Why Deep-Tech Startups Fail: Dr. James Tour on Management, Money & Markets

Not all of our companies have succeeded.

In every case that I that I can think back on in every case, it's not been the technology, it's been the management.

You have to have three things. You have

to have management, you have to have technology, and you have to have money.

Usually, if the management is is right, you can get the money when there's good technology behind it. It's a

three-legged stool. Any one of those three, it doesn't work out. This stool

is falling down. In every one of the cases, it's always been the management was not right.

We have with us today Kimmani Isaac. And

Kimmani got her undergraduate degree from Northwestern University and then she is now working at Salesforce, but

she is also uh planning to join uh the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School in May of 2026.

And with her current job in Salesforce, she's looking at the the uh she's a value service engineer, which means uh she does analysis of return on investment. She's covering the

investment. She's covering the healthcare industry, medical devices, automotive, uh uh uh manufacturing, energy, and utilities for Fortune 500

companies, which is which is a lot. uh

but part of her MBA she'll also be doing a master's in international studies and she's looking at sustainability and finance around this and she wanted to to

uh uh interview me uh to ask some questions about how we bring our technologies to market and the other thing that she has been attending my my

group meeting actually uh through zoom uh just to learn more about that and so she's been doing that for the last uh I don't a couple of months, something like that. Uh, so I'm going to just turn it

that. Uh, so I'm going to just turn it over to Kamani to ask any questions that she might have. And, uh, she sent me the list of questions, but I never read them. I just thought that I saw that

them. I just thought that I saw that they were extensive. So, I said, well, if if we're going to do this, why don't we just record it because maybe it'll it'll be a blessing to others. So, go

ahead Kimani.

>> Well, thank you for for making the time and for having me here and also for allowing me to attend the the lab meetings. It's been really lovely

meetings. It's been really lovely because I've been following your research since 2021. So being able to follow from afar and see how the work

has grown and evolved and then also now be able to have this conversation and see how your lab runs has just been an honor. So thank you.

honor. So thank you.

Uh so this conversation specifically is because I want to gain context around how the lab has come to be where it is and the decision making behind the

commercial paths that have been and are being pursued. So the goal of this part

being pursued. So the goal of this part of my research and laying the foundation for the thesis that I'll be doing in grad school is to essentially see where

the circularity of industrial materials is also going to shift the magnitude of economic flows more broadly between actors within industrial supply chains

and in our society. So, after joining the lab meetings these past few months and having conversations with some of your former students and current

students, it's clear that you run the lab in ways that really prepare students particularly well to enter the private sector. And you train them to pursue not

sector. And you train them to pursue not only scientific exploration, but also economic viability in their research.

And I'm curious, what experience actually shaped you to run the lab this way? It was not with intent. I think it

way? It was not with intent. I think it just evolved this way. And uh um so I started I started as an assistant

professor at the age of 28. Uh I had no experience in running companies or doing things like that. uh although as a posttock at Stanford I did have an idea

and I went to the we was very early on in the in in the time at Stanford that they had their tech transfer office and I do remember getting a a disclosure

form from them so that I could begin to reference my idea but uh um uh maybe a year or two after I I started my career

I started to file patent disclosures and then patent applications and uh uh started to to think that that hey maybe we could capitalize on some of

this and uh for the first many years until until 2014 actually we used to license a lot of the technologies to

companies and then it was sort of out of our hands to big companies and uh uh I I found out that by doing that you make very little money. uh you you could get

a little bit through what the university makes, but there was no real if there was a banner carrier at the big company, they got transferred out after a while and the the intellectual property just

kind of languished there. Nothing really

big happened and there was no liquidity event. So in other words, there was no

event. So in other words, there was no big event where I could make real money.

I just something small on the licensing fee and some small royalty or something that would flow through the university and then I would get a fraction of that and the students would get a fraction of

that. But then in 2014, I was approached

that. But then in 2014, I was approached by an by an investor and he said he wanted to start a company around

graphing quantum dots, a paper that we had published. And I said, "Sure, let's

had published. And I said, "Sure, let's go ahead and do this." And a few months after that, he and I got together and and he came with one of his associates and he said, "Well, maybe maybe do you

have other companies, too?" I said, "Actually, we Yeah. I do you have other technologies, too?" I said, "Yeah, we

technologies, too?" I said, "Yeah, we have something in computer memory." Oh,

we like computer memory. Let's start a company around that. And so it started like that. And those first few

like that. And those first few companies, I mean, I wasn't having students go into them. Uh uh we they would learn the technology and these investors would start the company, the

hire hire the CEO and do the board. And

I was never an officer or director in those companies. Now I should backtrack

those companies. Now I should backtrack a little bit that in 1999 I did start a company with four other professors and it didn't go well. I mean it it was

very easy to raise money in 1999 2000.

It was the dotcom boom and and really really quickly you could raise money and uh um but we were trying to make molecular electronic memory that would

have no moving parts yet nonvolatile memory. And at the time all there was on

memory. And at the time all there was on that was was magnetic hard drives. Uh we

didn't know that flash memory was coming down the line. And so flash took off and our company was no more because that was electronic memory that had no moving parts. But I also learned everything

parts. But I also learned everything what I should not do. Uh uh because in that first company I was on the board and and all sorts of and and I I realized I cannot be a professor and and

run a company at the same time. You

you'll do both poorly. And so when we started these other companies in 2015, so that was 15 years later, uh I was never an officer director on the board.

I didn't have to worry about conflict of interest and and I could just strictly be a professor. I didn't want to be a businessman. I didn't want to have to

businessman. I didn't want to have to cater to all of these these uh investors all the time and things like that. And

so we started starting these companies.

And then I think the students also changed. the students had started to

changed. the students had started to have more of an entrepreneurial interest and and uh uh prior to that they they all wanted to go into big companies you

know work for Intel, work for Merc and uh have a steady paycheck and a steady job and something like this and certainly some students that's what they still want. Uh but then they realized

still want. Uh but then they realized that hey you could you could do much better if you were with one of these startup companies because what happens is you can have a liquidity event either

taking it public or the sale of the company or something like that and you start you you you start having an earning potential which is much higher.

Yes, it is higher risk but these quote unquote steady jobs with big companies also can be high risk because they they cut people all the time now. It's not

like in the old days where where you started working for a company and you stayed with them for 40 years. That's

not the case anymore. And so, you know, they have hiring and firing and and and uh so people uh even in these quote unquote big companies over a 15-year

period could be at three different companies. So, so uh uh so more lately

companies. So, so uh uh so more lately uh the students have been wanting to pick these up. So, we we currently have 17 companies that that are in operation

right now. some of them doing better

right now. some of them doing better than others. And uh uh I with the with

than others. And uh uh I with the with that original investor, I've started about I don't know 14 of the 17 uh with that that one person. Uh we've done that

or or or 12 of the 17 something like that. And uh that's what we do. And so

that. And uh that's what we do. And so

it I think it it it sort of grew this way. It wasn't like I woke up one

way. It wasn't like I woke up one morning and said this is what we're going to do.

>> Okay. So if I understand you correctly, it sounds like really it happened quite organically and there was this

convergence of you filing patents, having experience, you know, seeing very little liquidity from the licensing and then this investor approaching you and

it really sort of grew from there in combination with a change in the interests of the students that you were working with overall.

>> Yeah. all all of that was happening at at at the same time, right? And you

know, I've always filed a lot of disclosures. I know that. So, I've been

disclosures. I know that. So, I've been at Rice 26 years. I've been a professor for 37 years. I've been at Rice 26 years. And I've kept Rice keeps the

years. And I've kept Rice keeps the recording of all this. In 26 years, we have filed on average one disclosure a month for the last 26 years, which means

that, you know, some of those disclosures sometimes get bunched together, but that's a lot of patents.

It's a lot of disclosures. I think the university has uh it's over 20% of Rice University's intellectual property has come out of my laboratory. So, so we're really quite active here and and uh I'm

certainly not 20% of the faculty here.

I'm one out of uh something like 900 faculty. So, so um uh yes, that that's

faculty. So, so um uh yes, that that's that's sort of of how it happened. It it

it it kind of evolved that way.

So, if I can take us back for a moment to that investor that you've been working with who initially approached you, how did they hear about you? What

is a little bit of their story?

>> Well, so he he doesn't read the basic literature, but I think he was reading in some trade magazine. What I've always done for many years is I've learned to work with the public affairs office

press releases that we we have a publication, we think it's it's something of interest, we we try to get it out in trade journals and magazines and things like that. And that you could do by working with the public affairs

office uh at the university. Now, some

professors, they they don't want to bother. Uh I actually intentionally

bother. Uh I actually intentionally bother with this. I do this and the reason I do this is it gets the word out much more broadly than the tiny little

nano community that reads your your your your articles. And uh it's it's really

your articles. And uh it's it's really really a boutique that that actually read the articles. And the ones to really read it in detail are really only the graduate students that have to read

it in detail to to either report on it in some group meeting or to to take some of the ideas and run with them. But but

uh uh uh so we've always tried to get things out in the trade journals and in magazines and things like that. And I

presume he read it. I never really asked him, but I presume he read it somewhere like that. And these were were graphine

like that. And these were were graphine quantum dots. He had an interest in this

quantum dots. He had an interest in this new material graphine. And so he reached out to me and this this was like December of 2014. I replied back and we

we we had a I remember we at the time I think we were met by Skype. That's back

when Skype was was more common. And and

uh um and then and then we we we visited uh we had a meeting with each other. I

was in in the city uh not far from him and uh so he he drove up with one of his co-investors and that and then then we started going one after another and uh it it it set up a whole different

precedent and what I had known from the first company that I had done back in 1999 is it took an enormous amount of time and here I wasn't having to give nearly as much. I could continue being a

professor without the the the big uh the big confusion. If you do not believe in

big confusion. If you do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ, send me an email tour.org and we will get together and I will

share with you about why I embrace the resurrection of Jesus.

>> So, you know, it's it's funny. Yeah, it

sounds like you understood very quickly that in order to broaden the reach of people that you could get the word out to, it was really about relying on the

expertise of the public affairs office to essentially do marketing for you. And

that's I remember part of how I initially learned about your research was I was reading fizz.org, which um you know is it's a journal for science news.

And I was looking at uh I was going down this rabbit hole because I was working with a mining equipment manufacturer that cared a lot about sustainability and we were in the process of doing a

transaction to get them a carbon accounting solution and ended up on this rabbit hole where I was thinking about how to redesign their business model because I also have consulting in my

background and found your research and thought, "Oh my gosh, this is amazing."

dug into the scientific articles, did my own economic analysis really broadly and was like this this changes the game fundamentally because a lot of the problem that we traditionally see with

recycling is the economics of it. It's

not that it's not feasible, it's just that it's too expensive quite often to make it work. So, I'm curious then when it comes to the commercialization aspect,

why did you and this investor decide to go public versus private? Or

if it's only been that a few companies have gone public, maybe talk me through some of the strategy on how some of the companies have launched.

>> I I don't get much involved on the business side. Sometimes I, you know, I

business side. Sometimes I, you know, I uh I do, but but in general, I don't. So

he he actually he wants if if if you don't take a company public fairly quickly. I mean you you you can go 20

quickly. I mean you you you can go 20 years and and a materials company actually on average materials company

takes 8 years to start selling material.

That's a long time to wait and that's on average. So you can easily go 10 years.

average. So you can easily go 10 years.

And and one of the first companies that we we we started was Weebit. It was

actually the second company that we started. We started under another name.

started. We started under another name.

And they make uh uh uh resistive uh uh memory. This RAM uh resistive random

memory. This RAM uh resistive random access memory. And they just started

access memory. And they just started selling really this this past year. They

just started selling. And so now they have contracts with three companies and and uh um and expanding at that and that's memory. It turns out it's it's

that's memory. It turns out it's it's very good for for AI as well. And so

that's expanding their markets. But that

we started in 2015. So it was a 10-year run before they started selling. Uh it's

very hard to break into the silicon market. So what he does is he takes

market. So what he does is he takes these things public rather rapidly, usually through a reverse merger. A few

years ago, something called spaxs were very large where you would take this this special purpose uh uh you you take sort of a failed company and just take

their spot on the stock exchange. Uh a

reverse merger is sort of like that, but it but the original company still stays around and uh but they're generally not they might not be doing that well in some cases. So you come in and do that

some cases. So you come in and do that and what that allows you to do, you open up the funding to the public market. So

rather than going the VC route and actually we've never gone the VC route in any of these companies that we've started. We've never had any VC money.

started. We've never had any VC money.

VCs as you know they have a high return on investment that they like because they have a diverse portfolio and the number of companies that are really going to make big money is generally

small. Now the top VC firms they they

small. Now the top VC firms they they they have more of a a selection process.

They the self- selecting for the the better ones. But in any case uh uh it it

better ones. But in any case uh uh it it it often doesn't work out as well for the the the initial investors when a VC comes in. If you go to the public

comes in. If you go to the public markets, that's another way to make money. Now, in the US, we have a lot of

money. Now, in the US, we have a lot of of of possible money you can get through these private uh uh sources. In other

countries, you don't. And so, so uh um they're more attuned to taking things to the public and raising the money that way. And so, that was the way that these

way. And so, that was the way that these companies started raising money was through the public markets. So it it can bring to the investors money more

quickly and I think that that's what his motivation was because what he likes to do is start these companies. He'll

infuse I don't I don't know exactly what the number is say half a million to a million himself and he'll bring a few others of his friends along with him that'll get it running. Then they'll

take it wi within about two years they'll take it uh public through a reverse merger and you start getting public money and you can start building this up more rapidly and you often

there's a hold there. Uh uh you can't you you you can't sell your stock right away but after 2 years you can start selling. Uh and and if it's done fairly

selling. Uh and and if it's done fairly well you can start to withdraw what your initial investment was. if your initial lesson was half a million or a million, now you've got that back in hand and then you can go on to the next deal with

that while this this first one starts growing. And so you you can you can kind

growing. And so you you can you can kind of pull some money out in that way. So

it allows you to do that much more quickly than if you had done the traditional VC route. So I think that that's why he has done that. And in any in every case, I've just run right

alongside him in the cases where he's wanted to keep something private uh and wait more years before they take it public. You know, I've just done

public. You know, I've just done whatever he does. And when when he says he's going to he's going to sell 15% of his stock. I sell 15% of my stock. I

his stock. I sell 15% of my stock. I

just what what I learned because because I'm not a quote unquote money guy. Uh uh

you follow what rich people do. Do what

rich people do. I took I took uh this class um on uh uh this this financial university or something some some uh some Christian teacher I forgot what his

name was but he said do what rich people do uh rich people don't rent furniture you know and and and so when you do what rich people do it's probably a wiser

thing so I just follow his lead >> okay that makes sense so it sounds like the intuition here was really around how quickly can we get certain companies to market

and that's why we'd rather take them public versus go the VC path and then also for you it allowed you to have access to almost this kind of financial

mentorship to be able to make what you felt were wiser decisions and kind of piggyback off of good what you felt was good decision-m >> Yeah and and and plus these guys really

respected me they respected the fact that I wanted to still be a professor I had worked with we we never took VC money in my first company in 1999, but I had talked with a lot of them. I mean,

they they they want you to leave your job in the university, go 100% into this, or they want you to mortgage your house and get quote unquote skin in the game and and and these sort of things.

And so they they that um now they're not all like that, but I'm just telling you, I've I've met many like that. And these

investors really respected me and they realized the best place for me is to leave me in my lab and come up with the next big thing and the next big thing and so and and and at the end of the day

a lot of time when you go with VCs the the inventors don't make a whole lot of money and and uh in this way I could get some founder stock and that that ran

right alongside and they protected me.

You know, these money guys, they can really drive your your equity to nothing. They have all these clever ways

nothing. They have all these clever ways of manipulating things, having capital calls, and they know you can't keep up with it, and then you get driven really

small. Uh uh he protected me. And I

small. Uh uh he protected me. And I

think that that what that did is it it it caused a lot of trust and and so it allowed him to make money. It allowed me to make money. And because he wasn't just thinking of this deal, he was

thinking of the next and the next and the next that we would come up with. And

so he had a lot to do with it. And he

even to this day he drives me faster than I would like. In other words, you know, he hears about this technology in my life. Let's start a company around

my life. Let's start a company around this. It's not ready. It's not ready.

this. It's not ready. It's not ready.

You know, we have to develop. Well, you

know, we just we just we'll just start a company and then you develop it. He he

he actually pushes me and I think it's good for everybody to be pushed a little bit.

>> That makes a lot of sense and actually it answers one of my initial questions which was what allowed you after having this experience where you know you had gone the licensing route you had seen

that you'd honestly made quite a little bit of money, not really much in terms of liquidity and then you'd had this failed experience of trying to run a company, trying to sit on a board to

trust this investor. And it sounds like it was that he knew how to recognize what your priorities fundamentally are

and to respect what you're good at without forcing you to make these huge changes, take on risk that you weren't comfortable with. And also while

comfortable with. And also while protecting your equity that you didn't experience dilution.

>> That's right. He did that. He did that and he continues to do that. And the

other thing is he sheltered me from the investors. In other words, investors

investors. In other words, investors love to call you up. Hey, you know, let's go have lunch and you sit across.

When are we going to start getting when are we going to start selling? How's it?

And and um he protects me from that and and and uh um so they go through him and so he'll say, "Okay, this is a really important investor. We'll bring them to

important investor. We'll bring them to your office." Uh, so I don't have to go

your office." Uh, so I don't have to go out and do these dog and pony shows with with uh w with all of these folks all over. At one point I I I just did one.

over. At one point I I I just did one.

That's it. And that's because I declined. They said, you know, would you

declined. They said, you know, would you come to Australia and do this this this show with us? I said, I'm not going to Australia. That's too far away. So what

Australia. That's too far away. So what

they did, he didn't do it, but one of the CEOs went to my wife and said, you know, we'll fly you and your husband business class, all expenses paid to Australia. you'll have a great time. And

Australia. you'll have a great time. And

and and so they went through my wife and and that's what forced me to to have to go to Australia. Um but but in in in general, he he he really respects my

time and he he understands what what a you know I can I can be a hotthead. He

understands that and he's a very calm guy and and um and so he bears with me.

>> Okay. No, thank you for sharing that. So

I am curious then. So you've mentioned a lot about the relationship that you have with him and how he's really respected you, shielded you from investors, shielded you from some of their either

sometimes predatory or kind of crazy acts and really just, you know, creates this safe space for you to focus on the work while also pushing you and

motivating you positively. I'm curious

how do you feel that when it comes to the students who are going on to launch these companies who are going on to really take on the risk of launching their own innovations that you know that

they're protected.

>> Uh that's a good question. You know when they take this on I don't look at their contracts. I don't look at things. Um uh

contracts. I don't look at things. Um uh

I just tell them be sure you get this.

Be sure you get your healthcare. We're

sure we're sure they they get you this and this and this and and uh um that your your your equity your stock is going to vest over time and and you get

these sort of things. And so I have to entrust them to these investors as well. You

know, I think sometimes the CEOs, I'm thinking in one company in particular, didn't didn't treat one guy very well. And I I was very concerned

very well. And I I was very concerned about that. And I spoke to this investor

about that. And I spoke to this investor friend of mine. I said, "Here's what they did to him." And I really love my students. They're like children to me.

students. They're like children to me.

And and uh um when they're not treated well, it really hurts me. And I felt that this guy had been taken advantage of by the CEO that he was promised certain stock was never never really

given and and things like that. And so I think they they learned from that too that that they're going to have to watch out for these guys if they want to be able to hire my students into these

companies because my students can really save them years of of train of of of needing to learn some of these things.

So, so, um, uh, you know, it it's still working together and he he he has to keep a this investor, he's realized he has to keep a better eye on the CEO, make sure that they're treating my

students well. I mean, sometimes my

students well. I mean, sometimes my students might be the CEO, sometimes they're not. Sometimes they're their CTO

they're not. Sometimes they're their CTO or their chief science officer, something like that. And and we want to make sure they're treated well. And if

they're not, I tell them, "Oh, this is not this is not good what they're doing to you. This is not good at all. you

to you. This is not good at all. you

should uh uh just tell them you're going to leave the company. I mean, so so uh um I I think I care more about my students than than I do about the

company because they they're like my children and I think that they they sometimes went into this because they trusted me and so that's why it's important that that we we treat them

well.

No, I completely understand and agree.

It see it's and this answers a different question I had which was around the how these relationships bear out over time because I think what often happens and and what I've

been hearing at some of the most recent sustainable finance conferences where you know people who are bankers and investors they're thinking really critically about what is it that is

going to enable the sustainable transition to happen and I often feel as though it comes back to relationships And it often comes back to getting away

from this short shortterm pressure that the markets have on us and really think and build over the long term and take

this this view not just of history and of money but of how can we make sure that what we invest in and where we allocate our assets is going to be

something that builds the community long term reinvests in the relationships because at the end of the day that's the most important thing. Yes. Yeah. That

that's certainly the case. The

relationship is is everything. And so

and then so he brings people along with him to co-invest and and people make money. And so when we when these

money. And so when we when these companies do well, there's people that that know that that this came out of my lab and they're they're ready to invest in the next big thing uh that we come up

with. Um uh so they don't all work out

with. Um uh so they don't all work out but there's there's enough probability that it's going to work and yes it it's a relationship and when there's where

there's trust it it it matters a lot. It

really matters a lot when there's a when there's trust there. Um it still has to be a good deal. you want you you want to get a good deal with these people but but there's there's a level of trust and

what what makes sense and you need to think about the technology like you know this this metallium this MTM uh uh that

flash metals USA this we took we we took public through the Australian market uh that's a mining com that's a mining country I mean that's what they do they

do mining and and so they had a lot of expertise in this you know others we might not go in that direction like we

have this new uh uh AI chip design, this new device design. Uh Australia has like zero presence in AI whereas the US has

an enormous presence in AI and and uh uh lots and lots of money flowing hundreds of billions of dollars are flowing all the time uh for AI. So so you know we

still think about the business senses as well. uh uh there there there's

well. uh uh there there there's something here and and uh and and there's the nice thing about the US also

is that that um we have very tight laws and and um CEOs can't mess around very much or they go to jail and and it's it's good to have tight laws uh and what

people do with their the money and so so there are advantages. So there's things like this that I think about as well.

But yes, relationship is is is a key for us.

>> So then I am curious a little bit around the friction point in the relationship.

So you mentioned uh uh the talk that you gave at Northwestern recently actually for graphine with the universal matter company that uh you know you could

create this kind of artificial price of about $3,000 for graphine and you mentioned then in one of your lab meetings that they didn't necessarily go

for that when you offered this idea and they decided to go a different path.

Could you maybe talk to me a little bit more about that story and how you navigated that?

>> You really misunderstood what I said. It

was your misunderstanding. So, let me clarify what happened. So,

>> okay.

>> So, I don't know what they're selling graphine for right now. I don't know what the price is, but it's probably somewhere say $60,000 a ton is what it

was when when we first started this work. It was up around $120,000 a ton or

work. It was up around $120,000 a ton or even higher than that. So I just said, "Okay, maybe $60 a ton. Maybe it's less than that now because they're making a ton a day of this stuff now. They're

they have the capability to do that." So

I wanted to say, "How much does this new process how much money can how much does it cost us to do this new process?" So if you

have PAS per poly fllororinated alkalle substances on any on a granulated activated granulated carbon

uh uh uh um then the granulated activated carbon if you if you have it on there and then you convert that carbon into graphine

all the PAS turns into calcium fluoride.

All the fluoride goes to calcium fluoride. What would this process cost

fluoride. What would this process cost us? Well, if at the end of the day we

us? Well, if at the end of the day we could sell the graphine for $60,000 a ton, then we're going to be making a lot of money on this this process. But I

said, let's artificially, just in my own mind, just just just in my own mind, let's artificially lower that to $3,000 a ton to bring it in line to where a

bulk plastic is sold somewhere around $3,000 a ton. If I did that, I'd be making $1,900 a ton on this on this

process. That's all I meant. I never

process. That's all I meant. I never

brought to them to say go for this at $3,000 a ton, nor would they ever go for it. I don't expect them to go for it

it. I don't expect them to go for it because I don't know what their internal costs are. I'm just saying the

costs are. I'm just saying the electricity cost is not the major cost.

There's a lot of other costs for them.

So, so I was just artificially doing this, but it's not something I present presented to them. And there there was no friction based on that. No friction

based on that. There may have been friction based on other things where I think they should go in one direction and they want to go another direction.

That that's that's fine. That's normal

stuff. And I leave it to them. They're

they're the business guys. They they

just stay out of my lab and I'll stay out of your company and uh uh we we'll we'll we'll do it. But that that that's that's like with all of them. I I let them run the business. I give them my

views and then then it stops there. But

um but I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

>> Okay, that's fair. And I think in any case, I appreciate the clarification because you know it's important to have that right so that I'm not misunderstanding things. I think then

misunderstanding things. I think then the where my question was really trying to drive towards is what happens when there are moments where you know you're

the scientific adviser and you're answering questions or you have an idea and they say no and it sounds like you know you sort of let bygones be bygones

you respect their expertise they respect yours and you just focus on your lab in those situations.

>> Yeah. I mean and and and you know there there's things I mean I'll give you an example. Universal matter was the first

example. Universal matter was the first to license from us flash jewel heating and it was for making graphine.

Um then I had offered to them I said hey we learned we can make carbon nano tubes by flash heating and they didn't respond to it. They they they didn't show any

it. They they they didn't show any interest in this. So I licensed it to another company. They made that decision

another company. They made that decision and so I licensed it to another company and uh uh uh so they you know I offered it to them and I also offered to them

the separation of metals from waste everything that's in metallium. I

offered it to them and they looked at it, they studied it and they said that's that's not for them. I said okay and I walked out and I started another company

around this and and uh uh I Yeah. So,

so, so you know, they made that decision and there's been other times where I've I've suggested to people what they might want to do, but they they're business people. They they make their decisions

people. They they make their decisions and and I don't get involved in the day-to-day of their business. So, it's

easy for me to throw out advice. It's

sort of like being a you know, an armchair quarterback. I I I don't know I

armchair quarterback. I I I don't know I don't know the stats on any of these guys on the field. I don't know what they run the 40 yard dash and I don't know I don't know what their you know

what their ability is to catch a ball or anything but it's very easy for me to when when some coach is having some trouble in a game I oh why didn't you listen to me if you'd only listened to

me you'd have been so it's it's very easy to play this armchair quarterback and and I realize that so I'll give them my advice and when they don't want it I walk away and and I'll give my advice

again and when they don't want it I walk away. But once they've turned me down

away. But once they've turned me down three or four or five times, I get the picture. Okay, these guys really don't.

picture. Okay, these guys really don't.

And so then I just go away and and it's up to them and and I say, "Well, you know, just send me the check in the mail."

mail." >> Yeah, absolutely. Let me laugh all the way to the bank, right?

>> Yeah.

>> So, I think then, so in the last sort of 15 minutes or so that we have, I'm curious if we can maybe look towards the future a bit. So, uh, do you have any

perhaps long-term hopes around the strategies that companies forming out of your lab might pursue when it comes to beating out competition in the market and thinking beyond just making the

technology cheaper than existing models for example?

>> Yeah. I mean, every company is so different. you know, have these ones

different. you know, have these ones that are purifying soil, pulling out metals, making graphine, making nano tubes, grabbing hydrogen, making silicon carbide. Every one of these is

carbide. Every one of these is different. I can tell you is is the same

different. I can tell you is is the same thing I I tell them is that the faster you can get to market, the better. I

mean, and it doesn't have to be perfect.

I mean, we we know from Microsoft Word, you can you can sell something. It

doesn't have to be perfect. And

Microsoft Word, I'll assure you, is much better than it used to be. We used to have crashes all the time. I mean, to to crash a couple times a day was sort of

normal. And if one thing bound up, the

normal. And if one thing bound up, the whole the whole the whole Microsoft Word crashed. Now you can have one thing hang up and you can stop that

and it doesn't affect all the other things you're working on in in the Microsoft Windows package.

uh um you know the whole Windows package I mean it's so much better than it was but they sold it for for you know two decades this trouble. So it doesn't have

to be perfect. Um but uh if you can come in at at 10 times lower price than what other people are coming in at, you can have a pretty good run here. And uh um

so that that's that's what I want to want to look at. But I also am looking at, you know, and I've learned this over the years, is is uh, you know, what's the best local to start

this company in? Uh, is it is it best to start this in the United States? Uh, uh,

if the CEO is in another country, is it best to then start it in another country or should we just search for a CEO that wants it in the best place for it? I

mean, so I so so I look at these things now and uh um and I'll give my advice to the to the investors and and I've gotten

to the point it's become so painful teaching CEOs the technology and sometimes they never really get it. They

never really get it. That's, you know, like we had one that was on the medical side and the CEO had no medical background. and he had no technical

background. and he had no technical background and every week I was talking with him trying to teach him this stuff and he'd get it for like a few a few days and then I'd have to have to go

over and I said look for these next companies I want an engineer or a scientist right there I want them to have be in business but but you know say

a bachelor's degree in engineering and then have gotten an MBA and and and had a background in this. I saw Elon Musk say how important it was in his

companies to have the leadership be engineers and I I see the same sort of thing when when the leadership does not have a background in that area. It just

makes it really hard for them to just get it, to really understand it. And

then any investor can just yank them around because investors keep trying to tell companies what to do. And and uh um and that's a dangerous place when investors are telling you what to do

because they really don't understand the technology. They don't understand how it

technology. They don't understand how it can have an impact. So, you know, I urge them just just listen at least listen to what I have to say here. uh because I I think you're going down the wrong road

and and there have been many occasions where I thought they were making the wrong decision and I knew they were and it took them took them a couple years to say yeah that was that was the wrong

choice. Uh so for example if you're

choice. Uh so for example if you're going to treat a certain type of cancer with our little molecular machines.

There's some types of cancers that this would be good for. There's other types it would not be good for. and and uh they go after the one that's not good for and what they told me well this big

investor you know his someone in his family had this so he wanted to go after this I said that like that is the worst decision that is the worst decision you might make him happy but you're going to

bury the company in the process because this won't solve that type of cancer and and how do I know that because I'm the one who developed this stuff I know how

it works and uh uh so so uh uh there's these sort of decision ision. And when

there's a CEO in there that doesn't have the medical background to understand why I'm saying what I'm saying, uh, he'll just go with the with with with what this investor wants. And it's it's and

at that point, you know, they don't want to listen. You just you just walk away

to listen. You just you just walk away and you just know what's going to happen. I just know what's going to

happen. I just know what's going to happen. So So in those cases, I just

happen. So So in those cases, I just wish they'd listened to me.

Because of you, millions of people have heard the gospel. If you confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that he's risen from the dead and you will be saved. That's right.

That's the requirement. We talk about science concepts which draw people in.

Take these nanom machines and have them drill into cells. It would be a great way to kill cancer, right? We also talk about Jesus Christ who's the best in everything. My faith in Jesus Christ

everything. My faith in Jesus Christ means more to me than anything. If you

could continue to give or give for the first time, we would certainly appreciate it. You can go to

appreciate it. You can go to jesusandinscience.org/donate.

jesusandinscience.org/donate.

All US donations are taxdeductible.

Thank you so much.

>> Well, because the critical thing that it sounds like you're trying to drive home hearing what you've just said is that the fact that you are an engineer allows you to exercise discernment to be able to understand what the potential

applications actually are versus what they are not. And understanding those limitations is really critical for the long-term viability of the company, for the long-term viability of the

technology, rather than just making some decision because an investor told you so and that investor has no idea what they're talking about.

>> Yes, that's right. That's right. And and

uh I mean, look, you can get domain experienced people that really know what they're talking about. Uh uh but but um to just go on the whims of an investor,

uh it's it's problematic. and and I'm really trying to drive them toward an early success. I I'm I'm looking at what

early success. I I'm I'm looking at what is the lowhanging fruit here? How can we make this work as an early success?

That's that's what I'm looking at. Um

and you know, I've been in this business a long time and when the technologies come out of my own lab and we've written papers around this, it really takes about 10 years for me to become really

fluent in a field. That's why when people contact me, hey, I got a great idea. you know, I'll give you a piece of

idea. you know, I'll give you a piece of it, we'll develop it together. I'm like,

there's no way. I mean, you're you're asking me to commit a 10-year part of my life, and you can only do that so many times, and and at my age, I don't have

too many decade segments left to to to be doing this. And so,

uh uh it it it's got to mean something to these people to say, you know, what are my thoughts on this? And when I'm emphatic, that is that is wrong. That

should not be done. I you know um I hope they take heed and in the cases where they haven't I think that they paid the price.

>> That makes sense. So then I guess coming briefly back to the investor that you work with and the respect that you named earlier that he shows you towards the science while also pushing you. Where do

you feel he adds expertise while also staying in his lane?

>> Yeah, he he he's purely a business guy.

He he knows how to move companies around, how to buy them, how to sell them, how to do these sorts of things.

And and he he has the very high level view. He he doesn't know the details and

view. He he doesn't know the details and he'll tell you that he doesn't know the details, but he's a visionary. And I

mean, he's got these big grand views and and uh uh he he's so yeah, that's what he adds. But you've got to get a CEO in

he adds. But you've got to get a CEO in there that really understands the area.

And uh I I mean there's been times that I've been concerned that the CEOs, they just need to go and I'll tell them. And

uh uh he's such a nice guy, it's hard for him to cut them loose. Uh uh so so th those are some of the decisions that that that need to be taken place. And so

you you waste a lot of time when you have the wrong person in there. You

know, not all of our companies have succeeded.

In every case that I that I can think back on, in every case, it's not been the technology, it's been the management. You have to have three

management. You have to have three things. You have to have management, you

things. You have to have management, you have to have technology, and you have to have money. Usually, if the management

have money. Usually, if the management is is right, you can get the money when there's good technology behind it. But

when the management, any one of those, it's it's a three-legged stool. Any one

of those three, it doesn't work out.

This stool is falling down. And uh uh in every one of the cases it's always been the management was not right.

>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean you know it's the great conundrum I think uh that I've seen personally working often with large manufacturing companies that have really

brilliant technical people is that often the reason that things are not going well is it's not the technology, it's the people. And it's bringing people

the people. And it's bringing people along. It's making sure that you have

along. It's making sure that you have the right people there in the first place, but also that communication, I mean, this is what my undergraduate degree was in, you know, is like people

come together in pursuit of a common goal, but, you know, it's actually the pursuit of that common goal and the ways that they self-organize or don't or how

they treat each other or don't, that's what creates the problem for the long-term viability of the organization itself.

>> Yeah. Yeah, that's true.

So I am curious uh when it comes to how you think about where we are now and zooming out a bit here. So we have many of the emerging technologies that are

coming out of labs like yours and then we also have these really large legacy u you know capital infrastructure

projects, factories, companies. What is

what are some of your hopes when you think about the large-scale transition that we need to make when it comes to sustainability

and how do you think we'll get there?

>> Yeah. So, sustainability is is a is a really hot issue. You know, you look at last December,

CO2 was like the most dangerous thing.

It was going to kill off humanity.

By January of 2025, CO2 was an innocuous gas that wasn't hurting anybody. So, you

have a political party change and everything changes and everybody that was doing CO2 capture, CO2 conversion is out of business now. I mean, they don't

want to renew their grants. They um it it's just it's just uh things change.

So, so you you you know, if you want to do something with sustainability, sometimes you have to have sustained funding. And when there's not sustained

funding. And when there's not sustained funding, you don't have sustainability.

Um, and and I I'm not I'm not saying I'm not uh uh I'm I'm not taking a stand on CO2. I'm just using that as an example.

CO2. I'm just using that as an example.

Although I do have concerns about CO2 to in my mind, CO2 is God's sink. That is

where carbon ends up. CO2. To bring CO2 back to any usable material, you have to break these carbon oxygen bonds, which are very strong. And you got to put in

about 200 kJ per mole per carbon oxygen bond and almost double that is what you got to put in because of the efficiencies. So, I don't think it makes

efficiencies. So, I don't think it makes good physical sense to ever bring CO2 back to a usable compound. If you're

worried about it, you you can store it down hole. But I don't think that the

down hole. But I don't think that the whole conversion thing is is a really wisely thought out thing. The problem is there was such a thrust behind that on

the sustainability that as a scientist I I would be laughed at if if I came too strongly with these arguments. The the

community laughs at you. So that's the danger. You want to do sustainability,

danger. You want to do sustainability, it has to make thermodynamic sense. I'll

give you another example. 20 years ago, they had this big push for corn ethanol.

We're going to take corn, we're going to make it into ethanol, and we're going to put that in gasoline.

We had done the calculations in in our in our carbon center here. If you if you tilled the ground, planted the corn,

watered it, uh uh all on ethanol running machines, would you have any ethanol at the end of the day? And the answer was no. It just

the day? And the answer was no. It just

didn't make sense. And we told venture capitalists, you're wasting your money going in for this this corn ethanol. And

they all lost their money that you you you can't fight the thermodynamics of the science. And so,

the science. And so, yeah, if you want to trap CO2, fine. But

to try to convert the CO2 into something useful, I mean, I just saw a talk yesterday. They're taking electricity,

yesterday. They're taking electricity, converting it into light. light

converting it into into uh converting the CO2 into uh u carbon monoxide that you can use is sin gas and and you know

I just confronted him with what are the thermodynamics of that you're taking electricity that electricity you're getting from the burning of methane anyway and even if you were to get that electricity from a sustainable source that should then be supplementing the

grid it made no sense to do the conversion that you're doing so if if you want to have a wise sustainable environment ef research effort, you have to think

through the thermodynamics. And you say, well, scientists have looked at this.

This is what they say. Yeah. The very

same scientists that are going to be making their money, getting their grant money from this, you have to have uh dispassionate scientists looking at

this, those that don't have some dog in this fight, uh, to really look at the numbers and to say, "This just doesn't make sense. I just don't see it. This

make sense. I just don't see it. This

just doesn't make sense." the whole direct air capture, we're going to pull CO2 directly out of the air. I am not sure that that really makes sense.

Certainly not on the systems that we have. By the time you look at all the

have. By the time you look at all the CO2 that you made to build that direct air capture system, it's very very hard to see this making money. And that's why

they want to put it up in in in Iceland where they can where they can get uh th this uh this, you know, this this this

energy that that from from from this this this ground. And so um it it's it's just hard to to to think about this. So

that's what you should do first.

uh uh you're going to have to only deal with very very big numbers. Really, if

you want to stop the CO2 problem, you got to stop creating the CO2. You got to allow nuclear to come in. Nuclear will

deal with a lot of this, but people don't want nuclear. And uh they say the the the wind and solar can do it. Well,

they can't do it yet. Uh you can't build enough solar panels to do this. And they

don't stand up well when there's when there's a a hail storm. I mean,

everything is broken. So, um, yeah, there there's a lot of big issues that you have to think about. Elon Musk is very big on on big these big solar arrays, uh, uh, and and and making

electricity that way. He's a very smart guy. You don't bet against Elon Musk.

guy. You don't bet against Elon Musk.

Uh, I'm just saying I'd love to see more about the numbers and how how how robust these these these solar arrays are where

you have, you know, a thousand football fields covered with this stuff and how much do you generate is it's it's it's very hard to compete with a 14-in hole in the ground through which oil and gas

just comes pouring out. Just goes

pouring out. your your footprint is 14 in as opposed to miles and miles and miles of these solar panels that cost a lot of money and a lot of energy to

make. So, so um you need to think about

make. So, so um you need to think about it in that way um if we're going to do something sustainable. But we do have a

something sustainable. But we do have a form of of of energy right now and that's nuclear. Uh wind windish doesn't

that's nuclear. Uh wind windish doesn't cut it. I mean look at Germany. Germany

cut it. I mean look at Germany. Germany

went high all on on on wind and solar and now they're buying uh this this this natural gas from from Russia and and from other places. They they just about

buried their economy. Europe is paying so much more for energy than we are paying and it makes it very hard for them to manufacture and compete with us

now because they blew this energy thing.

They didn't get it right. So you and and then what do you do with these wind turbines when they're done of their lifetime? You bury them whole. It's it's

lifetime? You bury them whole. It's it's

an environmental disaster. What do you do with these big solar arrays at the end of their lifetime? It's an

environmental disaster. Uh so you have to think really holistically about this and get dispassionate people, scientists to really look at some of these numbers because a lot of times it just doesn't

work.

>> No, that's fair. I mean, so what you're saying essentially, and you've invoked a lot of the issues, right? There's the

circularity piece. There's the energy consumption piece to even be able to get the energy from renewables in the first place. There's also then the economics

place. There's also then the economics piece, which is what I spend a lot of my time thinking about because the carbon markets are in a precarious place when it comes to the current administration,

the current geopolitical situation.

And then and there are a lot of people who have diverse you know solutions ideas but it really comes down to what is their vested interest right and I think that that's what you're driving

back to. I am curious uh because it is

back to. I am curious uh because it is invoked in the some of the research that your lab is doing. What are some of your thoughts on the energy storage piece?

There's a lot being said around the potential for solid state batteries and trying to figure out just battery storage more broadly to solve some of these challenges. What are

your thoughts on that?

>> Yeah, so volumewise, you cannot beat nuclear. You just can't. And nuclear

nuclear. You just can't. And nuclear

will run all day and at the end of the day, you have something about this big is your something about the size of a large pill

is the waste from that day. And so you you bury that under a mountain or something. And so so uh um rather than

something. And so so uh um rather than blowing out huge amounts of CO2 into the air on the other now if you if you move to hydrocarbon you you you can put so

much more energy density in a liquid hydrocarbon per volume than you can in a battery. I

mean so much more it just just doesn't even compare. Um and and uh batteries

even compare. Um and and uh batteries are very heavy. So for for for static systems, big arrays of batteries for

static systems, maybe that's all right.

Um uh uh it's really hard to beat it's really hard to beat oil for that. It's a

shame that we burn oil. So we it's much better to burn natural gas. Uh there are other ways of dealing with the natural gas without emitting so much CO2. And

these things have been figured out. It's

just a matter of implementing them. So,

in other words, you can take the methane, you strip the hydrogens's off, you get two two moles of H2, and you convert the

carbon to to a um uh carbon a carbon solid. Then you can take that carbon

solid. Then you can take that carbon solid and turn it into flash graphine and turn it into building materials.

That way, it doesn't enter the carbon cycle, at least it won't for hundreds of years. and uh uh which is all you have

years. and uh uh which is all you have to store it because in hundreds of years we'll have different energy sources. So

you don't have to be emitting the CO2.

What happens is when you do combustion uh uh it's over 800 kJ per mole of energy you get out by combustion.

Whereas if you do it uh uh converting it converting it to carbon solid plus hydrogen and then burning and and then using that hydrogen in a fuel cell

mixing it with oxygen that those two reactions combined are about 400 kg per mole. So it's about half the amount of

mole. So it's about half the amount of energy out when you don't blow out CO2 but the efficiency can be much higher.

So so in the wash it's about the same.

So there are ways what I'm saying is there are ways to use hydrocarbon fuel without blowing out CO2. This is not my idea. Every oil company now is working

idea. Every oil company now is working on this uh because on the next administration they may be hit with the CO2 problem again and they should have something ready to solve this. So there

are ways of dealing with it today. We

can solve this today. Uh it's just that you don't want to kill an entire economy in doing it. So you have to have that transition in a way that would allow you to transition to those sorts of energies

soon. Uh um the the whole waste

soon. Uh um the the whole waste footprint. I mean if we can learn to use

footprint. I mean if we can learn to use our waste and and that's a lot of what we do in in my lab. We take carbon waste, we turn it into graphine or nano tubes or some other building material.

We're learning how to to take old concrete and make it into new cement and concrete. Uh learning how to do that

concrete. Uh learning how to do that type of thing. taking old electronics, e-waste, and pulling the metals out rather than more and more and more mining. Uh, so there are numbers that

mining. Uh, so there are numbers that can look very good on that. Um, and so there's a lot of small steps that have to be taken to address these sort of things. But you really have to look at

things. But you really have to look at the numbers. What are the numbers here?

the numbers. What are the numbers here?

How much does it cost? Uh, you know, mining mining costs a lot of money. And

you right now everything that's that's that's mined in Australia gets shipped up to China for processing. And And

that's without the social risk of being, you know, having to go into indigenous lands and the Yeah.

>> political risk. Yeah. And and and people are fighting wars over resources. More

wars have been fought fought over resources than over ideologies. So So

you fight over resources like oil, water, minerals, and that's what we concern ourselves with. So if you if you if you you're not straddled with that, then you you don't have to fight wars.

If you can really desalinate water cheaply, you don't have to fight wars over this. If you can pull rare earth

over this. If you can pull rare earth elements out of electronic waste, you don't have to fight wars over this. So,

so there there's good reason to be able to do this. If you have if you have some energy sources where you're not dependent on foreign oil, you don't have to fight wars over this thing. So, yeah,

there there there's a lot of reasons to to live sustainably. And that's that's what we try to do, but I I think we have to we have to look at it rationally as well.

Absolutely. I think we are at the end of our time, so I'm going to close us here, but I just wanted to thank you again for being willing to have this conversation.

I mean, and also, you know, once again for giving me the opportunity to join your lap. I think it's been it's been

your lap. I think it's been it's been really informative. It's been very

really informative. It's been very validating as somebody who's coming more from the business finance side who's seen the need to have some of that engineering discernment. Um, and I

engineering discernment. Um, and I appreciate your perspective because I think you're right, the the the thermodynamics is a truth that we all have to honor and live by and

understanding how we then invest and how we allocate our resources is going to be a critical part of the economy in the future. And I feel like, you know,

future. And I feel like, you know, trying to convince people of that and trying to >> trying to also then make it viable >> from the technology perspective is one

of the critical things at the points in the supply chain and in the system where >> it's most impactful. So, thank you cuz I think the work that you're doing, I know is really really trying to tackle the

problem at its at its source rather than just be yet another band-aid solution that we then have to push on to the next generation.

>> Indeed. Okay. Well, thank you uh uh Kimani and uh maybe maybe in a few years we'll do this again and see uh you know, we'll just sit here and count money

together.

Yeah, we'll see how that goes. Hope I

mean hopefully. But um but I think in the meantime, you know, holding on to the purpose and the meaning of the work, that's what drives me.

>> Thank you for joining me today. If you

could give us a like, share, or podcast review, we would appreciate it. If you

have any questions, you could send them to ask at jesusandscience.org, and we'll try to answer some of those questions in an upcoming video. And if

you do not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ and you want to hear about why I believe, send me an email to tour at drjamesour.org

or and we'll get together by Zoom and I'll share with you why I embrace the resurrection of Jesus