Claro que los militares tambien empiezan a mover ficha.

Solicitation Number:
RFI-09-17-PKM
Notice Type:
Special Notice
Synopsis:
Added: Mar 25, 2009 3:16 pm
RFI-09-17-PKM
Advanced Energy Storage Technology and Manufacturing Roadmap Development
CONTRACTING OFFICE ADDRESS
Department of the Air Force, Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) - Wright Research Site, DPA Title III Contracting Branch, Det 1 AFRL/PKMD, Area B, Bldg 167, 2310 8th Street, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7801.
ADDITIONAL GENERAL INFORMATION
This is a Request For Information (RFI) only as defined in FAR 15.201(e) to obtain information about pricing, delivery, and other market information or capabilities for planning purposes. This RFI is not a request for competitive proposals; therefore, responses to this notice are not considered offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Companies that respond will not be paid for the information submitted except as an allowable cost under other contracts as provided in FAR 31.205-18, "Bid and Proposal Costs." The government will be utilizing non-government personnel under this RFI. The role of these non-government personnel is to ******** as technical advisors to the Government reviewers. These non-Government personnel will have access to the information submitted in response to the RFI, and will provide technical expertise and/or advice as required. All non-government personnel have Non-Disclosure Agreements on file with the Government. Contractors employing these individuals and supporting each project are identified below. In addition, this division of Northrop Grumman (Technology Services) and Tiburon Associates, Inc. will be precluded from submitting a response for this effort:
Contractor Support Company
Northrop Grumman Technology Services
Life Cycle Optimization Group
2555 University Blvd
Fairborn, OH 45324
Tiburon Associates, Inc.
1421 Prince Street, Suite 210
Alexandria, VA 22314
NOTE: Responses to this RFI are due no later than 27 April 2009. If late information is received, it may be considered by the Government Evaluation Team, depending on agency time constraints.
GENERAL INTENT
DE******ION
The Air Force, as the Department of Defense (DoD) Executive Agent for the Defense Production Act (DPA) is supporting the AEST&M Program, and provides this REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) inviting industry to provide information on potential topics for the Advanced Energy Storage Technology and Manufacturing (AEST&M) Roadmap Development. Industry responses to the RFI will be assessed and may assist in identifying potential future elements for the AEST&M Roadmap (2011-2015).
Note: There is no guarantee that any submitted topic will become an AEST&M project and responders to this RFI will have no competitive advantage in receiving awards related to the submitted topic area. The information submitted in all responses may be utilized to help the Government further define its requirements. If the Government develops a AEST&M project that addresses any submitted or similar topic, the resulting procurement will address technology and business specific requirements as defined by the Government to achieve AEST&M objectives.
BACKGROUND
Acting upon a request from Congress, the Department of Defense is charged with developing a multi-year roadmap to (1) develop advanced energy storage technologies, and (2) sustain domestic advanced energy storage technology manufacturing capabilities and an assured supply chain necessary to ensure that the Department of Defense has assured access to advanced energy storage technologies to support current military requirements and emerging military needs.
"Advanced Energy Storage" refers to "storage" only and does not include "energy generation". This RFI is intended to include man-portable, mobile/vehicle, and installation-level technologies and manufacturing capabilities.
Note that for purposes of this RFI, both domestic and foreign sources of manufacturing may be identified in addressing current or near-term capabilities. For development of the roadmap to achieve an assured supply chain, the AEST&M effort will only address domestic sources of supply and demand. The AEST&M anticipates defining domestic source to be a business concern that performs in the United States or Canada substantially all of the research and development, engineering, manufacturing, and production activities required of such business concern under a contract with the United States relating to a critical component or a critical technology item and that procures from such concerns substantially all of any components and assemblies required under a contract with the United States relating to a critical component or critical technology item. (This definition is used within the Defense Production Act Title III Program.)
While the focus of this RFI is on DoD-related systems and requirements, it is very appropriate to address technologies that also have application in the commercial/public markets. Technologies that have commercial use can drastically reduce the price and improve the availability of advanced capabilities to the DoD. An obvious example would be hybrid battery technologies for commercial automobiles and trucks that might be used also by military vehicles, even with some minor differences. For the demand information sought below, responders are encouraged to show how commercial demand and production can have benefits to DoD.
REQUIRED RESPONSES
Limit RFI responses to 20 pages. Responses must be unclassified and contain no proprietary information. Note: See Format and Page Limitations and Submission of Documentation paragraphs for additional instructions. Responses are preferred in the following format:
TITLE: Name of the recommended AEST&M project.
SUBMITTER INFORMATION: Responses should include the company name, location of research, development, or planned production facilities, and the title, telephone number, and mail and e-mail addresses of a point of contact having authority and knowledge to discuss the submission.
GOVERNMENT CUSTOMERS/INTERESTED ORGANIZATIONS: Identify the government customer organizations or suggested other government organizations cognizant of the technology/production issues and challenges. This should be the organizations/agencies that have the technical or programmatic expertise for assessing the values of the project to potential government customers. Identify the appropriate government programs (and/or point of contact), including organization, mailing address, e-mail address, and telephone and FAX numbers. Points of contact that can provide additional information useful to the project review should be included in an Appendix. (Pages in the Appendix do not count in the page limitation.)
Letters from current or potential government customers expressing an interest in addressing the challenges are encouraged. Such letters may be included in the Appendix, again without impacting the page limitation.
PROJECT NEED: This section provides essential background information on the technology. It addresses the technology's importance to national defense and the need for inclusion in the AEST&M Roadmap. This section should include at least the following:
1. Technology De******ion. The technology and its current and future uses.
2. Benefits. The advantages of the proposed technology over existing technologies and substitutes in terms of cost, performance, and other factors. Cite specific benefits to the national defense and/or the national economy of creating production capacity for the proposed technology.
3. Problem Statement. The nature of the problem (e.g., obsolete storage capacity, lack of production-scale capability, need for lower cost item), its impact on defense capabilities, and any other considerations that increase the need for the project.
4. Essentiality of Government Assistance. Address the following to support the need for potential DoD investment:
a. The expansion of capacity, the development of a technological process, or the production of materials is essential to the national defense; and
b. United States industry on its own cannot reasonably be expected to provide the needed capacity, technological processes, or materials in a timely manner.
TECHNOLOGY MATURITY: The roadmap development effort seeks to examine relatively mature technologies that reasonably can be expected to achieve true manufacturing capability by the end of government fiscal year 2015, 30 September 2015. Therefore, responders should include in their discussion supporting evidence that their technology has achieved Technology Readiness Level 7 (System prototype demonstration in an operational environment) with a path to achieve Level 9 (system proven through successful mission operations) by 30 September 2015.
TECHNOLOGY DEMAND: A primary requirement of AEST&M is that commercial clearly identified military demand for a technology must exist and be foreseeable within the period described above. This section describes, in as much detail as possible, current and future demand for the technology. It should include:
1. Projected DoD demand during the next seven years. Cite demand by item of equipment and material quantities and types, for existing and new programs. Be sure to indicate which military departments require the technology.
2. Projected commercial demand (if applicable) for the same period. Be as specific as possible about technology applications.
INDUSTRY CAPABILITIES: This section describes industry's current and expected capability to develop or produce the technology. It should include:
1. Domestic U.S. and worldwide production sources. Current and planned capabilities and capacity for specific firms, as available. Note current DoD sources of supply. Estimated quantity of material to be produced over the next seven years (with and without AEST&M assistance).
2. Market dynamics. Explain how competition and other market factors have affected domestic industrial capabilities. Cite market shares and trends, if possible.
3. Constraints. Factors affecting industry's ability and willingness to meet DoD demand without AEST&M incentives.
RISKS: Include a discussion of technical and business risks and issues that must be addressed and resolved (or accepted) before the DoD will have an assured supply chain.
1. Business Risks. Include an assessment of the time and cost to bring the new capacity on-line and the product is competitiveness with other sources (domestic or foreign) or with alternative technologies. Address all factors that would affect the sale of this technology and the long-term viability of the source.
2. Technical Uncertainties. Include requirements for new processes, significant scale-up of existing technologies, remaining development risks, product qualification requirements, and technology and manufacturing readiness.
PROJECT CONCEPT: Although the Program Office would structure any approved project, an initial concept is required to support understanding of the recommended project.
1. Technical approach. State recommended project's technical objectives and outline the technical approach. Identify what the proposed project would accomplish and how. Describe what work and investments would be necessary to increase the production capacity, increase yields, decrease costs, etc. Identify needed major equipment purchases or upgrades to existing equipment. Include a time-phased plan for major elements of the approach.
2. Business approach. State the proposed business case for the project. Identify current and future markets including customers, projected revenues, employee growth, and market share (include U.S. and world markets). State total investment needed, sources for the investment (own company, AEST&M funds, other government sources, etc.). Estimate the amount of investment industry would be likely/able to make in this project.
3. Cost/Funding Estimates. Provide a top-level breakdown of estimated project costs. Identify recommended type of AEST&M incentive to be used, e.g., production scale-up, engineering costs, equipment purchase costs, business development costs, process optimization, samples and qualification costs, or purchase commitments, etc.
REQUESTS FOR CLARIFICATION / POINTS OF CONTACT:
A responder may request clarification in writing from the Contracting Office for any requirement that is unclear by sending an e-mail to the Contracting Points of Contact: Norman.Willis@wpafb.af.mil and Jennifer.Hoskins2@wpafb.af.mil.
Any requests for clarification must be received no later than seven (7) business days prior to the close of this RFI in order to receive a timely response.
Technical questions regarding this RFI should be directed to Dr. Matthew Seaford, DUSD(AS&C)/Office of Technology Transfer, (703) 607-5313 or via e-mail at matthew.seaford@osd.mil.
FORMAT & PAGE LIMITATION
Your submittal should be provided on standard letter size 8-1/2 by 11 inch paper, limited to a maximum of 20 single sided, double-spaced pages. The font for text should be Times New Roman 12-point or larger. The Responder may use oversize pages (including "foldouts") where appropriate to contain graphic presentations. Oversize pages do not count as extra pages within the page limitations. Submitted responses should be in Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat format. Existing commercial documentation and product literature can also be submitted and is not subject to a page limitation. Note: No proprietary data should be provided.
SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTATION
Documentation shall be delivered to the Contracting Office at the following address:
Det 1 AFRL/PKMD
ATTN: Jennifer Hoskins
2310 Eighth Street, Bldg 167
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-7801
Telephone: (937) 255-5369
E-mail: Jennifer.Hoskins2@wpafb.af.mil
INFORMATION APPROACH
The DoD may or may not select any of the submitted recommended topics for use as a AEST&M project. Projects developed from these topics, as with all AEST&M projects, may be competed in a full and open competition. The Air Force is not required to provide feedback to responders.
The DoD is using the RFI process to help identify potential programs and to determine if there is an energy storage development or industrial base concern that could be resolved. Upon receipt of RFI responses, the submissions will be used to determine whether or not they are appropriate.
In the pursuit of additional information, the Government may communicate with the initiator of the RFI response. .
DISCLAIMER
This is a Request for Information (RFI) only, as defined in FAR 15.201 (e), to obtain information about pricing, delivery, and other market information or capabilities for planning purposes. This RFI is not a request for competitive proposals; therefore, responses to this notice are not considered offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. Companies that respond will not be paid for the information submitted.
No telephone calls will be accepted requesting a bid package or solicitation. There is no bid package or solicitation at this time.
All information received shall be safeguarded from unauthorized disclosure. Please do not submit any proprietary or classified information.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
All responsible sources may submit information in response to this RFI that shall be considered by the agency. Responses to this RFI are due no later than 27 April 2009. If late information is received, it may be considered by the Government Evaluation Team, depending on agency time constraints. All routine communications regarding this announcement should be directed to the contractual point of contact listed above. Please note: the Government is not required to provide feedback to RFI responders.
Direct all inquiries to the Contracting Points of Contact listed in the Requests for Clarification / Points of Contact paragraph.
Contracting Office Address:
Det 1 AFRL/PK
Bldg 167, Area B, 2310 8th Street
Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433-7801
United States
Primary Point of Contact.:
Jennifer Hoskins,
Contract Negotiator
Jennifer.Hoskins2@wpafb.af.mil
Phone: 937-255-5369
Secondary Point of Contact:
Norman L. Willis,
Contracting Officer
norman.willis@wpafb.af.mil
Phone: (937) 656-9037

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?

Súper condensador de tecnología de nanotubos, lo juro por mafalda que no esperaba estas capacidades para una ciencia que esta en pañales.

DailyTech - USC Reveals New Part Metal, Part Nanotube Supercapacitor

Versión traducida de http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=14719

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?

Y para hacer los nanotubos que se emplea, muchos chinos bajitos?

__________________

"Todo queda atado, y bien atado.", Francisco Franco Bahamonde (1892-1975), genocida.

Nanotubo - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre

Son el desarrollo tecnológico en materiales más prometedor de los últimos años. Sus propiedades mecánicas y eléctricas son la leche.

__________________

La vivienda siempre baja, vende ahora que luego no podrás, al principio cuesta luego te jode la vida, alquilar es ahorrar el dinero

Mi aplicación DEFCON para seguir las vicisitudes de nuestra deuda.

Ha comenzado la guerra de los estado por ser la referencia de la nueva producción de energia.

Texas:
Next energy frontier in store for Texas?
Argonne to Advise Battery Alliance

Michigan:
Several Michigan companies developing batteries, electric vehicles to decide on new production operations -
Vehicle batteries lead Ann Arbor area's projects impacting economic recovery efforts - Ann Arbor Special Sections - The Latest News, Blogs, Photos & Videos – MLive.com

la apuesta de obama:
Obama's Clean Car Chimera: Battery technology is still not good enough to jumpstart an electric car revolution - Reason Magazine




Artículo del año pasado que muestra todo lo que hay en juego.

I'm like everyone who reads this blog in the sense that I'd like to see some expedited effort towards getting a new battery technology into my ipod, blackberry, vehicle and a million other aspects of my life especially my pocketbook. On the one hand, we're waiting on EEStor to turn on the lights and start giving speeches. But on the other, we're to some degree waiting on each other. That is to say, as EEStor gains further attention around the world, it necessarily gains

additional prospective investors in ZENN which in turn acts as a gauge for EEStor's value. This perceived value makes it easier for EEStor to capitalize itself to grow and bring the benefits of the technology to the world faster. My personal opinion in studying this story is that Zenn Motors and EEStor have far more to gain from receiving attention of this venture whereas Kleiner Perkins CB gains more if it is kept secret. And to be blunt, I think we win more if KPCB wins less.

So, it's important to me as someone passionate about this topic, that we do things on this blog to hopefully accelerate the process. To that end and in light of Massimo's Fiore's recent analysis of ZENN's stock valuation, I am happy Tom Villar has agreed to update his own work on thinking of the value of Zenn stock as a catalyst for further discussion. So if you find EEStor fascinating, start talking with people about it--start asking for journalists to cover the story and keep the conversations going. Email a link to a friend and get this on the radar
-------------------
Back on July 2nd, 2008, b was nice enough to allow me to post an analysis on what I thought ZENN Motor Company (ZMC) would be worth which you can read here. My very amateur analysis put the value of ZMC at US $15 billion in 2012. Since then a lot has happened and there are even a couple of professional analyst starting to follow the company. One in particular caught my attention, Massimo Fiore of Versant Partners as he has produced two reports, one from March 2008 and a very recent one published July 18, 2008 which you can purchase here. Fiore's March 2008 estimate appears to have valued ZMC at roughly US $350 million for 2012 which is considerably less than my estimate of US $15 billion. At this point I'm thinking I must be way off and this is why I am an amateur and Mr. Fiore is a professional.

But then a curious thing happened. As mentioned above a second report was released just last week with startling different numbers assuming EEStor delivers as promised. Although the new numbers are still below my original estimates, Fiore is now suggesting a roughly ten fold increase in his valuation. I will not say anymore about Versant Partners report as they are a business that makes money off selling information and it wouldn't be fair for me to blab all over the web for free what took them considerable effort to produce. If you are thinking about making a sizable investment in ZMC, you would be an idiot to rely solely on free info like this when professional information is available.

For those wanting to convert a company's valuation to a stock price, simply divide the valuation by the number of fully diluted shares. For ZMC this is roughly 36 million shares. To give an example using my original estimate of US $15 billion we get a stock price of:
$15,000,000,000 / 36,000,0000 shares = $416 / share.
In the real world and assuming EEStor delivers to spec, the number of shares will be diluted as ZMC issues additional shares to raise working capital. A number like 45 to 50 million shares is probably more realistic.

Now on the surface these valuations seem ridiculous as returns of 6,000% only happen in the movies. About the only time an average investor has been able to get returns of this size was with a company like Microsoft where stock purchased in the mid 1980s for $0.10 and sold near the peak of $58 would show a return of 5,800% before inflation. So what is going on here? I see a couple of possibilities:

1. I am clueless and haven't the foggiest idea what I am talking about, a distinct possibility
2. Professional analyst want nothing to do with EEStor as the risk of looking like an idiot if the company doesn't deliver is too high
3. ZMC allows retail investors to get ownership in EEStor under nearly the same terms as the big Venture Capitalist (VC) firms.

If I'm right about the last point it is truly unique and unheard of as far as I know. As I mentioned above, returns of 6,000% don't happen, but actually they do, just not for retail investors. Returns of this size are necessary for successful VCs to justify all the risk they take as a lot of start ups flop and don't return a dime. ZMC's 3.8% stake in EEStor (soon to be 6.2%, see page 13 in the link) is partly what gives ZMC such upside potential.

Obviously this is an optimistic vision of what could happen if EEStor is able to deliver Energy Storage Units (EESUs) to ZMC. Professionals such as Massimo Fiore have to be more conservative as their responsibilities are to factor in all the things that can go wrong instead of focusing on what can go right. It is my hope the truth lies somewhere in between.

Finally since the professionals get to update their analysis, I thought I'd freshen mine up as well with some of the recent news and thoughts from the last two weeks. Below is an update to what was published in July 2, 2008.




Although EEStor and its technology are the main focus of this blog, neither EEStor nor its main equity partnerKleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers are publicly traded. The only equity partner publicly traded is ZENN Motor Company Inc. (ZMC) which paid USD $2.5 million in 2007 for a 3.8% stake in EEStor. This gave EEStor a theoretical market cap of US $66 million but if EEStor is for real, a true value of the company will need to add more than a few zeros to the end.

Since ZMC is the only way for retail investors to invest in EEStor, the question becomes how much will ZMC be worth when EEStor begins delivering product? To answer this question (or more accurately take a wild guess) I think three items need to be quantified:

1. profit margin on EEStor's Electrical Energy Storage Unit
2. EEStor valuation
3. ZMC primary line of business valuation

1) EEStor's Electrical Energy Storage Unit (EESU)

Assuming EEStor's original business plan from 2002 is still relevant we come up with two specifications that differ based on production volumes:

EESU Specifications:

Specifications Prototype /
Low Volume Mass
Production
Energy density (Wh/L) 606 1513
Specific energy (Wh/kg) 273 682
Price ($ US / kWh) $61 $40

Since EEStor has been working on a production factory since 2006 the mass produced specifications should be closer to what ZENN gets in late 2008, but recent information calls this into question as it seems the first production line is more a proving line than a typical production line. Therefore in this analysis I've decided to go with the Low Volume column and we further assume the cost figures are the EESUs production cost, not the wholesale price.

ZMC estimates a 52.2 kWh EESU will cost them C $5,200 which works out to a selling price of US $100 / kWh. Assuming the C $5,200 price includes the buck boost converter and other misc parts, we put the profit margin for automotive sized EESUs at approximately $20 / kWh.

2) EEStor valuation

The disruptiveness of EEStor's technology is obvious in so many sectors, the task of valuing this company with any degree of accuracy is limited to providing lower limits. Trying to forecast best case scenarios would be akin to estimating the impact of the personal computer in 1972, something only a time traveler could have done with any level of accuracy. Therefore estimates are mostly limited to major sectors with known production volumes and where it is relatively easy to determine the cost of switching to EEStor technology. The major sectors assumed to be significant are:
a) Transportation - Automotive
b) Military
c) Li-Ion Battery Market
2.a) Transportation - Automotive

From Dick Weir's and Carl Nelson's patent filed April 12 2001 is is pretty obvious the initial application was seen as a way to enable Electric Vehicles (EV) to replace Internal Combustion Engines (ICE) vehicles. With gas prices hovering around US $4.00 / gallon in the United States and much higher in most of Europe the incentive to switch to an electric power source with 1/8 the cost of gasoline is undeniable assuming any additional one-time cost are reasonable. Since an EESU + electric motor + misc parts are roughly only a few thousand dollars more than all the pieces required for an ICE, there should be no one-time cost impediment to buyers. Thisworksheet attempts to estimate EEStor's profits over a 5 year period using the above assumptions.

2.b) Military

Warfare will be transformed by the new types of weapons EEStor will make possible. Railguns, lasers and other direct energy weapons will obsolete many of today's aircraft and missile systems causing massive shifts in expenditures within the coming decade. Of course there is also the mundane existing battery systems that will also be phased out as time permits. EEStor's unique technology allows EESUs to be built to almost any size and shape so undoubtedly the first uses will be nothing more than plug and play replacements for existing battery systems.

No serious attempt is made to qualify the types of systems that will be effected. Instead this worksheet is a SWAG based on a percentage of total US military expenditures in the areas that could reasonable expect to benefit from EEStor's technology. Use by militaries other than the US are not included as it is unknowable the degree to which export controls will be imposed on the technology for military purposes.

2.c) Li-Ion Market

Although Li-Ion batteries have made some in roads into the transportation automotive market, the penetration is very recent and does not account for a significant percentage of existing production although this is changing rapidly. EEStor's technology will obsolete all Li-Ion batteries within 2 to 3 years although existing manufactures will face sudden and dramatic deterioration of their revenue as customers wait for the new UltraCap EESUs to become widely available. This market is only about $1 billion per year although the margins will be much higher than the transportation sector. EEStor can expect and additional $400 million / year profit from this sector by the time all Li-Ion manufactures have ceased operation.

3) ZMC primary line of business valuation

ZMC has targeted four main areas of operations:
a) Electric Drive Train (ZENNergy Drive)
b) Highway Capable Vehicle (cityZENN)
c) Low Speed Vehicles (ZENN)
d) EV Conversion Kit
3.a) Electric Drive Train (ZENNergy Drive)

The ZENNergy Drive is ZMC primary focus and best hope for becoming a major OEM supplier to the major automotive OEMs. ZMC has exclusive rights from EEStor as reported in ZMC's 2007 Annual Information page 10:
FGCI has entered into an agreement with EEStor dated August 24, 2004 (with subsequent amendments dated November 26, 2004, September 30, 2005, August 8, 2006 and January 22, 2007) (collectively, the "EEStor Technology Agreement" or "Agreement" in this section) to acquire in perpetuity the worldwide exclusive rights to use EEStor's EESU in the following markets:
• all-electric 4-wheeled personal transportation uses up to 15 kW (continuous output) drive system
• for vehicles with a curb weight up to 1,400 kilograms, net of the battery weight,
• for golf carts and similar-styled utility vehicles, and
• the aftermarket conversion of any internal combustion passenger vehicle to electric drive.

The exclusivity does not include high performance sports cars with a drive system of 100 kW(continuous output) or greater.
This exclusivity granted to ZMC locks up a significant portion of the world wide vehicle market as close to 50 million of the 70 million cars produced in 2007 would fall under the 1,400 kilogram (3086 lbs) limit. Although significant portion of these cars would be in the US market, EEStor technology will allow a return of much larger and heavier cars which have been a trademark of US automobiles for decades. Therefore I assume ZMC will not be able to stifle adoption of EEStor technology in the North American Market as manufactures can simply side step ZMC and concentrate on EESUs in larger heavier vehicles. Of course the world vehicle market is so large this shouldn't be an issue and the following worksheet gives profit estimates for the ZENNergy Drive for the next five years.

3.b) Highway Capable Vehicle (cityZENN)

In many ways cityZENN is an advertisement for ZMC's ZENNergy Drive as it will demonstrate how the ZENNergy can be combined with the body of a traditional passenger vehicle. This worksheet assumes ZMC meets sales forecast for the cityZENN over the next five years.

3.c) Low Speed Vehicles (ZENN)

Although this vehicle concept is near and dear to ZMC's founder Ian Clifford, the vehicle itself is more golf cart than car and simply not suitable to the US market in large volumes. This Kelly Blue Book review sums up the toy car feel of this vehicle. Hopefully ZMC is planning to market this outside North America. I am assuming no significant profit from the ZENN.

3.d) EV Conversion Kit

Although the concept of converting existing vehicles is sure to warm the hearts of treehuggers as it is always seems better to recycle something than make something new, the complexities on converting existing vehicles is daunting. Modern vehicles have a web of interconnected devices from dashboard displays, heaters, and power brakes. Mess with one system and all the other require changes as well. This will limit conversions to large fleets which makes this operation difficult to manage and time consuming as each vehicle type will need it's own conversion kit. We hope for no net profit from this operation as it could easily turn negative if mismanaged.

Summary

A final worksheet summarizes total gross profits for both EEStor and ZMC. I'm estimating a new valuation of ZMC for 2012 of $36 billion with a stock price of $600 / share.

Of course if others see the same numbers I'm seeing, it raises the question of whether one of the majors will try to buy ZMC so they can get the exclusive rights to the EEStor's technology. Even if EEStor releases excellent test results, it will take time for any of the majors to figure out what the technology is really worth. But once ZMC can successfully start selling cityZENNs and ZENNergy drive trains, then I expect a bidding war to develop for ZMC. What ZMC is worth at that point is any one's guess and of course whether Ian wants to sell will have some impact on this but at least some the majors are going to see the potential of getting a lock on a huge percentage of global production for at least the next 5 to 10 years.

Now if anyone is thinking they should immediately invest their life's savings in ZMC (ticker symbols ZNN.V andZNNMF.PK) because of the analysis they've just read, then click this link for some very important information you absolutely need to know before making your stock purchase. If you didn't click the link then keep reading.

As a total outsider to everything you've seen discussed here is at best back of the napkin estimates and at worst a misleading stinking pile of poo. Personally I have invested in ZMC up to my limit for speculative stocks and will not be increasing my holdings for the foreseeable future.

Cautions

When ZENN made the deal with EEStor it was 2004 and gas was selling for around USD $1.80 a gallon. At that price using EESUs for EVs is very very marginal and conversion kits make no sense at all. If prices fall anywhere under $3.00 then things aren't nearly as rosy and anything under USD $2.00 and ZENN is kaput. This dynamic could also explain why EEStor was willing to give ZENN such a great deal as at that time the compact EV market must not have looked very promising to EEStor.


Another caution is the price of electricity. Unlike gas and diesel, electricity isn't fungible. There are areas in the US where the price of electricity can be as much as 50% over the national average such as in the North East. Of course there are also areas that can be 50% below the average such as in parts of the Mid West and Great Plains states. If EVs prove to be a viable solution for ground freight, it will be interesting to see if there is an increase in migration of manufacturing businesses and jobs to states with low power cost.










Final tea leaf reading to consider:


ZMC is obligated to make a USD $700,000 payment to EEStor on third-party confirmation of permittivity testing of production units and another USD $500,000 upon delivery by EEStor of a production quality EESU. Successful permittivity testing also triggers an equity funding round where existing equity partners can purchase additional shares in EEStor. ZMC can increase its ownership to 6.2% of EEStor for USD $2 million. On May 30th ZENN received gross proceeds of CDN $15,225,000 after issuing and selling 4,060,000 shares.

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?

Hay veces que los fabricantes de energía me ponen los pelos de punta, una de ellas es esta, al final cuando la cruz roja nos pida sangre tendremos que preguntar si es para transfusiones o para hacer baterías.

Traducido por san google:
Versión traducida de http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/blood-battery.htm

Original:
HowStuffWorks "Blood Batteries"

Ojo son tres páginas.

Aquí para los más vagos.

¬Batteries¬ are pr¬actically essential devices but present a whole ho¬st of problems. Over time they can have trouble retaining a charge. Some stop working altogether. Others overheat or leak or even explode. They're also rigid and sometimes bulky. Then how about, instead of your standard AA or lithium-ion, a flexible, incredibly thin battery that could be powered by blood or sweat? Seems like an improvement, right?¬¬
¬A group of scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute claims they've created just such a battery, one that uses the electrolytes naturally found in bodily fluids. The results of the research, detailed in the Aug. 13, 2007, issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, are generating some excitement as part of a new crop of "bio-batteries" that run off of bodily fluids or other organic compounds. (The RPI team claims that theirs could even run on tears or urine.)
The battery is not only as thin as paper; it essentially is paper. At least 90 percent of the battery is made from cellulose, which makes up traditional paper and other paper products [source: RPI]. Aligned carbon nanotubes make up the other 10 percent, give the paper its conductive abilities and also make it black. The nanotubes are imprinted in the very fabric of the paper, creating what's called a nanocomposite paper. One of the paper's authors said that the battery "looks, feels and weighs the same as paper" [source: RPI].
Using nanotechnology, the battery's small size, flexibility and replenishing electrolyte source -- that is, as long as you eat -- make it ideal for medical applications. When using the battery away from the human body, scientists soaked the paper in an ionic fluid (a salt in liquid form), which provides the electrolytes.
More on Batteries
¬Batteries Quiz
How Batteries Work
Lithium-ion Batteries

¬The battery's paper-like construction grants it significant flexibility. The RPI research team believes that the battery could, in the future, be printed in long sheets, which could then be cut into small, custom-shaped batteries. The nanocomposite paper can have holes poked in it or be cut into unusual shapes and continue to ********. Several sheets could be lumped together to power medical implants, such as pacemakers, artificial hearts or advanced prosthetics. The battery would easily fit under the skin without causing any discomfort.
Because the ionic liquid used doesn't freeze or evaporate like water, the battery could be employed at a wide range of temperatures: from -100 degrees Fahrenheit up to 300 degrees Fahrenheit. Its temperature resistance and light weight mean that manufacturers of automobiles and airplanes -- both of which require light, durable materials -- may come calling.
The researchers behind the battery claim that their device is unique because it can act "as both a high-energy battery and a high-power supercapacitor" [source: RPI]. ¬Supercapacitors allow for large, quick bursts of energy, potentially extending the technology's already wide range of applications.
The battery, which is considered environmentally friendly because of its lack of chemicals and high cellulose content, was announced in the summer of 2007, but it may be years before it's ready to stream off production lines in long sheets. The RPI research team says that, in the meantime, they're trying to boost the battery's efficiency and to figure out the best method for production.
Other Types of Bio-Batteries

© Photographer: Andres Rodriguez
Agency: Dreamstime.com
Some bio-batteries can extract energy
from many forms of sugar,
whether it's blood glucose
or a soft drink.
It's not just researchers at the Rensselaer Polytechnique Institute who are working on bio-batteries. Many other corporations, universities and research foundations are competing to produce viable batteries that can be powered off of organic compounds, especially human fluids. Researchers consider sugar and human blood glucose potentially valuable sources of power because they occur naturally, are easily accessible and don't produce harmful emissions.
In 2003, Japanese researchers at Panasonic's Nanotechnology Research Laboratory announced that they were working on extracting power from blood glucose. At the time, they were using enzymes -- a frequent component of bio-batteries due to their catalytic properties -- to retrieve electrons from glucose. Two years later, a different Japanese research team, this one from Tohoku University, announced that they had succeeded in creating a small "biological fuel cell." Their cell could be used to power small medical devices, such as an implant to measure blood sugar levels in diabetics. Future versions of such technology could, like RPI's nanocomposite paper, be used to power an artificial heart with the blood that flows through and around it.
In August 2005, scientists in Singapore developed a battery that uses human urine as its fuel. Despite its potentially off-putting power source, the battery has a wide variety of applications. The researchers said that their device was the size of a credit card and could form the basis of inexpensive, disposable disease-testing kits. (Urine is already used to detect drugs and some diseases.) What makes the device particularly useful is that it integrated the battery and testing device into one disposable chip. Imagine a one-time use home-testing kit for diseases like cancer or hepatitis. One of the researchers involved in the project said that the battery could also be adapted to provide a brief charge to other electronic devices. A lost hiker might use one to power a cell phone for a short emergency call.
Electronics giant Sony announced in August 2007 that it had also created a battery that derives energy from sugar. One demonstration showed the small battery extracting energy from a glucose solution. In another demonstration, the battery sipped on a sports drink for power.
If urine-powered or sports drink-sipping batteries were not strange enough, a South Korean research team may have produced one of the strangest of all bio-devices in September 2007. These scientists produced "crab-like microrobots" made out of genuine living tissue. They made the tiny robots by extracting tissue from neonatal rat hearts and growing it on miniscule 'E'-shaped skeletons. These heart cells then "pulsated" for more than 10 days, allowing the robots to move up to 50 meters [source: Primidi.com]. With the right refinements, these microrobots could be used to clear away blockages in arteries.
While many exciting announcements have been made in the field of bio-batteries, it may be some time before we see them replacing nickel-cadmium, lithium-ion or the several other types of traditional batteries. Even so, the small, flexible, long-lasting and environmentally friendly battery technologies discussed here show the great possibilities researchers see in bio-batteries, especially for the field of medicine. With that in mind, scientists seem to be exploring every possible option in bio-battery and fuel-cell technology: One research team even devised a fuel cell that ran off of gin and vodka.
For more information about bio-batteries and other related topics, including some of the many types of batteries, please check out the links on the next page.
Sources
"Beyond Batteries: Storing Power in a Sheet of Paper." Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Aug. 13, 2007. RPI: News & Events - Beyond Batteries: Storing Power in a Sheet of Paper
"Blood, Sweat Could Power New Paper Battery." NPR. Aug. 27, 2007. Blood, Sweat Could Power New Paper Battery : NPR
"Microrobots made from heart muscles." Roland Piquepaille's Technology Trends. Sept. 2, 2007. Blood, Sweat Could Power New Paper Battery : NPR
"New fuel cell opens way for artificial hearts." Independent Online. March 13, 2005. IOL: News for South Africa and the World
31&art_id=qw111596760144B215
"Power from blood could lead to human 'batteries.'" The Sydney Morning Herald. Aug. 4, 2003. Power from blood could lead to 'human batteries' - smh.com.au
"Rennselaer University researchers develop nanotube-paper batteries powered by human sweat, blood, and even urine." Into Mobile. Aug. 14, 2007. Rennselaer University researchers develop nanotube-paper batteries powered by human sweat, blood, and even urine
develop-nanotube-paper-batteries-powered-by-
human-sweat-blood-and-even-urine.html
Bhattacharya, Shaoni. "Pee-powered battery smaller than a credit card." NewScientist.com. Aug. 15, 2005. Pee-powered battery smaller than a credit card - tech - 15 August 2005 - New Scientist
Biever, Celeste. "Bio-battery runs on shots of vodka." NewScientist.com. March 24, 2003. Bio-battery runs on shots of vodka - 24 March 2003 - New Scientist

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?

Nuevo empleo de la tecnología de súper condensadores, 15 horas de luz solar-led.

LED Solar Undergrand Light (WNDZ-12A )

Los flashcell se van abriendo camino poco a poco.

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?

Los de GM sacan una versión de “Segway” para ir sentados y para dos pasajeros, eso de ir en moto, uno delante y otro detrás ya no es “chic”.

No tiene un gran radio de acción, pero como es algo pensado para ciudad, sus 50 kilómetros de autonomía no están mal.

GM, Segway team up to develop 2-wheel urban vehicle - Apr. 7, 2009

Imágenes Adjuntas

gm_segway_03.jpg (18,4 KB (Kilobytes), 307 visitas)

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?

Venga hombre!!! o mujer.

Esto es un caharro que tenian olvidado en un almacen y que han sacado ahora a toda prisa para ver si engañan a un par de pardillos y suben un poco las acciones.
Asi de desesperados deben estar.

No le doy mas de dos dias de vida al cacharro este. Y a las acciones les doy una subida hoy del 0.00001%

Les va a costar mas la publicidad de esta mierda que lo que van a sacar en la bolsa, por que por supuesto no van a vender ni uno.

__________________

Dedicado a Mapkc

EESU funciona, ya se han hecho las pruebas y funciona demasiado bien, mejor de lo que pensaban los mas optimistas, pero el departamento de defensa de USA ha decidido que la tecnología se retendrá por seguridad nacional durante unos meses o años mas, hasta que el armamento de sus fuerzas armadas este con esta tecnología cubierto, léase “la guerra de las galaxias”, LM, ZENN y EESTOR recibirán compensaciones económicas por parte del estado ya de forma directa, en forma de contratos preferenciales, pocas trabas burocráticas a la importación y ahorro en impuestos (esto hay que cogerlo con pinzas, pues todo dependerá de lo agobiada que este la economía de USA y de lo que decida el señor Obama), de paso se contenta a los “litios” para que no pierdan el dinero invertido en I+D+I (cientos de millones de dólares), esto va a generar “mas tensión” en Bolivia (tensión simulada, por supuesto) de hecho el señor Evo Morales ha recibido la “invitación” formal de USA y de Japón y de forma mas amigable de Europa y China (Rusia al igual que los países petrolíferos están bastante mosqueados y de uñas) para que se pueda explotar el litio que alberga ese desierto al que llaman la “locura” o “el espejo del mundo” pues cuando llueve nadie es capaz de distinguir donde termina el cielo y comienza la tierra o viceversa. Evo en principio se puso algo gallito, pero tras leerle sus asesores de confianza la “cartilla”, parece que entrara en razones, eso si vendiéndolo como un triunfo de su gobierno, la razón de ello fue que o hacia ricos a los bolivianos y de paso tambien el y sus colegas o liberaban la EESU, vamos que, o se explota por las buenas o te comes el litio, en temas de dinero los lideres comunistas y socialistas son mas ambiciosos que los liberales y a todos les gusta tener cuentas monstruosas en paraísos fiscales.

Total que la idea de los militares USA esta calando(a por narices), baterías de súper litio de ultima generación (tecnología que se ha liberado del apodo “afecta a la seguridad nacional”) en principio y baterías de súper litio mas súper condensadores de 15kw después (tecnología de nano tubos), con lo que al final todos contentos y jodidos los de siempre, los consumidores, pero algo es algo.

La liberación de la EESU radicara en que no se le pueda aplicar “tecnología inversa”, vamos que sea difícil de plagiar durante un tiempo.

Según un informe serio, el desierto de Uyuni tiene litio para unos 500 años o mas, como ya expuse anteriormente, el litio ya dispone de tecnología parecida a la del aluminio para reciclarlo en más de un 98%, si la cosa no se tuerce, en los próximos años veremos vehículos eléctricos, híbridos y de combustión interna conviviendo de nuevo.

Uno de los apartados que últimamente se esta discutiendo y que no se como acabara, es liberar la tecnología EESU para las redes eléctricas de USA. De haí el movimiento que LM ha hecho hacia la producción y explotación de electricidad para empresas y hogares, apostando por las renovables, teniendo en cuenta que este ultimo año LM se ha apropiado mediante el procedimiento de OPA hostil o ¿Cuánto pides? de varias empresas del sector, vale, no ha sido LM, han sido tres de sus filiares con entidad propia, filiares de las que LM posee el 100% de las acciones, movimiento que no ven con malos ojos ni el gobierno anterior, ni el actual, pues LM tiene sobrada reputación en sus compromisos con el estado en lo referente a custodiar secretos militares y de alta tecnología, claro que LM tiene infiltrados del FBI y la CIA entre sus trabajadores, infiltrados que cuidan de que nadie se “chive” de sus secretos.

En fin, veremos lo que sucede al final, una de las cosas que me gustaría que sucediese a corto plazo es que la nueva batería de los “TESLA” siendo realista es que fuese de súper litio + súper condensador y siendo muy optimista solo de súper condensador y todo con autonomías de 600 kilómetros por carga.
Algunos dirán que esto es una exageración , pero en uno de mis primeros post me dijeron que los vehículos eléctricos “enchufables” tardarían años en verlos y que era una ilusa por pensar que en menos de un año esto sucedería, pues bien, los “TESLA” ya son una realidad, espero que a mediados de 2010,por fiarlo algo lejos, espero ver “enchufables” de 400 kilómetros a precios de 18.000 o 20.000 euros, vale con menos prestaciones que los de combustión interna, pero mi “Opel kadett” de 1986 tenia aire acondicionado de 4 ventanillas y pasaba algo de calor y no por ello me morí, pero con el tiempo todo llega.

un saludo y felices vacaciones.

__________________

Para los fundamentalistas de lo correctamente escrito, soy disléxica (pienso en imágenes) y aun sabiéndome las reglas ortográficas, suelo escribir mal, mas bien peor, lo siento, pero mi enfermedad, mi tiempo y porque no quiero hacerlo mas concienzudamente, escribo mal.
“El lenguaje y la escritura, no tienen mas fin, que poderse comunicar dos personas”
He leído el coran y la madre que parió al Islam y a los que lo profesan, ahhh claro hablo así porque...anda la ostia ¿será por que soy mujer?