Welcome to the world of ElectriPlast!! This Blog is dedicated to open and honest discussion on Integral Technologies & their intellectual property (IP) known as ElectriPlast. Discussions on this Blog include: Historical Perspectives (Integral & its Products); Management Profiles; Patents; Production Issues; Tech Spin-offs; Product Speculations and Time Tables; The Game Plan; Media Relations; Corp Supporters; Shareholder Impressions; & the Latest News.

My Photo
Location: Bavaria, Germany

I am a retired US Government analyst, currently residing in Germany. I am also a shareholder in the company called Integral Technologies (OTCBB: ITKG), and have a desire to enlighten and share its great and still emerging story. I am well read, focused and appreciate challenging interactions which spark creativity and develop enlightenment. That is why I created the ElectriPlast Blog, and the reason I am here.

February 04, 2010

ElectriPlast: Green Machines, Electric Cars and ElectriPlast



be Far


By Vince S. ElectriPlast Blog Editor

“Electric is the big deal this year,” said a planner of one 2010 auto show.

Those “Green Machines”

During the past decade, fuel prices reached record levels as did concerns about the availability of oil. Also, global warming fears and the environmental impact of the internal combustion engine combined to make it a decade to remember for manufacturers and consumers. And whether you accept or reject the dialogue about global warming and climate change, they, too, were burning issues during the first decade of the 21st century. In the US, a bad economy combined with years of poor planning caused an upheaval in the Big Three. When the dust settled, Ford was the only auto company strong enough to continue without a handout from Uncle Sam.

Against this backdrop, it is no surprise that the global automobile industry opened this decade with an impressive array of alternative fuel vehicles, more than it had ever fielded before. These “green machines” were rolled out in increasing numbers to the delight of concerned consumers who are looking for innovation, better mileage, relief from high fuel prices and less impact on the environment. Green machines or alternative fuel vehicles are generally those powered by electricity, an electric-gas combination, Ethanol, natural gas, or biodiesel.

After years of development in secrecy, car manufacturers are unwrapping and displaying their alternative fuel vehicles to audiences eager to be weaned from the 100-plus year-old internal combustion engine. Indeed, conference and expo centers in major cities around the globe and stateside in Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, New York, Seattle and Washington among others, displayed more green machines with higher fuel efficiency and lighter materials than ever before. Some industry analysts argued that the dramatic shift to alternative fueled vehicles is a risky move for an industry still in recovery mode after years of turmoil and declining sales. But is it?

Electric Cars

To be sure, there are price, range, reliability and safety issues, all hurdles that must be overcome before mass production begins, but virtually every major auto manufacturer in the world has an entry for the green machine category. Domestically, Ford has the Fusion Hybrid, which gets 47mph in electric mode, and the Focus EV, which they plan to have on the road in 2011. Upping the ante, Ford also announced plans for a new hybrid plug-in. By 2020, Ford estimates that it will have up to two million Fords with electric drive systems and advanced battery packs on the road. General Motors, anxious to prove to Uncle Sam that the bailout funds they received were put to good use, plans to introduce the Chevrolet Volt, an electric car with a gas-assist to increase the battery range. Also, GM has other EVs on the drawing board. Chrysler’s EV entry is the Fiat 500. BMW, Nissan (and parent) Renault, Toyota, VW, and many others have alternative fuel vehicles in the queue to satisfy growing interest and future demands. In fact, it was reported that the oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffet, recently made a sizeable investment in the BYD, a Chinese electric car company.

Electric vehicles aren’t strangers to American roads, having been introduced here in 1895. Initially as popular as the cantankerous hand-cranked gas-fired vehicle, the EV became a sidebar to the automobile story when, among other conveniences, the electric starter was invented--no more hand-cranking and cussing, Uncle Bob--and Henry Ford’s new assembly line produced so many gas burners that the price was well within reach of John Q. Driver, who took to the roads in droves. Periodically, an EV would roll down the road, capturing the imagination of bygone years, but, for the most part, Detroit and consumers were preoccupied with gas burners. Recently, the need for cleaner technologies became more apparent and while electricity was an easy answer, the biggest hurdle for the EV has always been the battery. Numerous companies are working on batteries to fix that problem. Once solved, the greedy gas slurpers’ low-mileage-high-greenhouse-emission days will be numbered. Even if oil becomes cheap again, battery-powered electric vehicles are still the way to go for all of the above reasons. So, electric cars are the “big deal,” as our opening quote states.

Enter ElectriPlast

If electric cars, powered by battery packs are the wave of the future, then one of the solutions being offered to fix that vexing battery problem is ElectriPlast. In the 17 December 2009 statement on our commercialization progress, Integral’s CEO stated that we are working with “one of the largest battery manufacturers in the world” to replace lead fins with ElectriPlast molded battery plates. According to one major manufacturer, electric cars will create a market so huge that no one company will be able to satisfy the demand for batteries. That’s good news for battery companies, but better news for ElectriPlast because there is no competition for our highly conductive recipe. Integral fully intends to become a top supplier for EV batteries, battery cables, wire harnesses, and other electrical requirements.

For the past three years, Integral claimed to have positive ElectriPlast test results, but it was not until this month that results were finally published. EB believes that it was no fluke that those results surfaced after the appointment of Mo Zeidan. Moreover, we believe that Mo hit the “reset button” when he saw the original set of test results and requested that the retesting focus on the specific product areas mentioned in the December press release. Those results and the hundreds of companies who responded to them have been very encouraging. So, can contracts be far behind?

Stay tuned as this exciting story continues to unfold.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's unfortunate that management didn't time their releases a little better. In other words, don't release the prior two PR pieces without having a PO to announce soon thereafter. In other words, don't let the momentum fade away....PK, are you not close enough to the situation to drop some knowledge on these guys.

February 06, 2010 1:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another GIANT leap of faith brought to you by the creators of EB.

Wasn`t Mo`s published data sheet result(singular), for a single formula containing Stainless Steel and Nylon? According to Integral`s press release that is. The actual data sheet....the one they claim will be shown to real customers....never gets around to actually telling what base metal was used as near as I can tell. Odd omission, wouldn`t you think? And it only took Mo six months to NOT figure that out.

Even if correct, how did the EB creator make the connection between Stainless Steel shielding test results and Bill`s claimed lead plate storage capabilities? Hmmmm. Not to mention that all the serious players are using Li-Ion or derivative technology these days.

How does Electromagnetic Shield Effectiveness equate to lead/acid storage capacity? Or any storage battery technology, for that matter? Apples and oranges, I`d say.

At this point we don`t have the foggiest idea if Mo plans to ever even test for a lead/acid Electriplast equivolent. Or when, if he does. The information hiway, as far as Integral is concerned, is a one-way street.

What about conuctivity? What happened to that? Weren`t there seven other high profile formulas? And was it 1,500 or 15,000 total formulas Tommy claimed. This could go on forever. Hmmmm. Maybe that`s the real plan?

Hey PK, why don`t you have Bill Robinson issue some sort of official company release stating that you are an authorized interpreter for them. That you are authorized to take the very guarded statements they make and move them to the next level. That GIANT leap of faith that I spoke about in the begining. You do it so well. Whether there is an iota of truth in any of what you claim is another thing.....it makes great headlines, doesn`t it.


February 06, 2010 6:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a bag of negative bones!!!If the above poster had but a single positive one it could ground him out, similar to a lightening rod, causing a definite shift in electron cloud density.The people who create this blog will have the last one on you and its so close you could touch it but not without some positivity.

February 07, 2010 6:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree..bag of negativity. He reaches and reaches to no avail. Totally misses the point and has a unsettled chip on his shoulder, which he would deny. I think good things are going to come from the use of this product, and that is based on the steady (but slow) course we appear to be on. Unfortunately for some their patience wears (THIN)at the drop of a hat.
Fat II

February 07, 2010 6:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Keep drinking the Kool-ade boys. Neither of your comments (nor PK) have bothered to address the issues.

Why am I not surprised?

How did he get from data sheets showing performance data for a stainless steel sheilding formula to lead/acid storage battery performance data?

When will Robinson direct Mo to provide data sheets for his Electriplast lead/acid battery plates?

Or will he, since most all hybrid manufacturers are now using either Nickel-Metal Hydride {NI-MH) technology or Lithium-Ion(Li-Ion). Certainly both Ford molels cited in his article are using them. Sorry, they already got the lead out. All the Kool-ade in the world won`t change that.

What comes next and when will it come? More data for other sheilding formula`s? How about some data for some of those conductivity formula`s? Isn`t that what about 90% of those application patents are for....conductivity?

Hey guys, get back to me when you want to talk about issues...not personalities.

Wah, wah, wah.


February 07, 2010 9:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

C'mon PK! How about something more than repeating what we've already heard (about three times)? Are we supposed to believe the "new" information? Why? There's nothing new and it is originating from the same people that have never delivered (dare I say "lied"?) on a promise in 10 years!

Oops! I forgot. Integral has a new set of people (Mo and this "Communications Director") to dish out the promises now. Can we look forward to another 10 years of unfulfilled promises?

I think not. The next 10-Q will show the money running out. Better buy up, folks, to keep the Boyz and Mo paid...payments on BMWs aren't cheap.

February 08, 2010 4:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How come no one wants to talk about the only new information we've had in years: the data sheet?

The only interpretation of that data that I've seen is very negative - EP's a lousy conductor and a brittle plastic.

Can anyone refute that with actual comparisons to similar data on metallic conductors or plastics?

February 08, 2010 4:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Can Contracts be Far Behind?"

From what was written, there is no reason to believe that they are. All the talk about electric vehicles and "green machines" (whatever they are), is very exhilarating. And, yes, such developments might benefit from a conductive plastic - with the right properties at the right price.

But the flaw in the logic is:
no one has even remotely shown how EP is relevant to any of this.

Just because there is a need, does not mean that there is, or will be, a solution. And we haven't even begun to broach the subject: what's the price and will nayone pay for it?

February 08, 2010 4:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More on the claimed lead/acid battery "green" applications...

Besides the obvious Automotive market, there is also a large and growing market for electric personal transportation. I read recently that the wheel chair industry was following Segway`s lead in battery technology. While I can`t produce that link now, I was able to find Segway`s web page.


Fascinating stuff. While having offered the Li-Ion battery technology since early 2005, they now offer the Ni-Mh technology as well. Sorry, Bill...no more lead there either.

What an interesting company!!

I want a P.U.M.A. !!!!



February 08, 2010 8:28 PM  
Blogger PK... said...

Such negativity screaming for attention. Answer this, answer that, spin, slam, slam, spin, slam.

'Thin' -- you lost me at: "Anonymous said..."

Here's a riddle for you. Buddy up with Scott M., and work to suss the answers to your questions through him. I--personally--choose not to enable you, or worse, see you use my responses "out of context" (or worse) on other message boards in an effort to justify your own Id.


February 08, 2010 10:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Spin or counter spin?


February 09, 2010 4:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's easy to understand the negativity here. Although I am still an investor (very long-term and will continue to be) I too have felt the frustration. Sometimes you need to take a step back and look big picture. From this perspective you might see a new product that the powers that be were trying to introduce during a severe economic downturn - no easy task. It might be a good idea to remind ourselves just what the level of risk is with this company and in case you don't know yet it's way up there. Anyone that understands investing and the associated risks would easily place this stock in the venture capital category in terms of risk. Looking at the potential upside, as a licensing company the level of profitability the company could achieve is significant (i.e. the risk/return relationship). Continue to be negative if you choose, just remember that you may have to eat your words at some point....

February 15, 2010 6:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think we're getting "negativity". We just aren't getting any "positivity" whatsoever. Its the "same old, same old" - more unsubstantiated and unprovable promises by the same folks that haven't delivered on anything in over a decade.

The only thing that seems to change is the target market. First it was antennas, then everything-conductive, then batteries and now EMI shielding. What's the plan? Or are we just grasping at straws?

February 15, 2010 7:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The more DD I do, the less comfortable I feel. Just Google "conductive plastic shielding". Here's a good example by a reputable company selling real product:


Looks like the conductive plastic race started years ago and our horse is still stuck in the gate...

February 15, 2010 7:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pk, with regard to the prior post, can you speak to specific reasons why ElectriPlast is better than the other conductive plastics in the market? What is the competitive advantage EP has? Is it ITKG's patents that are in place that give us a leg up?

February 15, 2010 9:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

chomerics is a joke in comparison to Integral -- at least from a performance standpoint. Yes, they have marketed products, but Electriplast is about to blow them away.

February 16, 2010 11:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a link to the Chomeric products' data sheet.


Its impressive. An extensive product line, numerous technical and application bulletins AND a sample request form. Chomerics is a subsidiary of a multi-billion dollar multinational company (Parker Hannifin) with extensive manufacturing and engineeering resources.

Can anyone prove to us why Electriplast is superior? We have the EP performance data, after all. Or can all we do is "Believe"?

February 16, 2010 6:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What is the competitive advantage EP has? Is it ITKG's patents that are in place that give us a leg up?"

First of all, I`m not PK.

I don`t have an answer but possibly some "what if`s" that should be considered before arriving at any kind of conclusion.

Let`s pretend for a moment that I am a small business owner that has a successful product already in the marketplace. This product contains a metal component that conducts electricity. My company holds patents on both the component and the end item.

One day a salesman, well call him Tom, trys to convince me that he can replace my metal part with a conductive loaded polymer part that will do everything my metal part will do but is cheaper to manufacture. Oh, his company holds the patent for this replacement part. Is owning the patent an advantege for the customer or the supplier? Is the ownership of the patent a cost factor of every part used?

Is it good business to give up my patent control for a slightly cheaper part when the cost can be passed on to, and included in, the final cost of the end item to it`s ultimate customer? What if some sort of design change is wanted or needed down the road? Am I required to renegotiate with Integral? Get permission? What if I build the metal component in house but am not equipped to form Electriplast? That will require that I pay for another companies profit line.

There are a lot of factors that go in to the ultimate cost of a component. Often it goes far beyond the usual manhours + materials + (x) amount of overhead.

One last thought. Do you know of any other raw material manufacturer that even attemps to patent the applications for their raw material? Applications that they have no intention of ever producing themselves?

February 17, 2010 4:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post. I don't doubt for one second that what you just described were a few of the similar if not exact difficulties that management encountered. That being said, I would suggest that the form of the subject patents and the time it has taken thus far in the contract process, are strong indicators of the "i"s being dotted and the "t"s being crossed.

Speaking from personal experience, in my business there are quite a few individuals/companies attempting and in fact doing "end-run-arounds". On some level I can understand this given the economic climate we have been in. All else being equal, I would rather own shares in a company that takes their time to get it right...

February 18, 2010 6:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes. That was a good post. It highlights EP's apparent lack of a Value Proposition. In other words, what problem does it solve that customers are willing to pay for?

We don't know if EP is cheaper than metal and we don't know if the total system cost is lower either.

But we do know from the published EP data sheet that there will no weight savings. Adjusting for density, it will take more weight of EP to acheieve the same level of conductivity or shielding than metal. So, no value here.

In the case of wire shielding, EP shielded wire will be fatter and heavier than the metal braid shielded incumbant products (again, using the EP data published by Integral themselves).

The poster also points out that conversion costs could be substantial. This could be the barrier holding up commercialization. Capital equipment might be required and product requaliifications are very expensive.

Without a compelling value prop, no one's willing to make the plunge.

February 18, 2010 5:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please tell us how you arrive at the following conclusion from the data sheet:
"But we do know from the published EP data sheet that there will no weight savings."
By the way, you may want to consider that a company that utilizes metals in its end product is also subject to the volatility of metal prices (i.e. increases risk from a profitablity and therefore investment perspective.) We all know what happens to the price of metals when the economy heats up..... timing is everything.

February 18, 2010 9:13 PM  
Blogger PK... said...

To All Concerned --

There is a high level of mis-information being tossed at the comments forum:

The higher weight factor referenced by one poster is incorrect. The weight of ElectriPlast material versus its metalic-based counterpart is reportedly 20-80% lighter.

The brittle-factor referenced by another poster is also incorrect. ElectriPlast materials were tested and have a higher resistance to brittleness due to weathering extremes, as opposed to metalic-based counterpart already present in the marketplace.

PK sends...

February 20, 2010 7:55 PM  
Anonymous oscar said...

Having followed ITKG for the last 5 years now, read and contributed to this blog, and put some my money where my mouth is, I want to share some impressions. I am a bit baffled by the stream of negative commentary some people feel necessary to post. Almost all of it seems speculative and non-substantial. What is your reasoning behind doing this? I have pondered, and have a few possible explanations:
Are you trying to act as ‘due diligence’ for the rest of us? I, for one, don’t need it. I have allocated funds for this stock from the place they ought to come from – my speculative investment pool. Anyone in his/her right mind would do the same, and don’t need your guidance.
Or, are you acting from schadenfreude – hoping for the company and the rest of us to fail miserably, for some strange psychological reason.
Or, are you an insider who is attempting in a very obtuse way to sabotage the company? This is a ridiculous strategy – if electroplast is a hoax, that will become apparent on its own. If it is what it purports to be, sabotage will not succeed.
Some suggestions: Stop posting anonymously. Explain your frame of reference and reason for posting. Don’t draw unsubstantiated conclusions about electroplast.
I have, myself, posted comments detailing my frustration with the company, but these have to do with lack of transparency and inability to capitalize on public interest. That, to me, seems to be a reasonable use of PK’s blog. The vitriole and unsupported characterizations about the material are not.

February 20, 2010 9:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No PK, you are wrong. Please don't confuse people by spreading incorrect information and not doing the proper calculations. Lets look at the data:

The volume resistivity of copper is about 1.7 x 10(-6) ohm-cm. Reference http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/BridgetRitter.shtml

The measured volume resistivity of Electriplast (EP) is 5.67 ohm-cm. Reference the EP data sheet.

These numbers are very, very different. The volume resistivity is about 1 million time LESS than that of the EP. That means that copper (EP's "metallic-based counterpart" as you say) is about a million times BETTER conductor than EP.

So, do you need a million times more EP than copper to make an equivalent conductor? No. Actually, one only needs about 1,000 times thicker part or wire since we have been working with volume (cubed) parameters.

But EP's density (specific gravity) works in its favor. EP's specific gravity is 1.65 (from the data sheet). The specific gravity of copper is 8.89. Reference http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-gravity-solids-metals-d_293.html

Therefore, a given volume of EP is about 5 times lighter than its "metallic-based counterpart" - copper.

So...parts or wires made from EP will weigh about 200 times MORE than the analogous parts made from copper (because one needs so much less copper for the same resistivity or conductivity).

I welcome anyone to refute these calculations.

"In God we trust - all others should bring data"

February 20, 2010 11:03 PM  
Blogger PK... said...

To the last Poster --

Trust me, somewhere within your drivel, you proved the point of my February 20, 2010 7:55 PM post...

As you so prominently note:

"I welcome anyone to refute these calculations."


To Oscar - Kudos for the wisdom of reading between the lines and courage of the questioning retort.

PK sends...

February 21, 2010 10:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My, my, PK! A poster merely does some factual calculations and your only response is an insult?

That shows what this blog is all about - not an exchange of factual information but just another forum to post unproven assertions.

Haven't we had enough of that from the Integral folks? I, for one, welcome people helping us make some meaning from the very few facts we have.

Why not publish a disclaimer - "This is the ITKG cheerleading blog." ?

February 21, 2010 1:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To poster: February 20, 2010 11:03 PM

I'll confess that I am not an engineer, so I am not able to refute what you have stated. But, somewhere along the way your logic breaks down, purely from a pragmatic standpoint if for no other.

Integral is not the only ones trying to carve out a niche in the conductive polymer (CP) market (see Chomerix, e.g.). Their claim, however, is that it is ligthweight, highly conductive, moldable, extrudable, etc., etc. Why is there a market for CP's, if, as you state in Electriplast's case, it would have to be 1000x thicker and weigh 200x more?

Is there another CP manufacturer w/better performance factors? If yes, who are they? If not, how do they have a market for their products?

TIA for your response.

February 21, 2010 3:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In part you rant: "Why not publish a disclaimer - "This is the ITKG cheerleading blog." ?"

You've got to be kidding, right? He has allowed far more leeway than I would ever consider on a shareholder-owned blog. You have every message board there is to spew your venomous hatred for all things Integral -- is that not enough? Apparently not.

February 21, 2010 4:01 PM  
Anonymous oscar said...

I, also, am not an engineer. But I think the following may be a salient point which is being missed. The data sheet which is subject of the current round of uproar appears to be about a EP formulation meant for SHIELDING - not for transmission...
"These superb EMI/RFI shielding properties over a wide frequency spectrum from DC to UHF outperformed the competition by over 40%."
So, it is ridiculous to draw transmission comparisons (200 times less effective) from this particular doping formulation. IN addition, the license just issued is for shielding...

February 21, 2010 7:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oscar, thanks for pointing out the obvious that was somehow missed. As PK stated earlier, there's a lot of misinformation being floated as fact. Our anonymous expert engineer just proved that fact once again.

February 21, 2010 8:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Yes. The EP shielding results do look impressive. However, don't forget that the thickness of the sample was 0.125". Typical metal foil or braid shielding is about 0.002" (2 mil). So it looks like they used 50-100x more EP to get shielding results comparable to metal foil. So there goes the supposed weight savings.

Its all consistent with the data and the "Engineer's" calculations - you need a heck of lot more EP to do the same job as metal.

February 21, 2010 9:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Response to poster: February 21, 2010 3:21 PM

That's a fair question. Let me try to answer.

The Chomerics Premiere data sheet shows 9 formulations with Surface Resistivities of 0.20-4.50 ohms/sq. Since we are now talking shielding (as opposed to conductivity) this is a better parameter to examine. The published EP formulation was measured at 17.33 - about 10x worse.

Also typical shield thicknesses for the Chomerics product are cited as 0.8-3.0 mm (0.030-0.125") in the brochure. So, they are recommending with very thick shields, too.

Bottomline, while the EP is definitely inferior to the Chomerics Premiere product line (and heavier/denser), they are "in the ballpark".

Could EP be used to make a molded plastic wire shield or device? Absolutely. The data shows that its not the best conductive plastic out there (more will be required and the part will be heavier) but it could certainly be made to work. There's no indication that it is "revolutionary" - but it is acceptable.

Where the unproven claims depart from the reality of the data is for conductivity applications - batteries, connectors, wire replacement, etc. EP and all the conductive plastics I have seen are orders of magnitude away from these applications.

Hopefully, our other friends on the blog won't find these comments to be "drivel" or "venemous".

February 21, 2010 10:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From PK`s "all concerned"....

"The brittle-factor referenced by another poster is also incorrect. ElectriPlast materials were tested and have a higher resistance to brittleness due to weathering extremes, as opposed to metalic-based counterpart already present in the marketplace."

From another, "not an engineer", but I doubt PK is either, both of the ASTM test methods indicated in the data sheet for tinsile and flexural strengths specify 'plastic only". With that noted, how can their results be compared to "metalic-based counterpart already present in the marketplace"?

Wouldn`t that constitute a high level of misinformation?


February 22, 2010 2:53 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home