Blacklight Power back in the news, things are looking hopeful, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

Topic started on 18-8-2009 @ 01:33 AM by Desolate Cancer

Came across this article on business magazine i frequent.

I remember first hearing about blacklight power here on ATS perhaps 3-4 years ago. The concept seemed plausible but they needed a lot of progress.

Now it seems they have done something right, since they landed significant funding aprox $60mm. Granted some of those sources are petrol companies, but I just view this as them wanting to stay in the energy business be it from oil or blacklight's source.

They also are at the point of now having third party tests be done. THis is all really really exciting. I mean they are not trying to make some stupid perpetual motion device or something, instead they are using atoms.

Of course this all depends on if the hydrino is a real and viable energy source.

www.fastcompany.com...

I am very excited to see how this progresses.

reply posted on 18-8-2009 @ 10:39 PM by Desolate Cancer

Very surprised by the lack of interest. This holds the potential to provide massive amounts of clean energy.

The company has received $60mm in funding, that is not your run of the mill family and friends.

Does anyone else remember this company being discussed on ats few years back?

Is it not great to see the progress they have made?

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 12:31 AM by SevenThunders

The problem is they've been around the block and have consistently failed to deliver. I remember when their supposed products were going to revolutionize the world some 6 years ago. It never happened. I remain very skeptical. There are several companies that have made similar promises but never delivered. Tom Bearden's company comes to mind.

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 01:37 AM by Ex_MislTech

reply to post by Desolate Cancer

I agree with the other posters viewpoint on them failing to deliver.

However...

Lookie here...

Cold Fusion experimentally confirmed

US Navy SPAWAR facility 2005 LENR [Low Energy Nuclear Reactions]

This has been an ongoing battle for 20 years.

The War on Cold Fusion

Some of the reasons it has been blocked is it will put a lot of ppl
out of work, and it will be the end of the age of fossil fuels.

Other reasons are it will bring the 3rd world into the 1st world
and possibly challenge 1st world hegemony.

The huge devaluing of the oil companies could cause serious
problems with stock markets and other financial instruments.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by Ex_MislTech]

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 07:35 AM by MajorDisaster

I wouldn't say they're "failing to deliver" at all!

Maryland, Virginia Company Buys 400 MW Free Energy Generator From BlackLight Power Inc.

They have already had the technology peer-reviewed and replicated by Rowan University, and they are already licensing it out to third-party energy companies - Akridge Energy being #6!

IMHO this is huge news and should rightfully be all over the MSM, but instead - massive silence. Big surprise

So it's left to folks like us to spread this around........

Good thread OP

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 08:19 AM by rnaa

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
I wouldn't say they're "failing to deliver" at all!

Maryland, Virginia Company Buys 400 MW Free Energy Generator From BlackLight Power Inc.

They have already had the technology peer-reviewed and replicated by Rowan University, and they are already licensing it out to third-party energy companies - Akridge Energy being #6!

IMHO this is huge news and should rightfully be all over the MSM, but instead - massive silence. Big surprise

So it's left to folks like us to spread this around........

Good thread OP

Be careful here what you are feeling all warm and fuzzy here.

The only reference to a company called Akridge anything is a commercial property developer in Washington D.C. Otherwise the only sign of Akridge Energy is its mention in the press release from Blacklight and the various blogs who have reported it. The developer and the energy company could be related. And the Blacklight generator could be destined for one of their office building developments.

Just be aware that Akridge Energy is not an electricity utility. The Presser makes it sound a bit grandiose to me.

(edited to tone down my skepticism)

[edit on 19/8/2009 by rnaa]

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 08:24 AM by MajorDisaster

reply to post by rnaa

So?

Just because this Akridge Energy doesn't have much of a web presence, does not mean they don't exist

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 10:18 AM by nataylor

Yes, Akridge Energy is a subsidiary of Akridge, the real estate company owned by John E. Akridge III. Akridge is also a shareholder in Blacklight:

www.reuters.com...

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 06:11 PM by rnaa

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
reply to post by rnaa

So?

Just because this Akridge Energy doesn't have much of a web presence, does not mean they don't exist

I'm just saying that this deal isn't a public utility company putting its reputation on the line here. Akridge doesn't have to answer to its shareholders or customers if it is wasting its money on vaporware. Especially since John Akridge is also a shareholder in Blacklight.

There is nothing wrong with Akridge Energy not having a web presence, nor the Developer using a wholly owned subsidiary to do its electrical contracting.

This deal just isn't really much of a credibility break-through like the press release implies, that's all.

reply posted on 19-8-2009 @ 08:23 PM by Desolate Cancer

Originally posted by rnaa

I'm just saying that this deal isn't a public utility company putting its reputation on the line here. Akridge doesn't have to answer to its shareholders or customers if it is wasting its money on vaporware. Especially since John Akridge is also a shareholder in Blacklight.

There is nothing wrong with Akridge Energy not having a web presence, nor the Developer using a wholly owned subsidiary to do its electrical contracting.

This deal just isn't really much of a credibility break-through like the press release implies, that's all.

You are absolutely right the deal isnt a big issue. What I find to be a rather big deal is getting the $60mm in funding, especially in this credit market.

That amount of money only comes from groups who have been convinced and shown very detailed results of how the product performs. Its not like blacklight went to family and friends and got $2mm they went to reputable places in a tough market with investors very reluctant to give amount big amounts of money like that and where able to secure a sizable amount of funds.

So this to me is fantastic because it means it should give them enough capital to quickly develop their technology, no need to keep working on a shoestring budget. Now they can build large reactors and prove one way or another if the tech is real and viable or if it is like you said vaporware.

reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 03:33 AM by Ex_MislTech

reply to post by MajorDisaster

If they have hard evidence of it working then I am all for it.

I had heard a lot of skepticism from many directions, and
no solid positive evidence.

Numerous scientists say it is likely a scam and offer reasons why

Some others here note fishy dealings between this company
and the fact it seems like a shell corporation to provide false
credibility for suckering investors.

[edit on 20-8-2009 by Ex_MislTech]

reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 07:26 AM by MajorDisaster

reply to post by Ex_MislTech

Look more closely on the page you yourself linked to, BLP have had their process replicated and confirmed by a third-party university, Rowan University.

As for "Numerous scientists say it is likely a scam", that happens for any and all claims of new energy breakthroughs, that is no big surprise.

It should also be noted, Jeanne Manning and Joel Garbon of the New Energy Movement devote a whole chapter to Randall Mills and BLP in their book "Breakthrough Power", they have looked into this themselves and they believe it to be the real deal.

reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 11:10 AM by nataylor

Rowan University also received a total of $170,499 from Blacklight in November, 2008. www.rowan.edu...

Is that normal? I don't know.

reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 04:18 PM by TeslaandLyne

Sounds like the:
Lyne Atomic Hydrogen Furnace

Theoretical limit is 1000 times input heat of 103 cal/mole of H2.
Can't tell because they don't tell.

reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 04:55 PM by buddhasystem

I read a large portion of their technical paper and I don't think what they propose is possible.

If there is the "true ground state" of the hydrogen atom (which does not exist, because if you believe in quantum mechanics at all, there is no such solution to the equation), then there is always a finite probability of a transition from states with higher energy, even if it's a small one. Given the abundance of hydrogen on our planet and in the Universe, it's inconceivable that spectral analysis wouldn't reveal even trace amounts of the proposed substance.

The math they present does look scientific, but I find the solution highly suspect.

I personally have no doubt that the whole thing is a relatively sophisticated fraud.

reply posted on 21-8-2009 @ 02:55 PM by Desolate Cancer

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I read a large portion of their technical paper and I don't think what they propose is possible.

If there is the "true ground state" of the hydrogen atom (which does not exist, because if you believe in quantum mechanics at all, there is no such solution to the equation), then there is always a finite probability of a transition from states with higher energy, even if it's a small one. Given the abundance of hydrogen on our planet and in the Universe, it's inconceivable that spectral analysis wouldn't reveal even trace amounts of the proposed substance.

The math they present does look scientific, but I find the solution highly suspect.

I personally have no doubt that the whole thing is a relatively sophisticated fraud.

Well it wouldnt be the first fraud involving alternative energy sources, nor the last I am sure.

So their method of soliciting the hydrino or rather bringing it out, it is a method that is found in nature?

I mean (please forgive my non technical wording) the whole idea is that you take hydrogen and through certain methods you make it change its electrons energy state, and by doing so it releases particles called hydrinos which then you can tap as an energy source, correct? SO the method they ar proposing to do this, is it found in nature/universe at all? I mean if they are using certain type of wave and that wave is found in nature then it would react with hydrogen and cause the release of hydrinos.

But if the method by which they propose to release the hydrino is not something found in nature then it could be plausible that is why it has not been discovered before.

reply posted on 21-8-2009 @ 05:22 PM by Pilgrum

reply to post by Desolate Cancer

What they've nicknamed the 'hydrino' is a hydrogen atom with its electron energy level somewhat collapsed in comparison to a 'normal' hydrogen atom (a lower level orbit if you like). They've been claiming that these hydrinos are basicly inert compared to normal hydrogen opening the possibility of new inert compounds. The production of hydrinos is where they claim the 'blacklight' or ultraviolet emission comes from, being the energy extracted from the atoms and that's where the company name comes from.

As Buddhasystem suggested, these 'collapsed' hydrogen atoms or 'hydrinos' have never been observed in nature making their existence unlikely and what I'd like to know is how these supposed 'hydrinos' are prevented from extracting energy from their environment to recover to the 'normal' energy level of standard hydrogen atoms making the whole process null at best in terms of energy output.

I see 2 possibilities here: elaborate hoax or the greatest discovery to date and worthy of the nobel prize. I've been leaning toward hoax since I first heard of them several years back.

reply posted on 24-8-2009 @ 07:52 PM by zarp3333

On the one hand, its been well over a century since we've harnessed internal combustion and a half a century since nuclear energy, it stands to reason that we would have seen some kind of break through by now given the advances in other sciences.

On the other hand, I've seen my hopes dashed over and over with dubious, inventions and purposefully hidden technology. Has anyone ever heard of the Massive Yet Tiny Engine? I think I read about it on ATS a couple years ago.

The technology is based on internal combustion but the efficiency was 3 times that of typical engines. Heres a link.

www.angellabsllc.com...

reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 09:00 AM by Desolate Cancer

Originally posted by zarp3333
On the one hand, its been well over a century since we've harnessed internal combustion and a half a century since nuclear energy, it stands to reason that we would have seen some kind of break through by now given the advances in other sciences.

On the other hand, I've seen my hopes dashed over and over with dubious, inventions and purposefully hidden technology. Has anyone ever heard of the Massive Yet Tiny Engine? I think I read about it on ATS a couple years ago.

The technology is based on internal combustion but the efficiency was 3 times that of typical engines. Heres a link.

www.angellabsllc.com...

Haha yea the my-t engine is still an active thread. It seems that though some say the concept is somewhat valid, the current availability of materials are not strong enough to handle it.

Others , myself included, say that this is a bs scam because the inventor could very easily get the $30k or so at most to install this engine in a car a boat a prop plane or something to show it actually working. Instead he turns it on for 30 seconds at shows then turns it off. So until he puts it in some sort of vehicle to demonstrate it; its a scam.

But back to this topic I am a big believer in Missouri state motto, of being the show me state. I hope the $60mm blacklight as secured will allow them to develop a generator to show it in action.

reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 09:28 AM by Pilgrum

reply to post by Desolate Cancer

Absolutely - 'show me' is what they have to do as claims are cheap. Let's see this working continuously for, say, 1 month or even just 1 week producing a useful output under the closest scrutiny by a team of independant experts with no financial ties to the company. When I say 'useful' output I'm thinking in terms of 100kW or more for the proof of the concept.

Something to bear in mind: 100kW for a month (72MWh) at typical energy market prices is only worth around $2000 to the generator.

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^