i think this is great russians have been working on this for years but never got it perfected but what happens if the magnetic containmentfields
become misaligned or interupted. would system automatically shut down
- Why not harness the already created sun and skip playing God?
Because the sun is very far away, therefore the light that actually reaches us is incredibly dilute thus requires very large structures to
convert this electricity into usable power. Furthermore, due to the rotational nature of the earth, and the constant changing nature of the Earths
atmospheric conditions, makes turning sunlight into electrical energy is notoriously unreliable and intermittent. All this applies with wind, also.
You can view wind generation data by the Bonneville Power Administration
here. So unless we have backups (such as fossil, nuclear (fusion /
fission) or expensive energy storage, we would only get power when the wind blows. The idea behind Fusion is that it will create a fusion reaction,
the same as in a hydrogen bomb, or the sun, that we can control to have energy at our will, cheaper and also at much higher densities.
In my opinion, advanced Nuclear fission can do everything that fusion hopes to do. The main difference is that advanced nuclear was demonstrated in
1954 with the Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE), and later the Molten-Salt Reactor
Experiment (MSRE). Why wait till 2018 for even a fusion prototype with actual power reactors becoming online around around 2050, when we can
make an advanced nuclear fission power reactor much quicker perhaps before the end of the decade?
The actual power point used in the presentation can be found here. Again,
it can do everything fusion can, only it has already been demonstrated.
- Why not work towards perpetual motion machines, wind turbines, solar panels, and similar very low budget high-return machines?
Wind turbines and solar panels are neither very low budget nor high-return machines. An example is
here, where the
cost of that PV system is 9100 dollars per kilowatt of capacity, despite having a capacity factor of well under 40%. By comparison, new Nuclear Units
are estimated to be at around $7500 per kilowatt with a capacity factor of over 90% meaning the nuclear plant will over the same time period on
average generate over twice the power (or more correctly, work). The electricity that solar plant sells costs 575% of the average electricity rate,
I aggree that fusion is out there, possibly attainable with the proper application of heavy funding and government support, but not likely any time
soon. Personally, I believe that the the real solution lies in refining current process in order to harvest energy that is lost in the process, such
as using the thermoelectric effect to harvest electricity from wasted heat, or developement of low pressure fluid turbines, whose application could
harvest more electricity (although only small amounts) out of waste fluid pressure (water, steam, whatever)
Originally posted by Quickfix
Why not just go to geothermal energy?
I am sure that is way cheaper and much more stable.
there are a few issues with geothermal energy.
1. Location... cant happen everywhere, need a vent. There arnt all that many areas where there is enough activity to make geothermal energy useful,
and a lot of those areas are hard to build at due to the nature of an active volcanoe.
2. Gases that escape from geothermal vents are unregulated, irregular, and in most instance are highly corrosive. (i.e geothermal development issues
in utah) Corrosive fluids, as we know, give metal problems, fluid turbines (hydro, steam. etc) are made of metal, many things that go into the
development of a power plant are made of metal. Issues arrise with constant replacement of corroded parts. (replacing a turbine multiple times a year
costs a lot a green)
3. More often than not, thermal gases generated from these "active sites" are harmful to humans. in more ways than just superheated gas. Health
issues arrise, legal actions... workers comp, INSURANCE. Companies dont like that.
As i said in an earlier post, i do not think that fusion is going to happen. Anyway, i am interested in what you want to do with a tesla coil. Since
they dont create electriceity, they take electricity to run, and they dont really fit into the mix.
It seems to me making another could be extremely hazardous, accidental black hole anyone?
It is impossible for a nuclear fusion reaction in a man-made reactor to create a black hole. We already create fusion reactions when a hydrogen bomb
explodes... no black hole there. Also, generally people do not reference movies when discussing technical matters.
As far as solar, complete pipe dream due to the cost, intermittency. And when you consider the complex grid that would be required to integrate large
amounts into the grid, it is by no means "simple", "decentralized", or "cheap".
If we want fusion in the near future we should stick to what works and that is cold fusion reactions through molten metals. Cold fusion reactions
occur when molten metal absorbs and confines hydrogen atoms. Helium3 has been produced as a result of such reactions. He3 is the perfect fuel source
for many reasons.
Like NASA, ITER is just a big distraction to cover the existence of advanced (portable) fusion technology from the public. ITER will be very
expensive, and as complicated as possible so no one can replicate the technology. In other words; they don’t want us to know how simple the Sun
really works because its main reactions can be replicated in a small device.
In school, we are all taught our Sun contains mostly hydrogen plasma. What if the standard model is wrong? It is my honest opinion that the true
anatomy of our Sun involves a molten core consisting of mainly iron/nickel formed by accretion just like other space bodies. This model is often
referred to as the electric Birkeland model. If Tesla was alive today, he would have supported it. The Sun model taught in schools is seriously
flawed. I often wonder if it is just coincidence or part of the plan to limit technical knowledge.
Another interesting fact; UFO saucer type crafts are known to eject molten metal and extremely hot pressurized/ionized gas. They obviously have no
problem raising enormous amounts of electrical energy.
Tesla coils may seem like they don't fit in, but it is just another thought of producing energy.
I know Tesla did some pretty amazing things that I still research today. And i happen to be reading a book on building Tesla coils.
From one Tesla buff to another, the guy did amazing things, and in my opinion is the most undercredited human being of all time. But Tesla coils do
not product energy, now if you are talking about transmitting energy, as in the wireless transmission of energy, thats where its at. that is why it
doesnt fit in. Check out "Nikola Tesla: a Man out of time" its a great biography of his life, and interatcion with the rest of society. I highly
recomend the book to anyone interested in Nikola Tesla or his inventions.
I am in no way bashing on that technology (tesla coils), Its just not a means of generating energy.
The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.
All content copyright 2013, The Above Network, LLC.