TheEEStory.com

I could not resist a small follow up visit. Three years ago, I posted as to why EEStor was physically improbable (Vcc), and in any event economically impossible (their announced ppb/ppt purity requirements).
It is now a year later than the promised 'reveal'. Zenn is on its last legs, as predicted. There is no device. As predicted.
I doubt Rossi's version of cold fusion (LENR) will supplant your hopes.
Next time, do the requisite due diligence before becoming engaged.
Regards
NanoCarbons, for whom the market opportunity because of this predicted failure is now about $10b.
Auf Weidersehen.

NanoCarbons wrote:

It is now a year later than the promised 'reveal'.

Do us a favor...come back in 3 more years. Thanks

Poor Nanocarbons. He's had an attack of the green-eyed monster.

But hey, if I was Nanocarbons I'd be jealous of Dick, too. After all, Dick did at least succeed in inventing a working, cutting-edge disc drive. Contrariwise, Nanocarbons apparently has deluded himself into thinking he's invented an ultracapacitor using room temperature superconductivity.

Of course, if he really had done so, he could make billions selling the superconductor alone.

What a fruitcake.

NanoCarbons wrote:

I could not resist a small follow up visit. Three years ago, I posted as to why EEStor was physically improbable (Vcc), and in any event economically impossible (their announced ppb/ppt purity requirements).
It is now a year later than the promised 'reveal'. Zenn is on its last legs, as predicted. There is no device. As predicted.
I doubt Rossi's version of cold fusion (LENR) will supplant your hopes.
Next time, do the requisite due diligence before becoming engaged.
Regards
NanoCarbons, for whom the market opportunity because of this predicted failure is now about $10b.
Auf Weidersehen.

*edit... awe, never mind. ah hell

Last edited Tue, 11 Oct 2011, 10:17pm by wasmaba

NanoCarbons wrote:

I could not resist a small follow up visit. Three years ago, I posted as to why EEStor was physically improbable (Vcc), and in any event economically impossible (their announced ppb/ppt purity requirements).
It is now a year later than the promised 'reveal'. Zenn is on its last legs, as predicted. There is no device. As predicted.
I doubt Rossi's version of cold fusion (LENR) will supplant your hopes.
Next time, do the requisite due diligence before becoming engaged.
Regards
NanoCarbons, for whom the market opportunity because of this predicted failure is now about $10b.
Auf Weidersehen.

Pay attention readers. This is guy who can remember his friggin password....something many of you struggle with.

Thanks NC for remembering your password and dropping in to accuse EEStor of fraud.

I for one, am glad to see him back.

He is an expert, but some here don't like his message.

C'est dommage.

CapMan wrote:

I for one, am glad to see him back.

He is an expert, but some here don't like his message.

CapMan, I wouldn't get too excited ...according to him it was only a 'small follow up visit'. hmmmm ...sounded like gloating to me.

Maybe a bit early for that, but what do I know, I'm not an 'expert'.

My problem with NC is purely personal. I am just not comfortable with people who have the need to tell the world the monetary value of his friends and guests.

Sounds like his own business is doing spectacularly well and he is letting us know he thinks we shouldn't just rely on our dreams :-)

Even so, none of us could have done due diligence, other than noting the improbability of eventual success based on industry commentators' views on the science.

Despite Rud Istvan's learned opinion, I continue to hope, and wish Dick all the best with his endeavours.

I also wish Rud every success in his own business.

kind regards
ei

... and people wonder why lawyers get a reputation for being egotistical jerks ...

I guess since you're here that means you're done saving the world from the birdie flu NC. Thanks. Now get busy on that $10B energy storage thingy!

Chus!

NC I responded to your allegations of possible patent abuse in the other thread where you posted. I hope you take the time to respond.

I personally have no issue whatsoever with you sharing your expertise and I hope you continue to do so. This site could do with more scientific dialogue based on real world experience.

Lensman wrote:

Poor Nanocarbons. He's had an attack of the green-eyed monster.

But hey, if I was Nanocarbons I'd be jealous of Dick, too. After all, Dick did at least succeed in inventing a working, cutting-edge disc drive. Contrariwise, Nanocarbons apparently has deluded himself into thinking he's invented an ultracapacitor using room temperature superconductivity.

Of course, if he really had done so, he could make billions selling the superconductor alone.

What a fruitcake.

A cutting-edge disc drive that was economically worthless. Is inventing a product that nobody wants a big deal? I have said all along tha DW is going to play until a new tech comes along to beat him. Then he can claim victory without producing anything. Deja Vue all over again.

cechilders wrote:

Lensman wrote:

Poor Nanocarbons. He's had an attack of the green-eyed monster.

But hey, if I was Nanocarbons I'd be jealous of Dick, too. After all, Dick did at least succeed in inventing a working, cutting-edge disc drive. Contrariwise, Nanocarbons apparently has deluded himself into thinking he's invented an ultracapacitor using room temperature superconductivity.

Of course, if he really had done so, he could make billions selling the superconductor alone.

What a fruitcake.

A cutting-edge disc drive that was economically worthless. Is inventing a product that nobody wants a big deal? I have said all along tha DW is going to play until a new tech comes along to beat him. Then he can claim victory without producing anything. Deja Vue all over again.

To be fair, since DW claims are pretty staggering, it will be a long time till that happens.

NanoCarbons is a joke...
;-)

I did my due dilligence. I know this is risky. So what? I can afford to lose what I have invested and this place has been a nice distraction over the past few years. Come back in three more and I'll give you an update then.

This all reminds me.. something about laughing last..

NanoCarbons wrote:

I could not resist a small follow up visit. Three years ago, I posted as to why EEStor was physically improbable (Vcc), and in any event economically impossible (their announced ppb/ppt purity requirements).
It is now a year later than the promised 'reveal'. Zenn is on its last legs, as predicted. There is no device. As predicted.
I doubt Rossi's version of cold fusion (LENR) will supplant your hopes.
Next time, do the requisite due diligence before becoming engaged.
Regards
NanoCarbons, for whom the market opportunity because of this predicted failure is now about $10b.
Auf Weidersehen.

cocky little prick aren't ya

NanoCarbons wrote:

I doubt Rossi's version of cold fusion (LENR) will supplant your hopes.

Way off target. You must be confusing this forum which is rooted in energy storage with a forum rooted in energy generation. Very few here put much if any credence into claims made by the plethora of crack pots regarding their energy generation machines much less invest in it, I doubt you could count on one hand the number of investors on this forum that own stock in perpetual motion machines or have invested in garage built cold fusion devices. Regardless, energy generation has absolutely nothing to do with capacitors or solid state energy storage.

NanoCarbons wrote:

Three years ago, I posted as to why EEStor was physically improbable (Vcc), and in any event economically impossible (their announced ppb/ppt purity requirements).

economically impossible??????????

Good time to review a few of your claims. The claim that each 9 in the 99.9994% purity adds one order of magnitude in cost to the final product.
Using the cost of $50 per ton for raw 85% pure mined Ba using your formula you end up with a cost of $5 million dollars per ton at 99.9994% pure. At 250lbs of Ba per EESU that cost would be $625,000 for the Ba alone. Simply ridiculous, and based on squat. You can't possibly think Lockheed, Zenn or anyone in the know would have walked past that yet you claim "economically impossible" based on this costing methodology. There is absolutely NO reason to conclude each 9 increases EEStor's costs by an order of magnitude. None whatsoever.

In the case of your previous "impossible" claim such as the "impossible accuracy" of the dicing equipment you didn't allow for the "inch to metric calculation" so take your own advice "do the requisite due diligence before engaging"

NanoCarbons wrote:

NanoCarbons, for whom the market opportunity because of this predicted failure is now about $10b.

The other issue is how much private sector money that could possibly go toward carbon nanotube electrodes in lithium batteries or capacitors using nanotube solutions is sidelined due to possible disruptive solid state storage technology such as that claimed by EEStor. My guess is that irks a few people in the carbon nanotube sector.

The worlds need for higher PD/ED electrical energy storage solutions increase every year. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if a few players with a big war chest and a great need for storage are taking wait and see approach rather than invest 100's of millions if not closer to a billion in lithium type solutions.

This Blog (is) the due diligence for EEstor. I am sure discussion on this blog over the last what, 3 or so years has steered billions (away) from EEstor. Here is where you get to analyze all opinions on the viability of the EEstor technology.

I know for me, I was stoked literally in the beginning, but after doing my due diligence primarily on this blog, I have downgraded my enthusiasm to cautiously optimistic.

any good investor knows you need all sides of the story, it is the only way to limit any kind of risk.

I am wondering also why the super long delay. we want to think it is because of better specs than patented, but it is starting to lean toward the skeptics in that maybe a few of the concerns about the safety and leakage are holding up production.

at any rate, I am not ready to call Dick Wier an out n' out liar. because if you believe they never worked out the science by building and testing prototypes, then that is what Mr. Wier is.

As far as his Tulip days with the hdd drives. They produced what they said they would, just not fast enough. so I dont see any kind of negative pattern with EEstor. the pattern would be that they are truthful and there is Production issues that were most likely 'unforeseen".

so enough for me to hope but not enough to risk money.

Een,

Yeah, but here's the thing;

Google BT suppliers, and ask any one of them. I think you will find that even 99.99% pure is something like $25 a pound in ton lots.

So, roughly, EEstor is claiming about $10 a pound for 99.999+ purity.

Maybe they should just sell the BT?

CapMan wrote:

Een,

Yeah, but here's the thing;

Google BT suppliers, and ask any one of them. I think you will find that even 99.99% pure is something like $25 a pound in ton lots.

So, roughly, EEstor is claiming about $10 a pound for 99.999+ purity.

Maybe they should just sell the BT?

I think EEstor is talking BT prices based on their own mining and purification of raw BT. I think that $25/lb bt probably costs $1/lb to actually produce using their method.

EEstor is using their home made BT in the EESU, so figuring cost of producing the Finished product includes (cost) of the BT they make themselves.

not saying you are wrong, but it is possible that BT is cheap to make.

So in addition to their first miracle, EEStor has another one...being able to produce BT for 10% of what BT suppliers have done in decades of competition?

OK

Yes, but only (if) producing BT at 10% of industry manufacturers cost is truely a miracle.

Remember also that usually the Supplier is not the actual manufacturer. Supplier price is always a mark up of their initial purchase cost.

But if you manufacture your self, cost is actual cost of mining, transport and in-house purification process. no middlemen.

So, you think that the major MLC suppliers have not worked that equation?

Do you know how competitive that world is? They win or lose money on tenths of a cent. They have pushed raw materials to almost the shovel level. They are not an ignorant bunch.

And as you will see from that googled list, there are many suppliers of the basic materials.

Last edited Wed, 12 Oct 2011, 10:02pm by CapMan

CapMan wrote:

Maybe they should just sell the BT?

At this point I would be glad to hear they have sold anything including BT..........LOL.

Actually Capman I have no idea what the size of the market is for BT purified to 99.99 or higher. Obviously it will be ginourmous if EEStor pans out. From what I see in the patents it appears as if CN/DW went to great lengths to recycle the expensive chemistry. I also have reason to believe DW was very serious when he said he wanted direct barite mine rights. The whole point here is EEStor will be both the manufacturer and end user of BT making Nanocarbons "economically impossible" comment seem just plain ignorant of the facts.

Some of Nanocarbons comments regarding Zenn or his comment like EEStor is a year (if not much more) behind and have never publicly revealed a working unit should be adequate enough. I have never understood the reasoning behind hyper inflating claims to the level of "economically impossible" or "impossible dicing" tolerances. All those comments do is cause guys like me to look at every claim Nanocarbons makes with one eye cocked.

I am not suggesting that this industry is ignorant. on the contrary, I think they are brilliant business people. I am sure the markup is significant.

but when you stackup the cost of mining and transportation across the board with other way cheaper materials, those figures must be similar.

then the only difference in manufacture cost with other materials is the manufacture process itself. I assume that this process is automated like EEstor claims their's is. this means minimal labor force. so it all barrels down to the equipment cost to maintain and run. there would be where to compare actual cost to manufacture.

I would be interested to see a realistic analysis and comparison with cheaper powder type materials manufacture.

@een

You think DW is actually worrying about Barite mines right now?

If he has the EESU, shouldn't he be working on production? Or qualification, or whatever?

I think we have agreed, there is not a huge staff there.

I think its like worrying about what color your socks should be at the AHBL party

Well said, Eenigma! Hear, hear.

seslaprime wrote:

I am not suggesting that this industry is ignorant. on the contrary, I think they are brilliant business people. I am sure the markup is significant.

but when you stackup the cost of mining and transportation across the board with other way cheaper materials, those figures must be similar.

then the only difference in manufacture cost with other materials is the manufacture process itself. I assume that this process is automated like EEstor claims their's is. this means minimal labor force. so it all barrels down to the equipment cost to maintain and run. there would be where to compare actual cost to manufacture.

I would be interested to see a realistic analysis and comparison with cheaper powder type materials manufacture.

Which is probably true, but these other BT manufacturers have already depreciated their equipment...so how does a new entrant compete when he has to spend millions on new equipment?