Print This Post
Newsletter 26: July 28, 2009
Game Changing Battery Technology: Is It Here Now?
Nearly every oil observer - Simmons, Maxwell, Jeff Rubin, many others, and least of all myself - see oil prices rising in 2 - 5 years, probably to new heights, if the global economy continues to recover. That’s based on pretty accurate visibility of new oil supply over the next 5 - 7 years, fairly certain rates of decline in old fields, plus assumptions of demand growth rates for OECD, developing, and oil exporting economies. I provided my own version of this vision in my newsletter last month, saying, “I continue to expect oil supply tightness to manifest itself in 2011, as indicated in my March analysis.
This vision of oil supply tightness is not a happy economic scenario. Very high oil prices would likely cause global stagflation and a poor investing climate. It would be particularly painful for relatively poor people and poor economies. It would help only oil exporting countries, many of which are not friendly to liberal humanitarian forms of government. So not really a very happy picture.
And yet this unhappy vision is built into the current business plan of all major global car companies - American, European, Japanese, and Chinese. They are all planning to bring on stream new hybrid gas-electric or diesel-electric or plug-in hybrid cars. Such cars will be about $7,000 - $15,000 more expensive than current standard models because of the added battery and related costs. Why do these companies think consumers will pony up so much more money for their new hybrids that perform only on a par with standard models in all ways but fuel mileage? Obviously because they think oil prices will be much higher. A future vision of stable or slow growing oil prices would not spawn the hoards of hybrids now entering into production.
I’ve often written that new technology is the only way the world can work itself out of a looming global oil shortage with minimal pain. Incremental technology improvements such as those being built into the new hybrids will be insufficient to avoid a painful period of adjustment to insufficient oil supplies. Only a major break-through could have such great impact. Only the development and rapid roll-out of a game changing battery technology will do the trick.
To be a game changer, it would need to store massive amounts of electricity at much lower costs than is currently available, be rapidly rechargeable and be safe in a crash. Such an energy storage unit would have impacts akin to the invention of the internet or to Edison’s harnessing of electricity or Ford’s development of the affordable car. We are not talking about simply a cheaper battery or a new way to make ethanol. We are talking about revolutionizing all aspects of energy use, not only transportation.
I hate to sound like a shill or a naive optimist. But I must say that it is looking to me like such a new technology could well be fairly near at hand. The technology is being developed by EEstor, a start-up company financed by a first-tier venture investment firm. I’ve written about EEstor and it’s minority owner, Zenn Motors several times in the past. I’ve noted that Zenn (ZNNMF) is an interesting speculation given the buy-in to EEstor by some very impressive people (Kleiner, Perkins and Lockheed Martin) and given that the upside potential for success would be so huge that is hard to even conceptualize. I’ve owned some modest positions in Zenn in nearly all my portfolios for about six months purely as a speculation. As with any speculation, you have to be willing to see your entire investment go down the drain if EEstor’s ESU turns out to be a dud for any reason.
Well, now I’m upping my stake in Zenn based on several recent developments. One is EEstor’s release of testing data indicating performance characteristics that exceed their objectives. A second reason is Zenn’s decision to exercise its option to invest an additional $700,000 to increases its ownership interest in EEstor from about 3.8% to over 10%. Zenn based their decision on independent analyses of EEstor’s test data. Zenn’s choice adds enormously to its potential value if EEstor pays off. Zenn also has rights to certain transportation uses of the EEstor USU.
The third factor in my decision to increase what is still a highly speculative “investment” is the release to the internet of an audio interview with EEstor CEO, Steve Weir. EEstor has been extremely quiet about it’s progress for the past few years. In fact it is known to some as a “stealth company” - in other words a company that is trying to avoid publicity. Now some enormously optimistic projections and background information has been leaked to the public via this audio interview. I’ve posted below a report of the interview by allcarselectric.com.
The report is long and detailed. Here are some key points that Weir makes:
- key to EEstor’s success is its aquous process of barium-titanate production which eliminates impurities, plus sealing it with aluminum oxide.
- the ESU has a modular design that imparts great safety and reliability.
- a production line is being installed now and units are being assembled for Zenn. Zenn should be able to demonstrate product by year end.
- capital requirements for production are low and equipment is readily available, suggesting rapid scalability.
- raw materials are cheap and abundant in the U.S.
- EEstor’s ESU should come in at a total cost per kWh of 20% - 10% of the cost of a lithium battery.
One thing I like about the EEstor story is that it is similar in some basic conceptual ways to previously successful game changing “new technologies” such as Ford’s cars or Edison’s harnessing of electricity. First, it is not really a new technology. Barium Titanate has been around for a long time. What EEstor adds is ways to prepare the substance, protect it, and utilize it. That’s similar to how Ford took existing technology but organized it in new ways. Secondly, like both Edison and Ford - and the internet - the potential uses for the new products are nearly infinite. If it works at the suggested price point of production, it will change not only transportation but warfare, electricity generation, and living conditions in third world countries, to mention only a few categories that come to mind quickly.
The investment question is whether or not this report of product available for testing by Q4 is reliable. There seems to be a lot of smoke coming out of EEstor recently; I think it’s likely there’s a fire. Something tells me EEstor is for real. That’s only a gut feeling, but given that the payback for success should easily be a ten bagger, I feel at this point that the risk/reward level is in quite attractive territory and thus Zenn stock merits a more substantial play.
Oil and Gas
I continue to think natural gas is not a commodity of interest because recent vast increase in reserves due in part to advanced drilling technologies means that price will not change meaningfully over a long time. Yes, prices will fluctuate a bit so active traders can profit. But essentially natural gas will be cheap for a very long time. So I am not interested in gassy E&P stocks. That said, some pipeline companies could be of interest to high yield investors, particularly if they are compensated based on volume. I do believe there will be added uses for NG in electrical production and perhaps transportation thus increasing volume requirements and thus pipeline traffic.
The price of oil seems to be rising and falling in sync with movements in stock averages. I think the price of oil stocks tends to lead the commodity so it was impressive that when oil took a dive from June 30 - July 14, oil stocks (OIH and IYE) at first followed suit but then recovered back to prior levels while oil stayed under $60. I think this was a clear bullish sign by oil stocks suggesting that oil traders were generally bullish, a view that has been vindicated as oil then rose right back up to nearly the $70 level of June 30.
On the other hand there is still plenty of spare capacity, perhaps 4 - 5 mb/d. And global demand is still sluggish. Evidence of low oil demand growth comes from, among others, BP statistical review of world energy as reported by The Oil and Gas Journal (7/6/09) under the headline, “BP Reports Fastest Oil Demand Fall since 1982.” The report points out that:
- for the first time, developing countries now consume more oil than OECD countries,
- the growth rate for developing countries, 17%, was the lowest in five years,
- OECD oil demand dropped 1.5 mb/d while non-OECD oil demand increased by only 1.1 mb/d.
- oil exporting countries in general need a price of $60 minimum to meet their internal spending requirements. Prices under $60 will result in further cutbacks to future oil production capacity.
I’m becoming convinced (along with many market observers) that the OECD economies will stop sliding and will have some sort of Q4 recovery. I don’t expect rapid recovery and I do expect an excruciatingly long wait for employment to increase. But I suspect that oil usage will stabilize in the OECD. If so, growth in developing and oil exporting countries plus continuing decline in old fields and reductions in E&P cap. ex. will begin to reduce global spare capacity soon. A 1% global oil demand growth rate for the next two years would eliminate 1.5 - 2 mb/d of spare capacity. Thus, it is not unlikely that by mid-2011 there could be sufficient pressure on oil supplies to bring the price well over $100 a barrel again. Oil equities are probably a moderately attractive buy on a long term basis, I think, based on the likelihood that the commodity will continue its longer term uptrend over the next few years.
Of course if the EEstor ESU comes to market as predicted by Weir, be prepared for some fallback in oil prices, especially longer dated oil prices. A cheap, reliable, powerful ESU will give electricity a big competitive boost compared with petroleum. That advantage will take years to filter into the economy, so it will probably not prevent oil from having one more big price surge. But it could begin to dampen oil shortages starting in three to five years and mitigate oil shortages completely in ten years.
A New Adventure
Starting quite soon I will be embarking on a new adventure that will leave me little time and energy for posting on this web site for a while. I can’t predict when I will be back to full strength in terms of writing about energy and I cannot discuss what I’ll be doing quite yet. Best wishes to all readers.
Here is the www.allcarselectric.com report on the EEstor interview:
EEStor Founder Dick Weir Confirms ESUs Presently Being Built, and Once Delivered to ZENN by the Fourth Quarter,
By 
Lyle Dennis, Editor-in-Chief, July 24th, 2009 Lyle Dennis July 24th, 2009
EEStor Inc is a Texas based startup that has been working in stealth mode for years to develop a disruptive breakthrough battery technology which would be extremely useful in electric cars. The material they use is called Barium Titanate (composition modified) and has already been demonstrated to have extremely high permittivity, which means is can hold tremendous amounts of energy. Batteries made from this material would be several times lighter and less expensive than lithium-ion batteries, will not degrade over charge-discharge cycles, and could be recharged in minutes. We recently heard from the CEO of ZENN Motors (ZNN.V) who is seeking to commercialize the ESU batteries for automotive use that the batteries were about to be publicly demonstrated for the first time, with proof they can hold energy at high voltage by September. ZENN is a 10 percent owner of EEStor, Inc. An extensive audio interview with the normally silent Dick Weir, founder of EEStor, has been leaked to the web. The 38 minute interview with an unknown interviewer took place in last month, and his identity has been confirmed by anonymous sources. This is the first time in history we are give such extensive public details of the inner workings and validity of what EEStor is doing. Weir explains that barium titanate has long been known to have high energy storage capacity but that previous workers had failed to successfully harness that property because of ineffective chemical engineering. He explains how EEStor realized a milling process wouldn’t work and how they invented a specialized aqueous process. “We’ve done a great job because a lot of this stuff has been out here over 3 years, 3 1/2 years, and no degradation whatsoever,” he says. “I mean zero. So we’re very happy that we really have superior chemistry here and from the aqueous process.” He explains how high purification is extremely important to remove sodium and potassium which has resistance and block the chemical ability to operate at high voltage. He also noted the importance of coating the powder with aluminum oxide which they’ve done and “sealed in all the goodness,” preventing particles from talking to one another. He confirmed the material has been certified as pure. Finally he notes that through other processes EEStor was able to achieve a high permittivity operating in the deep ferroelectric phase. As Weir puts it “we knew we’d hit the home run then,” and “the permittivity was 22,500 and or higher.” He noted their goal was 18,500 and that their tests “shows 22,500 and greater…we’re just not going to tell how great it is.” He mentioned they’ve passed all their milestones and have put ZENN’s recent $700,000 payment “to very good use.” “We’re actually installing our stuff now to go into ESU production,” he said. “And we’ve told the world that you can anticipate us being in a proto in a pre-production mode of ESUs by the 4′th quarter this year.” He notes since it is now June (at the time of the recording), “I’m ahead of schedule.” He says the ramp up of production is modular and inexpensive. He says “you get the hardware quick enough to actually ramp up and put your lines in at a very effective time frame.” And he notes it doesn’t cost $5 million for a piece of assembly equipment but rather “it’s more in the neighborhood of something $50,000 and I can buy it off the shelf…Very cost effective and time effective.” He explains how the basic ingredient Barite is very readily available, much more so than lithium. He says that Barite used to be used in cathode ray TVs which are now a thing of the past so therefore his company is “the best friend the Barium company’s got in the world.” Barite is mined in the US, and EEStor is working and likely to get the sole rights to a new mine just discovered in Nevada. He notes that even without that mine “the United States Geological Service says there’s at least 2 billion tons of (barite) in known reserves.” He compares that to the fact that most lithium is found in Chile and China, and warns “if you think we’re in trouble with oil, wait till you have to go to China to get your Lithium.” Weir indicates that a company in California is “actually putting the ZENN circuits together literally as we speak” to create ESUs for ZENN’s cars. He said UL certification will soon be forthcoming. In fact he notes the UL is ecstatic about ESUs because they’re s composed of “a fusible link design”. He notes that if one component shorts “nothing bad is going to happen.” It will simply short out “the fusible link on just one component.” “There’s nothing corrosive, harmful {or} explosive in our technology,” he says. “If it is in a car and gets crumpled up, you’ll blow all the fusible links and you’re totally safe.” He actually gives the pricing of ESUs at “$100 to $150 per kWh, excluding electronics” which is what ZENN will pay. This is about one fifth to one tenth the cost of lithium-ion batteries. Weir realizes the gold mine he is sitting on and its worldwide dramatic and disruptive potential. “We anticipate being in a production base of pre-production units in the fourth quarter this year, (and) I’m already out there putting EESUs together and I’m still in June,” he says. “So, it looks like I’m a little ahead of schedule.” And he predicts once ZENN gets and demonstrates its pre production units by the end of this year, “all hell’s going to break loose with ZENN and at EEStor.” You can say that again. Source (TheEEStory.com)
rated 5.0 by 16 people [?]
Tags: peak oil investments
Print This Post
34 responses so far ↓
1 Stuart Arthur // Jul 28, 2009 at 11:28 am
ineresting stuff. sorry to hear you will be taking a hiatus- the words you chose to express that suggest - at least to me- that perhaps you will be undergoing some kind of treatment. If so, I hope it is successful.
If I am totally wrong and you are engaging in some other kind of venture-best of luck to you ( I guess that applies in either scenario)
2 Keith // Jul 28, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Jim, the best to you in what ever is happening in your life… I have appreciated all of your investment insight over the years. Thank you.
3 Diane // Jul 28, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Thank you Jim for your words of wisdom. I always enjoy your thoughtfulness and insights. Best of luck as you open another door - each door teaches us something new about ourselves and our world
4 Jimp // Jul 28, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Jim K,
I hope your new “exploit” is enjoyable! Please don’t be gone for long, as you will be sorely missed. I have also found your insight/wisdom truly valuable. THANK YOU!
5 Jim Kingsdale // Jul 28, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Here’s a disenting view on EEstor. The information is quite dated and it does not make sense to me that very sophisticated people could make such a simple mistake. But I thought everyone should be aware of this view:
Surfing around abour your post I found this bit to be rather convincing. I’m sure you’ve seen it yourself, but I personally find it too convincing. My family is full of engineers and scientists and this is how they think.
”
, December 10, 2007 8:19 PM
Below is a detailed discussion clearly demonstrating the invalidity of EEstor’s claims and targets.
EEstor does not report either a new material, or any data that indicates the ability to store more energy than known titanate dielectrics. EEstor calculates the amount of energy they expect their capacitor to store. A fundamental oversight results in an invalid calculation that is inaccurate by more than a factor of 100! The error is uncomplicated. Simply, energy does not equal ½ CV2 for a capacitor made from a nonlinear dielectric. For all high permittivity ceramics, the dielectric permittivity (K’) decreases markedly with increasing electric field E (dielectric saturation). Energy increases roughly linearly with voltage for these materials, as opposed to with the square of the voltage (ref 2).
Importantly, this is not a case wherein EEstor claims to have made some specific breakthrough regarding this issue. No such breakthrough is reported. There are no energy storage measurements, no permittivity versus field data, and no mention of eliminating or reducing dielectric saturation. Their patent and presentations indicate a complete lack of awareness (or lack of acknowledgment) of this issue. EEstor simply purports to make (or aspires to make) high K barium titanate based material, with a K of 18,000, and ultimately with an incredibly high breakdown strength of up to 300V/um. They then calculate the energy stored as ½ CV2 without comment on the use of this equation.
How large of an error does this cause? Calculated energy density is ½K’E2 when calculated total energy is ½CV2. For K = 18,000, and a field 100 V/um, this invalid calculation gives 800 J/cc. (½K’E2 = (0.5)(8.85×10-12 F/m)(18,000)(1×108 V/m) = 8×108 J/m3 = 800 J/cc). Eight references describing actual studies of energy storage in high permittivity ceramic dielectrics (including barium titanate and BST) are noted below. All of these studies indicate a maximum energy density ranging from about 2 to 12 J/cc, depending on the exact material and the maximum breakdown voltage (which is on the order of 100V/um in most cases). Notably, for the studies involving very high K materials, if the authors had simply calculated energy storage using ½ CV2, as EEstor does, it would have similarly resulted in reported values on the order of 100 times greater than the actual measured values!
Hence there is no basis for concluding EEstor has made any advance in the field, and clear evidence that the sole basis for their claim of unbelievably high energy storage is the simple, invalid calculation. Their aspiration (with no reported results) to triple the breakdown field to 300 V/um in combination with the invalid calculation adds an additional factor of 9, giving an absurd 7200 J/cc (along with all of the corresponding hype and speculation about a new miracle material).
Below are notes regarding the references noted above that clearly substantiate the analysis above (one report of personal measurements, the other seven directly from a Google search on energy storge in ceramic dielectrics). .
1. (My work, unpublished), 1987 – Report to Maxwell Corporation on energy storage potential in high permittivity ceramics. Measurements were made on thin films up to 100V / um on barium titanate and PLZT based dielectrics. K varied as ~ 1/E over much of the voltage range, resulting in an approximately linear increase in energy density with field. Maximum energy storage was 4 – 8 J/cc.
2. Love, Journal of the American Ceramic Society 1990 – Also observed a linear increase in energy with voltage for several classes of high permittivity (up to 12,000) thick film ceramics (barium titanate, PLZT, PMN). Reported up to 5 J/cc at 80 V/um.
3. Triani, et.al, (ANSTO and CSIRO – Australia, 2001 – J. Materials Science and Engineering. They reported 8 – 10 J/cc for PbSr titanate, and noted that the energy densities were similar to those of the best BaSr titanate materials for a given field, but the maximum fields of up to 100V/um (100KV/mm) were superior for the PST.
4. Kaufmann, et.,al, Penn State and Argonne, 1999. DOE Contract Report. They report sputtered BaSr titanate thin films with a K of 500 and a breakdown field of 100 V / um. K decreases to 120, and the energy storage is 11 J/cc. Also reported are data for hot pressed AFE/FE lead zirconate. These had a maximum K of 12,000, and a breakdown strength of 12 V/um, resulting in an energy storage of 3.2 J/cc.
5. Fletcher, et.al, 1996 Journal of Applied Physics D. They report a theoretical analysis based on Devonshire theory of ferroelectrics. Optimal energy density is predicted for materials with Curie Temperatures well below the operating temperatures. Applied to BaSr titanate, the model predicts an energy density of 8 J/cc at 100 V/um. The model was verified in actual materials.
6. Randolf, et. al, (Austria, 1996) – IEEE Annual Report - Studied dielectric energy storage for powders embedded in polymer matrices. They reported using a PbTitanate-PbZnNiobate material with K = 5000, and reported energy densities of 1 – 10 J/cc.
7. Lawless, et. al., Ceramphysics Inc. 1992 report a high permittivity ceramic (K = 8000) for which a maxium energy density of 6 J/cc was observed for samples with optimum breakdown strength.
8. Freim, Nanomaterials Research Corp NASA SBIR Proposal 1998, reports reduced dielectric saturation for nanocrystalline microstructures, and states that “Commercial coarse grain dielectric based ceramic capacitors are ineffective for use in high energy storage and delivery applications since the dielectric’s permittivity decreases sharply when the applied voltage is increased.” They target 5 – 10 J/cc for the proposed new improved materials.
If you aren’t familiar with dielectric saturation, or even if you are and you don’t think back to where ½ CV2 comes from – you miss it. And until you collect information and compare with the calculation, you have no clue it makes a factor of 100 difference in this case. People don’t even realize what EEstor is asserting. If they said, “we are going to use barium titanate based materials, which up until now how only been able to store 8 J/cc, but our barium titanate will store over 1000 J/cc – people would ask themselves how is that possible and what is the basis for that claim.
Then you would find out it’s not just a case of them not providing data or proof of their claims. They don’t even claim to have observed or measured a property indicating their barium titanate would be different. There is nothing left but the calculation. The sole origin for their high numbers is that they simply start with the K of high permittivity modified barium titanate (eg., K = 18,000 not a new achievement), and simply calculate energy = 1/2CV2. Anyone could have done that at any time for any high K material and gotten the same outrageous numbers.
So at that point, one should ask why people get a factor of 100 less when they actually measure it. The answer is well documented and obvious – dielectric saturation. So the only justification for using 1/2CV2 which gives a factor of 100 higher than known and understood measured values, would be if you made a measured observation that you have a fantastic new material that doesn’t saturate at all and stores 100 times the energy.
EEstor has never made any such claim or reported to have made any such obvservation. They just did the calculation. It’s just a mistake.
6 TomFoolNC // Jul 28, 2009 at 6:31 pm
If this is as hot as Weir thinks it is, why would he give up 7% of the company for 700k. That would value the entire company at 10 million dollars. Chicken feed if they have what is claimed.
7 Jim Kingsdale // Jul 28, 2009 at 6:54 pm
I believe EEstor was contractually obligate via a stock option to offer Zenn the right to buy in at a specified price. I think the option was contingent on EEstor meeting a technological hurdle which they recently did meet.
8 TomFoolNC // Jul 28, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Jim, Per this article it looks like 700k was a milestone payment and its and additional $5M to increase the stake.
from: http://earth2tech.com/2009/04/23/eestor-are-we-there-yet/
“It’s a small payment, just $700,000, but is in addition to $1.3 million in previous payments to EEstor. Zenn can also invest up to another $5 million for a bigger equity stake now that EEStor has hit the milestone. ”
also, lots of links on the Wikipedia entry that might be worth reading, if you have not already.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eestor
9 C.B. // Jul 28, 2009 at 9:30 pm
This is the very best story I’ve read since long time about Eestor/ZENN.
I was a shareholder with ZNN for a good time, then out since there was no pep-news!
But you give me a lot of hope to return with ZENN for the very closed future for the car industries.
The competition is very high world wide to leave the oil industrie as a main power source.
Thanks again.
10 Jim Kingsdale // Jul 29, 2009 at 6:03 am
re: the Zenn investment, I seems the information in my piece was incorrect. According to a 7/2/09 press release you can find at
http://www.emediaworld.com/press_release/release_detail.php?id=623265
the Zenn investment was $5M. The other noteworthy fact from this press release is that Zenn was able to invest the maximum amount permitted under a prior agreement because other investors (presumably Kleiner Perkins) elected not to invest the amount to which they were entitled.
It is potentially quite troubling that Kleiner Perkins is no longer supporting EEstor. It is also a bit troubling that Mort Topfer, a former Dell top exec, has left the EEstor board for the second time as of June, 2009.
In sum, I must say that the skeptics on EEstor also have a lot of amunition.
It’s possible that Weir is hookwinking Zenn into bankrolling them now. But the question is why would Weir want to do that if he did not feel he was going to be successful fairly soon. Expectations have been raised for rapid product visibility. Weir must think he can produce.
11 wynn // Jul 29, 2009 at 7:42 am
best of luck, hope you get back to the news letter and to cb soon.
you are in our thoughts,
wynn
12 TomFoolNC // Jul 29, 2009 at 8:02 am
yes, its hard to understand why Zenn would invest another 5M, unless they were confident the technology works. How dependent are they on EEStor for their own success? If EEStor fails, does ZENN fail?
13 jimb // Jul 29, 2009 at 9:35 am
too late
14 TomFoolNC // Jul 29, 2009 at 10:53 am
this interview with Zenn CEO certainly implies EEStor is real, but he does ack that his companies success is tied to theirs.
http://gm-volt.com/2009/07/20/qa-with-ian-clifford-ceo-of-zenn-motors-eestor-to-publicly-prove-its-technology-imminently/
15 KV // Jul 29, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Jim,
Zenn’s bet on EEStor keeps its stock up, and if EEStor does come up with a battery that is lighter and cheaper than Li-ion, Zenn’s small car benefits.
Most R/D guys are way optimistic and are used to make promises. Weir may not be any different.
Research in high permitivity materials is ongoing and not just perview of EEStor. All the same, only investment option is indirect through Zenn, and one should not forget that it is a electric car company, and not a battery company.
16 robertessian // Jul 30, 2009 at 11:30 am
Jim, good luck in your new direction, and hope your good health allows you many joyful moments. It has been a pleasure…Peace
17 DuffBeer // Jul 30, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Jim, the best to you and your family in your latest adventure. With out goals and dreams we go no where. We have ours –
reach critical mass , get out to Arvada within two years and help our son in the Leadville 100.
Cheers ,DuffBeer
18 Trade Like Ben Bernanke | ETF Fool // Jul 31, 2009 at 9:12 am
[…] changing battery technology: is it here […]
19 Jimp // Aug 2, 2009 at 5:14 am
I wonder why Zenn would keep giving Eestor money if it’s not the desired product?
Has there been public proof of the “certifications,” that publicly back up Eestors claims, or is it all here say from the spokesman? Or would showing proof of the certifications give away secret/valuable data?
From what I have read, it would seem that Zenn/Eestor would have certainly committed fraud/misrepresentation if there product isn’t close to what has been stated by them. Or am I naive? I certainly don’t have enough experience in these matters in regards to “start-ups” to know if what Zenn/Eestor is doing is part of the game to keep the stock price up?
Jim, from what I read, it appears that Kliener Perkins is still invested with Eestor.
Jim, Do you still like Lynas Corp for the long term? Or do you now view it like SQM with the potential prospects of Eestor?
20 robert essian // Aug 2, 2009 at 6:09 am
Professor, it is estimated that the top 50 oil company’s have cut back by 15% their spending on finding new oil. Additionally we have a 6 to 9% depletion rate in the largest 800 oil fields annually. We have above ground issues that will get even worse as we approach the back end of Hubbert’s curve which I suspect we are nearing. The United States is loosing their suppliers of oil, Nigeria, Venezuela, Mexico, and to a lessor degree Saudi Arabia. Leaving only Canada and their dirty oil.
Is the United States in for some rough times, possibly unimaginable times? Any sensible person would have to conclude…YES!
Debating any game changing technology will not alter the fact that harder times are close at hand. Time to lock and load…Regards
21 Jim Kingsdale // Aug 2, 2009 at 6:47 am
jimp - to repeat, I think the EEstor technology is still very highly speculative. There is no assurance whatever that they will be able to deliver what they hope to, despite the permittivity goal that seems to have been reached. As for Kleiner Perkins, yes they seem to still be stockholders but they seem not to be supporters of the company either on their web site or in recent financings for EEstor.
If EEstor is successful, that would bode ill for lithium batteries so would be negative for SQM. It might also be negative for rare earth element demand but my sense is that such demand comes from a very broad variety of high tech products, not just some batteries.
I own some shares in Lynas, SQM and ZENN - but not a lot. They are not what I consider to be core portfolio holdings - even though they are all very interesting speculations.
22 Jim Kingsdale // Aug 2, 2009 at 6:51 am
Robert - there is still a lot of spare oil capacity and a lot of economic weakness, so I’m not sure if it’s time to “lock and load” - but if you have a longer term outlook - like five years - then you may be right in my view.
23 KV // Aug 2, 2009 at 7:22 am
Jim,
This might be game changing in electric cars….
Nissan rolls out zero-emission electric car in new environmentally friendly headquarters
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nissan-rolls-out-electric-car-apf-3413919923.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=
from the article:
…Nissan has promised that the Leaf, which goes into mass-production as a global model in 2012, will be about the same price as a gas-engine car such as the 1.5 million yen ($15,000) Tiida, which sells abroad as the Versa, starting at about $10,000.
24 robert essian // Aug 2, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Professor, one thing I have witnessed many times in my life is that if you have something someone wants they will try to take it. That’s the reality. I aim to protect my family.
KV, I read (or watched a video) in Financial Sense Editorials and their numbers suggest that we would only be able to turn over 2% of our internal combustion engines to electric vehicles per year. If this is the case we are talking a long time before even game changing auto technology would even make a dent.
Regarding batteries it seems to me that the lead carbon battery will be the most sensible way moving forward. Why? Costs, infrastructure, and in addition the supply chain is free flowing and plentiful. Very little if any capital would be needed to ramp up. These are the basic views by John Anderson in an article written in Seaking Alpha. He makes a compelling arguement that I respect.
On a lighter note Jim, your name sake and my prized Rottweiler is touching 92 pounds. He’s well mannered and very protective. Loves kids, etc…He knows all the tricks and commands. Anyways I have trained him to smile on command (real knarly looking as you can imagine) using candy corn (loves them). Well I had my grandson (4 years old) walking the leash with JK yesterday and for kicks had him smile at a stranger as he was walking by. Needless to say the stranger freaked, and my grandson and I had a good belly laugh. I hope you did as well. I did introduce myself to the stranger and explained my motives for teaching JK this new trick. He laughed too once his system settled down a bit.
Jim there are five stages of grief and I believe your site and those that have followed it will be well prepared when the stuff hits the fan. So as a human being you played your part and well. Can’t ask anything more of yourself. As I have said before you have done this for our benefit and for free. Thank you so much…Peace
25 KV // Aug 2, 2009 at 1:27 pm
RE - I had forgotten about lead-carbon, thanks for jogging me. Somewhere, I had read that the real shortage may be copper needed in building motors for electrical vehicles. I am invested in copper wire manufacturers, as I see long term future to be electric, everywhere.
26 robert essian // Aug 2, 2009 at 1:48 pm
KV, I too hold your sentiment.
For kicks take a look at PLM. They are do to be permitted this quarter. I have 18,300 shares @ .79 cents. A risk I know but it looks as though it could go somewhere. Anyways I’m betting on it.
KV, while Jim is away let’s stay in touch, I consider you a friend and wish you well…Peace
27 robert essian // Aug 2, 2009 at 1:51 pm
PS: PLM is Polymet mining out of Minnesota and their stock is going up lately and sits at $1.67 a share. A nice bounce to the portfolio.
28 Jimp // Aug 4, 2009 at 3:31 pm
A poster on Yahoo states that trading was halted today in regards to ZENN.
I wonder why?
29 Jimp // Aug 5, 2009 at 3:32 am
From Seeking Alpha;
Lead acid battery guru John Petersen
Why I’m an EEstor Skeptic 0 comments
Aug 5, 2009 06:18 am | about stocks: ZNNMF.PK
Font Size: Print EmailTweetThis
EEStor worries me because the only entity that ever talks about them is Zenn Motors (ZNNMF.PK), a Toronto company that is blatantly promoting its ownership of a minority interest in EEstor interest to maintain a $170 million market capitalization that its business fundamentals could never justify. The lawyer in me considers the whole smarmy process public relations through hearsay.
It’s not at all encouraging that EEstor has allegedly been making performance claims that approach the maximum theoretical limits of both physics and chemistry. While extraordinary results can frequently be obtained in a laboratory staffed by PhD with unlimited time and budgets, they are not possible from a factory owned by a company with no manufacturing expertise and staffed by guys in gimme caps
I also find the idea that EEstor will go from a first generation prototype at the end of this year to a commercial product next year completely ignores the complexity of taking a phenomenon from the laboratory and turning it into a manufactured product. EEstor apparently needs material purities measured in single digit parts per million. That is $6,000 toilet seat country, not mass produced $100 per kWh energy storage devices. On balance I would be amazed if EEstor had a product sometime in the next decade.
My career is littered with companies that did wonderful things in the laboratory but could never turn the amazing science into a commercial product. As a case in point, I offer Applied Nanotech Holdings (APNT.OB). I was counsel for their IPO in 1992 and the stock had a pretty good run in its early days. To date the company has never generated a penny of revenue that didn’t come from contract R&D.
Until I see a lot more hard data coming directly from EEstor supported by credible third party confirmation, I’ll continue to believe that EEstor is just another Texas R&D company that’s “all hat and no cattle.”
30 Jimp // Aug 7, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Zenn sure had a nice run this week! What’s weird is there is no real news to justify the bump.
Thanks Jim!
31 robert essian // Aug 10, 2009 at 6:56 pm
I’ll turn out the lights Professor…
32 Seeking Alpha : Time to Forget About Zenn Motor // Aug 12, 2009 at 6:53 am
[…] to Forget About Zenn Motor Jim Kingsdale submits:On July 26th I wrote a piece about oil and energy which also focused on the speculative battery technology company […]
33 Transcripts : Time to Forget About Zenn Motor // Aug 12, 2009 at 6:55 am
[…] to Forget About Zenn Motor Jim Kingsdale submits:On July 26th I wrote a piece about oil and energy which also focused on the speculative battery technology company […]
34 Rex Tillerson : Time to Forget About Zenn Motor // Aug 13, 2009 at 2:16 am
[…] to Forget About Zenn Motor Jim Kingsdale submits:On July 26th I wrote a piece about oil and energy which also focused on the speculative battery technology company […]
Leave a Comment