TheEEStory.com

dvwilbur: Oregon has run a trial on the possibility of taxing vehicles by miles driven (2006-2007) with 300 GPS-equipped cars that record mileage (and more...) No government will let you drive in this country for free, and preferably not for less cost.

Spreadsheet on part 2 calculations posted for review & comment (under Files)

One of the things that seems to be overlooked when talking about the cost savings of using electric rather than gas is the amount of tax on gasoline to provide for local, state and interstate road construction and maintenance. If gasoline sales go down because cars become electric, the roads will still need maintenance and therefore the tax money will have to come from somewhere (electric taxes will go way up) or the revenues will have to be derived from another source (auto registration fees, toll roads).

Distributed electrical generation simply screws everybody. Economic justice would not allow people to disrupt the grid by pumpimg excess power back for the same price they pay, particularly since the vast bulk of their need occurs during peak demand, while the power they put back is virtually useless and mostly disrupts grid operations and results in much higher emissions. I strongly object to subsidizing these silly systems and demand the construction of nuclear plants
and the resulting generation of electricty at affordable rates, which WILL NOT cause additional emissions required in order to "chase" variable solar or wind generated inputs. If such people want to leave the grid, then they should actually LEAVE, not stay hooked up, expecting everyone else to absorb their mostly useless excess power at ridiculously high costs.

Yeah because using an EESU is FULLY TESTED AND PREDICTABLE ;) Heh, j/k

Apparently eestorblog isn't aware of comments made by ZENN's Weir - he look to be the Intel of electric propoulsion - he has the rights to market the units to any and all autmakers for use in cars under 3100 pounds. He is not about to make an exclusive deal with ANY automaker - that would make zero economic sense. The GM Volt is far more advanced than anything Ford has in development. They need merelt rip out the EREV portion and battery pack and replace all with around 800 to 1000 pounds of EESU's and Voila!, they are ready for market. All of the car's systems have been tested. Switiching to EEStors would actually accelerate the pace to the showroom, by eliminating a large portion of uncertainty and parts/systems to be tested. The Volt becomes simpler, not more complicated.
And GM also has at least two more vehicles ready as well. Ford has zero and won't have anything for another 4 to 5 years.

Concerning these "rumours" about Ford, would they be working directly with EEStor or Zenn?

Anything fitted with "LEVergy" sounds like it might be expected to float in the air.

the whole "ergy" jogs my memory now...

I dont much like the name LEVergy, but I suppose I can live with it.

Very surprising indeed. It is either a coordinated effort for branding or the major investors of ZENN and LightEVs are the same. One thing sure, I couldn't believe this is pure luck they have chosen the same font and style.

Ah, I found the issue, it's a cube 101.6mm per side which is 944 cm^2 as Daniel mentioned

I think you mean 101cm^3 not 101mm^3. One is the size of a 1 litre bottle, the other is the size of a single drop of water :-P

flyer: searching the trademark database

How did you get this info?

just kidding. i dont know if that's true or not.

of course they could. whoever owns it....i think the price just went down.

With this new trademark does this mean eestor could put in a claim for eestor.com if they wanted?

flyer, late yesterday... ;-)

b,when did you receive this info?

Sorry, should be "active/non-active volume ratio".

Huh. They converted wrong. It's actually 944 cubic cm - about one litre.

Still works out to 650 Wh/l though (0.65 kWh/l)

Original EESU energy density = 702 Wh/l, with the calculated 75% not used by "components" (ie. "active material").

Pretty close. So this document is suggesting that the active/non-active volume is about the same, and this one-litre container also holds all the power control & conditioning electronics. Pretty good, if I say so myself.

Beeautiful. Thanks B.

I have placed 384 components into an array 8x24x2 (384) in the space the size of 2 DVD cases.
(using the specs for the 52.2kWh EESU components 6mm * 11 mm * 11 mm)

it would be good to see the actual specimen!!!

Brilliant :)

Yes, and I think that's consistent with what LM has always said. LL said they're a systems integrator, and were intereested in exploring integrating the EESU into some of their efforts. This was obviously one. And so the significance I see is that I doubt they would have included the EESU in the patent at all without first giving it a pretty thorough review/test.

Surely it means that the patent pre-dates LM's agreement with EEStor. That is, LM became interested in the tech some time *before* it signed a deal with EEStor.

That is a bizarre statement, as TV said, because Eestor is specifically mentioned. Mr Vanbebber does seem to be keeping things quiet on Eestor from what you said about the WPP.

Also perhaps he means the patent isn't "about" Eestor, but the overall configuration. The EESU is just a storage component integrated into the solution they are patenting.

He acknowledged that the patent mentions EEStor but cannot comment about EEStor further at this time. He's at a loss for what information to provide since the key people are still on holiday. I think we'll learn more next week.