[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', '
')Instead of investing trillions in exotic technologies, we need to spend what's left of our capital on reengineering how we live so that we simply need less energy. We need a Manhattan Project to redesign our communities and houses, replace industrial agriculture with local organic agriculture, break our addiction to the automobile, and get a handle on the population problem. We need to establish a new relationship with nature that sees it not as the adversary but as our companion in life.

[Heineken]

And I agree with you, Ludi. I'm not hopeful that our society can change its mindset anytime soon.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'A')nd I agree with you, Ludi. I'm not hopeful that our society can change its mindset anytime soon.

[MicroHydro]

People are deeply irrational about our situation. I was particularly amused about the article about energy from steer manure. Wrong, wrong, wrong. We will need that manure for organic fertilizer when synthetic ammonia is unavailable.

As for energy from cattle, there is a good solution available now. Turn your car into an oxcart. The engine, transmission and fuel tank can be removed. Now get some oxen to pull your car around. Heck, with some solar panels on the roof of the car, you could still listen to the stereo. Much more comfortable than a Connestoga wagon.

[DaveA]

I think proven technologies like solar and wind are a far better place to spend money than fusion power research and other "solutions to all our problems for only $5 trillion and 25 years of research" type things, at least in the short term. That money could also be way better spent on getting us off trucking as the primary means of shipping goods from place to place.

[richardmmm]

exotic and alternative energies sources have been available since the 1930s. Water is funny stuff and if you hit it with the correct resonance using electricity and electrodes it will simply break apart. The hydrogen and oxygen can then be recombined giving you more energy than you put in to seperate it. There are US patents registered for equipment that servers this purpose and you can build a test setup in your garage for under $500 USD.

There are other alternatives such as aquafuel, that is documented, patented and has been produced and tested, search google for it.

Cold fusion is another concrete reality with COP observed inexcess of 5.0 a petrol engine having a pathetic COP of around 0.2 Again you can get details of how this works and how you can build your own rig and test it out for yourself.

There are simply dozens of ways of making energy. Read about Tesla and some of his inventions. Sure there is a lot of rumor and crazy stuff out there, but the guy has some genuis ideas that were basically burried.

The problem with free energy is one of security. Imagine Hitler or Stalin with solar or cold fusion powered armies. Even terrorists hiding out in the mountains with unlimited energy supplies would be a threat.

It's nice to think that these technologies would bring peace on earth, but most likely they would give madmen unlimited powers.

For that reason and a varitey of others, including greed, dogma and pride many amazing inventions have been surpessed.

Here is a good example of a very simple one, tested and confirmed by BMW.

http://anon99.tripod.com/water_engine/

This stuff is out there but it is not happeing.

Many Japanese companies have developed overunity engines (produce more electricity than they consume) and have made public statements that they cannot release them at the moment.

http://www.cheniere.org/misc/kawai.htm

There is no need for urgent development, if these things were allowed, they could be on the market within weeks. You could retrofit your own car to produce and run on hydrogen if you did some investigations and spent a couple of grand.

The technology is simple 1930s electrical stuff, that has just been swept aside.

And please no, dogma, and slandering against this posting. I am not interested in bigoted opinions. If you think this is a bunch of rubbish then prove it by building and testing a unit for yourself, not by shooting off your toungue. Certainly there are a lot of hoaxes and conspiracies out there but there is also a lot of genuine science.

cold fusion was burried because a buch of respected scientists had been busy spending billions a year on hot fusion (the suns processes) with zero results. Cold fusion can be up and running with a few hundred dollars of components. Their careers would have been ruined if they had admited the realities of cold fusion. Many of these other ideas also have problems against the established physics of the day. Scientists have been wrong in the past and it has also been notoriously difficult to get them to admit it.

There is much we need to learn about physics and the universe.

[richardmmm]

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/

here is another bunch of amazing ideas, this guy has all the details of how you can build you own cold fusion setup, aquafuel, antigravity devices that has tested models with pics and details, the works..........make one for yourself and you'll see............

all the information is out there.

it just threatens the establshed norms and the power structure so badly that it won't be allowed to be commerically released.


The MAHG is probably the best device, developed in the 1930s and patented by a renounded scientist.

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/index.htm

http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/tests/index.htm

[Clouseau2]

Sigh another "100 MPG carbuerator" style post.

Why is it easier to believe there is a vast conspiracy of government & industry elites suppressing "free energy" research/inventions rather than just believing that all of this stuff is just BS?

If any of this stuff would work, you could start a company and make billions. Somehow I doubt the energy mafia could go around and stop every one of these "miracle" energy solutions.

[Clouseau2]

The most humourous of these snake oil salesmen I think is the lutec (google for it). I've been popping my head into their website for a few years now and I notice that the "when can I buy one FAQ" is incremented once a year to the following year.

All these scams play on the great desire all of us have in having a clean solution for our energy problems.

[Clouseau2]

Actually, I just used the internet wayback machine on their page for the very first time:

Sep 10, 2002:

1) Can I buy one?

A. Not yet, we are still developing the first pre-production model, we anticipate our first production should begin in July 2002.

2) How much will it cost?

A. We are unable to put a firm figure on it yet, but anticipate having all costings together by the end of May 2002.

Apr 15, 2003

1) Can I buy one?

A. Not yet, we are still developing the first pre-production model. We anticipate the first products to be available for purchase by the end of 2003.

2) How much will it cost?

Jun 06, 2004 (Oops, someone forgot to update it for a while)

1) Can I buy one?

A. Not yet, we are still developing the first pre-production model. We anticipate the first products to be available for purchase by the end of 2003.

2) How much will it cost?

A. We are unable to put a firm figure on it yet, but anticipate having all costings together by the end of 2003.

NOW:

1) Can I buy one?

A. Not yet, we are still developing the first pre-production model. We anticipate the first products to be available for purchase by the end of 2005.

2) How much will it cost?

A. We are unable to put a firm figure on it yet, but anticipate having all costings together by the end of 2005.

[aahala]

I'm not sure we need a new Manhattan Project. The jury's still out
whether the human race can survive the knowledge from the last one.

[richardmmm]

Clouseau2 is right, there are many fakes, Luctec being one of them, but there are others worse than that.

There are however many ideas which are valid, have been patented and work just fine.

Cold fusion does exist and is valid and unless you spent sometime to try a few of these contraptions out you are not really qualified to make any kind of sweeping opinionated judgement across the board, unless of course you prefer to just operate in ignorance.

The sites that I have listed are not people asking for money, or trying to say they are marketing anything, they are simply testing out ideas, other peoples ideas and ideas that are already patented.

NASA for example sent it's last explorer out just recently using a plasma engine that is patented.

It was not long ago that people were ridiculing bio-diesel as some hippy clap trap and now we hear about it all the time.

Aquafuel, which is a carbon based, synthetic alternative is also patented and is a viable and tested alternative.

When you see the kind of opionated, bigoted sweeping statements being posted here, then you can understand why the world is in such as mess. The whole is simply a sum of the individuals.

If you have a hole in the ground that squirts out 100,000 barrels a day and all you have to do is barrel it up and get $50 a pop, your gonna sqaush pretty much anything else that comes along.

I don't think that people making these sweeping statements about everything else being rubbish and oil being the only valid alternative have really thought into the kind of revenues that even small operators in texas make from a single well.

Look up the histroy of AC electricity and see what a struggle there was to convince Edison who had already invested millions into DC generation to make the switch or even accept AC wasn't a completely loopy idea.

The world is full of people with thier own adgendas and they don't care what is the best way or the easiest way or even the most intelligent way, they care about what is the most profitable way from them personally, or their company.

Even though BETAMAX was a much better format and much better quality, we ended up with VHS that had to spool the tape around half the inside of the machine to avoid patents. Absolute madness. If video was about giving humanity something useful, we'd all have been using BETA, it wasn't it was about making profits and BETA, a superior product and a much simpler tape spool mechanism got burried.

If it can happen with one lousy format that was obsolete within 2 decades, how much more is it going to happen with multi multi billion / tirllions of dollars of oil revenues, most of which simply gush from holes in the ground that were drilled decades ago. If that isn't free money I don't know what is.

If I had a well, running oil like that or the rights to parts of Saudi that were bought for pennies in the 1900s and I was pulling in a quick $2M a day for what amounts to basically money for nothing, I'd be burying cold fusion, ceramic petrol engines with 200mpg, aquafuel, and anything damn other thing that came along. What do I care, I have all the money I want. It is more profitable for me to spend a million dollars buying a few loopy ideas than it is for me to accept them and lose my oil revenue.

All those mafia movies are so popular, somehow we all understand the concept of what they get upto so well, yet we can't see it beyond the Al Pacino characters, just because it has a corporate logo and a fancy feel good add campaign on TV ?

[abelardlindsay]

I think the way we'll get ourselves out of this is that in the process of adapting to peak oil we'll come up with all sorts of heretofore unforseen tech and conservation than any top down government solution would provide.

Consider for instance the deforestation of Britian in the 19th century. After wood became increasingly hard to get because of deforestation the country was forced to switch to coal which required a lot of effort to mine and polluted greatly. In the process of clearing the coal mines of flooding they invented the steam engine which launched the industrial revolution and western civilization was saved once again. As Joseph Tainter of Collapse of Complex Societies fame points out, Western civilization was ripe for collapse many hundreds of times over the last thousand years but always found some kind of technological solution or energy subsidy to bail itself out that usually came about by accident or from some unexpected corner of society. Many other civilizations collapsed, such as Rome and the Mayans because their governments kept tightening the screws and embarking on massive, complex and ultimately useless wastes of energy to try and fix things. What ended up happening was they kept running into negative returns on the energy they spent and their citizens eventually gave up on their civilization because of declining living standards and opression that made living in simpler civilizations preferable. By the end of the Roman civilization, land owners who were taxed greatly and forced by the government to be herediteraly bound to the land were hoping for a barbarian invasion to free them.

[cube]

It's always amusing to see a bleading heart liberal naively believe a government programme will save society. Rent control, universal healthcare, ect...in the end nothing was accomplished save for creating jobs for bureaucrats.

If humanity's ills could be solved thru government programs then we'd be living in a utopia right now. The only thing governments have proven itself to be superior in capability is waging war and collecting taxes.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('richardmmm', 'e')xotic and alternative energies sources have been available since the 1930s. Water is funny stuff and if you hit it with the correct resonance using electricity and electrodes it will simply break apart. The hydrogen and oxygen can then be recombined giving you more energy than you put in to seperate it.

There are simply dozens of ways of making energy.

And please no, dogma, and slandering against this posting. I am not interested in bigoted opinions. If you think this is a bunch of rubbish then prove it by building and testing a unit for yourself, not by shooting off your toungue. Certainly there are a lot of hoaxes and conspiracies out there but there is also a lot of genuine science.

[Optimist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ater is funny stuff and if you hit it with the correct resonance using electricity and electrodes it will simply break apart. The hydrogen and oxygen can then be recombined giving you more energy than you put in to seperate it.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('richardmmm', ' ')giving you more energy than you put in to seperate it.

[erich]

Dear Folks:
All the tech I cite in my post have peer reviewed papers behind them. The tech many of you presented will not stand up to a google scholar search. http://scholar.google.com/

The only "cold Fusion" that will is the sonic bubble type. Much of the tech I mentioned also is publicly held, and moves forward by the support of private investment.
I Agree that wind has great potential and is growing recently at a good clip, but there is a lot of environmental resistance to it's installation. Bio-Diesel, alcohol, etc. From all I read take more energy to produce than they deliver, when you look at the full equation. Venter's bugs may change this.

We are a society of specialization and have been since the planting of the first wild seed. We cannot return to a simpler time that really only existed in our romantic minds. Only now are we beginning to understand the deep complexities of the soil, the symbiotic fungus etc.
With that understanding we may be able to push beyond the petro intensive agriculture that is now the only way to feed us all. I can't wait for Dr. Venter to start snooping in the soil.

[richardmmm]

To a man with only a hammer, every problem seems like a nail.

To a man who has decided that the world is flat, it is impossible to investigate too far for fear of falling off the edge.

Many scientific laws in the past have been proved to be utter rubbish. Even soild ones, from Newton have later on been shown to be flawed or over simplified, or applicable only in localised environments. Even Newton himself kept much of his work secret for fear of being ridiculed by the peers of his day. After 3-400 years of the catholic church dominating medieval times, Science slowly replaced the dogma of religion, only to later become a dogma itself. There are so many contrdictions in modern physics, and whilst the discipline itself remains valid, the insitutions and peer evalutation of results are based more on belief than genuine investigation of the frontiers of knowledge.

Paradigm 1: It is impossible to transmute elements with ease in experiments performed without the presence of extremely high temperatures (millions of degrees K) or large acceleration voltages. (Natural radioactivity and natural or artificial fission are the only exceptions.) - the fact that there are some exceptions might possibly suggest that there are others no ?

• Paradigm 2: It is impossible to obtain significant unexplained excess energy in experiments with an input energy: All energetic balances in all experiments must be explained by conventionally understood chemical reactions, conventionallyunderstood nuclear fission, natural radioactivity, or conventionally understood nuclear fusion. If there is any other reported significant excess energy in an experiment that would suggest a new, unknown source of energy, these alleged experiments and claimed processes are prima facie to be regarded as mistakes, or worse.

OK, but before nuclear reactions were understood they were also unexplained and therefore impossible right ? What about subparticle reactions, what about dark matter etc etc etc etc.............

• Paradigm 3: The validity of Special Relativity cannot be questioned legitimately. It is such a well-checked theory that it has achieved the status of Fact, not Theory. Space and time cannot exist separately. They are entwined forever as “space-time.” (Witness this from Caltech Prof. David Goodstein, who has also disparaged cold fusion: “…there are theories in science which are so well verified by experience that they become promoted to the status of fact. One example is the Special Theory of Relativity— it’s still called a theory for historical reasons, but it is in reality a simple, engineering fact…” — from a video-taped lecture, “Atoms to Quarks” in The Mechanical Universe series.

OK, so even though science has made many mistakes and false assumptions in the past, even though freely admiting that we do not know everything, we now know everything there is to know.............sounds good to me..........

• Paradigm 4: The validity of the fundamental structure of Quantum Mechanics cannot be questioned legitimately. QM is open to many interpretations— The Copenhagen interpretation, the Multi-Worlds hypothesis, etc., but QM’s fundamental structure, as already revealed, is not open to revision at its foundations.

• Paradigm 5: The so-called vacuum— a region of space-time, a plenum, that is devoid of atoms and molecules and is seemingly “empty”— may be pervaded by “Dark Matter,” “Dark Energy,” “electromagnetic radiation” and “quantum fluctuations,” i.e. zero-point energy (ZPE). However, no table-top experiment that has ever been performed can tap this vacuum and obtain technologically useful energies. Remarkably, it is now asserted in mainstream publications, that Dark Matter comprises 30% of the substance of the universe and Dark Energy comprises 65% of the universe! Though the nature of these two cosmic constituents is entirely unknown— of course, theories multiply about what they are— the Establishment has the chutzpah to claim that a “Theory of Everything” is not far away and that that theory will most likely be found in terra-electron volt particle accelerators costing billions of dollars— and most certainly never in cold fusion/LENR experiments.

OK so we know virtually nothing about the constituents of basically 50% of the universe and yet we must only investigate the part that we already know........objective science at its best right ?

• Paradigm 6: Gravitation is to be understood by General Relativity or its derivatives— i.e. by the curvature of 4-dimensional space-time. No other fundamental mode of understanding gravity can be allowed (such as “pushing gravity” theories2), and certainly no theory of gravity that would allow anti-gravity to be demonstrated easily in table-top experiments. This is most ironic because Establishment physicists freely admit that two major foundation paradigms to which they subscribe— Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity— have not yet been shown to be compatible and have not been unified in an acceptable manner to them.

OK, so although Newtons initial laws of gravity were over simplified and in the past science has been a constant revision and evolution of thought and investigation, even with the two pillars of the science proved to be flawed, it is impossible that they might be flawed............great logic there.......a nobel prize for that scientist.......

• Paradigm 7: The Second Law of Thermodynamics can never be violated in macroscopic systems. One cannot make a “Perpetual Motion Machine of the Second Kind” that would convert ambient thermal energy to useful work, with no heat rejection into a lower-temperature reservoir.

But with 50% of the makeup of the universe unknown it is possible that energy appears to come from no where, simply because we don't understand where it is coming from yet right ????

As you can see, the foregoing is a highly restrictive set of dogmas within which scientists are expected to conduct their work. There can be no doubt that these are the intellectual walls that the Scientific Establishment has erected. True enough, a huge amount has been learned about Nature within the confines of these paradigm restrictions, and much technological progress has occurred too— but there is so, so much more to the universe and to what human beings surely will be able to do and become if they could be liberated from those restrictions! There are other restrictive dogmas in modern science, particularly in the areas of biology and medicine, but these seven enumerated paradigms are the fundamental constraints as they affect physics and chemistry and the topic of ICCF10— “cold fusion” and LENR. Those reporting nuclear phenomena and excess heat phenomena are among those who challenge Paradigms 1 and 2 above, The CF/LENR community has demolished those paradigms very effectively.

Modern science seeks to protect its interests, not to reveal truth.

The suppression of cold fusion is just one example of how our modern scientific community operates more like a group of high priests than seekers of genuine scientific understanding. As a result, the science we live with today only represents a small fraction of the true scientific knowledge available to mankind. Much of the good science conducted over the last hundred years has been suppressed (cold fusion is just the beginning of this story). It has largely been concealed to protect either the financial interests of certain corporations or the ego interests of certain individuals or scientific groups, or both.

Whilst the scientific community admit that the two main precepts of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity as yet are incompatible and remain ununified and therefore somewhat flawed, they still refuse to think outside the square. Having admited that 65% of the universe is dark energy and 30% is dark matter about which almost nothing is known, they still dictate that researchers must remain entirely within the realm of what is known. This is absolutely no different to the Catholic Churches assumption that the world was flat and it's refusal to accept otherwise, even after observations had proved otherwise.

references on request.

[Optimist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')any scientific laws in the past have been proved to be utter rubbish.