NASA Scientists Staking Reputations on LENR

by W.F. Price on July 8, 2012

I’ve mentioned LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) here before, posting a couple pieces about the technology, which may or may not work. Since then, quite a bit more information has come to light, and NASA Langley chief scientist Dennis Bushnell has come out all but endorsing the technology. Originally, it was called “cold fusion,” but apparently it is not fusion, but rather something else entirely that involves weak force nuclear reactions.

Here’s a list of attendees at a recent LENR conference in Williamsburg, VA. Not exactly a bunch of cranks.

For some background, Bushnell posted a short, informative piece on the Langley research site, and Zawodny made another video.

I’m posting this because for some reason this research is being largely ignored by the mainstream media (although evidently there will soon be a feature-length report in a popular science magazine). Additionally, if it actually works it could be a real game-changer. I think men ought to think about the implications of extremely cheap energy. On the one hand, it could be great for all sorts of reasons, but there are always unintended consequences, such as even more terrible weaponry and formidable surveillance/social control than we already have. For example, I can imagine drones powered by these little reactors hovering above every urban neighborhood 24 hours a day, streaming live video to police.

However, on a positive note, if Andrea Rossi and his competitors get these things to market as soon as they claim they can, gasoline will suddenly be as cheap as water (and then, of course, we’ll all have to go buy nuclear cars).

Oh, since I’ve been investigating this on and off for six months or so, I’ve noticed a few indications that the big boys in industry may already be on the ball. Siemens, for example, recently divested entirely from nuclear energy; a move I thought was incredible at the time. Siemens has been one of the biggest players in the nuke industry for decades, and I can only interpret this as an indication that hot nuclear power is about to be supplanted by something with more potential (i.e. not wind or solar).

{ 45 comments… read them below or add one }

evilwhitemalempire July 8, 2012 at 02:49

I can imagine drones powered by these little reactors hovering above every urban neighborhood 24 hours a day, streaming live video to police.
————————-
big brotherism is probably inevitable

the real question is whether or not it will necessarily be misandric
(whether consensus can be shifted in our favor in time)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Johnycomelatley July 8, 2012 at 03:41

I’ve been following ‘cold fusion’ for a while now and am absolutely flabbergasted at the lack of attention it has received in the mainstream media.

I guess it doesn’t dovetail in to the elite’s ‘green’ agenda and the global carbon tax, probably doesn’t bode well for the US petro dollar mechanism either.

Imagine the implications, we could be growing bananas in the arctic… : )

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
ode July 8, 2012 at 04:23

A nuclear power protester once told me it takes at least 10 years to build just one nuclear reactor so according to her logic it’s an impractical energy source since it cannot be scaled up fast enough to meet our energy needs. I corrected the lady by telling her, “It takes 6.5 years for the lawyers to get the paperwork approved and only 3.5 years for the engineers to actually build the damn thing. So technically speaking it’s more accurate to say it takes 10 years to bring a nuclear reactor online, NOT it takes 10 years to build a reactor.” What happened?…..Feminism over-regulated everything.

For those who doubt me look at China, Russia, and South Korea they have a proven track record of finishing nuclear reactor projects on average in only 5 years time. I doubt the LENR idea will work, smells like BS if you ask me. Anyways it’s a mute issue, for anybody who’s been following the news (no I don’t mean the Lame-Stream media news) you’d know there’s a major nuclear power construction boom going on in the world. The neglect of the USA’s nuclear power reactors and the expansion of China’s nuclear capacity is another sign of the balance of power shifting from west to east.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
albert magnus July 8, 2012 at 04:25

Both with the strong interaction and the weak interaction you have to overcome the Coulomb barrier from the electromagnetic force to get it in range. The Widom-Larsen effect uses the collective properties of a lattice to create a few energetic particles to penetrate the Coulomb barrier, but you are on the edge of the tail and seems pretty tough to create enough energetic particles.

Siemens pulling out of nuclear energy probably has to do with the new techniques producing large amounts of natural gas for the foreseeable future and the German government and many other European governments coming out against nuclear power in general. They also might not be getting the contracts in China, the only country building lots of new plants. The US had a lot of talk about a nuclear renaissance a few years ago, but the natural gas prices basically killed it. There are a couple of new plants in Georgia and SC coming online, the first in 30 years or so, but no big push.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Ted July 8, 2012 at 04:27

“I’ve been following ‘cold fusion’ for a while now and am absolutely flabbergasted at the lack of attention it has received in the mainstream media. ”

Jeffery D. Kooistra, a professional scientist who writes a column for Analog Science Fiction magazine, has a view on why this could be.

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KooistraJthealterna.pdf

Basically, the “prestigious labs” that tried to replicate the Pons and Fleischmann result just didn’t put the work in to say either way. It was entirely too easy for them. Kooistra describes some of his own mundane scientific work and how difficult it turned out to be. It has the ring of truth about it. He concludes:

“In the larger world, within weeks of the announcement came both supportive positive findings and a lot of negative findings. And then within months, “cold fusion” was written off as a mistake, and even as “the fiasco of the century.”

“Oh, give me a break!

“Those few months affected my understanding of how science works more than anything before or since. I knew how hard it could be to perform a good experiment even when you’d had months to prepare it, even when the best expert in the world was your mentor, and even when many of the tricks had been worked out long before you came on the scene. And now some scientists from a few “prestigious labs” were trying to tell me that they, having grabbed the first lump of palladium that was at hand, had tried to replicate the “cold fusion” experiment and failed, so therefore, Pons and Fleischmann hadn’t done it either.

“Bullshit.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
albert magnus July 8, 2012 at 04:31

“The neglect of the USA’s nuclear power reactors and the expansion of China’s nuclear capacity is another sign of the balance of power shifting from west to east.”

US power prices are some of the lowest in the world because we enormous reserves of coal and natural gas. All, those regulations and paperwork have made the US nuclear power industry one of the safest industries of any type in the world. I’m not sure the Chinese safety record will be as good.

So the impetus for more nuclear power will come from natural gas prices going back up (which they might) or from a serious push to get carbon emissions down. (Another heat wave in DC might do it).

The TVA (the power utility for the area around Tennessee) plans to move to a mix from 40% nuke/gas to 60% nuke/gas in the next 20 years to hedge against carbon reduction and gas prices. That’s probably a reasonable guide to what will actually happen.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Art Vandelay July 8, 2012 at 04:31

So where is the commercial interest in this technology?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Ryu July 8, 2012 at 05:10

I’m curious about the research you’ve done on this.

Did you go to any sites/forums frequented by physics nerds/professionals? What did they say?

I don’t believe much of anything that comes from the MSM, especially regarding science. But I do know that there are men out there who are obsessed with physics and would know the answer easily. If you want to know about PU, you go to the PU community. If we want the truth about cold fusion, ask the hobbyists and people doing the research. Email the researchers/teachers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 05:25

You need to read and understand this;

http://wimminz.wordpress.com/2011/08/18/an-interesting-look-a-energy/

and this;

http://wimminz.wordpress.com/2011/08/18/kicking-the-can-down-the-road/

before you can form any valid opinion on the latest pie in the sky psudo scientific bullshit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
aaa July 8, 2012 at 05:26

Interesting stuff. When I first read about thorium-based power plants I was pretty excited — and then Germany (one of the more functional nations in the world) passed legislation to end the use of nuclear power in its near future.

I wouldn’t underestimate the ability of the energy sector to keep this kind of technology from being generally available to the public. It looks like we’re stuck with petroleum and its “green” cousin (ha!) natural gas as the primary energy sources for our lifetimes. Some may find this overly cynical, but to me its a simple extrapolation from the past century of world history.

Energy is too important to world finance to allow a level playing field to develop.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
J July 8, 2012 at 06:09

I have been on this for a year or so. I was watching only a bit, when our government scientists were doing it with lasers. It really does seem like Rossi has the ability to be the first super billionairre, if he is not undercut most likely by those at the top all ready.

You knw these dudes who have power are not going to let their golden goose die in the wke of anothers without a fight!

Like how teh combustion engine has been obscolete for several decades, and many inventions have come out (kinds of cars) that could have made it better. The oil tycoons buy out the patents.

I don’t see them buying out this one? So either a mafia type hit, or he sells out to the US Government, UN, and others. I think our Uncle Sam here has already bought his products. We are looking into ho the US Navy could use it.

Definitely something to keep up on! He even claimed last year he will be ready by this August(2012)?!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
greyghost July 8, 2012 at 06:36

I think the number one reason this doesn’t get any attention by the greenies is the fact that it doesn’t involve central control. As it stands now they can by regulation make energy expensive and play the carbon credit game to control people which was the whole purpose in the first place. Lots of campaign contributions to both sides when you have a huge industry subjected to political regulation.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
lushfun July 8, 2012 at 06:46

Very informative and interesting stuff dude.
I wonder if it will take a long time to commercialize or will they begin small scale commercial pilot testing sooner than we think and it detonates the energy industry worldwide. Doubt it makes much impact at first but long term it definetely will.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
TiredGuy July 8, 2012 at 07:01

“I wouldn’t underestimate the ability of the energy sector to keep this kind of technology from being generally available to the public.” – aaa.

It amazes me that the United States continues using century-old obsolete technology when it comes to ethanol production. Not only do they use the wrong crop – corn – but also their extraction method of heating the raw mixture and distilling it is extremely inefficient. For smaller nations, the sugar-cane derived ethanol (which is put through special filters to separate the ethanol from the water instead of distilling), is a good enviro-friendly, economically-friendly option.

However, it is suspicious that when the pacific nations started shifting away from diesel and coal fired generators for their electicity and started moving toward ethanol – the United States started handing out free diesel generators like there was no tomorrow.

“Energy is too important to world finance to allow a level playing field to develop.”

Sounds realistic. Can’t have a bunch of islanders lounging in paradise _not_ paying for diesel…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
albert magnus July 8, 2012 at 07:40

“Did you go to any sites/forums frequented by physics nerds/professionals? What did they say? ”

I’m a PhD physicist who works as a physicist, so I guess this is one of those sites! A lot of those people who are listed at the conference are not “physicists”, but chemists, engineers technical people and so forth. Not that physicists are anything super special, but one of the problems with “cold fusion” is that it was mainly run by chemists who didn’t have a lot of experience with measuring neutrons and so they made mistakes simply due inexperience (and ego!).

Remember when concocting your favorite conspiracy theory about energy issues remember the following:
1) Democracy plays a big role. The US likes ethanol and coal because a lot of corn farmers and coal miners employ people in swing states. Also, with nuclear power there is a big NIMBY factor. Its not just corporations, its your neighbors that are against your favorite fancy power source.
2) In the future people will need more and more energy, so its possible that if a new energy source were found it wouldn’t necessarily replace the old technology, at least not right away, but it could still grow rapidly. For instance, most of the new electrical plants in the US are natural gas, but they haven’t shut down the coal, hydro, nuke plants we already have. The auto industry doesn’t really care what your car runs on, as long as you buy a new one every 4 years (or whatever). They have been fairly receptive to new types of engines.
3) People have been working on these problems a long time, so a lot of things they are trying are pretty obscure and high-risk of failure. They are fun, but they are hard problems. Sometimes they just don’t work!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer July 8, 2012 at 07:56

“So where is the commercial interest in this technology?”

—–

Well, for one thing, it would revive the flagging marital aids market.

No more impotent batteries or cumbersome, libido-deflating wall cords.

By liberating husbands from the chore of clitoral stimulation a new era in men’s activism may be achieved, such as what happened with women when the “sewing machine” was invented.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 08:56

@ albert magnus

I’m NOT a physicist, I am an engineer, but we both know practical commercial power generation at the capacities required to maintain a modern civilization requires a “dense” / “high slope” energy source.

where;

“dense” = very compact, you can get a lot of power from solar voltaic, but it just doesn’t scale to power an aluminium smelting plant.

“high slope” = the energy difference between input and output sides of the generator is large, eg 100 foot fall of water or 1,000 degrees farenheit.

You need BOTH of these tricks as an absolute minimum before you can even begin to consider a commercial power plant.

“cold fusion” and EVERY-MOTHER-FUCKING-THING-ELSE that is not at PRODUCTION stage of development is absolutely and totally useless.

WE can do uranium, plutonium and thorium today, and that is IT for anything more energetic than simple chemical reactions, eg burning shit that contains carbon.

Go look at the first link I made above, and compare the numbers for total UK energy consumption and the first stage of the Saturn V (not carbon but still chemical combustion)

Then compare a 747 with the Nimitz.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
J July 8, 2012 at 09:46

@Magnus

Same here as afor. I agree with a lot of what you say. I was n the Navy for ten years. Honestly, I don’t see how a technology even if you had the stuff from Iron Man movies, would just usurp decades old “proven” tech! Recently, as in the past twenty years equals recent in military upgrades, they were pushing that radical design of a ship the DDX. New type of hull, new type of gun, new type of cruise missles, you get the idea.

Problem is like you said: implementation! We have all those technologies, and they work! But all the old ship builders they got rid of favored slow progression of tech over rapid progression. The DDX sounds great, even to an old hand, ut the rapidity they were planning with the next generation of ship was too much, too inefficient financially (read military industrial complex would not get enough for what they rape us with)! So they started building Phase two DDG’s instead to replace our older combat vessels. I don’t care for McCain, but he was right: “why risk soo much, when there is nothing out there that matches what we got?”! It’s true, it makes great fiscal sense to spend the money refining the process to real “viability” instead of “dragging” it through the builder’s shipyards when you don’t know if it will work!

I think teh way Rossi is working with his tech, and all the backers it seems he has working with him namely our government or Europe’s I am assuiming, is working his designs on so many levels at the speed of light; relatively speaking of course!

At least that is what I have gotten in my research of the whole series of projects!

After ten years in I have gotten out, and I am pursuing a double major in physics and industrial mechanical engineering. I hope to be up there with you one day, and a serious upgrade from the enlisted worker I was. Hey, I was a damn great one too! LOL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Charles Walbridge July 8, 2012 at 09:49

I suspect that the media have been wary of this thing because the cold fusion business that made them look like dupes 23 years ago.
This also has a little of the too-good-to-be-true feel. More than that, it’s too much like dilithium –limitless energy. Even worse, the idea of a simple nuclear steam engine seems way too steampunk.

Expect fossil fuel companies to turn into energy companies — as fast as they can. The worth of their in-the-ground resource will drop.

You apparently have had LENR on Google alert.

Another significant topic to track via Google alert is “vasalgel” (or RISUG) which should shake up the balance of power — the control of reproduction– between men and women.
I don’t like abortion. This could make it substantially less common.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Tom936 July 8, 2012 at 10:08

On the one hand, it could be great for all sorts of reasons, but there are always unintended consequences, such as even more terrible weaponry and formidable surveillance/social control than we already have. For example, I can imagine drones powered by these little reactors hovering above every urban neighborhood 24 hours a day, streaming live video to police.

With respect, I don’t think that’s a reasonable worry.

First, it looks like they haven’t even demonstrated LENR in the lab yet. It’s a lot easier to demonstrate it in the lab than to make it run any type of power plant, and a lot easier to make it run a huge billion dollar power plant than to make it run a small power plant, and still harder to make it run a tiny power plant in an UAV.

Second, UAVs and other weapons aren’t limited by the overall availability of power in the first place. Battery technology has more impact on them than cold fusion does.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel July 8, 2012 at 10:56

Thanks for posting this, Bill. It’s certainly worth keeping an eye on LENR. I believe there’s something to it beyond poor experimental design producing misleading results. However, as AfOR has pointed out, LENR is nowhere near being a technology yet, let alone capable of producing manufacturable products.

I will say without reservation that Rossi is a con-man and the e-cat is a fraudulent device. It’s just not possible to manufacture a product before the underlying physics is well-understood. The reason Rossi has achieved so much traction with European governments is that he’s talking to the same people who have littered the English countryside with useless wind turbines and buried Germany and Spain in solar photovoltaic malinvestment. Rossi’s selling rainbows and unicorns and he’s found the perfect buyers.

For the foreseeable future, the future of energy is oil, coal and natural gas. The planet is stuffed full of naturally-occurring hydrocarbons. Peak oil and global warming are the two biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on mankind. We’ll see $2.00/gallon gas in the US again before we see $6.00 gas, taxes and inflation aside.

So how to explain NASA’s interest in LENR? They want a better fuel cell. If LENR is real, and it looks like it is, it holds the promise of being able to build a box that generates a low power electric voltage for years. Perfect for satellites and other space vehicles. But for supplying power to our technologically complex civilization? Let’s wait and see.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 11:07

@ charles martel

“So how to explain NASA’s interest in LENR? They want a better fuel cell. If LENR is real, and it looks like it is, it holds the promise of being able to build a box that generates a low power electric voltage for years. Perfect for satellites and other space vehicles. But for supplying power to our technologically complex civilization? Let’s wait and see.”

we have HAD that for 25+ years, a domestic washing machine sized unit that will produce a couple a kW constant for a decade or more. simple lump of radioisotope degrading to produce only enough heat to scorch your hand wrapped in peltier couples with the cold side being space itself for the delta tee…. no moving parts and as reliable as a radium night light

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Keyster July 8, 2012 at 11:16

This reminds me of the AC vs. DC current debate between Edison and Westinghouse – – only of course on a modern technological scale. Thankfully AC won out. So much for those invested in cable/wiring stocks of copper back then!

The BIG issue that escaped our glorious News Media for years (until the liberals discovered it might be harmful to our water tables) is Fracking Technology. We suddenly have access to vast reserves of natural gas (and oil) that would have never been available to us before. It absolutely devastated oil man T Boone Pickens prophecy and investment in wind power, (but at least he wasted his own money). Of course now he’s promoting natural gas 18 wheelers, LOL!

Groups of inquistive and imaginative men will ALWAYS find a solution to a problem. It’s what men do. While Sally Ride works on her adorable little STEM program for girls, NASA scientists and other men will be busy solving the REAL problems facing humanity.

Wait until Romney is elected and watch our energy resources REALLY open up on public land (and the Keystone pipeline started). Obama’s so
far in bed with the Greenies, he’s beyond hope and won’t change.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Matt Strictland July 8, 2012 at 11:58

The solution is to use less energy and to use renewables where possible

With affluent populations shrinking and improved efficiencies no need to run the Red Queen’s Race any more.

The only real issue is going to be transit, mass forms can’t work in unstable cities and heavily policed cities can’t be sustaine.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
CastleD July 8, 2012 at 11:58

Sorry but Kim Kardashian’s latest activities are more important this. Maybe they should hire her as a spokesperson.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 12:42

@ Keyster

“This reminds me of the AC vs. DC current debate between Edison and Westinghouse – – only of course on a modern technological scale. Thankfully AC won out. So much for those invested in cable/wiring stocks of copper back then!”

Really? You think?

You’d be about as wrong as it is possible to be if you think DC isn’t used for (long distance) power transmission.

You’re also clearly technically clueless re the copper comment. partly because voltage nullifies IsquaredR, partly because copper is rarely used for grid transmission lines…. nor was it ever….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Thos. July 8, 2012 at 12:50

I’m not a huge believer in secret conspiracies that prevent fundamental breakthroughs in physics in being presented. There’d be packets of Nobel prizes for this kind of work, if successful.

Anyway.

I mentioned one before in a discussion that technology improvements walk hand-in-hand with the unemployment rate. As productivity goes up, so does unemployment. Here’s a nifty little graph I found on Slate.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/07/08/male_employment_never_recovers_from_recessions.html

The variables are a bit simplified and don’t exactly prove my point but it’s interesting nevertheless. If you’re college educated, and in the tech sector, you’re probably safe — within limits. (All sectors have inter-generational conflicts as younger workers are cheaper for some tasks.)
The rest will get increasingly fucked.

We’re working now on transportable robots to work on construction sites. Concrete floor finishers, tilers, and even riveting/welding waldos are on their way.

This is going to be a critical social cohesion issue. The robots only get better which means even more unemployment is guaranteed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 13:13
Charles Martel July 8, 2012 at 13:30

AfOR
we have HAD that for 25+ years, a domestic washing machine sized unit that will produce a couple a kW constant for a decade or more. simple lump of radioisotope degrading to produce only enough heat to scorch your hand wrapped in peltier couples with the cold side being space itself for the delta tee…. no moving parts and as reliable as a radium night light

True, but those devices have drawbacks. They’re relatively large and heavy for their power output and the radioisotopes require special handling. LENR devices offer the potential for significantly higher power densities in smaller packages with no requirement for shielding as they would contain no radioisotopes.

I understand your skepticism, believe me, but as smart as you are you should remain open to the possibility that we’re looking at a paradigm shift, where most informed observers are skeptical and also turn out to be wrong.

LENR theory no longer incorporates the concept of low temperature nuclear fusion. I’m not a physicist and won’t pretend to understand Widom-Larsen theory but the best analogy I can come up with is chemical catalysis, where some chemical reactions take place at a lower activation energy than they otherwise would in the presence of specific catalysts. In my limited understanding, LENR is analogous to chemical catalysis, but at the nuclear level.

You’ve pointed out previously that low energy nuclear reactions would be the alchemist’s mythical transmutation and used that observation to dismiss LENR as impossible. You may still be right but a recent paper by Lewis Larsen suggests that tungsten to gold transmutation may in fact be happening in nature.

It’s conventional physics wisdom that this is all bullshit. Until fairly recently that’s exactly what I thought. I’m no longer so sure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 14:07

@ Charles Martel

“It’s conventional physics wisdom that this is all bullshit. Until fairly recently that’s exactly what I thought. I’m no longer so sure.”

No Charles, the most fundamental definition of SCIENCE is that you have to be able to replicate / prove something, at the drop of a hat, on demand.

NONE of this stuff is classifiable as science.

Not because some future derived principles as yet unknown say that it can or can not be so, but because it cannot be replicated on demand at the drop of a hat.

NO NEW (at the time) SCIENTIFIC principle or technology, NOTHING, ever broke this fundamental principle.

Not X rays discovery (or even the guy who almost discovered them but ignored the fogged film) not fission, not FET transistors not a single thing, EVER, in any technological field of endeavour, ever, ever, ever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Keyster July 8, 2012 at 15:25

You’d be about as wrong as it is possible to be if you think DC isn’t used for (long distance) power transmission.

You’re also clearly technically clueless re the copper comment. partly because voltage nullifies IsquaredR, partly because copper is rarely used for grid transmission lines…. nor was it ever….

I’m talking about in the context of that time dick-weed, when the “grid” was an experimental concept and nothing more than a few city blocks, and where DC seemed perfectly reasonable.

And it’s I times R, not squared. There is excessive voltage drop (in the form of inductance) across copper, which is why it’s not used for power distribution. Power distribution is neither pure AC or DC but generated in phased loops.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Ted July 8, 2012 at 15:37

“And it’s I times R, not squared. ”

My inner pedant protests.

Power = volts times current.

Volts = Resistance times current.

So power = Resistance times current squared.

Power in this case being what’s lost in the transmission line.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
AfOR July 8, 2012 at 15:40

@ Kayster
“And it’s I times R, not squared. There is excessive voltage drop (in the form of inductance) across copper, which is why it’s not used for power distribution. Power distribution is neither pure AC or DC but generated in phased loops.”

I’d quit digging if I were you… only a wimminz or a 11 year old boy could know less basic physics.

oh, and “in the context of that time” DC power transmission was used commerically from 1885

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Ted July 8, 2012 at 15:45

Here in New Zealand, hydropower is generated in the low-population South Island, but used mostly in the North Island. A major transmission problem.

The transmission lines above ground are 3-phase AC. But when it comes to crossing the Cook Strait with undersea cables, it’s rectified to DC, sent across the Strait, then converted back into AC. A lot of trouble to go to, and a major pain. All our equipment is decades out of date and held together with the heavy electrical engineering equivalent of string and chewing gum.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
V10 July 8, 2012 at 15:46

aaa: “I wouldn’t underestimate the ability of the energy sector to keep this kind of technology from being generally available to the public. It looks like we’re stuck with petroleum and its “green” cousin (ha!) natural gas as the primary energy sources for our lifetimes. Some may find this overly cynical, but to me its a simple extrapolation from the past century of world history.”

Industry may or may not squash this. Depends what industry. The modern global economy is built upon relatively cheap energy. Not only is it cheaper to build things oversea, it’s cheaper to ship the incomplete items back and forth several times during production, than it is to build it all in one factory. If energy costs continue to rise, transportation costs eat into the cost savings of having Chinese work for pennies.

A unified corporate conspiracy is one thing. Competing corporate conspiracies is another. I find the later more plausible. Some industries will profit, others will be bled. Guess we’ll see who’s got the better lobbyists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
ode July 8, 2012 at 15:47

albert magnus

US power prices are some of the lowest in the world because we enormous reserves of coal and natural gas.

Yes and No
You are correct that we do have cheap prices for electricity relative to many other nations
here is the evidence

But look at the chart in the link and you’ll notice France has almost the same price for electricity. We’re talking about a country that gets 80% of it’s electricity from nuclear. A nation does not have to be sitting on top of a giant coal mine to enjoy cheap electricity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel July 8, 2012 at 15:57

AfOR
No Charles, the most fundamental definition of SCIENCE is that you have to be able to replicate / prove something, at the drop of a hat, on demand.

NONE of this stuff is classifiable as science.

Yet. And maybe never. But we don’t know yet.

More than anything it reminds me of the state of materials science before the discovery of semiconducting materials. If you’d said, for example, “quantum tunneling” to a materials scientist in 1890 he would have thought you were off your rocker. Back then everyone knew the electrical conductivity of all materials was fixed and easily quantifiable. Well, this turned out to be only partly true.

As I implied before, the safest approach to LENR for anyone who earns their living as a scientist or engineer is to pronounce it to be bullshit, until it’s proven not to be. I no longer make a living as an engineer and so am free to speculate. It looks to me that there is more to LENR than an endless series of poorly designed experiments. To your point, no-one fully understands what that is yet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
ode July 8, 2012 at 16:20

Keyster

Groups of inquistive and imaginative men will ALWAYS find a solution to a problem.

Sorry this isn’t the last 10 minutes of a Star Trek episode where the engineering department finds a solution to a pressing technical problem.
This is reality. People fail to remember that ultimately all resources come from nature. Technology only allows you to extract this resource, it does not “create” it.
For example
nature made rivers – mankind made hydroelectric dams
Nature made coal – humans made excavation machines
Nature made oil – humans invented oil rigs

Okay you get the point. What happens when technology becomes so advanced that everything that can be extracted has already been extracted? The answer of course is you find another resource to extract.
The news sensationalism about oil fracking is purely a financial play to part fools from their money.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
MRA July 8, 2012 at 17:54

I’d like to point out that since Obama cut the founding for the NASA, the elite scientist in astronomy and the whole NASA is very angry at Obama, the NASA was forced to end the Shuttle program and hire private companies to do the job, but he dose not make the same cut of money to anything women-brand.

Just like the Komen stop funding PP and the rage topped the sky.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Pirran July 8, 2012 at 19:24

3-2-1….wait for the econazis to decry the horrendous effects of cold-fusion (or any other variant). They did it to fracking, they’ll do it to this.

It also explains why there’s been so little attention in the MSM (where most of the science correspondent’s are paid up eco-activists). In the UK, they effectively put an end to fracking until very recently – despite large deposits of suitable shale being discovered (manufactured terror of seismic tremors, methane in the water supply, yada, yada, yada).

Econazis have a vice-like grip over the scientific establishment (just look at the bio of Sir Paul Nurse, the current President of The Royal Society) and an abiding terror of cheap, reliable energy. It would undermine every intent of the autocratic green regimes they would dearly love to impose on us all. Some are even honest enough to admit this (Monbiot et al), though not many.

There’s lots of good, sound stuff on this (http://wattsupwiththat.com for example). James Delingpole’s blog is very good and his latest book is a keeper (as is Donna Laframboise’s)

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/jamesdelingpole/

http://www.amazon.com/Watermelons-Green-Movements-True-Colors/dp/0983347409/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1329322764&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Delinquent-Teenager-Mistaken-Worlds-Climate/dp/1466453486/ref=pd_sim_b_2

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Dan July 8, 2012 at 19:49

LENR…..I’ll believe it when I see it.
And I play with radiation for a living.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Mark Plus July 9, 2012 at 07:34

The female mind has evolved to understand “burning stuff” as a source of heat because our species has used fire since paleolithic times. It doesn’t understand “nuclear reactions” because, apart from outliers like Marie Curie and Lise Meitner, high-IQ men had to use their ability to think abstractly to puzzle out these natural phenomena and figure out how to use them technologically.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Poester99 July 9, 2012 at 09:10

Imagine the implications, we could be growing bananas in the arctic… : )

yes… but would we want to?! 8)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
John Wong July 10, 2012 at 06:24

Eugene Mallove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Mallove was the publisher of Infinite Energy magazine and was found murdered in 2004. A lot of conspiracy theories arose as to why he was killed and three people were on trial for his murder as of this year. He seemed to have been at the wrong place at the wrong time when they were breaking into his parent’s unoccupied house that he was checking on. Infinite energy magazine is still around and continues to give information about the field. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Mallove

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kyubi July 15, 2012 at 01:01

“Siemens has been one of the biggest players in the nuke industry for decades, and I can only interpret this as an indication that hot nuclear power is about to be supplanted by something with more potential (i.e. not wind or solar)”
Free energy with Nikola Tesla (the pioneer of this), is a subject highly controversial since it violate laws of thermodynamics… (conservation of Energy and Entropy). I personally make amateur research in those fields and found recently something incredible: The ability to create and destroy electrical energy like the Genesis and Nemesis… I have tested it in electronic simulation and found that the theory was valuable, now I prepare an experiment to validate this stuff in real world… If it work that would change a lot things like the Oil and Nuke will be rare like salt water in the sea…
Only one problem: I fear that it will be used for evil purpose like said in this article (drone powered by those device or mass destruction weapon ) .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: