Archive for the ‘Batteries and Fuel Cells’ category

« Older Entries

Battery Patent Apps Could Support Coda Automotive’s New Energy Storage Biz

February 2nd, 2012

 

Greentech Media recently reported that Southern California electric vehicle startup Coda Automotive (Coda) launched a battery business called Coda Energy, which will enter the grid-scale energy storage market.

Coda’s patent portfolio offers a window into the battery technology that might be part of the new business.

Coda owns at least half a dozen U.S. patent applications relating to energy storage technologies, including U.S. Patent Application Publications Nos. 2011/0256431 (’631 Application), 2011/0256432 (’632 Application), 2011/0281145 (’145 Application), 2011/0304202 (’202 Application), 2011/0304298 (’298 Application, and 2012/0015242 (’242 Application).

A search in Cleantech PatentEdge™ yields an additional international application, Publication No. WO 2011/060074 (’074 Application), entitled “Battery thermal management systems and methods,” which is the international, or PCT, filing of the ’145 Application.

The ’431 and ’432 Applications were filed based upon the same provisional patent application and are entitled, respectively, ”Battery temperature control” and “Battery humidity control.”

The ’431 Application is directed to systems for controlling temperature in a battery pack including temperature control gas transported through a distribution and heat transfer system.  The ’432 Application is directed to systems for inhibiting condensation in a battery pack which include a humidity sensor and control system.

Also pertaining to temperature control are the ’145 Application and its international counterpart, the ’074 Application.  Entitled “Battery thermal management systems and methods,” the ’145 Application is directed to systems for thermal management of a battery pack in which the battery pack (102) has a thermally conductive interstitial member (108) disposed between the battery cells (104a-d). 

The interstitial member (108) is coupled to a plate (110) along a bottom surface of the battery cells and fills at least a portion of the insterstitial space (106).  A first plate (110a) may be located along the bottom of the battery pack (102), a second plate (110b) located along a first side of the pack, and a third plate (110c) located along a second side of the pack.

A cooling fluid (112) flows along the bottom surface of the battery cells (104a-d).  The cooling fluid (112) draws heat generated by the battery pack and may flow in different directions to disperse the heat.

The ’298 Application is entitled “Battery charging using multiple charges” and relates to distributing charging load among multiple chargers.  Less relevant is the ’202 Application, which is electric vehicle technology for disconnecting a battery during a crash.

The most recent application, filed in June of last year and just published January 19th, is the ’242 Application, entitled “Battery with improved terminals.”  The ’242 Application is directed to a battery cell (10) comprising a casing (12), a cell core (14) housed within the casing, and a sealing lid (16). 

A pair of terminals (18, 20) are supported on the lid.  Fasteners (33) are spaced apart and offset relative to the terminals (18, 20).  According to the ’242 Application, this arrangement provides a relatively large surface portion for connection to the terminals.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Green Patents

Green Patent Profile: Nanosys IP Covers Lots of Dots

December 2nd, 2011

 

Nanosys is a Palo Alto company that develops advanced architected nanomaterials technology, including quantum dots for LEDs and silicon nanowire composites for advanced batteries. 

Quantum dots are nano-sized semiconductors which emit light when excited.

Nanosys’s quantum dot phosphors convert blue light from a standard GaN LED into different wavelengths.  Depending on the size of the dots used, LED light that passes through a film containing the dots can adjust the spectrum to convert the emitted light to various colors, including the white light the human eye is used to.

I recently spoke with Andrew Filler, Vice President of Intellectual Property, about the company’s patent portfolio.  Filler told me that Nanosys owns and/or exclusively controls over 750 U.S. patents and pending applications, with about 235 issued U.S. patents and another approximately 200 issued international patents.

A search in Cleantech PatentEdge™ yields 201 U.S., international and European patents and published applications listing Nanosys as owner and assignee.

Filler said that Nanosys’s patents comprise several technology or product families, including, for example with respect to its quantum dot technology, the core material of the quantum dots, the material for the shell that surrounds the core, ligands to put the dots in a matrix, quantum dot films, various quantum dot combinations, and devices such as light sources with quantum dots for producing white light.

One substantial patent family relating to core-shell material is entitled “Highly Luminescent Color-Selective Nano-crystalline materials” which has been exclusively licensed to Nanosys from MIT and, according to Cleantech PatentEdge™, includes at least 8 issued U.S. patents and 4 or more pending/allowed U.S. applications (Nano Matrix Patents).  

For example, U.S. Patent No. 6,322,901 (’901 Patent) is the parent patent in this family and was recently successfully defended in an ex parte reexamination proceeding instituted by Nanoco in the United Kingdom. 

According to Filler, on October 1, 2010 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a Notice of Intent to Issue in the ‘901 patent Reexamination, thereby validating all of the original broad core-shell quantum dot claims in their originally issued form, as well as the 19 new claims added during reexamination.

Nanosys also owns or controls exclusive rights to over 125 issued U.S. patents and pending patent applications (and over 150 corresponding foreign applications) covering all aspects of the QD-LED technology and applications, as illustrated in the sample patents provided below in Figure 1. 

 

FIG. 1:  Summary of exemplary Nanosys patents covering QD-LED technology

 

The  ‘901 patent represents just one of several fundamental patents covering core-shell quantum dot compositions and manufacturing techniques. 

In addition, Nanosys IP provides comprehensive coverage of nanocrystals, core-only quantum dots, nanocrystal/quantum dot synthesis, integration techniques, ligand and matrix materials and chemistries, quantum dot composites, and applications and devices including white light devices and other specific QD applications.

Some of Nanosys’s patents relate to fundamental small molecules for use with nanocrystals.  One example is U.S. Patent No. 6,949,206, granted in 2005 and entitled “Organic species that facilitate charge transfer to or from nanostructures” (’206 Patent).

The ’206 Patent is directed to conductive compositions for modification of charge transport across a nanostructure-containing matrix and claims a number of different molecules. 

These molecules are coupled to a nanostructure via a binding group, cause an exciton in the nanostructure, and facilitate the injection and/or extraction of charge with respect to the nanostructure.

By searching in Cleantech PatentEdge™, I found as one example of a patent family relating to LED devices “Light-emitting diode (LED) devices comprising nanocrystals,” which includes at least two published U.S. applications.

An example is Application Publication No. 2010/0110728 (’728 Application), which is directed to an LED device having nanocrystals in a hermetically sealed container. 

LED device (700) comprises LED (702) on a substrate (706).  A hermetically sealed container (708) contains a plurality of luminescent nanocrystals (710) and is optically coupled to the LED (702).

 

A light guide (712) is optically coupled to the hermetically sealed container (708).  A first portion of the light emitted from the LED (702) is down-converted by the luminescent nanocrystals (710), and this down-converted light along with a second portion of LED light are emitted from the light guide (712).

FIGS. 14A and 14B illustrate the down-converted light (1414, 1416) and the second portion of light (1412) in more detail in LED devices (1400, 1401) with luminescent nanocrystals (710) dispersed in a region (1404, 1404′) within the light guide (712). 

According to the ’728 Application, hermetically sealing luminescent crystals allows for increased usage lifetime and luminescent intensity.

The business based on Nanosys’ patent-protected technology seems to be working well.  Filler told me that Nanosys made a “multi-prong” deal with Samsung worth up to $80-90 million, cutting across different products including flash memory devices, solar cells, film transistor displays, and LED lighting.its U.S. Lumidots business.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Energy Efficiency, Green Patents

Too Mod for Batteries: Ioxus Introduces iMOD Ultracaps

November 23rd, 2011

Ioxus is a manufacturer of premium performance ultracapacitor technology for transportation, alternative energy, medical, industrial and consumer markets.  Ioxus has focused on improving capacitor technology, specializing in electric double layer capacitors (EDLC).

The Oneonta, New York, company recently announced the release of its 16V/58F iMOD Ultracapacitor Module Series for alternative energy markets (pictured below).

The iMOD is an ultracapacitor comprising a plurality of in-line high voltage capacitors which provide power for such green technologies as wind turbine pitch control systems, start and drive systems on hybrid vehicles, and power conditioning for renewable energy systems.  The iMOD allows for in-line high voltage capacitors sized to parallel or replace common battery sizes.

According to Cleantech PatentEdge™, Ioxus currently owns one U.S. utility patent and has at least four pending U.S. patent applications, all relating to ultracapacitor technology.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0053844 (’844 Application) is entitled “High voltage EDLC cell and method for the manufacture thereof” and directed to an EDLC having a unit cell structure with alternately interleaved electrodes formed lithographically and a separator between the electrodes and impregnating an electrolyte therein.  The ’844 Application also describes a manufacturing process for the EDLC cells.

U.S. Patent No. 7,830,646, is entitled “Multi electrode series connected arrangement supercapacitor” and directed to an EDLC series stack formed into a single electrolyte cell structure.  The figure below shows a complete 12-volt EDLC in a poly bag package. 

An EDLC device (10) includes five concatenated electrode assemblies (34-38).  Voltage monitor/control tabs (39-42) extend external to poly bag (31), which provides a lightweight, puncture resistant, air-tight seal for the cell stack.  The power tabs (32, 33) and voltage monitor/control tabs (39-42) provide the complete electrical interface.

Ioxus ultracapacitors have many applications in green technology. For example, they have previously been used on wind turbines to control the pitch of rotor blades relative to wind speed in order to maximize efficiency. Rotor blade pitch control is also used as a safety feature to slow or stop the turbine when wind speeds are too high or in the event the turbine loses connection to the grid.

Compared to batteries, ultracapacitors are preferred for use in wind turbines due to their light weight, solid state design, and ability to operate in cold conditions. Ultracapacitors also require very little maintenance and have an approximate ten-year life span – twice as long as most batteries.

According to Ioxus’ press release, the iMOD modules deliver easy to install, ready to use, and durable ultracapacitor modules at a lower price and with improved cell balancing.

According to Chad Hall, Ioxus Founder and Vice-President of Sales, “This is a complete, ready to install package. You can go up to 750V without any external management, you can run parallel to a 12V battery or replace a 12V battery. It’s ruggedized to handle insustrial environments.”

While ultracapacitors charge quickly, they are limited in application as they also discharge quickly. They are ideal when relatively short bursts of electricity are needed. As this technology improves, its application will undoubtedly increase.

Are ultracapacitors the new battery? Due to their lack of long term power delivery, ultracapacitors are not ready to replace batteries yet, however, they are certainly preferred in some situations.

David Gibbs is a contributor to Green Patent Blog.  David is currently in his third and final year at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego.  He received his undergraduate degree in Geology from the University of California, Berkeley.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Energy Storage, Green Patents

Advanced Battery Patent Suit Ends in Cross-Licensing Deal

November 18th, 2011

 

Previous posts (here and here) discussed the patent litigation involving A123 Systems Inc. (A123), a Boston area lithium ion battery maker, Canadian utility Hydro-Quebec (H-Q), the exclusive licensee of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,910,382, 6,514,640, 7,955,733, 7,960,058 and 7,964,308 (collectively “Cathode Materials Patents”),and the Board of Regents of the University of Texas (UT), the owner of the patents, as well as H-Q’s recent complaint adding Valence Technology and Segway to the dispute.

The parties recently announced they had settled their disputes and entered into a settlement agreement and patent sublicense deal (see the A123 press release here).

Some details of the Patent Sublicense Agreement have been made public.  Actually a cross-licensing deal, A123 has taken, or will take, a license to lithium metal phosphate patents developed at UT, a family of electrode metal carbon-coating patents, and several lithium metal phosphate patents licensed to H-Q by Nippon Telephone and Telegraph.

A Swiss-based alliance called LiFePO4+C Licensing AG, formed by H-Q, Sud-Chemie, Universite de Montreal and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, has taken, or will take, a license to two recently-issued battery patents owned by A123.  A123′s original Nanophosphate patents, developed at MIT, are not part of the settlement.

The Cathode Materials Patents are entitled “Cathode materials for secondary (rechargeable) lithium batteries” and relate to host materials for use as electrodes in lithium ion batteries.  The patented materials provide a larger free volume for lithium ion motion that allows higher conductivity and therefore greater power densities.

Both sides called the resolution a victory for the advanced battery market.  Elie Saheb, Executive Vice President, Technology, for H-Q said the agreement “will help accelerate broad-based market penetration of lithium metal phosphate products.”

A123′s CEO, Dave Vieau, called the agreement “a win-win for the entire industry by paving the way for faster adoption” of phosphate-based lithium ion technology.

I’m sure we’re going to see much more cross-licensing activity in clean tech as green patent infringement suits continue to proliferate, move forward and reach resolution.  The LED lighting sector, in particular, with companies patenting different features and components and litigation on the rise, is a likely candidate for cross licensing arrangements.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Energy Storage, Green Patents, IP Litigation

DFC by FuelCell Energy: Is Clean Coal on the Horizon?

November 16th, 2011

FuelCell Energy is a Danbury, Connecticut, manufacturer of ultra-clean fuel cell power plants. Their Direct Fuel Cell (DFC) systems are currently producing electricity at more than 50 locations worldwide and have generated over 850 million KWh of power.

FuelCell was recently named by the Department of Energy as the recipient of a $2,994,108 award to utilize its DFC power plant to capture carbon emitted from a conventional coal fueled power plant.

The DFC utilizes FuelCell’s patented hybrid fuel cell system.

FuelCell owns U.S. Patent No. 6,356,290, entitled “High-Efficiency Fuel Cell System” (’290 Patent). The ’290 Patent describes a carbonate fuel cell system that produces electricity through a series of chemical reactions.

Heat produced from the reactions can be used to drive an unfired turbine generator. Figure 1 of the ’290 Patent depicts a heat engine (3), shown as a turbine generator, having a gas compressor (3A), and a gas decompression section (3B). By using the exhaust heat from the carbonate fuel cell reaction to drive a turbine, the plant is able to increase its overall energy output and efficiency.

Figure 1:


Fuel cell technology is efficient because it produces energy without going through the combustion process. Rather, fuel cells use an electro-chemical process to produce electricity and heat.

As a result, unlike conventional combustion based power plants, there are no harmful NOx’s or SOx’s produced. Learn more about fuel cells here and here.

The electro-chemical process used in the DFC fuel cell, based on the ’290 Patent, involves three chemical reactions depicted below:

Reaction One (Internal Reforming):  CH4 + 2H2O –> 4H2 + CO2

Reaction Two (Anode Reaction):  4H2 + 4CO3 –> 4H2O + 4CO2 + 8e-

Reaction Three (Cathode Reaction):  2O2 + 4CO2 + 8e- –> 4CO3

The first reaction takes a fuel source such as methane and combines it with steam to produce hydrogen gas and CO2. The hydrogen gas produced in the first reaction is combined with a carbonate in the anode reaction to produce water, CO2 and electrons (electricity).

The third reaction (cathode reaction) uses oxygen, CO2 and electrons to produce a carbonate and heat. The carbonate is then used in the anode reaction. The heat produced in this reaction is used to drive a turbine generator.

FuelCell’s DFC technology may be able to utilize flue gases from a fossil fuel power plant, such as a coal power plant, for use in the above process. Flue gases can be concentrated so that the CO2 can be separated from the remaining air and NOx gases.

The air and CO2 can be used in the cathode reaction. The CO2 from both the flue gases and the fuel cell reactions can be collected, stored and sold in either gas or liquid form.

According to a recent FuelCell Press Release:

FuelCell Energy’s carbonate fuel cell technology separates and concentrates CO2 as a side reaction during the power generation process. DFC carbon capture research conducted by FuelCell Energy has demonstrated the DFC is a viable technology for the efficient separation of CO2 from a variety of industrial facility flue gases such as cement plants and refineries. In addition to the carbon capture, the research also verified that DFC technology is capable of destroying some of the nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions in flue gas streams, thus, reducing the cost of NOx removal equipment. This award from the DOE will advance DFC carbon capture technology further by funding research to assess the capability of DFC technology to seperate the CO2 within the flue gas emitted by existing coal fired power plants in a cost-effective manner.

A Department of Energy Press Release states the Department’s goal for FuelCell’s award is to achieve at least 90 percent CO2 capture from flue gas of an existing plant with no more than a 35 percent increase in the cost of electricity produced.

FuelCell states, “Technology currently in use to capture CO2 from the emissions of coal fired power plants are energy-intensive with high operating costs. DFC power plants potentially represent an efficient and cost-effective approach to separating CO2 while generating ultra-clean power rather than consuming power, as required by current CO2 capture technologies.”

If FuelCell is able to caputure CO2 from a coal plant while producing excess electricity, it will represent a dramatic departure from current carbon capture systems, which require large amounts of energy and are net energy consumers. FuelCell’s DFC may make the illusive goal of efficient clean coal a reality.

David Gibbs is a contributor to Green Patent Blog.  David is currently in his third and final year at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego.  He received his undergraduate degree in Geology from the University of California, Berkeley.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Carbon Capture & Sequestration, Carbon Emissions, Green Patents

Clean Tech in Court: Green Patent Complaint Update

September 30th, 2011

 

Several green patent lawsuits have been filed in the last two weeks in the areas of biofuels, energy storage, smart grid, LEDs and environmental remediation.

 

Biofuels

Genifuel Corporation et al. v. Oyler

This is an inventorship dispute over numerous patent applications relating to production of fuel and fertilizers from algae, including two that have issued as U.S. Patents Nos. 7,905,930 and 7,977,076.

In the complaint (Genifuel-Complaint), filed September 15, 2011 in the District of Utah, the Salt Lake City biomass-to-fuels company Genifuel requests an order declaring the defendant is not an inventor of the disputed IP.

 

Energy Storage – Batteries and Fuel Cells

Lester Electrical Inc. v. Diversified Power Int’l

The complaint (LesterElectrical-Complaint) was filed September 26, 2011 in the District of Nebraska.

Lester Electrical, a Nebraska industrial battery charger company, accuses Diversified Power of infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,114,833 (’833 Patent).  The ’833 Patent is entitled “Monitoring and controlling system for battery and battery charger” and is directed to battery charging and control technology for battery-operated vehicles.

 

Limnia, Inc. v. Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. et al.

By this complaint (Limnia-Complaint), filed September 13, 2011 in the Central District of California, San Francisco-based hydrogen fuel cell maker Limnia asserts four patents (and, oddly, one pending patent application) against Energy Conversion Devices (ECD), United Technologies and AeroVironment.

The patents are U.S. Patents Nos. 7,011,768, entitled “Methods for hydrogen storage using doped alanate compositions,” 7,169,489, entitled “Hydrogen storage, distribution, and recovery system,” 7,279,222, entitled “Solid state hydrogen storage systems,” and 7,399,325, entitled “Method and apparatus for a hydrogen fuel cassette distribution and recovery system.”

The accused products are ECD’s metal hydride storage containers and solid hydrogen storage canisters, United Technologies’ alanate hydrogen storage systems, metal hydride systems and polymer-dispersed metal hydride systems, and a host of AeroVironment’s energy systems, electric vehicle charging solutions, and passenger and fleet electric vehicle charging systems.

 

LEDs

Dow Corning Compound Semiconductor Solutions, LLC v. Cree, Inc.

In this declaratory judgment action (Dow-Cree_Complaint), filed September 27, 2011 in the Eastern District of Michigan, DCCSS requests judicial declarations of non-infringement and invalidity of three Cree patents relating to silicon carbide wafers used as precursors for semiconductors.

The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent No. 7,294,324, entitled “Low basal plane dislocation bulk grown SiC wafers,” U.S. Patent No. 7,314,520, entitled “Low 1c screw dislocation 3 inch silicon carbide wafer,” and U.S. Patent No. 7,314,521, entitled “Low micropipe 100 mm silicon carbide wafer.”  The patents are directed to silicon carbide wafers having certain diameters and dislocation densities and methods of making such wafers.

 

Smart Grid

 TransData, Inc. v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co.

This complaint (TransData-Oklahoma_Complaint), filed September 16, 2011 in the Western District of Oklahoma, is the latest in a flurry of lawsuits by Texas smart meter company TransData against a number of utilities in the southeastern United States.  Details on the other TransData suits can be found in a previous post.

The asserted patents are U.S. Patents Nos. 6,181,294 (’294 Patent), 6,462,713 (’713 Patent) and 6,903,699 (’699 Patent), which relate to antenna and wireless communication devices for use with electric meters. The ’294, ’713 and ’699 Patents are related patents which trace back to an original 1998 filing date.  They describe early solutions for wireless transmission of electrical consumption data.

 

Environmental Remediation

Atlantis Holding Company, LLC et al. v. Pine Environmental Services, Inc.

Atlantis, Summit Holding Company and Aquarius Holdings Company (d/b/a Proactive Environmental Products) sued environmental monitoring solutions provider Pine Environmental Services (PES) on September 28, 2011 in the District of Maryland (Atlantis-Complaint).

Proactive makes replaceable stainless steel motors for groundwater sampling equipment, and the plaintiffs accuse PES of infringing U.S. Patent No. 7,584,785, entitled “Groundwater sampling device” (’785 Patent).  The ’785 Patent is directed to a replaceable internal electric motor for a groundwater sampling device, the motor including means to align it with an alignment pin of the groundwater sampling device.

The complaint also includes allegations of trademark infringement and counterfeiting based on U.S. trademark registrations for several marks, including PROACTIVE, PROACTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCTS, MONSOON, TYPHOON and HURRICANE for motors and pumps.

 

Recycling & Waste Management

R360 Environmental Solutions, Inc. v. Scott Environmental Services, Inc.

From the Sow’s Ear to Silk Purse Department comes this suit involving U.S. Patent No. 8,007,581 (’851 Patent), entitled “Incorporation of drilling cuttings into stable load-bearing structures” and directed to processes for recycling drill cuttings from oil drilling equipment and converting them into high-load-bearing civil engineering structures such as vehicle roads and drilling pads.

By its complaint (R360-Complaint), filed September 16, 2011 in the Southern District of Texas, R360 requests a decaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the ’581 Patent.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Biofuels & Biomaterials, Energy Efficiency, Green Patents, IP Litigation, Smart Grid

MIT Battery Startup Likes Liquidity

September 27th, 2011

 

Liquid Metal Battery Corporation (LMBC) is a Boston-area startup pursuing an liquid metal battery technology.

According to this Greentech Media piece, Don Sadoway of MIT is the inventor of LMBC’s core technology.

Sadoway is a named co-inventor on two related patent applications, U.S. Application Publication Nos. 2011/0014503 (’503 Application) and 2011/0014505 (’505 Application) describing and claiming batteries having liquid metal electrodes.

The ’503 Application is entitled “Alkaline earth metal ion battery” and is directed to an alkaline earth metal ion energy storage cell (10) which contains three liquid constituents: two liquid electrodes and a liquid electrolyte.

More particularly, the cell (10) houses a molten metal body (14) that serves as a negative electrode, an electronically conductive liquid alloy body (16) that serves as a positive electrode, and an intervening ionically conductive electrolyte (20).

According to the ’503 Application, calcium or magnesium is used in the liquid electrodes (14, 16) because these elements generate relatively high voltage, are safe to handle and are relatively inexpensive.

An electronically conductive container (22) houses the liquid constituents, including an electronically conductive lid (26).  An insulating inner sheath (24) prevents shorting between the negative and positive electrode (14, 16), and an insulative seal (29) confines molten constituents and vapors to the container (22).

A portion of the lid (26) in contact with the negative electrode (14) acts as a negative current collector (27) such that electrons pass between the negative electrode (14) and an external source or sink by way of a negative terminal.

Similarly, a portion of the container (22) is in contact with the positive electrode (16) and functions as a positive current collector (23), through which electrons pass between the positive electrode (16) and the external source or sink by way of a positive terminal (30).

The ’505 Application, entitled “Liquid electrode battery,” is a continuation-in-part of the ’503 Application, which means it claims priority to the ’503 Application and has some common disclosure as well as some new material.

The ’505 Application adds certain improvements to the liquid metal battery, such as a circulation producer including thermal management devices to provide a heat transfer path so heat can be conducted away from the liquid constituents (14, 16, 20) of the battery.

According to the ’503 and ’505 Applications, the use of liquid electrodes provides the advantage of higher current density:

The use of electronically conductive liquids for electrodes 14 and 16 with a liquid electrolyte 20 facilitates facile oxidation and reduction of the active alkaline metal and its cation at the electrodes 14 and 16. The electronic conductivity of the liquid electrodes promotes high current density during operation of the cell 10 by enabling electron-transfer reactions to occur at sites over entire liquid electrode-electrolyte interfaces rather than being limited to triple-phase intersections. Furthermore, because reactions at both electrodes occur entirely in the liquid state, the reaction kinetics are not throttled by the nucleation of distinct product phases. Thus, the cell constituents are consistent with extremely high current densities…

Sadoway told GTM that the all-liquid configuration is self-assembling and should be scalable for large-scale electrical grid applications at relatively low cost.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Green Patents

In New Suit with A123 Hydro-Quebec Drills Black & Decker and Leans on Segway

July 12th, 2011

 

In a previous post, I wrote about patent litigation between Canadian utility Hydro-Quebec (H-Q) and Massachusetts based lithium ion battery maker A123 Systems (A123), in which A123 lost its bid to have its declaratory judgment action litigated in its desired forum of Boston.

Last month, H-Q opened a new front against A123 and also targeted Valence Technology (Valence) and Segway. 

Filed in federal court in Dallas, Texas, the complaint (HQ-A123-2d-Amended-Complaint) sticks with the same previously disputed family of patents, alleging infringement of three newly-issued patents in that family – U.S. Patents Nos. 7,955,733, 7,960,058 and 7,964,308, entitled “Cathode materials for secondary (rechargeable) lithium batteries” (Cathode Materials Patents).

H-Q asserts that A123 is infringing the Cathode Materials Patents by selling rechargeable lithium metal phosphate batteries for use in Black & Decker’s DeWalt cordless power tools, and Valence and Segway are infringing by selling Segway Personal Transporters that contain lithium metal phosphate batteries and cathode powder made by Valence.

The Cathode Materials Patents relate to host materials for use as electrodes in lithium ion batteries.  In particular, the patents are directed to a synthesized cathode material containing a compound with an olivine structure comprising the general formula LiMPO4 where M is iron, manganese, nickel or titanium.

According to the Cathode Materials Patents, these cathode materials provide a larger free volume for lithium ion motion that allows higher conductivity and therefore greater power densities.

H-Q is asking the court for a preliminary and permanent injunction and monetary damages.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Green Patents, IP Litigation

Primus Energy Storage Tech Goes with the Flow

June 8th, 2011

 

Primus Power is a Hayward, California, startup that makes flow batteries for grid-scale energy storage.  A flow battery is a type of rechargeable battery that works by the flow of electrolytes through an electrochemical cell, which converts the chemical energy to electricity. 

Unlike typical batteries, in which the active chemical species are stored inside the battery, the dissolution of active species in the electrolyte of a flow battery permits external storage of reactants.  For this reason, flow batteries are not limited in the amount of active material that can be used and have the ability to scale up power and energy density.

Primus owns a family of at least three pending patent applications relating to its flow battery technology, including U.S. Patent Applications Publication Nos. 2009/0239131 (’131 Application), 2010/0021805 (’805 Application) and 2011/0070468 (’468 Application). 

The ’131 and ’468 Applications are entitled ”Electrochemical energy cell system,” and are directed to energy generation systems including a cell stack assembly (12) made up of a plurality of cells (13).  Each cell (13) includes a positive porous electrode and a negative metal electrode.  

Pressurized halogen reactant enters the system through feed pipe (15) and flows through a metering valve (17) to mixing venturi (18).  Circulation pump (16) circulates the electrolyte from reservoir (19) through the mixing venturi (18), to the positive electrodes in the stack assembly (12) and then back to the reservoir (19).

According to the  ’131 and ’468 Applications, the metal electrode includes zinc, the halogen includes chlorine, the electrolyte includes an aqueous zinc-chloride electrolyte, and the halogen reactant includes a chlorine reactant (though this Greentech Media article says the Primus technology is based on a zinc-bromine system, not chlorine).

The ’805 Application adds the concept of maintaining the system’s inner pressure above the liquefication pressure of the halogen reactant.

Primus’s battery flow technology has received some high level attention and funding, including $14 million from the U.S. Department of Energy and $11 million in venture capital, according to the Greentech Media piece.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Green Patents

XP’s Equalized Cells to Provide Xtremely Large Scale Energy Storage

May 11th, 2011

 

Xtreme Power (XP) is a Kyle, Texas, advanced battery maker which provides and operates integrated energy storage and power management systems. 

Marketed as the Dynamic Power Resources (DPR) product line, XP’s systems combine energy storage and control capabilities in a modular approach that provides flexibility in size for various scale grid and off-grid applications.

XP owns at least one U.S. patent and several pending patent applications relating to its technology, which aims to efficiently equalize batteries, i.e., reduce the gap between the weakest and strongest cell in a battery pack.

At least two of XP’s patent applications – Publication Nos. 2008/0088276 (’276 Application) and 2009/0134718 (’718 Application) – are directed to battery packs having a uniform or optimum DC environment for every cell in the battery pack. 

U.S. Patent No. 7,808,131 (’131 Patent) also relates to a battery pack connection scheme that achieves a synchronized DC environment for the cells.

The ’276  Application describes a battery pack (100) having batteries (101, 102), a positive terminal (106), a negative terminal (108), and cables (111, 112, 121, 122) connecting the batteries to the terminals in a parallel fashion.

The connections form uniform parallel conductive paths, as shown in the circuit diagram below.  In particular, the first cable (111), first battery (101), and second cable (112) form a parallel circuit with the third cable (121), second battery (102), and fourth cable (122).

The circuit branch consisting of cable (111), battery (101) and cable (112) is similar and preferably identical to the branch consisting of cable (121), battery (102) and cable (122).  More particularly, resistance, inductance, and capacitance are modeled for each cable and those values for cable (112) are very close to corresponding values for cable (122).

According to the ’276 and ’718 Applications, this configuration makes the voltage and current nearly uniform throughout the cells:

A battery pack connection scheme is shown that provides a synchronized DC environment for every cell in the pack, such that every cell in the same or similar voltage level in the pack sees an identical, or very similar, voltage and current environment.

XP’s battery technology has impressed at least one major utility as the company was selected by Duke Energy to provide what would be the largest (36 MW) energy storage system linked to a wind farm at a planned wind plant in west Texas.

Comments Off »

Posted in Batteries and Fuel Cells, Green Patents