Energy


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Energy

1 · 2 · 3 · Next
Author Message
Profile Robert W Johnston
Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 03
Posts: 56
Credit: 454,516
RAC: 0
United States
Message 841806 - Posted: 19 Dec 2008, 4:22:24 UTC

With energy being the major cause of world conflict and economic turmoil one would think the brains of the world would offer a solution. It seems nuclear energy is the cheapest but there seems to be a problem with radiation fallout (accident site). Is there any way to produce nuclear power without the fear of radiation fallout? If this could be accomplished I would think we could all drive around leaving petro behind.

Is there a BONIC PROJECT for the research of alternate energy?
____________

Profile kasule francis
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 08
Posts: 293
Credit: 104,493
RAC: 1
Uganda
Message 841830 - Posted: 19 Dec 2008, 5:12:39 UTC - in response to Message 841806.

There is a way known as cold fuson ,not sure though if they have started using it.
____________
We choose to go to the moon and to do other things, we choose to go to the moon not because its easy but because its hard. kennedy

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3822
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 841856 - Posted: 19 Dec 2008, 6:02:25 UTC - in response to Message 841806.
Last modified: 19 Dec 2008, 6:45:56 UTC

With energy being the major cause of world conflict and economic turmoil one would think the brains of the world would offer a solution. It seems nuclear energy is the cheapest but there seems to be a problem with radiation fallout (accident site). Is there any way to produce nuclear power without the fear of radiation fallout? If this could be accomplished I would think we could all drive around leaving petro behind.

Is there a BONIC PROJECT for the research of alternate energy?

There is a big international project in nuclear fusion called ITER, in construction at Cadarache, France. Whether this will provide a practical form of energy production I don't know. Time will tell.
Tullio
Edit. If you go to the BOINC home page you'll fine a link to a World Community Grid project sponsored by IBM and Harvard U. about a new type of solar cells. This could be an answer to your last question.
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 842493 - Posted: 20 Dec 2008, 11:56:26 UTC
Last modified: 20 Dec 2008, 12:14:46 UTC

Nuclear energy is the answer but only to produce electricity for use in Battery powered vehicles, electric home heating etc. you can't expect to carry around a reactor in your car. Batteries are close now to providing capability for a commuter vehicle with a range of perhaps 100 miles before a small, efficient, engine has to take over. perhaps a direct-injected turbo diesel or gas engine. Diesel if the price can be made comparable to gasoline once again. These vehicles can be recharged overnight in your garage. BUT we need 4-5 cent per kilowatt hour rates not 10 cents and up.

Lithium-Ion -Polymer batteries will need to be improved one more step in production cost and storage density --this will come in the next few years I feel pretty sure. This is a good place to spend some National R&D money.

There will, to my estimation, always be a danger associated with Nuclear Power --these concerns will be seen to be acceptable risks compared to perceived (and real) problems with CO-2 and the OIL PATCH brand of politics, runaway costs and shortages etc.. The power plants CAN be properly designed and constructed to be essentially fool proof. I do not like the cost estimates coming out here in Tennessee to finish some recent TVA reactors---perhaps as much as 18 Billion. Seems like someone smart needs to go to work on these estimates and hammer away at bogus costs and red tape delays. A nuclear plant is in many ways simpler than a coal-fired plant --its just a big tea kettle.

I have ranted on before that there should be a national service to train in the operation of these plants --an elite core of nuclear engineers --perhaps trained at an expanded Naval Academy (they have nuclear powered ships). If there can be a National Transportation Security Agency and force then there could be a National Nuclear Power Corps. Maybe this could be extended to include a Construction Corps to be able to expertly and economically build the hundreds of reactors that we will need.

Hate to add another appeal to Government for a solution; but, I don't see it happening in the private sector, and we need commonality of design, intent, leadership and of purpose.

Cold fusion is largely a hoax. Fusion reactors are more efficient in theory but none exist and are not likely to exist except in the lab where they operate for a few microseconds. The reactants are incredibly hot--temperatures only found in the sun and in Super Colliders and other types of "Atom Smashers". There has to be a magnetic field to contain the reaction since no material would stand up to these temperatures--seems like a much more dangerous scenario than fission.

Breeder reactors that produce plutonium may be the way to go if there is a concern about producing enough enriched uranium for fuel. Natural Uranium is .7% U-235 and has to be enriched to about 3% for use in a reactor. A Breeder produces more fissionable material (Plutonium) than it had to begin with.

Not to denigrate anyone, but, if the French can do it (80% nuclear) then we can do it too. All that is necessary is to muster national will and pull our head out of our posterior ends.

What do you all say

Profile kasule francis
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 08
Posts: 293
Credit: 104,493
RAC: 1
Uganda
Message 842501 - Posted: 20 Dec 2008, 12:26:32 UTC - in response to Message 842493.
Last modified: 20 Dec 2008, 12:48:25 UTC

A site for does interested in reading on other forms of energy weather they are practical i dont know but its a good piece by prof fran de aquino look at his motors and simple gcc one can built.it is said some govts have paid up to 600million dollars for some pieces of that technology.

http://users.elo.com.br/~deaquino/
____________
We choose to go to the moon and to do other things, we choose to go to the moon not because its easy but because its hard. kennedy

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3822
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 842561 - Posted: 20 Dec 2008, 14:58:58 UTC - in response to Message 842493.

Nuclear reactors that can use natural uranium without any enrichment exist. They must be moderated with heavy water. Caada has built several of them as CANDU type (Canada Deuterium Uranium). Italy had one prototype designed by prof. Mario Silvestri of the Milan Polytechnic University. It was called CIRENE (CISE Reattore a Nebbia) but unfortunately it was never started because a referendum after the Chernobyl incident put a end to nuclear power stations in Italy.Prof.Silvestri asked for at least a test of the software to be performed but he was not allowed to do it. He died soon after.
Tullio
____________

Profile Robert W Johnston
Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 03
Posts: 56
Credit: 454,516
RAC: 0
United States
Message 843349 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 1:44:47 UTC - in response to Message 842493.

you can't expect to carry around a reactor in your car

RESPONSE: i DON'T SEE WHY NOT! We carry around propane, diesel and gasoline which are all explosive. One gallon og gas equals approx one stick of Dynamite. So, what,s the problem except radiation?

You engine now is exploding one time per revoluation...

Semi-Trucks and buses carry over 100 gal of fuel and...

Don't understand is it the fear factor?
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 843433 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 3:43:53 UTC - in response to Message 843349.

Assuming your question not based on whimsical humor---I will reply that it's simply a matter of cost; batteries are cheaper than nuclear reactors and condensing the steam back into water would be a problem. So there !!

Profile Robert W Johnston
Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 03
Posts: 56
Credit: 454,516
RAC: 0
United States
Message 843464 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 4:30:08 UTC - in response to Message 843433.

I thought a radiator could slove that problem.
I admit there would be a few bugs to work out but look around you it is totally amazing that we have manage to do what we have and no other creature has accomplished what we have. Who would ever tought just a few years ago we would be using light bulbs and internet... The list is so huge that you guys can make the impossible come true.

We can now make diamounds due to a student
kavlar due to a factory worker
kemo because of ground rocks left in a pocket

Maybe someone will make a mistake and discover cold fushion

But if you think it cannot be done than you're the wrong person for the task. You have already lost before you begun.

Heck I remeber when the signal wing aircraft was impoaaible

sleath was impossible
now look a russian sci guy had the answer years and years ago. no straight lines...

There is someone out there that will figure it out and he will be the greatest hero for long time as the man who saved mankind
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,365
RAC: 844
United Kingdom
Message 843612 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 13:22:54 UTC - in response to Message 843349.

... One gallon og gas equals approx one stick of Dynamite. ...

Use pellet injection into the cylinders?

Boom or ver...oom?


Except that I would expect the gallon of gas to be a lot cheaper than the dynamite...

Cheers,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile kasule francis
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 08
Posts: 293
Credit: 104,493
RAC: 1
Uganda
Message 843647 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 14:49:16 UTC - in response to Message 843464.



ONE KILOWATT COLD FUSION REACTOR DEMONSTRATED *

One Kilowatt Cold Fusion Reactor Demonstrated (December 5-7, 1995)
by Jed Rothwell, Contributing Editor, Infinite Energy Magazine


Cold Fusion at Power Gen '95 in Anaheim

Last week, at the Power-Gen '95 Americas power industry trade show in Anaheim, a 1-kilowatt cold fusion reactor was demonstrated by Clean Energy Technologies, Inc. (CETI) film light water electrolytic cold fusion reactor. The cathode is composed of thousands of 1 mm diameter co-polymer beads with a flash coat of copper and multiple layers of electrolytically deposited thin film nickel and palladium. The beads are covered by three U.S. patents, with additional patents pending. During this demonstration, between 0.1 and 1.5 watts of electricity was input, and the cell output 450 to 1,300 watts of heat. CETI previously demonstrated smaller cold fusion cells. In April, at the Fifth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF5) they demonstrated input of 0.14 watts and a peak excess of 2.5 watts, a ratio of 1:18. In October, at the 16th biannual Symposium on Fusion Engineering (SOFE '95) they demonstrated a cell with 0.06 watts input and 5 watts peak output, a ratio of 1:83. Ratios at Power-Gen ranged from 1:1000 to 1:4000.

The ICCF5 and Power-Gen calorimeters were designed and constructed by Dennis Cravens. The SOFE '95 calorimeter was constructed by George Miley's group at the University of Illinois.

The Power-Gen cell and calorimeter are much larger than CETl's previous cold fusion demonstration devices. The cell is 10 cm long, 2.5 cm in diameter, containing roughly 40 ml of beads. Previous cells had about 1 ml of beads. The cell itself is wrapped in opaque foam plastic because the cell geometry has been improved and the improvements are not yet covered by patent applications. Other components in the calorimeter are made of clear Lucite plastic. (Photographs of the device can be found on the World Wide Web; see address below.)

The flow calorimeter reservoir held 2.5 liters and the flow rate was set between 1.0 and 1.5 liters per minute. A control cell was mounted parallel to the hot cell. The flow to both cells is regulated with precision valves. The reservoir and pump consist of a Magnum 220 aquarium pump with micron filter attachment, plus an additional Lucite cylinder built on top to hold a cooling coil, gas trap, and a muffin fan. Water is circulated by a magnetic impeller pump, driven by a 50 watt motor mounted underneath. Static in-line mixers ensure mixing. (These are plastic objects about an inch long with vanes to stir the flow.) A few weeks before the conference, Cravens decided to increase the flow rate in order to keep the temperature below 50 degrees C. The new flow rates exceed the capacity of his flow meters. He was not able to procure a bigger flow meter in time for the conference, so no flow meter was installed. Flow was measured by turning stopcocks to redirect fluid from the cell outlet tube into a graduated cylinder for 15 seconds. This test was performed many times, and the flow rate was not observed to change measurably, except when it was deliberately adjusted between runs. The water hose from pump is coiled in air cooled box on top of reservoir. Air is drawn through box by a 3.5 watt muffin fan. Total power consumption by all components in the calorimeter including the circulation pump, the cooling fan, the cell, control cell, and DC power supplies was 85 watts.

The Delta T temperatures and reservoir temperatures are measured with K-Type thermocouples, with Omega Model HH22 Microprocessor Thermometers. Power is measured with Metex M 3800 series multimeters. The pump, muffin fan and DC power supplies electrolysis all have one common AC cord, which is monitored by a Radio Shack analog AC voltmeter and a multimeter.

The first test was marred by a mysterious malfunction in the control cell. The control cell consisted of tin plated steel shot beads, arranged as an electrochemical cathode, in the same configuration as the smaller CETI thin beads. During tests at the lab, this produced no excess heat, as expected. However, during the first test at one point it appeared to be producing a Delta T temperature as high as 2.6 deg C. Assuming the flow rate and input power were stable, this would indicate a 216 watt excess. When Dennis noticed it was getting hot, he said he thought was due to a short circuit or an obstruction in the flow, or both, since a an obstruction would likely cause both problems. He turned off the control cell for safety, and repaired it later on. He reported to me the next day that it was shorted; the anode and cathode had come in contact because it was plugged up. I expect this explains the apparent excess, but I do not have any detailed data or additional information on this because I was no able to observe the equipment closely when this incident occurred. I did not verify the thermocouple temperatures, and I do not have an opportunity to note the input power levels were, what the flow rate was, or when the apparent excess began. (The incident occurred soon after I arrived. I was sitting across the room listening to the exposition.) The control cell was replaced with a joule heater for the remainder of the conference, which raised the water temperature the normal, expected amount.

Later on, in subsequent tests, I was able to observe the machine closely, and to make direct measurements of its performance with my own tools. I tested the flow rate on cold fusion cell side many times. As noted above, I did not see any measurable changes except when the flow was deliberately changed from 1,300 ml to 1,000 ml per minute by closing the valves. I checked the thermocouple readings in the reservoir, inlet and outlet with two thermistors and a thermometer, and all three agreed closely with the thermocouple readings. The reservoir temperature can be taken by picking up the top and inserting the thermistor probe into the water directly. Testing inlet and outlet temperature required a little more ingenuity. I confirmed the outlet thermocouple reading by taking a 250 ml sample of water from the outlet pipe during a flow test and immediately measuring the temperature before the sample cooled significantly. I confirmed the cold fusion inlet temperature by turning off the control side joule heater and taking a 250 ml sample from the control outlet pipe.

Several measurement results:

Test 1, December 4, two hours

INPUT POWER
Measured AC: 0.7 A * 120 V = 84 W
Electrolysis: 0.18 A * 8 V = 1.4 W
OUTPUT POWER
Flow rate 1200 ml/minute (300 ml/15 seconds)
Delta T Temperature 16 to 17 deg C
1200 ml * 16 deg C * 4.2 = 80,640 j/min = 1,344 W

Test 2, December 5, afternoon, 30 minutes.

INPUT POWER
Measured AC: 0.7 A * 140 V = 98 W
Electrolysis: 0.02 A * 3.9 V = 0.1 W

OUTPUT POWER
Flow rate 1000 ml/min (250 ml/15 seconds)

Delta T Temperature 6.7 deg C
1000 ml * 6.7 * 4.2 = 28,140 j/min = 469 W

Prototypes and consumer products

CETI plans to follow up on this demonstration with demonstrations of prototype consumer products, including larger cells for space heating and heat engines. They are hard at work on these devices and they will demonstrate them as soon they can. They estimate that it will take six months to one year to make suitable prototypes. CETI is now engaged in joint R&D projects with five corporate and university strategic partners, including the University of Illinois and the University of Missouri. All five have independently verified the excess heat. The University of Illinois group has fabricated beads from scratch using a sputtering technique rather than electrolytic deposition. They have observed excess heat from their own beads as well as beads provided to them by CETI.

Akira Kawasaki and I took many photographs of the calorimeter. I scanned four of them, and John Logajan uploaded them in his home page:

WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan

I will describe the Power-Gen demonstration in more detail in an upcoming issue of "Infinite Energy" magazine.

Jed Rothwell, Contributing Editor
Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D.,
Editor-in-Chief INFINITE ENERGY:
Cold Fusion and New Energy Technology
P.O. Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
Fax: 001 (603) 224 5975
Phone: 001 (603) 228 4516




____________
We choose to go to the moon and to do other things, we choose to go to the moon not because its easy but because its hard. kennedy

Profile Clyde C. Phillips, III
Send message
Joined: 2 Aug 00
Posts: 1851
Credit: 5,955,047
RAC: 0
United States
Message 843742 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 18:32:13 UTC

I wonder, how much nuclear energy is there out there? It might be a very great amount but it's still limited. I wonder how fast we're depleting it. If we get very greedy with energy, we'll deplete it faster. And then there is the problem of discarding the waste. Could we dig a hole five miles (8 kilometers) down, blow up a cavity down there and drop the waste there? We'd have to line the hole lest it collapse, though.
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 843800 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 20:36:54 UTC - in response to Message 843647.

What is the fusion equation and what are the elements that fuse into what other element. Perhaps this is a Battery ??

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 843801 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 20:38:13 UTC - in response to Message 843742.

There is no limit using a reactor that breeds plutonium.

Profile Robert W Johnston
Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 03
Posts: 56
Credit: 454,516
RAC: 0
United States
Message 843864 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 23:29:55 UTC - in response to Message 843801.
Last modified: 22 Dec 2008, 23:38:26 UTC

I'm glad to see there are some brillent brains at work to reslove this energy problem. The world is in turmo and only Cold Fushion can reslove this. The world needs to know there is an answer soon.

Battery problem I have not yet seen a battery that will withstand the constant pounding it receives in City Driving 24/7. Driving in the right lane tears them up with-in 6 months even faster for the new gel batteries. Maybe the manufactures need to start recommending installation of batteries into some type of scock asborbing carrier.

If anyone has any ideas about cold fushion please share it. What you know may make it easier for the next guy to slove.

Normally when things get this bad a World War starts from past history. The problems we are facing is global.

I wish you luck on future testing and it sounds like it may have possiblities. Has there been any updates since 1995?
____________

Profile Robert W Johnston
Send message
Joined: 18 Jan 03
Posts: 56
Credit: 454,516
RAC: 0
United States
Message 843868 - Posted: 22 Dec 2008, 23:36:26 UTC - in response to Message 843742.

We'll send it to the sun to help it live longer:)
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 843889 - Posted: 23 Dec 2008, 0:36:57 UTC

Just do a google search on Cold Fusion--if you believe in it after reading a few of the articles and Wikepedia --then ask yourself why there is no commercial expolitation after a decade or so.

It seems that an electrolyte--usually heavy water--is passed through a calorimeter containing some type of palladium beads. The mixture is stirred and also a current is put into the solution. It appears that they can't account for the correct energy balance to begin with and pick up trace amounts of helium which are probably present in the atmosphere any way. Repeatability is also a problem. The amounts found don't jive with any purported fusion calculations to begin with off by a whopping bunch. Probably due to poorly designed experiments and sloppy use of inaccurate calorimeters. Don't forget, certain chemical reactions will produce heat.

Rather than argue with the proponents and claimants just ask them when we will have a commercial product and where to order it.

I don't know why this has not been officially de-bunked by now. But then again we had Para-psychology and the Princeton PEAR group for years.

The energy required to overcome the repulsive forces of the proton is enormous and will most likely forever require millions of degrees worth of hot energy.

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3822
Credit: 393,242
RAC: 238
Italy
Message 843975 - Posted: 23 Dec 2008, 3:38:48 UTC - in response to Message 843801.
Last modified: 23 Dec 2008, 3:39:27 UTC

Unfortunately the SuperPhenix breeder reactor was shut down because its liquid sodium coolant corroded the steel tubings. It was the biggest breeder reactor ever built. Emilio Segre', one of the fathers of nuclear bombs, once told me "Breeders are a folly".
Tullio
____________

Profile Allie in Vancouver
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 07
Posts: 3949
Credit: 1,604,668
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 844012 - Posted: 23 Dec 2008, 4:46:20 UTC - in response to Message 843889.



I don't know why this has not been officially de-bunked by now. But then again we had Para-psychology and the Princeton PEAR group for years.


Even official de-bunking wouldn’t matter because cold fusion is like UFO’s or free energy from water or belief in a white-bearded-man in the sky: it is all magical thinking and there is never an argument against that sort of silliness.

____________
Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 844111 - Posted: 23 Dec 2008, 11:04:22 UTC - in response to Message 844012.



I don't know why this has not been officially de-bunked by now. But then again we had Para-psychology and the Princeton PEAR group for years.


Even official de-bunking wouldn’t matter because cold fusion is like UFO’s or free energy from water or belief in a white-bearded-man in the sky: it is all magical thinking and there is never an argument against that sort of silliness.

Yes that's right--but in the case of Cold Fusion we had educated scientists making the claims on several different sets of experiments in a few different locations. We also did in the case of J. B, Rhine at Duke and at the Princeton PEAR project.

Borrowed quote on PEAR:

“It’s been an embarrassment to science, and I think an embarrassment for Princeton,” said Robert L. Park, a University of Maryland physicist who is the author of “Voodoo Science: The Road From Foolishness to Fraud.” “Science has a substantial amount of credibility, but this is the kind of thing that squanders it.”

1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Energy

Copyright © 2014 University of California