[lper100km]

The web site is full of information and testimonials, but what I don’t see is product certification by any testing authority such as UL. I would have thought that this is the first thing that a product manufacturer would do to legitimize it’s claims. The company testing method may be sufficient, but it suffers from self interest and is probably not comparable with other products that are certified by UL and which are unified through a common protocol. As far as the ‘house’ test is concerned, you could probably cover the inside of the box with 18 gauge sheet metal and get far faster warm up than the paint.

Whilst I’m not ready to call it a scam, I sense that this product is relying on the magic and general ignorance of ‘nano’ technology to make it’s sales pitch. I do have difficulty imagining that a 9 to 12 mil paint coat can provide enough insulation to measurably reduce heat loss. It really needs a much more professional and studied approach. Endorsements alone really don’t cut it. Real world independent technical data and full reports on actual project performance are what is needed to establish credibility.

However, they do have a world wide sales network for what that is worth. Stock performance is marginally abysmal, falling steadily from a high of around $1.50 about three years ago to around $0.07 today – and no, it is not due to the recent sell off. Its pink sheet listed.

[yeahbut]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emergingclarity', '.')..

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emergingclarity', '.')..

[yeahbut]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emergingclarity', '.')..

[oiless]

Company I work for built a new shop this spring, big metal building. The contractor used a paint on insulation on the inside of the south facing wall to keep the heat down.
I don't remember the name of the stuff (if I knew it) but it looks like white rough texture paint, went on in several spray applications to a thickness of about 10 mil or so.
The wall gets warm to the touch inside, but not hot. The outside of the wall is white.
I don't have a non-treated wall to compare to, but my impression is that it does something, but not a lot as far as insulating goes. I was told that it was expensive as hell.
Stick with real insulation.

If you live somewhere that you can build a log home logs are one hell of an insulator.

[skeptik]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ') If it works it would be well worth it to do a couple rooms at a time with the 5 gallon bucket option, but I can't afford to lose the money if it turns out to just be expensive paint that does nothing for my energy bills.

So one of ya'all with more money than I have do the test and give us unbiased results! (Pretty please.....)

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('skeptik', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ') If it works it would be well worth it to do a couple rooms at a time with the 5 gallon bucket option, but I can't afford to lose the money if it turns out to just be expensive paint that does nothing for my energy bills.

So one of ya'all with more money than I have do the test and give us unbiased results! (Pretty please.....)

[kolm]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '
')I do beleive in physics so I know that if their claims are true, that the paint resists both conduction and radiation, then it would work. Does it work? I can't afford to test it and I wish UL or CR would and give a full analysis.

[sandshark]

To "yeahbut":

I can understand and appreciate your urging of skepticism on other readers. However, instead of boring you with a lot of information which you probably won't review... I suggest you test/try this product. Even if it's just one gallon, and a little experiment of your own. You WILL be impressed with its performance, that I can assure you. I was, and the fact that I tried it myself is the only reason I would sound so certain (seeing is believing, for me).

Discussing doubts is fine, but TRY IT. It truly does sound "too good to be true", I agree. But it's works, and it's true. By the way, if you ever buy any to test it yourself... there are quite a few uses for it so I don't think the gallon will go to waste (walls, pipes, etc).

Just to get you started, take a peek at this residential case study. It's detailed and pretty interesting.
http://www.nansulate.com/pdf/CaseStudie ... estudy.pdf

The homepage, Nansulate.com, has a lot of info on it. Case studies, TESTING data, MSDS, spec sheets, etc. It's also patented, fyi.

Let me know if you need to know where any other info is. I'm not the most knowledgeable, but I am intrigued so I know enough to keep up a bit as a layman.

[sandshark]

An offer which can't be beat...

Here's how certain I am that Nansulate works as the company claims: If anyone would like to discuss a small trial (just one gallon) application or experiment... I may be willing to send you a gallon on my dime. Think of it as my getting into the holiday spirit (really, just for fun).

No, I'm not a company insider. I would prefer that this person be honest and forthright, so that if someone takes me up on that offer that it's not a wasted gallon of product. All you have to do is try it in earnest, and report back. Why? Because I am very entertained by this product (the 'too good to be true factor' is amazing), and I would LOVE to see an honest skeptic (or someone who can't afford a gallon) try it and be as surprised as I was about its performance.

Anyone want to discuss this? It's no-risk, and seeing as how I'm not into "wasting" $$... it shows how confident I am in this stuff being legit, right? Nobody in their right mind would issue a challenge like this if the product didn't work. The eye-opener factor would be worth the cost for me, hence the challenge I just made.

[sandshark]

Are you all aware that Nansulate recently won a "Best Product 2008" award from BuilderNews magazine in the energy efficiency category. And also is #43 on QualifiedRemodeler's Top 100 Products of 2008 list. I don't know for sure, but I doubt that trade publications would give an award to a bogus product and risk their good names... agreed?

Look at the residential & industrial "Case Studies" on the website. That is REAL WORLD information - I saw someone here asking for real-world info about using the product.

But more than likely, the bottom line is it's hard to believe unless you try it (but reading the case studies - i.e. others who have tried it, is a good starter. there's energy and $ savings figures there).

[lper100km]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') saw someone here asking for real-world info about using the product.

[sandshark]

Iper100km, Do you read the posts at all? I posted a residential case study with the info you're asking for. LOOK at the case study, and then look at the industrial case studies also.

They have nothing to do with wooden boxes (lol!). Your insults are entertaining, sure, but they are off base. But FYI, since you'll likely think omission is admission... I assure you it's not. I'm not a promoter. This thread is about the product, not the stock. Would you like to trade insults, or would you like to LOOK at information and risk having your pre-conceived viewpoint be proven wrong?

http://www.nansulate.com/nansulate_resi ... tudies.htm

http://www.nansulate.com/pdf/CaseStudies/gdavis_casestudy.pdf

http://www.nansulate.com/nansulate_indu ... tudies.htm

[sandshark]

Iper100km, Couple more tidbits for you...

Would a medical device have Nansulate built into the specs if the product was some sort of scam? You can contact Edward Moore Design, a Canadian govt recognized design firm, and inquire about that. Oh, wait, THAT info is also on the testimonial page of the company's website as well. Look it up.

How about Industrial Nanotech giving a white-paper presentation re: their new quick-cure epoxy (EPX) product at Pipeline Coating 2009 conference in January 2009 in Vienna, Austria? Would that well-known conference invite a scam to speak there and smudge the conference's credibility? Look at the conference's website, and logos/images of the sponsors. What do you see... a bunch of HUGE well-known companies, AND tiny little Industrial Nanotech's logo as well (as a sponsor along with the big boys).

Conference Homepage
http://www.amiplastics.com/ami/AMIConfe ... ventID=151

Conference Schedule (look at day 3):
http://www.amiplastics.com/ami/Images/G ... 202009.pdf

The more you insult me, the more info I will give you. Soon, you will either ignore everything because you aren't one to admit you may be wrong... or you will simply be reduced to insulting me for no valid reason.

You want the patent info also? Let me know.

[GoghGoner]

Simple question:

Whati is the R-value of this product and what independent group rated it?

[GoghGoner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GoghGoner', 'S')imple question:

Whati is the R-value of this product and what independent group rated it?

[sandshark]

To try to answer your question...

Patent:
http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Par ... S=burchill

Insulating Properties From Patent:
"The insulation characteristics of a coating having a thickness of 0.058 inches prepared from this composition were measured by ASTM method ASTM C-518. The results shown below indicate that the coating has outstanding insulation properties: Thermal Conductivity: 0.187 Btu/hr ft .degree. F. R-Value=0.058/(12.times.0.187)=0.026 hr ft.sup.2.degree. F./Btu t.sub.mean=180.degree. F."

Here's some K value info (and other specs):
http://www.nansulate.com/pdf/Specsheets ... arCoat.pdf

K value is a better measure, from what I understand as more engineers deal in K. The K value of the underlying technology (Hydro-NM-Oxide) is around ~.02. They say the coating dries to a 70% composition of Hydro-NM-Oxide. What matters, as a bottom line, is does the stuff work or doesn't it? Changing the view that the traditional insulation industry has fostered over the decades isn't comfortable (but challenge yourself).

Dr Peter Wachtel, the scientist behind this and also named on the patent, is involved with Princeton Polymer Laboratories (in NJ I believe). R value is a common sticking-point with the regular non-epoxy product, but as I said before... there is no magic involved. The proof is in the pudding, as they say. No tricks involved; try it yourself. I also recommend entering "Nansulate" into youtube.com and watch some of the insulating ability demonstrations there.

But FYI, they say the R value for the new epoxy (EPX) will be released soon since a 1" thickness is possible for that product (hence, can do the standard 1" thickness R value lab test).

[lper100km]

That’s not a case study, Sandshark. That’s just an opinion. You can save that much just by lowering the internal temperature a few degrees. Maybe the previous owners liked it at 80 and the new owners prefer 68. Who did it? Was it an independent? Was it the home owner? Was it Nansulate?

Where’s the UL certification for this product? Is the company not in violation of some statute or other by selling insulation material without UL certification? Is it listed in the building codes as a viable insulation method?

I don’t think I am being insulting by asking for credible information. Appearance at seminars, exhibitions and trade shows never implies endorsement by the sponsors and by itself is no proof of product efficacy. You have to admit that the idea of a 3 mil layer of paint exhibiting the extraordinary conductivity and radiation properties claimed is a bit thin.

[sandshark]

Iper100km, Yes, I agree. The whole thing "sounds" too good to be true. I felt that way too, which is why I tried it myself.

Seriously, watch the demos on youtube. They aren't rigged (because my results were similar).

And although you've identified potential holes in the case study (via possible lack of scientific controls), you are assuming the worst-case botched case study. And you may be correct in taking that stance, since this product is pretty new. But at the same time, the case study may be completely valid... and based on my experience with the product, my view is that the case studies are valid.

If you want better proof of case study, look at the industrial case studies. There, IMO, is much less of a fudamental change in what's measured if a corporation is using the product... as they are unlikely to change their processes due to using Nansulate. Look at the Bandvulc Tires case study, and the Textile industry case studies.

The thing is... the stuff works. Are you an honest person? If so, and if you are curious enough to do your own simple little experiment... let me know, and maybe you can take me up on my goodwill offer to give you a gallon and then you can report back to the board here. I am confident that your eyebrows will be raised. If I wasn't, then would I really waste my $ on a stranger? I will put my $ where my mouth is, because I love the concept of a new/novel product being proven legit.

About the UL... I'm not sure. Maybe the company can give me/us that answer. However, I did read that Nansulate was approved for European Union building codes.

[sandshark]

About UL... I don't think I answered that question fully. I don't believe they have any official UL rating (that I'm aware of), and the product lacks official widespread/accepted recognizeable certifications for thermal insulating abilities. Obviously.

They do have official 3rd party lab data for the corrosion prevention, mold prevention (and I think lead encapsulation). If you want that info, let me know and I can give a link to it.

But, the K value of Nansulate is known... and K is a good measure of thermal insulating ability. R value may leave off certain types of thermal transfer, whereas K doesn't (right?). But, to be fair... lack of official R value (since this stuff can't be applied at 1" for a lab to test it for R value) is one of the biggest challenges which exists.

But, look at the project list on the website. Quite a few businesses have seen enough reason to use the product. Those who will ONLY deal with a product which has an R value... will simply pass on this for now. No problem. But, I say... I can prove it works. Try me (my offer of a gallon). The ability of the product is the bottom line, period. The other credibility will come in time if the product is effective. I would say, "I'm honest" (I am), or I'd say "trust me" (since you can), but since we're all strangers... I know those are empty words. Therefore, the best I can say, other than providing case study info, etc, is TRY THE STUFF. That is the most realistic challenge possible (when lacking in the info which traditional thinkers want - nothing wrong with traditional thinking, but this product is not traditional). I am literally standing here in front of you, daring you to step up and try it. And furthermore, if you're sincere enough and have a good idea for a valid experiment... then I will even provide you the gallon of product as long as you promise to be honest and fair in your test and conclusion.

I also recommend a person contact a distributor (I'm not one). There is a large network of distributors, and I doubt that would exist if this product was just some bogus gimmick. Think about it.

p.s. I put it on a toaster oven also (yes, I know that's comical), and that was more proof that this product works. The top of it doesn't get as hot anymore. I also put it on an untreated natural gas pipe which was just starting to form surface rust... and it stopped it completely. I also put it on a copper pipe which was coming out of my hot water heater, and now it's warm to the touch instead of hot to the touch. My largest application was on my raw wood beam ceiling which didn't have insulation above it between that and the roof. This product is obviously especially appealing in cases where you don't have the ability to simply lay down some fiberglass rolls.