Category Archives: Energy Storage

Click here to enlarge image

Mar. 15, 2005 — Try to get Bob Sinuc to pontificate on the future of fuel cell technology and you won’t get far. Instead, the vice president of engineering for fuel cell developer Plug Power will politely remind you that, “we’re a reality-based company.”

So it’s no surprise to see Plug Power announce the operation of its second-generation experimental home energy station without much accompanying hype. No flowing descriptions of how the device will enable the hydrogen economy. No explanations of how this technology will cure all evil by liberating the world from oil. It’s as if they’re merely saying, “Here it is. Any questions?”

However, what they have created is a device — the home energy station — that could disrupt a variety of industries if it could one day be affordable to the average homeowner.

Click here to enlarge image

The current design of the station runs on either natural gas or propane, along with a supply of water. The fuel and water are used to make hydrogen, which powers a fuel cell to generate electricity. Waste heat is dissipated or used to supplement a home’s primary heating system. In addition, hydrogen is generated and stored at high pressure for fueling up a fuel cell car. The process at the core of this type of fuel cell — known as a PEM, or proton exchange membrane cell — occurs at the nanoscale.

Plug Power already had a first-generation unit in experimental operation in Torrance, Calif., in partnership with Honda, which uses it to fuel up its FCX experimental fuel cell car. Now that Honda has unveiled a new FCX designed to work in cold temperatures, the two companies saw fit to put a second-generation home energy station in a cold climate. Plug Power’s hometown of Latham, near Albany in upstate New York, was a perfect fit.

Automakers, says Sinuc, “realized that at some point in the development of fuel cell cars they are going to be limited by the infrastructure.” In short, no one’s going to buy fuel cell cars if there isn’t anywhere to fuel them up.

But if you could buy a home energy station along with your fuel cell car and fuel up your car at home in six minutes the value proposition suddenly changes. Add to that the additional benefit of generating your own electricity and gaining supplemental heat, and you’ve got a combination that could certainly lure some early adopters.

Sinuc wouldn’t comment on the business model to eventually sell the device, but he said there are no restrictions. The company could sell it to gas station operators or homeowners, and it could work with Honda or other automakers to sell the home energy station in tandem with a car.

Plug Power and Honda are not the only companies to hit on this idea. In February, UTC Fuel Cells, Hyundai Motor Co. and ChevronTexaco unveiled a hydrogen energy station at the Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center in Chino, Calif. The project is part of a Department of Energy-sponsored hydrogen fleet and infrastructure program.

The program has similar goals — to test a fleet of fuel cell vehicles, in this case Hyundai Tucsons and Kia Sportage fuel cell vehicles — to demonstrate safe and practical hydrogen technologies in real-world use.

These collaborations are going a long way to assuage some of the biggest fears about the so-called hydrogen economy — that transporting hydrogen would be dangerous, that generating it on-site would be impractical, or that fuel cell cars can’t be made to work in cold climates.

However, don’t sell your current car just yet. Sinuc and other experts are quick to point out it’s a very long way from proof-of-concept to your putting a fuel cell car in your driveway or an energy station in your home.

Evident receives OSD grant


February 23, 2005

Feb. 23, 2005 — Evident Technologies of Troy, N.Y., announced it has received a Small Business Innovation Research grant from the Office of Strategic Defense for a project to develop a high performance thermoelectric material using its quantum dot technology.

The objective of the project is to demonstrate that quantum dots can be used to produce an improved thermoelectric nanomaterial by engineering thermal and electronic properties to achieve increased efficiencies. Thermoelectric materials can be fashioned into devices to create electricity from temperature differences or into solid-state cooling devices.

However, says Evident Technologies, a shortcoming of existing thermoelectric materials is that they make for inefficient devices, either for cooling or energy conversion. The company will therefore work to develop an advanced thermoelectric nanomaterial that it says could offer significant cost and performance benefits for both military and commercial applications because of the material’s improved efficiencies.

The quantum dot thermoelectric project is scheduled to be completed in June of 2005. Gregory Scholes of the University of Toronto will collaborate with Evident Technologies to measure and characterize the materials. The award was granted under the United States Department of Defense’s Office of Strategic Defense SBIR Phase 1 proposal OSD04-EP3 “Nanostructure-Enhanced Bulk Thermoelectric Materials” and the program is managed by the Navy’s Office of Naval Research

Click here to enlarge image

Jan. 21, 2005 — As a new year begins, it seems to be a good time to ask: What will 2005 bring? Within the MEMS industry, there’s always something interesting afoot, so let’s answer that question by exploring 2004’s accomplishments and developments that could shape 2005.

Accelerometers got their foot in the door with cell phones in 2004 — a huge accomplishment. But, will the use of accelerometers for peripheral applications, such as pedometers and game controllers, really catch on? Or will it take a truly feature-rich function, such as display scrolling, to make their use ubiquitous?

Either way, how much momentum can we really expect to see in terms of their integration into cell phones in 2005? Perhaps an even more intriguing question is: What impact might the newly launched tri-axis accelerometers have on this particular space?

Click here to enlarge image

Gyros have become a near standard in European cars for use in electronic stability. Now it’s up to American automakers to follow Europe’s lead to maintain that momentum. But will they? Legislation in the United States could help here by mandating the use of rollover detection systems. The auto industry’s need for small and lightweight components could make MEMS gyros a top candidate in such systems.

But legislation takes time, and mandates sometimes are scheduled to kick in several years after passage to accommodate automakers’ development cycles. In the meantime, this might be the year that MEMS gyros make a breakthrough for use in camcorders.

It also may be the year for pressure sensors. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration is expected to make its final ruling in March advocating the use of the direct (i.e. MEMS) method of monitoring tire pressure. NHTSA alluded to this last summer, but the market didn’t take that as a green light. An official ruling should result in a spike in sales of pressure sensors.

As for other MEMS sensors, about half a dozen companies are diligently working to develop sensors for the detection of biological and chemical weapons, but as the war in Iraq drags on, it appears that the urgency has abated somewhat. Don’t expect breakthroughs of significance this year because there is still a fairly large disconnect between what’s technologically feasible and what the market expects.

In the meantime, will this be the year for wireless sensing networks? It’s probably a bit soon here, too, although great strides are being made to a critically important piece of that puzzle, the operating software. Now, if only there were a power source small enough to allow end-users to take advantage of the tiny form factor of these sensors. …

There’s no doubt that microphones will have a breakout year in 2005 — probably in the second half — as they become integrated into cell phones. The question is, what’s next? MP3 players look like the next logical choice, but don’t count out automotive telematics.

Several optical MEMS companies are doing very well, but a real sales breakthrough isn’t expected until optical networking gains traction, which may take another year or so. However, watch for optical MEMS to make their move as the new technology core for cell phone displays in 2005. Even though it may be for only one or two handset models, it would be an auspicious start. In addition, the competition for optical MEMS in digital TV is expected to start heating up this year, although we may not see tangible results until 2006. While Texas Instruments may have portable projectors and home theater wrapped up, digital TV is still a wide-open race.

Overall, it appears that growth in the automotive and computing markets, longtime mainstays of the MEMS industry, may be cooling. The good news is that the consumer and communications segments are ready, willing, and (almost) able to pick up the pace, as the above indicators point out. Interestingly enough, robotics is another area to watch in 2005 — not for industrial applications, bur rather, for consumer end-uses.

MEMS product development clearly occurs in waves, and the next wave of products on the horizon became much clearer in late 2004: cooling chips and fuel cells. Although In-Stat/MDR doesn’t expect to see any technological or commercial breakthroughs in 2005, it’s quite possible that more companies may enter the market, as is typical for emerging device segments.

Although the point of this column was to look ahead to 2005, I can’t help but look back at 2004 and designate my pick for the most novel product of the year: Pria Diagnostics’ Element, an over-the-counter male fertility indicator for in-home testing. It uses an optical MEMS component in conjunction with an LED to read fluorescent chemicals that bind to a sample of sperm.

While the end-user is men, of course, it should be marketed to women, too. I have no doubt that they’ll be the ones who will ultimately buy the $40 kit, which is currently awaiting Food and Drug Administration approval. What will the industry think of next?

Jan. 18, 2005 — Nanosys Inc. today announced it entered into a collaborative agreement with Sharp Corp. of Osaka, Japan, to develop nanotechnology-enabled fuel cells incorporating Nanosys’ nanostructure technology.

Under the terms of the agreement, the two will collaborate to develop high performance fuel cells for use in portable consumer electronics such as laptop computers, cell phones and cameras. Financial details of the agreement were not disclosed.

Proponents of fuel cells for consumer electronics say the inherent higher energy density of small fuel cells in comparison to batteries has the potential to lead to longer operational time.

Nanosys is a Palo Alto, Calif.-based company that develops nanotechnology-based products using high performance inorganic nanostructures. Sharp Corp. is a worldwide developer of consumer electronics, information products, electronic components and other products.

Jan. 12, 2005 — Ener1 Inc. (OTC.BB: ENEI), a Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based developer of clean energy technologies, announced it has signed letters of intent to acquire Giner Electrochemical Systems LLC (GES), a privately held company located in Newton, Mass., that specializes in the development of fuel cell technologies and products.

GES has contributed to the development of many technologies and products for fuel cell power generation, including proton exchange membrane high-pressure electrolyzers for gas production, regenerative fuel cells, and direct methanol fuel cell stacks and systems.

GES is currently owned by Giner Inc. and General Motors Corp. GES will maintain its existing GM multi-year contracts and its research and development relationship with GM going forward, according to a news release.

Click here to enlarge image

Jan. 7, 2005 – For an investor searching for the most likely beneficiaries of micro- and nanotechnology development, choosing companies is difficult. Should the investor focus on material suppliers, process enablers, manufacturing companies, IP powerhouses or the producers of “micro- and nano-refined” end products?

Should he focus on existing mid- and large-cap stocks, or is a tectonic shift towards new entrants with revolutionary technology likely to provide the winners?

Click here to enlarge image

As it stands currently, most micro- and nanotech innovations are aiming to improve conventional products in existing markets with existing customer relationships. It is very unlikely that new entrants acting as sub-suppliers will be able to rapidly penetrate mass markets, even if they promise far superior technology and performance. It is typically a very laborious process to win customer favor and prove that you can deliver in large volume, with reliable quality and at low incremental cost.

Investors should therefore first make a careful analysis of how a company is embedded into existing value chains. Since many small micro- and nanotech companies do not have direct access to end customers, they are dependent on the success of their system-integration partners. It is, therefore, very important for micro- or nano-subsystem suppliers to choose the right partners who understand their market needs and know how to execute them flawlessly.

As far as the “right” stock valuation of a micro- or nanotech company is concerned, the common valuation criteria of other technology stocks can be applied.

Companies serving cyclical markets with high competition and low long-term visibility deserve a valuation discount. Companies with a dominant market position in high-growth markets with high barriers to entry and with non-cyclical characteristics deserve a higher valuation. This is particularly true if their process technologies might be expanded to new markets or products, thereby further increasing their growth possibilities.

It is even more difficult to analyze an early stage company. Even if the potential long-term reward could be huge if a company is successful, investors should not underestimate the technological and manufacturing hurdles. It is not a trivial task to evolve from “proof-of-principle” into a large manufacturer and supplier of a reliable, respected and cheap mass fabricated micro/nano-subsystem.

Isn’t it more likely that, at least for existing markets, established companies with proven subsystem manufacturing track records are going to eventually be the market leaders? If so, perhaps the startups could have more success applying a license and royalty-based business model. Although it would only allow access to a smaller part of total product revenues, it would liberate them from the execution risks of investing in mass production facilities.

So how should a moderately risk-tolerant investor construct a portfolio of micro- and nanotech stocks?

First, the portfolio should have a balance between companies serving different markets to mitigate the risk of being too focused on a single sub-sector. In addition, each of the companies should be a market leader.

Second, the portfolio should keep a balance between stocks of larger and smaller market cap, thereby giving a true picture of all the different micro- and nanotech activities throughout the different industries. This would also help smooth out the portfolio in case of volatile market movements.

Small-cap stocks should find a place in the portfolio if they are market leaders with an interesting growth perspective that is not well addressed by existing bigger players.

Large-cap stocks that have developed micro- and nano-processing capabilities, like high quality semiconductor companies, are also important. They already have evolved into processing powerhouses and will eventually expand into new markets like sensors, energy conversion and storage, bio-analytics and data storage.

Companies delivering the necessary tools for analytical tasks or for layer deposition should also be given a respectable weight. These equipment companies are very often the first to perceive the possibilities and opportunities of their tools, which allows them to accumulate considerable IP.

Finally, material suppliers should be part of an investment plan if the companies can show new processes by which their basic materials can be specifically arranged to meet a customer need.

In summary, investors should always be aware that success in the stock market is more likely achieved with a long-term investment horizon. This is particularly true for micro- and nanotechnologies, where the best companies will hopefully not only leverage their expertise over the next years, but over the next decades.

Jan. 4, 2005 — Nano-Proprietary Inc. (OTC: NNPP), an Austin, Texas-based holding company, announced through its subsidiary, Applied Nanotech Inc. (ANI), that it has entered into a research and development agreement with KRI Inc. KRI is the R&D subsidiary of Osaka Gas Co. Ltd., a gas utility company in Japan.

The agreement is to develop a hydrogen sensor for automotive fuel cell applications. The collaboration is the result of a joint proposal submitted by KRI and ANI to Japan’s New Energy Industrial Technology Development Organization. The proposal was one of eleven grants awarded in the area of hydrogen energy by the development organization. The project is expected to take about one year.

Dec. 28, 2004 — NanoDynamics Inc., a Buffalo, N.Y.-based nanomaterials developer, announced it will distribute its nano- and micron-sized metal powders in Japan and Korea through an exclusive agreement with Kanematsu-KGK, a distributor of advanced materials and machine tools in Japan.

The company’s initial focus will be on copper and silver powders targeted at the ceramic capacitor market. NanoDynamics’ ND Materials unit manufactures a broad range of nano- and micron-sized metal powders in dry, unagglomerated form, and as ready-to-use dispersions.

Applications include materials for microelectronic inks and pastes, interconnects for solid oxide fuel cells, thermally conductive fillers for polymers and fluids, ink jet printed conductors, and anti-microbial additives.

Click here to enlarge image

Dec. 23, 2004 — Nanomaterial and biotech companies usually make for unlikely bedfellows. But on Tuesday, a manufacturer of carbon nanotubes and a startup that uses a relative of nanotubes for drug applications announced that they had merged.

The merger will give carbon nanotube manufacturer Carbon Nanotechnologies Inc. (CNI) an avenue for developing drugs or other medical products. C Sixty Inc., which will become a wholly owned subsidiary of CNI, will get financial security as well as business support.

Ray McLaughlin, CNI’s executive vice president and chief financial officer, said the merger dovetails with CNI’s long-term goal of using nanotubes in medical applications. CNI already works with customers to incorporate single-wall carbon nanotubes in energy devices, conductive polymers and lightweight materials. Nanotubes are tubular cousins of buckyballs, the carbon molecules that are at the heart of C Sixty’s drugs.

Click here to enlarge image

“One of the applications we always held in our back pocket was medical applications,” McLaughlin said. “It’s always been part of our long-range business plan. C Sixty is playing in that market today.”

C Sixty was founded in 1999 in Canada under the leadership of oncologist Uri Sagman. In its early days, the company focused on developing buckyballs as delivery mechanisms for AIDS and cancer drugs. Scientists use the term C-60 for buckyballs, referring to their structure of 60 carbon atoms linked together. The molecules’ formal name is buckminsterfullerene, named for geodesic dome inventor Buckminster Fuller.

In 2003, C Sixty moved to Houston, the birthplace of buckyballs. That same year it partnered with the pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. to develop drugs for degenerative diseases. Buckyballs work as antioxidants, mopping up cell-damaging free radicals that are believed to cause Alzheimer’s and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig’s disease.

The support of CNI will allow the smaller C Sixty to concentrate on the challenges of developing nano-based drugs rather than devote time to fund raising, said C Sixty President Russ Lebovitz. With Merck, C Sixty was able to complete a round of safety and efficacy trials. At the same time, it has been tackling some basic questions such as the relationship between buckyballs’ structure and function.

“I need a year or two to move things forward,” Lebovitz said. “I have to keep the science going forward. … This provides a framework for stability.”

Lebovitz and McLaughlin said the merger will allow the companies to look for opportunities to use their complementary intellectual property portfolios. CNI was co-founded in 2000 by Richard Smalley, who co-discovered buckyballs in the 1980s as a chemist at Rice University in Houston.

CNI also will explore ways to combine the spherical and tubular forms of carbon to improve or make new products, McLaughlin said. “There’s the unknown potential of bringing those two technologies together,” he said.

In addition, CNI will help C Sixty pursue federal funding opportunities, according to McLaughlin. CNI and its partners received a $3.6 million Advanced Technology Program award through the National Institute of Standards and Technology in October to develop fuel cells.

“We’re hoping to create a mechanism (allowing C Sixty) to be self-funded,” McLaughlin said. “We’ve already started the process.”

C Sixty will retain its offices near Houston’s medical hub and not move to CNI’s headquarters in South Houston. Bob Gower, the president, CEO and a co-founder of CNI, will serve as chairman of the board at C Sixty. Smalley is a scientific adviser for both companies.

By David Forman

Dec. 17, 2004 – Experts may continue debating whether a hydrogen-powered energy infrastructure is practical, affordable or safe. But Jim Balcom is not waiting for their answer. Instead, the CEO of PolyFuel Inc. is pushing forward with what he calls a breakthrough fuel cell membrane technology — one the company claims offers dramatically superior performance and much lower cost, two critical needs of the automotive industry.

In October, the Mountain View, Calif.-based company announced a new hydrocarbon-based polymer membrane that it says operates in low humidity and high heat and produces 10 to 15 percent more power than the perfluorinated membranes currently in use.

The membrane uses a lattice of nano-structured hydrocarbons to support a grid of conductive blocks through which protons flow as the cell generates electricity.

“Each of the markets has very different requirements at the system level,” Balcom said. “Those cascade down to different requirements at the membrane level.”

By custom-designing a membrane for a specific purpose, he said, designers can avoid adding complicated and expensive systems to compensate for the buildup of heat or humidity and to avoid other environmental problems.

The company is pursuing a leadership position in the engineering of such membranes, a component Balcom compares to the microprocessor inside a computer. Just as performance improvements and technology innovations in the microprocessor market drove the computer industry forward, Balcom predicts membrane innovation will drive performance in the fuel cell market.

Atakan Ozbek, principal analyst at market research firm ABI Research, agrees. “The MEA (membrane electrode assembly) development is in the center of it all,” he said. But, he cautioned, PolyFuel will square off against competitors with deep pockets and long histories of innovation themselves.

“DuPont, W.L. Gore, 3M. These are all 800-pound gorillas,” he said. “PolyFuel is a small startup.” But more than the competition, Ozbek says PolyFuel must show that its technology scales into pilot manufacturing. “They achieved these results at the lab level,” he said. “I don’t want to decrease the importance of this announcement, but the important thing is they need to achieve these results in the field.”

Design of the automotive fuel cell began 14 months ago. Balcom said customers had validated the design, though he declined to name them. This is the second fuel cell membrane PolyFuel has announced that is custom-tailored toward a specific vertical market. Previously, the company rolled out a membrane for use in direct methanol fuel cells, a likely candidate to power next-generation portable electronics.

The company is also in talks with companies active in other fuel cell markets, such as stationary electricity generation and backup power. Balcom said he believes the portable power market will mature much earlier than fuel cells.

The company plans to generate revenues in earlier-maturing markets to underwrite expansion as it gears up to supply bigger, later-maturing markets like automotive. Nevertheless, he said, “We approach this market (automotive) with a healthy degree of skepticism. Fuel cells have been five years away for the past 15 years.”