Well maybe they are trying to keep it a secret and waiting for the right time to release the information.

When is the right time? Gasoline prices were $4 and went back down. If there were promise to their devices and realistic deadlines, GM's volt might be powered by them. As it is now, the 2010 production year for the Zenn vehicles was cancelled with no anticipated startup date for production just this April.

As of this moment, with no pre-production model, this isn't getting off the ground.

Invest your money. I hope you become rich.

 

It isn't what they are saying I find interesting, but what they aren't saying. I suspect there are some core problems they haven't mentioned, such as materials breakdown with temperature cycling or some such.

Visualize this though, a fully charge capacitor next to an explosion, or a catastrophic failure of such a device. The effects should be interesting and violent.

I dragged this thread up again because I think it has gone past the scam phase, and into the really hard technical issues phase. They have to have something in terms of hardware, or it would have evaporated by now.

 

I agree with Bill. They probably DO have this capacitor that they're saying they have on wikipedia, BUT, it probably has some complications which they are taking care of. Think about it for yourself:

WHY would a company who has a superb product not release it? I can only think of two reasons:

1) The don't have that product, so it's just a joke / scam / intimidate competitors
2) They have it, but they can't just release it yet. All the safety and technicalities have to be sorted out for it to be mass produced.

It's no joke to mass produce a super capacitor and have cars blow up on the highway ... there are serious safety considerations in the automobile industry, especially in the electric/fuel cell ones.

That wikipedia article looks like they do have this product, and are not releasing it until they get everything right.

P.S. The project I am currently working on is about wireless electricity. M.I.T already made a transmitter which can charge your LCD T.V, cell phones, mp3 players / ipods, laptops, and basically any portable device wirelessly. Why do you think its not released yet? Wirelessly charged devices? No cords? Who wouldn't want to release this technology and make huge profits? Problem: At 45% efficiency, not going to happen. They're currently making the transmitter super efficient and only then can they be confident to release this device. The company is already up, and they're using investor's money to do research as they have no product out yet: http://www.witricity.com/

 

So If I show you a capacitor, will you invest money in me to develop a better one?

I can put a thousand caps on a few stacked PCBs in a box and say look what my box can do.

Caps are like magnets to some. They are amazing devices. If you show someone a scope grab showing how much VOLTAGE you can pack into a little cap, some folks think that is the bees knees. As with magnets, people see them attracting ferrous metals and the eddies in non-ferrous metals and think its magic. Over unity guys see this and think !There has GOT to be a way to keep this spinning FOREVER!.

Same as with CAPS. !There has GOT to be a way to improve the CAP to pack 1000x more juice inside.

Its "sexy" to think they have a cure to the ills of societies current ( ) problems.

 

I think this is probably a scam and I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist but I think the major car makers don't want to make electric cars.
Once the production costs of the batteries come down, which would happen with a bit of research and mass production electric cars would cost much less than petrol cars. If that happened their profit per car would drop. They also don't want to retool their factories and throw away all the manufacturing equipment for gearboxes, engines, etc.
I can't even buy an electric car in the UK because they are not available and there is zero infrastructure.

 

They have it, but they can't just release it yet. All the safety and technicalities have to be sorted out for it to be mass produced.

So the previously announced dates for delivery were just to ward off the competition. Their delivery promise to that car manufacturer was false, making everything that car manufacture said about their delivery schedule was false. I hope the car manufacturer didn't spend too much money ramping up for production only to find out they were lied to by a supplier.

That is not a good way of doing business. Their delivery dates are pipe dreams.

Invest your money ... make millions.

At what efficiency do you suspect will be close enogh for the wireless transmission of electricity?

 

Super capacitors are already here, this one is supposed to have a density significantly higher than anything else. If it isn't a scam it will be a technology transformer. Things like rail guns and high energy lasers become routine and common overnight. Bet there are applications I haven't thought of either.

There are forums devoted to it, they even have sections only open to professionals to post (readable by the public) debunking it too. I suspect there is significant pressure to put up or shut up.

I suspect this thread will die down again until something else comes along to stir it up again.

Wireless still has the same problems as with Tesla's age, it will be handy for around the home but not for the public. Who pays for it is a killer.

 

I wonder how much Lockheed invested for the international rights.

I agree this will revolutionize technology. Their promises of delivery failed to materialize, giving creedance to the scam claims.

 

At what efficiency do you suspect will be close enogh for the wireless transmission of electricity?

If the efficiency is between 80-90%, this can be a viable alternative to AC adapters and batteries, especially batteries due to the high cost of producing AND environmental damage they do to our planet. At the moment the efficiency is at about 45-50%, and it's not enough. The M.I.T guys I believe said that >70% is enough to have it up and running, but I still think that's too low. It should be at least >80%. What you may not have realized is that for power to get from the power plant to your home also has efficiency issues. Power is lost on the way through the lines, transformers, all those grids that the current has to go through, etc. If I'm not mistaken its about 10% electricity lost due just to transport it to your house from the plant itself. It's an acceptable loss and it's not really that significant. We are dipping into more and more renewable energy sources (the electric companies), and losing 10-20% "renewable" electricity isn't really "losing" it...it'll come back

Oh, wireless electricity to your home was already done by Tesla, or almost completed when they tore his tower down. The problem lies with our current infrastructure: You can't just migrate from gasoline/diesel fuel cars to electric/fuel cell cars. The reason is we have such a huge economy that is dependent on the petroleum sector, and mechanics, gas stations, petroleum companies, workers of those companies, an entire industry that is dependent on what those cars use as fuel. The same applies to wireless electricity: you can't have all these utility companies all the sudden gone because one company is able to wirelessly send electricity to around the world to its customers at a much cheaper rate than you can. Since when did two utility companies in two different countries have the same price per kWh? You're never going to have that, and sadly, never going to have wireless electricity delivered to your home direct via the power plant. Well, I shouldn't say never, but not in the near future that is. Even if electricity was sent to your home wirelessly from the powerplant, I still think there would be major metering issues. How can you know how much a customer actually used? What if their neighbor used some of it? After all, it is wireless, just like internet. Unless there is some sort of "encryption" haha Nevertheless, It'll still be landlines delivering the power to the homes, but I think it's feasible to have wireless power for the inside of the home for electronics and what not. We have way too many gadgets these days to charge and re-charge, so it's a good potential.

 

When did the "internet" become wireless?

I will grant you that small segments of the internet is wireless ... like your laptop to your router, or your connection via the cellular network.

The vast majority of the internet is still wired. My WPP is wired. Between my router and the rest of the internet is wired. Starbucks is wired. McDonalds is wired. You might access them via wireless devices, but that's as far as it goes.

As far as wireless charging in the home ... I'm sure the non-ionizing radiation issue will rear it's ugly head.

 

Cooking the birds as they fly, or damaging a newborns DNA may be a hiccup.

 

Power plant electricity is cheaper than batteries, but it ain't cheap. My electric bill is not a fun thing to look at, unless you have stock in the power plant.

 

In Australia and possibly other countries there are now very tight restrictions on the efficiencies and standby currents (not charging but plugged in) of chargers for battery powered devices. I doubt any wireless method could meet them except perhaps the 2 part transformer used for toothbrushes.
Personally I think that 80-90% would be good enough from socket to device but legislators may differ in their opinion.

 

When did the "internet" become wireless?

I will grant you that small segments of the internet is wireless ... like your laptop to your router, or your connection via the cellular network.

The vast majority of the internet is still wired. My WPP is wired. Between my router and the rest of the internet is wired. Starbucks is wired. McDonalds is wired. You might access them via wireless devices, but that's as far as it goes.

As far as wireless charging in the home ... I'm sure the non-ionizing radiation issue will rear it's ugly head.

The internet, as I explained in my previous post, is like the powerplant that sends the electricity to the homes. It's wired and I said that it will be wired for a long time until very efficient technology replaces it like microwave transmission of power, and the same goes for making the internet backbone wire-free. The "router" that connects your laptop to the internet from the wall outlet (telephone port or cable port) is like what I'm trying to do: wirelessly power the devices within a home. So lets use the laptop as an example: You will be getting wireless internet to your laptop from the router, and you will be getting the wireless power to the laptop from the transmitter that is built into the walls of the home or a free-standing transmitter box. Just like how multiple laptops can connect to the same router to gain internet access, multiple devices will be able to get power from the single transmitter. There may be multiple transmitters inside the home due to the inverse square law, but that is being worked on to make it really efficient at greater distances. You may need 2-3 per house at the current stage of design of what the witricity corp is trying to get out, but later on in the future I'm sure 1-2 is max you'll need for this technology to power all the devices inside a single home. It's great!

In Australia and possibly other countries there are now very tight restrictions on the efficiencies and standby currents (not charging but plugged in) of chargers for battery powered devices. I doubt any wireless method could meet them except perhaps the 2 part transformer used for toothbrushes.
Personally I think that 80-90% would be good enough from socket to device but legislators may differ in their opinion.

Mark, I remember watching discovery channel or some other program which I forgot, but I remember that they showed a Plasma T.V that cost $110 just to keep it plugged in for one year. Just to keep it plugged in! Not even using it costs $110 per year, and that is horrible!

 

but that is being worked on to make it really efficient at greater distances

I would think efficiency at greater distances would be a tough sell because of the inverse-square law.

 

I would think efficiency at greater distances would be a tough sell because of the inverse-square law.

Sure the inverse square law exists, but you can work around it to overcome the obstacles that are faced with, say, a house that needs wireless power for the devices inside it.

You can, as an example, wrap the entire house in copper coil (behind the drywall and run it in between the 2x4 or 2x6 (whatever the home's frame is made of)) and then the inverse square law will not be a problem because all the electronic devices are "inside" the "transformer", so there will be minimal power loss.

Another suggestion would be to use evanescent coupling with efficiency tweaks in the material and shape of the coils. There are certain conditions that really extend the "inverse square law"'s applicable distance much greater than it would due to conditions like resonance and wavelength/size of transmitter/maximum Q designs and maybe add a little bit of RF radiation to help out in the transfer of power. This topic needs a lot more research, but for house-like distances the inverse square law shouldn't be much of a problem and workarounds can be done in my opinion.

 

The reason the internet is wired is the same as what has been mentioned, it ain't free, nor will it be. Even if it were free I'm not too fond of sending my financial information over a encrypted link that is never as secure as I would like it to be.

Like it or not, money rules. Even a free service cost somebody something.

 

Actaully here the way it all works.ATT or the Baby Bell's not sure which created the first fiber optic network to connect CO(Central Offices) to CO's. Then you have loops that come out of the CO's to your business's and homes. So even with a cable modem 99% of your connection is fiber optic. Its just he mile to and from the CO that is coaxil. Further more here is how they afford it. Verizon, ATT, SBC or another comm giant says were building a fiber network in so and so town or from here to their. They then subcontract out a bunch of companies to build it. Now the companies that build it don't get paid till its done. Well Verizon ATT, etc... drag their feet and the other sub contractors are too slow, so half the contractors that laid the fiber go under before it goes live and loose all their money and never get paid. This is how the comm industry was build. I know because a close relative recently retired from Verizon after they designed and implemented FIOS across the city.

 

I've used all three in my house, telephone voice, telephone DSL, and now FIOS. I paid for the FIOS reciever, and if it ever goes down they are responsible unless it is vandalism. It is now part of my house.

 

What is this FIOS thing anyway, a new provider? We don't know about this stuff because I'm in Canada, so is it some new internet, TV, and phone provider?