Venture Capital: enabling technology and promising startups

[uberhund]

Remember the good old days when the US had an economy? For those too young to remember, an important source of stimulus for growth and innovation was venture capital.

If you were a venture capitalist today with wealthy Limited Partners to satisfy, what enabling technologies and/or promising startup investment opportunities would you currently consider?

 

[SteveCNC]

Power storage devices for serious amounts of power . We really need a game changer in that department .

 

[uberhund]

That's a good one, SteveCNC. The lack of efficient, easily managed storage has crippled... well... everything. Consumer electronics, air and ground transportation, and space exploration. But what improvement in power density would be needed to qualify as game-changing? How would the VC recognize a great investment when he/she saw one?

Actually, Nasa/JPL deep space probes may give us some useful guidance on what a reasonable goal would be. The laws of weight versus power are the most extreme for space projects. When JPL needs an extra long, easily managed, dense source of energy, they use various forms of atomic thermal generators. It would seem, therefore, that densities along of the lines of atomic thermal generators would be the minimum goal for new batteries.

Looking for something with the energy density of fissionable uranium is not good news for would-be battery innovators.

According to the back of my envelope, since the introduction of the electric car in the 1890s, the power density of lead-acid batteries has merely doubled. Had the development of batteries followed what's commonly known as Moore's Law, doubling every two years, my arithmetic shows that the power density of storage batteries would today exceed that of Antimatter. Seriously. Antimatter. Perhaps someone with math skills better than mine can improve upon my conclusion here.

At any rate, since usable power densities approaching antimatter are impossible, that leaves various forms of atomic energy as the only solution to the storage issue.

And this is not good news for consumer products or Earth transportation or my new iPad.

Were I the Managing Partner of this hypothetical venture capital firm looking for your power storage game-changer, my current impression is that any prospective portfolio company would need to demonstrate a non-nuclear solution capable of somewhere between 10 and 33 MJ/kg, at a cost appropriate for commercial applications.

So unless someone out there has an affordable 10 MJ/kg solution in the works - the world needs to get accustomed to fossil fuels for the duration of our life on this planet.

Your mileage may vary, especially if you're driving a Prius (I suppose. Never been in one. Do they still get great mileage with the air conditioner on and the radio blaring? I'm not an environmentalist, so I don't know. Just wondering).

 

[MeteorWayne]

Your mileage may vary, especially if you're driving a Prius (I suppose. Never been in one. Do they still get great mileage with the air conditioner on and the radio blaring? I'm not an environmentalist, so I don't know. Just wondering).

Yes, about 48 mpg either way...

 

[rcsplinters]

Your mileage may vary, especially if you're driving a Prius (I suppose. Never been in one. Do they still get great mileage with the air conditioner on and the radio blaring? I'm not an environmentalist, so I don't know. Just wondering).

Yes, about 48 mpg either way...

Pardon for wandering a bit off topic, but I drive one of those vehicles. Oddly enough, I think the greatest fuel conservation feature on the Prius is that graphic that reflects fuel consumption and when the gas assist is used and when it is not. Strikes me that a retrofit product that displays the equivalent (sans electric motor usage of course) information might change driving habits, particularly for those, like myself, that could care less about mileage but despise tithing at the local fuel tabernacle every few days. Such a device would be a worthy product for a startup.

Oh, before anyone gets the idea that I'm an environmentalist, my other vehicle is a gas guzzling diesel truck which I immensely enjoy.

Now back to topic, one area of space commercialization that would seem lucrative to me that you don't hear much about would be human factors improvement both in and beyond LEO. The sky is the limit on improvements in food, waste management, water management, heat/cooling, weight reduction, entertainment, communication, etc etc etc. There's a lot of interest in trying to build the next ride up hill, but not so much in what you do and how you live once you get there. From the human factors perspective, the ride uphill is 8 minutes while the ride once you are there is measured in days, weeks, months and eventually to be years.

 

[uberhund]

RCSplinters writes:
graphic of fuel consumption .... information might change driving habits
I concur, Splinters. My German car has had an analog needle indicating similar information since the 1980s. It in fact does affect my driving (still aggressive, just more fuel-efficiently so).

Interesting input on enhancing the orbital experience. How would this be measured? What would a VC be looking for to know that a money-making game-changer has been brought to the table?

So the laundry list of enabling technologies for which VCs should be shopping consists of, so far:
1) Storage Technology with a density of at least 10MJ/kg (my add - SteveCNC may disagree) at commercially viable prices (also my add)
2) Enhanced passenger experience post-boost- phase (definitions of success TBD).

What else?

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

I would invest my money in single stage to orbit vehicles, that seems like a good place to help.

 

[uberhund]

I believe single stage to orbit lifters already exist for small satellites, do they not? In any case, why would a VC invest in a new one? That's the point of this thread.

 

[nesp]

How about technology that allows weaving of arbitrary-length, high tensile-strength, low-mass carbon nanotube technology to allow construction of a geo space elevator? That would be a game changer with high returns. Might not be near-term enough for typical VC$ though.

 

[rcsplinters]

RCSplinters writes:
graphic of fuel consumption .... information might change driving habits
I concur, Splinters. My German car has had an analog needle indicating similar information since the 1980s. It in fact does affect my driving (still aggressive, just more fuel-efficiently so).

Interesting input on enhancing the orbital experience. How would this be measured? What would a VC be looking for to know that a money-making game-changer has been brought to the table?

So the laundry list of enabling technologies for which VCs should be shopping consists of, so far:
1) Storage Technology with a density of at least 10MJ/kg (my add - SteveCNC may disagree) at commercially viable prices (also my add)
2) Enhanced passenger experience post-boost- phase (definitions of success TBD).

What else?

How would an investor measure that? Well, it depends on the stage of development presented. One of the first things I'd be looking to capitalize would be hiring the russians to put some human factors specialists in orbit to see what they bring back. What's the most boring work? What's repetitive? What do they hate or love doing? What sort of devices would improve things? Where could they cut weight? Where could they cut complexity? Human factors is a broad subject, but these illustrate the point. Armed with that information, then it would be reasonable to consider product opportunity. Of course you might substitute former astronaunts for an HF expert for some product speculation.

 

[SteveCNC]

Maybe something as simple as a better barf bag would be a great thing since a lot of people will take the whole 3 days to adjust to weightlessness a more convienient and sanitary barf bag would be great .

 

[uberhund]

I like the carbon nanotube idea. But how would the VC know that the product was "game changing" as to what is already available? Would it be 10x longer than any built before? Would it be 10x cheaper to make? Would it be 10x lighter but 10x stronger? To enable the nanotube to join the list of game changers, what would the necessary performance parameters be? Also, what commercially viable project would the nanotube enable?

As soon as someone comes up with these, along with a way to monitize the VC investment, I'll add it to the VC shopping list.

 

[sftommy]

Senator Nelson probably is thinking of the venture capitalist in his tax break idea. His website has posted the complete text of the proposed bill and it does seem to be directed more to them than the traditional investor.

Venture Capitalist are usually looking for return on investment and are sometimes known to be very aggressive in cost controls. I don't think the venture capitalists see enough of a market to get a return on investment after startup costs. That's the support this fledgling commercial industry needs, and a launch site that doesn't bump them every time DoD has a hiccup.

Once the fundamentals are in place, Venture Capital will flock to commercial space, but they will want to be making money at it!

 

[nesp]

I like the carbon nanotube idea. But how would the VC know that the product was "game changing" as to what is already available? Would it be 10x longer than any built before? Would it be 10x cheaper to make? Would it be 10x lighter but 10x stronger? To enable the nanotube to join the list of game changers, what would the necessary performance parameters be? Also, what commercially viable project would the nanotube enable?

As soon as someone comes up with these, along with a way to monitize the VC investment, I'll add it to the VC shopping list.

As I menioned, the carbon nanotube idea would not be near-term enough for a VC in the context of a space elevator. But how about in the context of stronger, lighter, materials for spacecraft structures? That's a definite money maker in terms of reduced weight.

The best aluminum/composites spacecraft structures at a few g/m3 consume perhaps 10-15% of total weight. Carbon nanotubes theoretically have at least 10X, and perhaps 20-30X the tensile strength -- several million psi -- at a fraction of the weight. There are reports of nanotube sheets with mass density of 0.1 g/m2. If properly engineered, the structural weight of a spacecraft could become a negligible portion of the total weight, maybe just a few %.

 

[uberhund]

Thanks, nesp. That helps. So here's the list so far distilled from two days of contributions:

• 1) Storage Technology with a density of at least 10MJ/kg (my add - SteveCNC may disagree) at commercially viable prices (also my add)
  2) Structural carbon nanotube materials with a weight of .1g/1000 meters or less (my add, nesp may disagree), at costs 10x less than the equivalent quantity of aluminum (also my add).
  3) Enhanced passenger experience post-boost- phase (more flags, more fun, I guess. Need definitions here).

For better or worse, this is the charter for the MIT, Stanford, Rice, and Georgia Tech graduating classes of 2012. According to the members of this thread, developing prototypes of these game-changing technologies will entitle you to venture funding by which to create waves of space-applicable innovations not seen since the Apollo era.

Are they up to it?

 

[uberhund]

Hm. I'll take the silence as NO. At least for the readers of this forum, nobody's going to step forward to produce these technologies.

This does not bode well for manned space flight, which is fine with me.

Since manned space flight is evidently not an interesting business proposition, let's focus the precious dollars available on probes. My hope is that we dump everything we've got into probes and/or rovers to Triton and Europa.

I'm guessing we would garner more science in the three or four years these missions would last than the entire 10-year useful history of the inane ISS.

 

[SteveCNC]

Actually I was looking into the battery one myself as an interesting thing I might have the technology needed to produce said item at my fingertips being a high tech machinest and all . But I don't want to give away my insights at this time but I do have an idea that may increase the power density by a factor of roughly 2.5 times what it is now . While 2.5 times isn't all that huge it may be enough to make some difference .

I started studying current designs a few days ago when this thread started and since at one point I had thought about attempting to compete in the rover competition but decided (even if my design could get sponsored which I do have a design) the time constraints would require things I didn't want to give up however designing and producing a better battery is within the realm of possibility for me on my own so I'm looking into it .

 

[uberhund]

Excellent, SteveCNC. I hope you pursue the competitions and your battery concept. 2.5x is plenty impressive. Power density truly is on the critical path for... well, everything. I love those competitions - it's one of the things NASA/DARPA does best.

Your post reminds me of a need for another game changer: How can we develop a culture that promotes innovation, creativity, and inventiveness over sports stars, movie stars, and useless bling? I think NASA/DARPA are doing the best the can here, but they need help from other sectors.

In any case, keep us posted on your progress when you're ready to talk about either the rover competition or the battery.

 

[EarthlingX]

http://www.gpsdaily.com : Venture Capital Fund Backs Business Opportunities From Space

by Staff Writers

Paris, France (ESA) Aug 24, 2010

Two start-up companies offering a communication handset for outdoor enthusiasts and a computer game to compete live with real racing drivers, both made possible thanks to space technology, are the first to receive funds from ESA's new Open Sky Technologies Fund.

German TakWak GmbH is developing a three-in-one communication device integrating mobile phone, satellite navigation and walkie-talkie functions for outdoor enthusiasts enjoying active sports like hiking, skiing and kayaking. It combines three separate systems in one easy-to-use handset with special features for sport.

German TakWak GmbH is developing a three-in-one communication device integrating mobile phone, satellite navigation and walkie-talkie functions for outdoor enthusiasts enjoying active sports like hiking, skiing and kayaking. It combines three separate systems in one easy-to-use handset with special features for sport. Credits: TakWak

Another start-up company backed by venture capital is Dutch-German iOpener Media, who are pioneering the next generation of online gaming.

iOpener allows gamers to compete in real time against cars in real races, by using 'live' satnav data.

Organised by ESA's Technology Transfer Programme Office with Europe Unlimited and the Chamber of Commerce of Milan, and supported by IBAN, EBAN, KIS4SAT, NAVSAT and EC's Enterprise Europe Network, the ESA Investment Forum in October will give investors an occasion to spot new interesting companies.

The companies, many stemming from ESA's Business Incubation Centres, are all using technologies from European space programmes or satellite services to create their innovative solutions.

http://takwak.com/ (under construction)

http://www.iopenermedia.com/


www.esa.int : ESA Technology transfer programme

ESA’s Technology Transfer Programme Office (TTPO) has successfully transferred over 200 space technologies to non-space sectors for applications as diverse as cooling suits for a Formula 1 racing team, ground penetrating radar to detect cracks in mine tunnels and several health-care innovations.
The activities of TTPO have also led to the creation of a number of new start-up companies in Europe, many of which have been promoted through ESA’s Business Incubator.