Stewardship
Consider the full impact of energy infrastructure on land, water, and future generations.
KINETICCORE × TULALIP · ENERGY FOR GENERATIONS
Energy for the
generations ahead.
Cleaner power. Greater independence.
A future shaped by the communities it serves.
A better energy future
begins with your vision.
The future of energy should strengthen a community’s ability to care for its people, its land, and what comes next.
For Tribal Nations exploring their energy future, KineticCore offers a conversation about a different way to store power—one built around kinetic motion rather than chemical reactions.
Every Nation has its own priorities. Our starting point is to listen, then explore where our technology can support a community-defined plan.
A FUTURE WORTH CARING FOR
The people.
The places.
The generations to come.
Energy independence
Explore how locally planned storage can support greater control over energy systems.
Lasting value
Evaluate long-life infrastructure around the needs and economics of the community.
Cleaner energy deserves
a different kind of battery.
The choices we make about storing and delivering power have consequences far beyond the equipment itself.
AN ALTERNATIVE TO CHEMICAL STORAGE
Store energy.
Rethink the chemistry.
MaterialsMineral extraction and processing can carry significant environmental impacts.
SafetyLithium-ion systems require measures to manage thermal runaway and fire risk.
End of lifeResponsible collection, recycling, and disposal matter for land and water.
AN ALTERNATIVE TO FUEL-BASED POWER SUPPORT
Support power.
Reduce dependence on fuel.
Recurring costsFuel delivery, operation, and maintenance add ongoing expense.
Air qualityDiesel combustion produces exhaust and carbon emissions.
Community impactNoise and equipment siting can affect the surrounding environment.
Storage supplies previously stored energy. It does not generate power or replace a generator’s runtime in every application.
THE VISION, MADE CONCRETE
A shared vision.
A practical place to begin.
For Tulalip, the next step is to connect community priorities with a specific project: a proposed clinic pilot, a wider deployment opportunity, and the technology and economics that support the case.
23Potential Tribal deployments
11Locations identified in the proposal
60%Targeted pilot peak draw reduction
25 yearsDesigned operating life
Start where it matters
A clinic pilot.
A broader possibility.
The first planned pilot combines a clinic heat pump and HVAC update with EV fast charging, without a transformer upgrade. Potential Washington grant support could help bring the project forward.
60%Targeted reduction in grid peak power draw
~70%Targeted reduction in diesel generator use
1stPlanned Tulalip pilot to demonstrate the approach
Planned pilot area · Aerial imagery supplied in the October 28 presentation.
Additional funds are sought to reduce development risk and expand pilot production operations. Pilot reductions are proposed targets, not measured results.
Tulalip Tribe Leading “Green”
Three paths to
move the vision forward.
Potential Tribal investment in KineticCore, from bridging grant work to supporting the clinic pilot and an initial production facility.
Start the grant work.
Provide bridging investment so grant work can begin immediately after the December 2026 announcement.
Bridging investment
Support the pilot.
Support the Tulalip Clinic Pilot without the Washington State RD&D grant, participating as a supporting investor.
Supporting investor
Lead the next stage.
Support KineticCore as lead investor, incorporating the Tulalip Clinic Pilot and the initial production facility.
Lead investor
Proposed investment & deployment timeline
Potential pathway
Dec 2026Early 2027Feb 2028Dec 2029
Tier 1 · Bridging
Tier 2 · Clinic pilot
Tier 3 · Pilot + facility
Grant preparationGrant execution
Swipe to explore timeline
Potential investment paths and proposed timing from slide 4 of the October 28, 2026 Tulalip subdeck. Timeline spacing is schematic. Grant award and investment remain subject to confirmation.
Tulalip leading green
Local deployment.
Lasting impact.
An opportunity to connect energy storage development with Tribal priorities for emissions reduction, resilience, and electrification.
23 / 11
Potential kinetic battery deployments
across 11 Tribal locations.
Support the Priority Climate Action Plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve resiliency.
Reduce Tribal grid infrastructure upgrades needed for further electrification.
Support the planned multi-node microgrid approach.
Reduce peak power draw from Snohomish PUD and associated peak generation and pollution.
Potential deployment locations from the supplied proposal; locations and scope remain subject to project development.
The challenge · Deck 02
Electrification needs power.
The grid needs relief.
1,200 GWU.S. CI&T power demand
$232B/yrPower demand costs
Up to 50% demand growth by 2040 adds pressure to infrastructure, operating costs, and emissions.
590 GWAdded power demand
$944BEstimated grid upgrades
$248B/yrAdded demand costs
18M tons/yrAdded CO₂
2040 scenario from slide 2. Sources cited in the deck: EIA, American Clean Power and the CPUC 2023 Electrification Impact Study; future costs assume $35/kW average demand pricing. Current emissions are reported as 37 million metric tons/year.
Rethink peak power
Full power.
A smaller grid draw.
Behind-the-meter kinetic batteries support periodic, high-power loads. The grid provides part of the power; the battery helps supply the peak.
Conventional approach
Full grid capacity for peak demand$$$
Full grid capacity for peak demand$$$
The KineticCore approach
Partial grid + kinetic battery$
Partial grid + kinetic battery$
PEAK SHAVING
Power when it’s needed.
The deck describes peak power shaving of up to 80% and multiple operating cycles per day.
FACILITY ECONOMICS
Reduce the cost of demand.
Potential power cost reductions of up to $110,000 per year, depending on the load profile and electricity tariff.
GRID STEWARDSHIP
Make existing capacity go further.
Reduce the need for grid power upgrades and the emissions associated with peak power generation.
Technology in development · Deck 05
From the workshop
to the field.
NEXT / TRL-6
Pilot build & testing
2027 development target
THEN / TRL-7
Ready for field pilots
2027–2028 development target
High-resolution AI recreations based on the deck’s prototype photo and product concepts. Equipment details and the person’s appearance are reconstructed; consult the original supporting slides for source photographs and technical references.
Engineered for repeated use
Kinetic energy.
Long-term thinking.
A non-chemical approach to high-power storage. The TRL-5 prototype is complete, with TRL-6 development and TRL-7 pilots planned for 2027–2028.
65%Lower cost than Li-ion at high power*
200,000+Design cycle capability
25 yearsDesigned service life
Non-chemicalNo chemical spills; fully recyclable design
*Company-reported design and cost claims from the deck. Cost comparison applies to the high-power duty cycle modeled there. Product visuals are AI-recreated development concepts.
The economics · Deck 04
The purchase price
is only the beginning.
Repeated high-power use changes the economics of storage. The deck compares initial capital cost with the replacement costs accumulated over ten years.
Replacement costs add up.
Some technologies require repeated replacements under the modeled duty cycle.
High upfront cost limits ROI.
Steel flywheel storage avoids some replacements but starts with a larger investment.
Kinetic storage changes the curve.
The company model positions the kinetic battery as the lowest-cost option in this comparison.
Scalable redraws of slide 4; bar proportions traced from the source images, rather than reconstructed raw inputs. Model: 250 kW boost, $20/kW demand pricing, 15 partial cycles/day at 25 kWh each; replacement CAPEX assumed at 65% of initial CAPEX. The deck states $75k/year savings for this model. “No ROI” means no payback before replacement or within ten years. See the source slide for its assumptions; the separate on-page calculator uses an explicit monthly demand-charge calculation.
At the core · Deck 23
A different flywheel.
A different power equation.
The presentation compares two approaches to 50 kWh of storage: a heavy steel cylinder and KineticCore’s lightweight flywheel.
6,000 → 330 kgMass for the same modeled storage
8 → 150 Wh/kgReported energy density
| 50 kWh comparison | Steel cylindrical flywheel | KineticCore flywheel |
|---|---|---|
| Mass | 6,000 kg | 330 kg |
| Dimensions shown | 1.0 m × 1.0 m | 1.6 m × 0.5 m |
| Tip speed | 370–430 m/s | 1,400–1,620 m/s |
| Energy density | 8 Wh/kg | 150 Wh/kg |
| Cost per kWh | $1,000–$1,600 | $190–$230 |
Company comparison from slide 23. The slide characterizes the design as 95% lighter and 450% faster, with improved safety; it cites the 1994 ORNL “Flywheel testing and evaluation” report for its failure-mode claim. These are supplied technical claims, with pilot testing and certification still on the roadmap.
One battery, multiple beneficiaries
The value extends
beyond the meter.
Illustrative lifetime impacts for a kinetic battery shaving 250 kW of peak power, as modeled in the presentation.
For facilities
$1.5M
Power cost savings over 25 years
$100k
Grid access upgrade savings
25%
Maintenance savings
For utilities
$400k
Deferred grid upgrades
9 GWh
Regulation benefit in the deck model
3,450 tons
CO₂ production avoided
For the supply chain
960 tons
Mined rare earth and mineral ores avoided
1.6 MWh
Li-ion battery resources displaced
0.95 tons
Non-recyclable Li-ion hazardous waste avoided
Deck model: 250 kW peak shaving, 4 hours/day over 25 years; $400/kW grid upgrade cost; $20/kW demand rate; 375 kg CO₂/MWh; 400 kWh, 0.6C Li-ion comparison with a 6.5-year life. These figures describe a modeled scenario and are not Tulalip pilot results.
Explore demand-charge savings
$6/kW$40/kW
Illustrative annual demand-charge savings
250 kW × selected monthly rate × 12 months
This simple illustration assumes the full 250 kW reduction lowers billed demand every month. It excludes equipment, installation, charging energy, service costs, and tariff-specific rules; it is not a project ROI estimate.
Scaled impact · Deck 07
One site is a start.
Adoption changes the system.
If 10% of 6.5 million U.S. commercial, industrial and transportation sites shaved 250 kW by 2040, the company model projects:
163 GWReduced peak demand · 27% of added demand
$260BGrid upgrade savings · 28% of projected upgrades
$68.5B/yrReduced power costs
5M tons/yrReduced CO₂ generation
$70B+Addressable market in the deck’s adoption scenario
Scenario from slide 7, distinct from the current 2026 TAM estimate. Market calculation assumes an average of two kinetic batteries per DC deployment and a 30% federal tax credit. These are projected adoption impacts, not installed results.
Traction & action · Deck 11
Evidence behind
the opportunity.
Grants, prizes & energy accelerators
Organizations shown in the deck’s grants/prizes and accelerator sections.
$546kGrants & prizes won
$1.58MPre-seed raise
49Customer/partner NDAs, LOIs & MOUs
9Distributors / licensees
Four pilots planned: Washington, Maryland, California and Colorado.
11,792Requested pilot + commercial units, 2027–2033
Company-reported demand opportunity
| Direct revenue | $503M |
| Recurring revenue | $87M |
| License revenue | $95M |
| Total | $685M |
Requested units and revenue opportunity are reported in slide 11; they are not recognized revenue or firm purchase orders. NDA/LOI/MOU counts are distinct from contracted sales. Organization logos identify the programs shown in the deck, not a new endorsement claim.
From proof to deployment
A deliberate path
to scale.
Prototype validation comes first. Pilot builds, field deployment, and certification create the foundation for production.
2026
Proof of concept
TRL-5 achieved. Six developmental prototypes built; pilot design underway.
2027
Build & test
TRL-6 target. Contract manufacturing for four pilot units.
2028
Deploy & certify
TRL-7 target. Deployment and UL certification; in-house batch of approximately 12 units.
2029
Low-rate production
TRL-8 target. Prototype manufacturing line targeting 144 units.
2030–31
Expand production
480 units in 2030; 1,200-unit semi-automated line and TRL-9 target in 2031.
2019–2026$2.116M
Funding history shown on the timeline: $150k founders, $1.43M pre-seed, $536k grants.
Pilot design$395k
NLR fellowship shown in the development funding path.
2027–2029$4M Seed
Seed funding, grants and pilot activity support development and certification.
2030 onwardSeries A + sales
Production expansion and licensing.
Slide 16 uses historical funding figures that differ from the traction slide. They are shown here with their original context rather than combined.
Development and manufacturing milestones are planned targets from the October 2026 deck, subject to funding, testing, and certification.
THE BIGGER PICTURE
National market & business opportunity
Beyond the first pilot
Electrification is raising
the cost of peak power.
The deck estimates a 1,200 GW, $232B/year power demand challenge across U.S. commercial, industrial, and transportation facilities, with up to 50% demand growth by 2040.
$42B → $65BReported TAM, 2024 to 2026
17 → 30States with demand rates ≥$20/kW
Demand-rate map from the supplied presentation.
2024 / $42B TAM
2026 / $65B TAM
Scalable redraws of slide 10; ROI curves traced from the original images, not recalculated from an underlying model. The deck reports TAM growth of over 35% in two years; the displayed $42B and $65B figures are retained as provided. Chart colors distinguish payback ranges and are preserved for readability.
Validate
Entrepreneur programs, customer discovery, and funded pilots establish the initial market.
Expand demand
Utilities, EV charging networks, OEMs and EPC partners create routes to market.
Build supply
Manufacturing partners, supply chains, and logistics support regional and international deployment.
Deck adoption scenario: 10% of 6.5 million U.S. CI&T sites shaving 250 kW by 2040 equates to 163 GW reduced demand, $260B deferred grid upgrades, $68.5B/year reduced power costs and 5 million tons/year reduced CO₂. The deck separately cites a $70B+ addressable deployment market under this scenario. These are projections with different assumptions from the 2026 TAM estimate.
THE BIGGER PICTURE
Capital plan & financial projections
Seed round proposal
$4M
$25M pre-money valuation · $250k–$2M individual investments · AHG-Energy listed as lead.
Deploy capital into execution.
Team expansion, pilot programs and UL certification, and the first production facility.
The deck reports $7M in soft commitments for 28 pilot units and a planned 2.5-year runway.
Five-year targets
5,000 UL-certified units deployed
1,250 MW of peak demand reduction
250 jobs created
Regional focus on $20/kW+ power markets
Multiple revenue streams.
B2B hardware, recurring monitoring and service, per-unit licensing royalties, and Power-as-a-Service leasing.
The deck also outlines self-funding after Series A, an acquisition exit target, Opportunity Zone and IRS Section 1202 qualification claims. Eligibility depends on the relevant investment and entity requirements.
Projected revenue through 2033
| Metric | 2028 | 2029 | 2030 | 2031 | 2032 | 2033 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Units sold | 16 | 204 | 840 | 1,260 | 2,160 | 4,320 |
| Hardware revenue | $4M | $30.6M | $63M | $75M | $108M | $222M |
| Services / licensing | $136k | $1.3M | $5M | $20M | $49M | $105M |
| COGS | $3.7M | $21M | $45M | $62M | $94M | $183M |
| EBITDA | $0.8M | $7.5M | $12M | $16M | $38M | $104M |
| Net income | $0.7M | $7.1M | $11.8M | $16.1M | $39.4M | $105M |
| Total revenue (reported) | $5.4M | $32M | $68M | $97M | $157M | $327M |
Figures are reproduced from the company pro forma. Reported total revenue does not equal the displayed hardware and services/licensing components in every year; totals are retained as provided. Financial projections are forward-looking, dependent on production, sales and funding assumptions, and do not represent guaranteed results.
85% IRR
Illustrative seven-year seed investor return in the deck.
74× MOIC
Illustrative seven-year multiple on invested capital.
$25M NPV
Illustrative net present value at a 25% discount rate.
Slide 22 assumes first-facility output is sold with a waiting list through 2033, bottom-up labor COGS and 10% distributions. It models a $4M seed for approximately 15% equity and under-five-year ROI (2030). Return projections are company scenarios based on first-facility capacity, LOIs/MOUs, modeled labor and material costs, and recurring revenue. LOIs/MOUs and soft commitments are not recognized revenue. See the original presentation for the full model and expansion scenario.
Business planning · Deck 13
Build locally.
Scale through a network.
REVENUE
Hardware + recurring value
U.S. production and pilots, B2B hardware sales, monitoring and service, per-unit licensing royalties, and Power-as-a-Service battery leasing.
PRODUCTION
Expand the supply base
Licensed manufacturing and three to four additional facilities. Direct sales target regions with higher power costs; distributors operate within segment and regional limits.
REACH
Follow electrification
U.S. manufacturing and market partners, then international expansion supported by multi-country IP protection. Target regions: UK, EU, Middle East, India and China.
Strategic targets and relationships shown in the supplied deck; inclusion of a logo does not imply a signed supply or customer agreement.
Expansion scenario · Deck 21
From one facility
to a wider footprint.
125,000Units in the 2036 expansion scenario
$6.3BUnit revenue opportunity
$190M/yrRecurring revenue
31 GWReduced grid demand
$9.4B/yrCustomer power savings
$50BDeferred grid upgrades
1,500Jobs created
Long-term option-to-scale scenario from slide 21; the deck also reports 340 million tons of CO₂ pollution reduction and a ten-year Opportunity Zone exit point. This multi-facility scenario is distinct from the first-facility 2033 pro forma and depends on capital, manufacturing capacity and market adoption.
The team behind the technology
Engineering experience.
Entrepreneurial vision.
Dr. James Clegern
Founder · President & CTOBS and MS Aerospace Engineering; PhD Industrial Engineering. 22 years as a USAF officer, engineer and test director, with 14 years in flywheel design and battery analysis.
Chuck Clegern
Co-Founder · Chief Operations Officer41 years in construction and electrification; C-level leadership and four exited startups.
Allison Raduziner
Business Development Lead32 years in business development and marketing, business growth and fundraising.
Erin Evans
Senior Engineer34 years in systems design, data and system analysis.
Yuval Wasserman
30 years · Power systems manufacturing
President, Advanced Energy, retired
Duncan Lawrie
54 years · Composites manufacturing
President, Lawrie Technology Inc.
Keith Lehmeier
12 years · EV charger integration & controls
Lightning eMotors Engineering Director
Dr. Byan Wilson
37 years · Energy innovation
Executive Director, CSU Energy Institute
Cabell Hodge
12 years · EV & infrastructure
Group lead, NLR Transportation and Mobility
Raymond Cooper
12 years · EV builds & charger integration
President, KiloWatts EV charging
Advisory expertise spans power systems manufacturing, composites, energy innovation, EV infrastructure and charger integration. Full advisor and patent details are included in the source presentation.
Patent & IP status · Deck 24
Innovation with
an international footprint.
3U.S. patent entries
9International patent entries
2021–2026Dates listed in the presentation
KineticCoreU.S. trademark reported as secured
United StatesEuropean UnionJapanSouth AfricaAustraliaChinaCanadaUnited KingdomIndiaIreland
Company-reported IP status from slide 24. Listed patent/application identifiers, territories and dates are available in the original slide below; no independent legal-status verification is implied.
A closer look
Questions worth asking.
Why focus on peak power instead of energy alone?
Facilities need enough instantaneous power to run equipment and fast chargers, even when those peaks are brief. The proposal focuses on reducing the highest grid draw that can trigger demand charges and expensive infrastructure upgrades.
Where does a kinetic battery fit?
Behind the meter, alongside the grid connection. It supports periodic high-power loads through multiple daily cycles, helping a facility serve peak loads with less grid capacity.
How is this different from a traditional flywheel?
The deck compares a 330 kg KineticCore flywheel with a 6,000 kg steel flywheel for 50 kWh of storage. It reports approximately 150 Wh/kg energy density versus 8 Wh/kg for the steel example. These are company technical comparisons; the development roadmap includes further testing and certification.
What stage is the technology at?
The TRL-5 prototype is complete. The proposal targets TRL-6 in 2027, field deployment and UL certification in 2028, then manufacturing expansion. The Tulalip clinic deployment is a planned pilot, with potential grant support and additional funding still needed.
What does the deck say about efficiency and footprint?
The company reports 91–93% round-trip efficiency, an approximately 30-square-foot footprint, low maintenance and an all-weather design. Final site planning and pilot validation will establish project-specific requirements and performance.
Can I review the full presentation?
Yes. Open the original October 28, 2026 Tulalip presentation ↗ for detailed comparisons, financial assumptions, advisors, patents and backup slides.
The original evidence
Explore the supporting slides.
Review the original charts, technical figures, assumptions and IP details at presentation scale.
Original slides retain the source presentation’s visual style and wording. All figures are dated company claims or projections. Download the full source presentation ↗
Build the next chapter of energy stewardship