon” problem in that as one electrical parameter is improved, another is corrupted- that is the unfortunate chemistry: push in one side of the balloon, the other side pops out. Those that have experience in high-K materials and perovskites will understand this. I am surprised EEStor has been able to win over Lockheed, Zenn, and Kleiner/Perkins- they have not done their technical homework, but rather have let the business people become enamored with a great sell job.
February 3rd, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Check out the link. ZENN claims that EEStor is “pretty bullish” on delivering energy storage units this year.
http://www.news.com/Zenn-swaps-motors-in-latest-electric-cars/2100-11389_3-6228749.html
March 19th, 2008 at 8:57 am
ZENN look to be on the same schedule than LM :
http://www.northernlife.ca/News/LocalNews/2008/03-18-08-green-jobstop.asp?NLStory=03-18-08-green-jobstop
At the bottom of the article:
“ZENN is receiving the new technology from our partnership with EEStor by late 2008 and I expect it will be tested through 2009. If all goes well our vehicle can go toe-to-toe with internal combustion vehicles at a much cheaper price. Affordability is as important to us as being green,”
Catharine Scrigeour, public affairs, ZENN Motor company.
May 4th, 2008 at 4:57 am
3.5kV capacitors? I have watched EEStor for 3 years now. Barium Titanate? If they could do it we would see prototype cars with astonishing fuel economy NOW.