Electricity collected from the air could become the newest alternative energy source

Didn't Tesla work on some device which exploits the potential difference in the atmosphere to collect electricity?
I do seem to remember reading about it-it used a long rod pointed high in the sky,with a metal plate at the top,connected to a condensor (capacitor)to store the charge.It wasn't a Tesla coil,but far simpler,and collected rather than generated electricity.

Im sure I read about it,including Teslas origional drawings of the device.
Think it was on "JLN labs" website,but sadly I can't find it now.

I am really surprised by this thread.

Not by the discoveries on tapping atmospheric charges for electrical energy, BUT by the hang dog surrender and defeatist statements by most if not all posters on this thread, that 'TPTB' will not allow it to happen.

Who the hell is TPTB? Are they so powerful that they can dominate or kill EVERY single one of us? Who the hell is TPTB that they presume the ability to make us sit or stand or buy at their every command?

They are nothing more than humans, equal to you and i and they are few in numbers. They can only control by using wealth, not by wisdom as evident by their pathetic failures, but even that wealth is diminishing every day, and will become NOTHING if the masses decides so - by having no confidence in it.

Alone, you and I are insignificant, but if more of the masses are awakened, as many already are, TPTB will run out of options and are even running scared. Reach out, discuss and debate the truth and reality, and humanity will win against further enslavement.

Good luck!

reply to post by starstrings

Back at the end of '08 a channeling from a trusted source was asked where to invest for the future. The ascended masters said new energy research (mostly quantum physics related) and new agricultural research.

These new companies that sprout up are going to be so important for the future of humanity on this planet.

On the face of it this seems a fantastic idea, and I am impressed by its scope, however one question occurs to me.
I read in the article linked by the OP that the proposed method of collecting electrical energy from the atmosphere, would involve preventing lethal strikes , and would supposedly involve absorbing any electricity BEFORE a lightning strike could be induced . While the very thought of preventing natures most savage claw from striking at the ground is a grand notion, I wonder if it might turn out having some negative affects.
When lightning forms and strikes , its passage burns impurities out of the air,cleaning the air we breathe.
I dont feel comfortable with the idea of removing lightning from the atmosphere altogether, or even in any large percentage, until an experiment can be devised which can tell us , what negative effects might occur without it, and how to mitigate any negative effects caused by the ceasation of lightning activity.

See if I can get this to work A bit old but you never know

Free Energy

Wow were just now acknowledging Tesla's work, talk about being a bit behind.

Second Line

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Sly1one]

reply to post by starstrings


Electricity in the air comes from energy from the sun and space. So it is indirectly solar power. Just with a middle man. By all means do it. Very interesting.

Just thought I would post this for you all but please don't comment on my thread comment here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
This thread will become pretty important in time due to energy for all. Some people may mock when I mentioned Egypt but its significant but just may not seem so yet.
Good thread.

First, there is NO free energy/electrcity.

Just because we don't understand all of the variables involved doesn't mean it is FREE.

Second, lightening plays a critical role in nature, in way of cleaning air, creating ozone, starting natural fires, etc.

If we do "harvest" the energy before it becomes lightening we could cause drastic environmental changes....could even be worse than burning oil.

For now I will stick with solar and thermal.

reply to post by peck420


Actually it is free energy in a relativistic stance. As long as the sun burns, we get energy. As to how much is there, it's constantly rejuvenated. 1 second of the total output of energy from the sun could supply the US with energy for a million years. I don't think you grasp the gravity of the situation. Us taking some of that energy is like taking a cup of water from the ocean. And because we are talking about the sun, that cup is instantly replaced.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
On the face of it this seems a fantastic idea, and I am impressed by its scope, however one question occurs to me.
I read in the article linked by the OP that the proposed method of collecting electrical energy from the atmosphere, would involve preventing lethal strikes , and would supposedly involve absorbing any electricity BEFORE a lightning strike could be induced . While the very thought of preventing natures most savage claw from striking at the ground is a grand notion, I wonder if it might turn out having some negative affects.
When lightning forms and strikes , its passage burns impurities out of the air,cleaning the air we breathe.
I dont feel comfortable with the idea of removing lightning from the atmosphere altogether, or even in any large percentage, until an experiment can be devised which can tell us , what negative effects might occur without it, and how to mitigate any negative effects caused by the ceasation of lightning activity.

Interesting as the Relampago del Catatumbo is purported to be one of the largest creators of ozone. This did stop for months this year.


atlasobscura.com...

reply to post by BANANAMONTANA


While Im aware that Ozone is in of itself not super helpful in terms of climate change, the result of removing one of natures most powerful forces from large swathes of the earth, in my opinion needs careful examination before being enacted.
I really dont see why a method of collecting energy DIRECTLY from lightning bolts cant be developed instead. I hear alot of pathetic nonsense about capacitors not having the storage capability to collect such large amounts of energy, but as excuses go , in the 21st centuary... thats absolute tosh. Resistant material research gets more impressive every femtosecond, so I cant understand why a storage method cannot be devised.

reply to post by Gorman91


And as with all energy sources humanity has found, we start with taking a cup...then we adjust our lifestyles until we maximize production and consumption.

If humanity found a new source of cheap electricity, how long do you think it would take to change ALL of our home usage to electricity?

40, maybe 50 years, and you would be talking 4-5 times increase per person not including vehicles....this is just changing household items to electric vs gas. (Hot water tanks, furnaces, stoves, barbeques, etc.)

Add in vehicle use, and you could be looking at 10-20 times increse in energy consumption...very quickly we start taking more than a cup.

How many times do we have to abuse a system to the point of breaking before we will learn to look at the true root of our energy problem, our USAGE, not our production.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by BANANAMONTANA

 

While Im aware that Ozone is in of itself not super helpful in terms of climate change, the result of removing one of natures most powerful forces from large swathes of the earth, in my opinion needs careful examination before being enacted.
I really dont see why a method of collecting energy DIRECTLY from lightning bolts cant be developed instead. I hear alot of pathetic nonsense about capacitors not having the storage capability to collect such large amounts of energy, but as excuses go , in the 21st centuary... thats absolute tosh. Resistant material research gets more impressive every femtosecond, so I cant understand why a storage method cannot be devised.

I agree, but why fund decent research when we can have wars over resources and allow some of the largest lobbyists pay off climate change scientists.

If there's any real potential with this, study leader Fernando Galembeck, Ph.D, may be close to finding himself "suicided".

The corporate slavemasters aren't going to like an unlimited energy source they can't apply the scarcity principle to. It will diminish their capacity to keep people killing each other over resources (MIC), manufacturing divisiveness and thus fostering distraction away from their tyrannical strangehold on humanity.

Watch your back, Fernando.

This technology probably won't be commercially available, ever.

The reason is not because it won't work, or even that it won't work well. In fact, the technology would probably work TOO WELL.

When looking at this from the strategic POV, people in power do not want normal (average) people to have knowledge of or access to this kind of POWER.

If this technology were to be stolen, and fell into the "wrong hands," imagine what the "bad guys" could (and would) do with it. They would weaponize it. Entire cities could be destroyed... or worse.

SCENARIO: A group of terrorists (or smart maniacs) gets this technology. They weaponize it. They sends salvos of monster lightning strikes at New York because they had a bad experience there one week. New York gets blasted into the stone age. BUT... they can't stop the lightning, which has chain-reacted into a larger and larger system that ultimately results in a cascading exothermal inversion, whereupon the entire atmosphere is burned off.

This is why TESLA's notes were stolen, most of which are still classified to this very day. This is why he was not allowed to succeed. Man is not ready for this kind of fire.

reply to post by xxshadowfaxx


He did and even built giant instruments to achieve it. There is an alternative history theory that an advance civilization already had the technology to do so, thousands of years ago.

Nikola Tesla proved this potential in the early 20th century.

This man, Fernando Galembeck, is a teacher at Unicamp, a University in Campinas, Brazil. I happen to study at the same University (management) and i go there a few times every week.

I have nothing to do with the Chemistry area there, but would be nice to have a chat with this guy.

[edit on 26/8/10 by Canslli]

I dont get it... wouldnt the country that controls free energy and is free from the shackles of oil be a country ontop? they wouldnt have to pay for oil, they wouldnt have to pay for electricity, everything would be free! imagine how cost effective this would be for said countries army! i just dont get why they would surpress it... TPTB are interested in power over money and this is exactly that... Power....

I once contemplated why conditions that create lightning could not be efficiently replicated within a controlled structure. It seems to me that nature always utilizes the most efficient means for anything/everything.

Nature can expel electricity within a concentrated and measurable means (which to me would mean controllable and routable). Which brings two questions to mind:

1. Why can't we collect, then harvest, naturally occurring lightning (perhaps the size of storage necessary is not feasible?)

2. We have the technology to seed weather.. Why wouldn't there be means to efficiently reproduce this weather within a controlled environment?

Obviously, I'm no meteorologist and my understanding about such is certainly that of a laymen. However it seems that we know enough about lightning:

The conditions needed to produce lightning have been known for some time. However, exactly how lightning forms has never been verified so there is room for debate. Leading theories focus around separation of electric charge and generation of an electric field within a thunderstorm. Recent studies also indicate that ice, hail, and semi-frozen water drops known as graupel are essential to lightning development. Storms that fail to produce large quantities of ice usually fail to produce lightning.

Source