EEStor announces permittivity certification… now what?

UPDATE: EEStor issues clarification on permittivity tests, includes temperature range. EEStor’s “hot pressed dielectric layers have met and/or exceeded a relative permittivity of 22,500 over a temperature range of -20 and 65 degrees centigrade.”


On April 16 ZENN Motor closed the trading day at $2.14 (Canadian) a share on the Toronto Stock Exchange. Four days later it had climbed to $3.50, a 64 per cent increase. Then today — an hour or so again, to be precise — this press release hits the wire:

EEStor Inc. Announces Relative Permittivity Certification of Their Composition Modified Barium-Titanate Powers

CEDAR PARK, Texas, April 22 /PRNewswire/ — EEStor, Inc. announces relative permittivity certification of their Composition Modified Barium-Titanate powders. The third party certification tests were performed by Texas Research International’s Dr. Edward G. Golla, PhD., Laboratory Director. He has certificated that EEStor’s patented and patent pending Composition Modified Barium-Titanate Powders have met and/or exceeded a relative permittivity of 22,500.



EEStor feels this is a huge milestone which opens the advancement of key products and services in the electrical energy storage markets of today. The automotive and renewable energy sectors are a few of the key markets that would benefit greatly with the technology.

Smells like blatant insider trading to me… but I digress. Let’s talk about the release (which was followed up immediately by a release from ZENN).

This is the “permittivity” certification that everyone has been waiting for, and this is the announcement that EEStor CEO and co-founder Dick Weir has talked about as the key milestone before the company can begin commercial production of its EESU systems. It also means ZENN must make its next payment to EEStor ($700,000). Finally, Weir has indicated to me that he will be more willing to open up and talk about EEStor’s plans once this milestone was reached and announced, so hopefully in the coming days more insight will be forthcoming. Stay tuned…

17 thoughts on “EEStor announces permittivity certification… now what?”

  1. How do Canada’s insider trading laws compare to the US? This was, perhaps, the most obvious case I’ve ever seen.

    Until some trusty third party sees a working prototype, I’ll remain a skeptic, regardless of this news.

  2. Mr. Tyler,
    When you talk with Dick Weir, ask him one simple question… Show me a prototype that meets the patent specs. I will bet you he won’t.
    Then ask Dick Weir:
    What happened to the 2004 business plan? Where are the ceramic batteries that meet the patent specs in 2004?
    The following is from UFTO:
    “Subject: UFTO Note – EEStor Ultracapacitor and Ultrabattery
    Date: Wed, 05 May 2004
    “A number of major companies have said they would issue a purchase order quickly if specs are met.
    The company is currently seeking equity investment of $3.5 million. A business plan is available.
    Contact Richard D. Weir, President and CEO
    EEStor, Inc. Cedar Park, TX

  3. I just got kissed by my sister. No joy here. Unfortunately the PR as written does not indicate if this permittivity can be maintained at high voltages and high field strength. We won’t know what all this means until we see if Zenn and KP are excited enough (I assume they get more details than we do) to take larger equity positions in EEStor. Until then it’s just more tea leaves.

  4. Hoax Exposed
    I have finally had enough of this BS on EESTOR and want to offer the following to all of you listeners out there. After designing e-circuits for decades one becomes very “up to speed” on various pitfalls involving electronic components, especially capacitors. Engineers are always quick to transition to seemingly impossible breakthroughs with “caps” that specify huge volume-vs-capacitance claims.
    Case Point – Y5V Dielectric (AKA “Barium Titanate”)
    Exhibit 1 – Barium Titanate:
    This dielectric is known for losing over 80% of its “labeled capacitance just by applying 50% of its rated voltage.
    Please see data sheet example for for AVX Y5V.
    Exhibit 2:
    Simply search for avx “cY5V.pdf” and look at first page, top-middle graph, “Capacitance Change vs. DC Bias Voltage”.
    Yes – you see it right, if you apply 50% of the parts rated voltage its capacitance drops DOWN by 85% to 15% of its capacitance rating.
    It gets worst – look at what happens when you increase its temperature. Look at first graph “Temperature Coefficient”.
    It even gets worst again – Y5V (Barium Titanate) looses as much as 15% of its capacitance from aging for just 1,000 hours.
    Exhibit 3:
    Please look at the last page for Vishay Y5V capacitor data sheet, link:
    Trouble finding it, search: Vishay elecdata.pdf.
    Chip manufacturers like Maxim and Linear Technology have been offering “Cautions” about Y5V (also known as Type-F dielectric by Panasonic and some others).
    Exhibit 4:
    Please find data sheet for LT1610 (just one of dozens of examples that caution usage of Y5V)
    Linear Technology LT1610 link:
    The Bottom Line:
    Power-house, top rated capacitor company scientists have been working to develop the “wonder cap” for numerous decades…..and all of the sudden out-of-the-blue EESTOR claims they have done what 10’s of billions of $$ spent by Kemet, AVX, Vishay, Sprague, TDK, Panasonic and a dozen more companies could not do. I don’t buy it – especially because of the lack of “transparency” by EESTOR on their technology.
    Come on EESTOR – put up or shut up!

  5. No No No Dave, EESTOR did not all of sudden make their claims. EESTOR claims they had a ceramic battery meeting their patent specs back in 2001. Just Dick Weir won’t show it to any third party for verification. DW wants to keep it for himself. (JOKE)

  6. Mr. Hamilton, Should I suggest you call Dr. Edward G. Golla of Texas Research International who allegedly performed the permittivity certification for EESTOR.
    I have read reports that Dr. Golla certification was done onsite at EESTOR’s office. What is troubling for me is Dr. Golla utilized EESTOR’s test equipment to perform the certification. If this is true, the credibility of Dr. Golla would be zero. NO RESPECTED SCIENTIST WOULD PERFORM A CERTIFICATION OF PRODUCT WITH THE COMPANY THAT IS PAYING HIM TO PERFORM THE CERTIFICATION. Please investigate and get to the bottom of this alleged permittivity certification

  7. Mr. Hamilton,
    I apologize, I hit the enter button before editing previous post.


    If you get a chance, ask Dr. Golla when was the last time Dick Weir calibrated the test equipment he used to certify permittivity?

  8. Taking stock of Zenn’s ride

    “Most puzzling was that Mr. Clifford didn’t want to discuss how close EEStor was getting to commercial viability, saying it’s not Zenn’s job to predict.

    Really? But Zenn told investors it will introduce a car with EEStor technology by the end of this year. Surely management must have some inkling as to when these “batteries” will be ready. The company is standing by that prediction, incidentally, but it looks impossibly far-fetched given what we know from EEStor.”

    About time a reporter sees through EESTOR’s and Zenn’s BS.

  9. Mr. Hamilton –

    I don’t believe the 64% increase was due to insider trading. The increase was most likely due to a front page (on Yahoo anyway) news story that the US government was set to invest a bit of money into renewable energies and energy storage. This article mentioned ultracapacitors specifically. Since there are obviously traders that trade according to government spending they probably googled ultracapacitors and found out about Eestor and of course Maxwell and probably invested a bit in both.

    I think Zenn’s press release about the trading activity shows that they were worried about how it was going to look to the general public when they issued the permittivity results. I’m rather skeptical of the claims but don’t believe insider trading occurred here.

  10. Well, there are a lot of people who do not believe this tech. stuff. However when i seen the tests done at various tempatures (-30f to 240?), this is for real. 22% higher PR than was expected. Also clues that this tech. is new by what is described, not clearly, but discharge rate is not like a regular cap. Also the barium titanate is modified in the patent, so it does what it says it does at an increaced voltage. When Tesla started with his ideas, everyone was a skeptic. But with time history proved him right. If this proves out, like the goals have been met at each stage so far, then this will be the biggest break thru since the invention of the light bulb. I am excited. “Necessity is the mother of invention”.

  11. Well, how long does it take for zenn to do their proofing permittivity test? They have 5 days to caugh up the dough once they complete it. I would keep an eye on volumn of the stock in the absents of news. If the volumn goes up substantially, along with price, it is good news. If it goes up along with price decline, there is a dump happening – and znn will be a penny stock.

    How long does it take to prove the pemittivity test?

  12. Firefly…a second life for lead batteries…without lithium…by Caterpillar?? On the market this summer.

    “Firefly Energy Inc. (“Firefly”) is a Peoria, Illinois-based battery technology company developing a portfolio of lead-acid battery technologies and products to enhance performance within major portions of the $30 billion worldwide battery marketplace. The company’s first applied technology is a microcell foam-based battery technology, which can deliver a unique combination of high performance, low weight and low cost, all within a battery that unleashes the full power potential of lead acid chemistry while overcoming its performance drawbacks. Firefly’s battery products and their patented microcell technology deliver to battery markets a level of performance achieved with advanced battery chemistries (Nickel Metal Hydride and Lithium) but at one-fifth the cost.”

    From Firefly’s web-site:

    In the advanced battery architectures that Firefly has perfected, the MicrocellTM composite foam “grids” are impregnated with a slurry of lead oxides which are then formed up to the sponge lead and lead dioxide in the normal fashion. Because of the foam structure, the resultant negative and positive plates have enormous surface-area advantages over conventional lead acid grid structures. This results in much-improved active material utilization levels (i.e. from the historical 20-50% up into the range of 70-90%) as well as enhanced fast-recharge capability and greater high-rate / low-temperature discharge times.

    The signal advantage of Firefly’s Microcell Technology™ is that it fundamentally changes the performance of active materials within the lead acid cell due to its unique architecture. Overall, the Firefly foam electrode structure results in a redistribution of most of the electrolyte (the biggest “resistor” in a lead acid battery) into the pores of the foam plate, in closer proximity to the lead chemistry. This is in contrast to a traditional lead acid battery, where most of the electrolyte is in the separator, more distant from the plate’s chemistry. Each foam wafer contains hundreds or thousands of spherical microcells (depending on the foam pore diameters). This leads to enhanced active-material utilization levels because each microcell has its full complement of sponge lead or lead dioxide and sulfuric acid electrolyte.

  13. I have just come across this site and have found it informative and interesting with some great content.
    “EEStor feels this is a huge milestone which opens the advancement of key products and services in the electrical energy storage markets of today. The automotive and renewable energy sectors are a few of the key markets that would benefit greatly with the technology.”
    If this happens then it will be a good thing, would it not?

Comments are closed.