"Too Cheap To Meter - A Black Swan Hiding In Plain Sight", originally posted on AngelList, May 3, 2016.
KGE is developing an optomechanical device that allows electricity producers to create new electrons with a chemical process which enhances the inherent capabilities of water, light and hydrogen, generating excess aqueous electrons, the e(aq), or the low energy pair production of electrons.
A brief LinkedIn article, Artificial Lightning Seen as Clean Energy Breakthrough, is available, as is a more detailed technical description at artificial lightning.
This may also be thought of as “photon-electron conversion”, "electrons from water", "Too Cheap To Meter", or simply and colloquially, reverse engineered lightning, (slides). Here are a few recent promotional images, lightning electricity generation.
The efficiency of this technology will cause the merging of storage and generation concepts. But since storage currently enjoys far more interest than generation, this should probably be first marketed along the lines of "the bottomless water battery -- recharges faster than you can use it". It's also much easier to start on a small scale. Once that effort draws interest, the astounding generation capabilities will become clear. There will be no going back.
Since late 2016, this technology has been the subject of discussions with one of the U. S. National Energy Laboratories. Please enquire if you would like to know more.
1. What is the business problem you are solving?
Everybody wants cheaper electricity, if they even have it in the
first place, but electricity producers pay too much to supply what
they sell. They are coasting on the inertia of historical
technological development. They need cheaper, cleaner, renewable,
sustainable, more efficient generation and storage, in this case, one
and the same. Their "pain" is that they know something far better must
be out there, but have no idea what that might be. KGE relieves that
pain with a "black swan" solution three hundred years ahead of its
time. We remove a technological barrier
by reframing electricity, disrupting the current stagnation, and addressing the problem with an actionable solution.
Inspired by nature itself and informed by science, KGE provides a
valuable, singular update from the current Tesla and Edison
technology by using quantum theory. This is a major upgrade,
removing pain most people don't even know they have, ticking
along with pre-Einstein solutions. The true pain here is
incalculable, the human problem of survival itself, the quality of life
and the cost to provide electricity to those without it. The
solution is hiding in plain sight, "unknown public
information”*, as it were, and is best actualized through the
entrepreneurial system, which is obligated to pursue it. That's you.
is your specific solution and value proposition?
KGE's solution is its chemical process to create electrons. This is highly
valuable to customers due to a first-(and only)-of-a-kind scarcity
which provides exponentially superior, i.e., billions and trillions,
not mere “10x”, cost efficiency. Of course, this will require a
technical explanation to technical people, but simply, recall that
only two pounds of plutonium exploding caused Hiroshima. That is the
kind of capability in nature we are harnessing, and we do it
repeatedly, in the femtosecond range which nature allows. Imagine that kind of efficiency used to generate electrons naturally from light in water. This
new approach has no competition (other than the current old
approaches) and is protected by both a provisional utility patent and
trade secret law. No one else is proposing creating new electrons,
only pushing and pulling existing ones, a notion left over from the
1700s. Quantifying the value in customer terms, once understood,
this is nothing less than a “must-have”.
big and growing is the total market and your target segment?
target segment here is the the entire electrical energy sector, with
few exceptions. Predictably, my personal feeling is that trillions
of dollars will flow from this concept. But then, I'm putting it out
there mainly because I stumbled upon something very useful, not to make
money. Once it is understood what is described here, money sort of
loses its meaning, even to those of us that still need it. Growth
rate predictions are similarly not meaningful. It's probably a paradigm-shifting one-of-a-kind black swan, but possibly just a tin foil hat pipe dream. As someone who made quantified business risk decisions for
many years, I wish I could be more helpful. But you'll first have to
understand the science, then look at the history of technological
development, especially the disruptions, and use your own best
judgment. Pick a heuristic, I had to do that too over the years.
Eyeball it. Gut feel it. Maybe hear me out, then grill me with
questions. Nature and science make the case for themselves.
does your business model make money?
Currently, the seat-of-the-pants plan is to license the technology to
bulk electricity producers, then perhaps take over a few of those.
Eventually, through us or others, it will extend to a much
broader customer base and the individual consumer. Almost complete
market penetration is expected, extending to everybody who uses, or
wants to use, electricity. KGE's current strengths are in firing the
imagination and explaining technical possibilities, not business
It is recognized that expert help is needed here.
are your competitors, and how do you win?
top competitors are hydrocarbon fossil, nuclear, “renewables”,
such as solar, wind and tidal. Their only advantage is as legacy
systems. New concepts such as LENR are also in the picture. Each competitor can be compared and contrasted in great detail and they are discussed on the confidential website. That's probably
better-suited for a long pitch with Q&A than here. KGE's general
advantage is the enlightened use of quantum theory. We have a much
clearer picture of the electron, and transcend current engineering
informed mostly by Faraday and Maxwell. Edison and Tesla didn't know
what we do now, yet we are still using their systems. Who has re-visited all this on a clean sheet of paper? KGE has. We argue
that nature and science make this new solution inevitable. Its only barriers are that it is nascent, unknown and unvetted, with no
traction. Other than that, things are going great, with the future
still stuck on the AngelList Blog. But yet another advantage we have
is that there is an AngelList Blog, and ideas can be
shared quicker than in Westinghouse's and Edison's time. So, the
future won't be stuck here for long. As those innovators previously
demonstrated, nature's superior solutions simply will not be denied.
are your specific marketing and sales plans?
might be best to position this as a "strategic acquisition”, a
“must have” to be “first to market” and carrying an
unfathomably large opportunity cost risk. It seems like a perfect
vanity project for tech companies and venture capitalists flush with
cash and looking for more headlines, which would later filter into
established electricity production concerns**. Then again, that
directly contradicts what was said above in 4. So, as you can see,
the vision here is about as sophisticated as Bill Gates' dad's
personal computer market projections in 1980. For now, it's ad hoc
and week-to-week until this attracts some attention. As soon as it's
even taken half-seriously, the cache of being even marginally
involved with this should attract them like flies. That's just human
nature. But this time, the next big thing really is that big.
a highly speculative potential black swan with a nascent, unvetted
technology, first let me say we will never, ever use words like
“rollout”, nor will we “drop”. We can try to make our best
guess as to strategic partners, and are actively looking for advisors
and industry connections. Our unused "potential customers" slide says “Insert Gratuitous Logos Here”, because that sort of unseemliness is usually pure fluff. Specific milestones include “Get
Attention ASAP” and the like. I once planned and scheduled the
entire Hot Functional Test (HFT) milestone for startup of a nuclear
plant and can't make up phony “milestones” here and now for this; it's too soon. It'll be typical product development for hardware,
that's the template. Even the simplest prototype would need some custom manufacturing and a probably a laboratory, so all I have as an example
right now is lightning itself, which has the distinct advantage of
pricing details and sales channels are too far ahead to speculate
upon. Although our customized marketing plan – be the first on
your block to jump ahead three hundred years – is pretty solid.
So, as you
can see, and all kidding aside, this needs your help.
7. How is
your team uniquely qualified for this venture?
team right now is nature as it exists, the science that describes it,
and me, Bryan Kelly. Briefly, I inquired, made observations, used intuition, became inspired and put together a technical argument from Google
Scholar and the Georgia Tech library. Then I expressed it in patent
language. It was all on my own, entirely self-motivated, and not
part of any company or institution, about as unique as it gets. I
know the energy domain from the standpoint of engineering and
construction for electric utilities, mostly nuclear, and later, as a result of this inspiration, intuition and in-depth scientific research. The project began when I was starting back into nuclear construction a few years ago, after decades elsewhere, and became inordinately interested in physics, electricity and gravity.
I am literally a Westinghouse baby
from Pittsburgh, where he built his company, who grew up around a
previous era of innovation. As the type who visited Tesla's Niagara
Falls memorial as a kid on vacation, I can see why he passed on a
billion 1907 dollars to give us what we have today. When an idea like this takes hold, you are in its thrall and unstoppable. It takes on a life of its own. Now
I'm looking to build a team that loves this one and can manage its
execution. My role here is mainly to initiate and lead, because I envisioned what can be accomplished and laid out a plan in the form of a patent. I've run teams before where I had ultimate P&L responsibility,
but in a different sphere, and I'm probably well-rounded enough to
pass your basic competency test. As for chemistry, culture and other
such frivolities, you will have to judge. I am just here to get this
done, no matter what it takes. Email and arrange a phone call. On the other
side of this blog post is an idea far
more important and “investable” than myself or any team.
big is the funding request, and how much equity will you give?
don't know what kind of funding to request as yet. I've put in about
five years of sweat equity, but it was a labor of love. Now I'm
looking for your sweat equity, which is simply interest in the
project, first. Then we can plan and phase this as with any product
development project. I know what has to be done, but not how to do
it, in a business sense. I made a lot of deals in my attorney days, and
easily admit I don't know enough to have an informed opinion. I'm
still learning these deal structures and what might be the
right-sized fund and ask. I'm probably a higher equity, lower dollar
type, with everything phased slowly. There is no need to have
all the answers right now. I'm here to start something, but not an early
career empire builder planning on sticking around forever. I will
get you on the right path, then you run with it. And if it's your
money that makes this happen, you might want your own people in there
asap – I get it it, experienced product development people. I
recognize that I'm older, and a founder that will likely cede easily,
when the inevitability of success becomes evident. Until then, I see
myself as the reality distortion field remover when the “it can't
be dones” happen, because nature already does it and science tells
us how. I will kick your backward asses until you understand that
and make it happen. When you understand the consequences here, you
will see why the current valuation estimate is “approaching
infinity”, and why startup-experienced people are needed to do this
right the first time, not a first-timer like me, guessing at it.
are your forecasts for revenue, expenses and cash flow?
the undiscovered country, a potential black swan. You are either
intoxicated by the prospect of an electrified planet by now, or a drive-by. I can not answer this question honestly without
a lot of 0's and infinity signs. Divide those, and you have your
cost/benefit. In the middle, maybe tens, or even hundreds of millions. Upside,
trillions. Current cash flow 0. Get the picture?
Cash flow, as I see it, is most-closely correlated to say, standing on a water molecule, perhaps in a cluster of six, producing a billion trillion electrons from light every second, and how very few of those it might take to replace the local coal and nuclear stations. Would this take up my entire kitchen counter? Also, as an afterthought, somebody might pay for something along those lines. That's the plan.
schedule planning and forecasting used to be my job, later it was analyzing risk. But those all involved previous similar undertakings and
projects. Engineering and construction is somewhat similar to
product development, and yes, I've had P&L responsibility, in the
low 100 millions. I get it. When somebody becomes interested we can
hone this down and start doing things in phases. But I'm looking for a
"We have to have this!" instead of, "Well, what's the
EBITDA multiple?" **
much and when do you foresee investors getting a payout?
could go either M&A, outright sale or IPO. Quickly, or in ten
years. Of course it will make money – it's the most imaginative
energy solution proposed in human history. Ok, maybe “fire” was
more impressive, I admit it. The question for you right now is: “Do
I have any interest in the next (and probably last) big thing in
electrical energy generation?” If you only have two nickels to rub
together but know what to do here and can help, let's talk. My current favorite "comparable" company story is French Giant Veolia To Buy Nuclear Waste Cleanup Startup Kurion. Very
roughly, it was a highly technical idea on the back of an envelope,
with five million in, $365 million came out in less than ten years.
This will either be far better than that or is a complete joke.
Let's find out.
source for those ten questions is: 10 Answers That Will Make Your Startup Plan Worthy of Investment.
of this? Don't worry, virtually no one has. I can find no evidence that this idea has ever even been considered before. Not a single musing. That's how fresh it is. When you get into it, you will see that for yourself. You are
probably among the very first to see what is inevitably
going to happen. It's not like I can present this at the local
solar-powered propeller hat app pitch fest. You've likely been
This is one
of two black swans involved in this proposed KGE unicorn. That said,
I freely acknowledge the tin foil hat nature of my proposals. But
coming from the Karl Popper school, may I say that you are welcome to
try to falsify what I've found – because I can not.
You have a
strong interest in the future and big ideas, not incremental
iterations of a 2% improvement of the same old shinola. Deep reality
seems far more fascinating to you than virtual toys. Lukewarm is
something you are not. You are not a drive-by, formulaic, incurious,
throwing spaghetti-at-the-wall statistical investor – not that there's
anything wrong with that. You are looking for a mini-Manhattan
Project, from and for visionaries, at its nascent conceptual stage.
Expect no spreadsheets here. I want your interest and advice before
I ask for any money anyway. It's easier to throw a few bucks at
everything and hope something works, than to understand anything.
While I understand and respect that approach, this is not the place
Here, you will
be required to stop talking about the “cutting edge” and actually
understand what it is. And it is simple and correct, not a
contrived, iterated, incremental fad that is going to seem like
something for a little while then fade away.
We are going to need to
hire some specialists of course, mostly in optomechanics, a field
full of knowledge looking for something useful to do, water chemists,
physicists, hydrogen and photonics experts, materials types, as well
as all kinds of other interesting engineers and experts. But that'll
cost nickels and dimes compared to the frivolous nonsense we both
still see daily, even in the hard science side of start-up, and
especially on the energy-related side of that side. Sure, I love my 140 characters, but KGE is the actual flying car. KGE is the actual too cheap to meter.
of concept” here is nature itself. We are simply
reverse-engineering. I didn't come about it that way, but that is
its essence. That's the paradigm shift. There are no disputes about
nature's best (or at least far better) ways of doing certain things, but people haven't always looked at engineering solutions with that in
mind. That in itself is natural, they're just following the path of
accidental discovery and happenstance development. Why? Because
it's easier than thinking too hard. Somebody else smarter than me
will do that, right? Not necessarily.
science and everyday examples, prototypes that are archetypes, speak
for themselves. Once you understand that, and most especially the scale of large numbers of small things doing small things repeatedly on infinitesimal time scales, and how that adds up to very large things on our human scale, you'll see that there is only relatively easily-achievable grunt work left to make it happen. Remember those two pounds of Hiroshima plutonium? Now imagine that kind of efficiency at a billion trillion times a second, but used to generate electrons naturally from light in water. One might call this design philosophy “technology informed
by teleology”, unlocking the beautiful simplicity and utility of
that which is.
we're doing things now works fine, too. I like my gasoline car,
fossil and nuclear electricity, but they're suboptimal, and many of
these so-called new technologies are just laughable. Our current
technology is not wrong, but we forget that it came about
accidentally through happenstance. And for the most part, it has not
been updated since Einstein, let alone kept current. I argue that we
don't have to move forward based on that past. Have Edison's and
Tesla's methods been re-considered in light of quantum theory? How
far has electrical generation come since say, 1955, or even the
time to take a breath and revisit all that?
Contact email@example.com to
arrange a phone call.
* The Half Life Of Facts
** VC Investor Lessons From the Past 12 Years: Exits