by kolm » Tue 12 Jun 2007, 03:56:52
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Judgie', 'O')k, let's all get back on track.
Being able to have our mobile phones and laptops post-peak is all good if we have the generation capacity in place. The real concern though is, can this system be used to power transportation systems as they are today, or is it only good for small scale applications?
From a first glance: The first question is how the efficiency behaves if you scale the transmission distance up. Although you create a three-dimensional field, in an ideal world only the designed recipient would 'suck' out energy from your device; the transmission losses will come from imperfection of the world, i.e., other energy leeches. On a lab scale, air would not allow for many such leeches, but thinking of hundreds of meters.. Well, if you drive a car through a strong, alternating magnetic field, from what I know this induces electric current. This might or might not be of concern for the driver, but surely will affect efficiency negatively. The amount of possible energy leakages, roughly speaking, will grow at the very least with the square of distance, if not with the cube (I have no idea how much you would lose to accelerating/heating ions and the like).
The second question is about public safety and acceptance, the third about cost and maintenance. However, I do have the feeling that the idea falls flat at the first hurdle already. (And, I might add, the guys at MIT surely know this, but they are clever enough to know their great success will be covered by the mainstream media, but nobody will knock their door in three years and demand answers why nothing panned out.)
And finally, why would anyone want to replace the transition technology? IMHO, it is pretty good, albeit its usage (logistics etc) might be suboptimal in some places. And certainly, it is not the main problem re energy issues.