[Vo]: Ion source
Hi, Can someone who seen a 10mA ion source tell me approximately how big they tend to be (order of magnitude)? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
[Vo]: Magnetic Electric Plasma Confinement
I contributed the first part of this to the fusion topic at wired: May I present a possibly practical hot fusion machine that I have been thinking of for years that combines magnetic and electric fields for critique as an open source offering. The magnetic part is provided by hoop coils in a row like a egg shaped wire and paper lantern with the largest diameter hoop in the center and progressively smaller diameter hoops at the ends. The current in the center coil is much greater than that of the other coils so the magnetic field has a small waist in the center. The hoops are held by a strong insulating material which supports an electric gradient with the center grounded and both ends positively charged. The thermonuclear plasma is securely held because it cant escape either from the center for magnetic reasons or the ends for electrical reasons. The plasma will become positively charged leading to the advantage that fewer electrons will radiate thermal blackbody energy wastefully. The curves of the magnetic and electric fields promote stability as they block escape for each other. The center of the machine is linear without the curve of a torus. This second part is a suppliment for Vortex members: With Perpetual Motion of the Second Kind any fusion machine producing energy releasing nuclear reactions will create surplus energy. I think the diode array will be more of a general purpose electrical energy and refrigeration source. A modified ME vessel may be usful in industry and space propulsion PS, another topic: The experimental discrete 1N914 diode diode array tested by Tom Schum consisted of 32 modules in series each module containing 32 parallel diodes see http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/ Aloha, Charles M. Brown
[Vo]: The Oil Gang -- The Empire continues its assault
Jed wrote: ``Against this backdrop, Washington is consumed with ethanol euphoria. President Bush in his State of the Union address set a production goal for 2017 of 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels, including grain-based and cellulosic ethanol, and liquefied coal.'' Kyle wrote: If anyone ever needed damning evidence that Bush is a dumbass, there it is. ... For some reason, Cheney reminds me of the galactic emperor from Return of the Jedi Hi All, By their works you shall know them. Before we dismiss the the Oil Gang as bumbling fools, remember that making ethanol from corn requires a net increase in oil consumption and helps keep the price of oil up in the face of the world oil glut. The other issue, control, is still a challenge to the Oil Gang. They are making progress in Iraq as the oil fields are turned over to American companies -- at the cost of American lives and tax dollars -- but they still are no closer to breaking the Russian grip on Kazakh oil than they were before 911. Jack Smith PS Look for action to take out the Iranian oil fields.
[Vo]: Lots of press reports about cold fusion
Here is an article in Norwegian, apparently pro-CF (judging by an automatic transaction): http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2007/mars/1174909392.3 Google Alerts brought me five stories plus one about Hair Extensions: http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=30396Symposium to discuss Cold Fusionhttp://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=30396 experiments Resource Investor - Herndon,VA,USA Researchers say they have new evidence supports âlow energy nuclear reactions,â also known as cold fusion. Scientists will discuss evidence of cold fusion, ... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070329095612.htm'Cold Fusionhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070329095612.htm' Rebirth? Symposium Explores Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Science Daily (press release) - USA Science Daily In 1989, 'cold fusion' was hailed as a scientific breakthrough with the potential to solve the world's energy problems by providing a ... http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/45750.htmlScientists shed new light on http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/45750.htmlcold fusion Earthtimes.org - USA CHICAGO, March 29 US scientists say the concept of cold fusion, a controversial concept once hailed as a scientific breakthrough, may be ready for rebirth. ... http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/fusion_0329Fusionhttp://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/fusion_0329 Experiments Show Nuclear Power's Softer Side Wired News - USA For a few months in 1989, tabletop cold fusion -- even simpler to construct than fusors -- seemed to hold enormous promise, following claims of success from ... http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070326/full/070326-12.htmlCold fusionhttp://www.nature.com/news/2007/070326/full/070326-12.html is back at the American Chemical Society Nature.com (subscription) - London,England,UK After an 18-year hiatus, the American Chemical Society (ACS) seems to be warming to cold fusion. Today that society is holding a symposium at their national ... - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Lots of press reports about cold fusion
Interesting that the ACS seems to create more press interest than does the APS where the same papers were given a month earlier. Nevertheless, this exposure is good news and will give other writers the courage to say something positive about CF. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: Here is an article in Norwegian, apparently pro-CF (judging by an automatic transaction): http://www.forskning.no/Artikler/2007/mars/1174909392.3 Google Alerts brought me five stories plus one about Hair Extensions: Symposium to discuss http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=30396Cold Fusion experiments http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=30396 Resource Investor - Herndon,VA,USA Researchers say they have new evidence supports ‘low energy nuclear reactions,’ also known as cold fusion. Scientists will discuss evidence of cold fusion, ... ' http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070329095612.htmCold Fusion ' Rebirth? Symposium Explores Low Energy Nuclear Reactions http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070329095612.htm Science Daily (press release) - USA Science Daily In 1989, 'cold fusion' was hailed as a scientific breakthrough with the potential to solve the world's energy problems by providing a ... Scientists shed new light on http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/45750.htmlcold fusion http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/45750.htmlEarthtimes.org - USA CHICAGO, March 29 US scientists say the concept of cold fusion, a controversial concept once hailed as a scientific breakthrough, may be ready for rebirth. ... Fusion http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/fusion_0329 Experiments Show Nuclear Power's Softer Side http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/fusion_0329 Wired News - USA For a few months in 1989, tabletop cold fusion -- even simpler to construct than fusors -- seemed to hold enormous promise, following claims of success from ... Cold fusion http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070326/full/070326-12.html is back at the American Chemical Society http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070326/full/070326-12.html Nature.com (subscription) - London,England,UK After an 18-year hiatus, the American Chemical Society (ACS) seems to be warming to cold fusion. Today that society is holding a symposium at their national ... - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Lots of press reports about cold fusion
Here is some interesting follow up on these stories: They all seem to be positive. I do not recall ever seeing five positive press reports on cold fusion in a single day. http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=30396Symposium to discuss Cold Fusion http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=30396experiments Resource Investor - Herndon,VA,USA Researchers say they have new evidence supports âlow energy nuclear reactions,â also known as cold fusion. Scientists will discuss evidence of cold fusion, ... This one is short, and a CF supporter appended a note alerting people to Mallove's book and MIT's shenanigans. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070329095612.htm'Cold Fusion http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070329095612.htm' Rebirth? Symposium Explores Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Science Daily (press release) - USA Science Daily In 1989, 'cold fusion' was hailed as a scientific breakthrough with the potential to solve the world's energy problems by providing a ... A rewrite of an ACS announcement, which was generally positive. http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/45750.htmlScientists shed new light on http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/45750.htmlcold fusion Earthtimes.org - USA CHICAGO, March 29 US scientists say the concept of cold fusion, a controversial concept once hailed as a scientific breakthrough, may be ready for rebirth. ... A short UPI report. I do not recall ever seeing a positive report from a wire service. Perhaps we really have turned the corner. http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/fusion_0329Fusion http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/fusion_0329Experiments Show Nuclear Power's Softer Side Wired News - USA For a few months in 1989, tabletop cold fusion -- even simpler to construct than fusors -- seemed to hold enormous promise, following claims of success from ... Inane comments by the reporter, with notes appended by various people including me and Bill Beaty. (Thanks Bill!) Here are some of dumb comments made by the reporter to me, which are among the stupidest comments ever, right up there with Time Magazine's Lemonick: [W]hile cold fusion can be replicated be anyone, what is implied in the hype ebbed away... is the fact that Pons and Fleischmann's technique didn't, as hoped for, produce an exploitable 'energy profit'. I'm sorry if this was not made clear. Clear as mud! I still wonder what he was thinking. Anyone can replicate cold fusion? This like Lemonick's gem: So . . . anybody can repeat [the experiment]. that's what you're saying, right? The reporter later wrote: Put simply, there was not enough space to cover cold fusion's promise and details of the aftermath surrounding Pons and Fleischmann's work. My response: Space is not the issue. Your comment was factually incorrect and misleading. A factually correct statement would not have taken up more space. You wrote 'The hype ebbed away when other researchers were unable to replicate their results.' That should say: 'Within a year, 92 groups of researchers reported they were able to replicate the results.' http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070326/full/070326-12.htmlCold fusion http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070326/full/070326-12.htmlis back at the American Chemical Society Nature.com (subscription) - London,England,UK After an 18-year hiatus, the American Chemical Society (ACS) seems to be warming to cold fusion. Today that society is holding a symposium at their national ... We have discussed this. This is by Katherine Sanderson, who will probably soon be looking for a new job. - Jed
[Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
Recent negative comments on Vortex on this subject are short-sighted and counter productive, despite the fact that ethanol itself is not a desirable transportation fuel. It is all about infrastructure, 'stepping stones', stop-gap solutions, and the ramping up of domestic farm production with what we have now - in anticipation of what we will have in two to three years time. The Agriculture Department said that US farmers intend to plant 90.5 million acres of corn this summer, the highest level since 1944, when the USA was in effect feeding most of the War-ravaged World. ... and up from 78.3 million acres year-ago levels, which was already high historically - an increase of over 15% year to year. Much of this will go into ethanol/butanol. It is not clear what percentage of that will also employ corn cellulose, which can double the yield per acre planted. In reality, the corn to ethanol process is only viable today because of Federal subsidies and tax breaks. These are the result of political support of farm belt congressional representatives and politically powerful farming organizations and major agricultural corporations. Many observers have noted that when push comes to shove in the USA, the farm lobby is more powerful than the oil lobby. In fact a great deal of allow farm land is owned by big-oil. These subsidies are not unlike supports given to oil producers in the past - but still the trend to ethanol would be alarming - except for two extremely bright spots in alternative energy RD, closely related to corn-to-ethanol which do make excellent sense: Algoil (biodiesel from algae) and cellulose-to-butanol (and cross-over technologies). We are only one to two years away from a major shift to these lab-proven technologies, however, and no further breakthroughs are required - just implementation of what we have (and sorting out of overlapping patent and IP rights) ... Therefore - the most valuable outcome of our current National fascination with the conversion of corn to ethanol is that it, and the infrastructure which is derived from it, may prove to be the direct stepping-stone along the efficient real path leading us to a sustainable carbon-neutral energy future, one that will provide us with increased home-based energy supplies and significantly reduce our input of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere - but *without* ethanol itself, in the longer time-frame. That 'real path' to self sufficiency is - and remains - under the same name: bio-fuel but it is not ethanol per se: it is cellulose-to-butanol -- or as an even better alternative: algoil. These are being produced now in pilot-plants and can take-over the entire infrastructure from ethanol easily. Here is some information which is more authoritative than DoA: the corn growers association: http://www.ncga.com/news/notd/2007/march/031507a.asp Highlights: 1) Three billion gallons of new ethanol production capacity will come online in 2007. This is almost as much as total production in 2004. 2) NCGA President McCauley: “The industry is a lot closer to manufacturing ethanol from corn cellulose than many people think. Corn cellulose will become as important to the ethanol industry as corn starch already is.” 3) The switch to Butanol. Butanol is a significantly better fuel than ethanol, and in principle (and in labs now) it can be 100% substituted using special fermentation yeasts... although for political expediency butanol is being plugged as 'complementary, not competitive. BP announced that it will invest $500 million into butanol in a partnership with DuPont and UC Berkeley to develop the new technology for butanol. Other oil companies are on-board because butanol is also being made as we speak from petroleum AND from coal. IOW it is the only transportation fuel which makes great economic sense to both the farmer, the oil driller, and the coal miner. With those three lobbies, its ultimate success is all but guaranteed. In most ways, butanol is superior to gasoline, as it is cleaner, safer, and less toxic. It is more expensive than gasoline now - but that is partly a function of low demand, which can change overnight - once the switch is mandated - at the pump. Unlike fuel ethanol, or even the 15% blend - with butanol zero changes to an auto engine are required to sue butanol. With more efficient hybrid autos, and with cellulose-to-butanol from the farm belt and Algoil from lake and offshore aquaculture (and flooded deserts) the USA can become self-sufficient in transportation fuel before the end of the decade. All that is required in political will-power and the active participation of big-oil - instead of active hindrance. We may need to be self-sufficient very soon as a practical matter - if the Hawks in DC and the UK decide to take-out the Iranian oil fields as punishment. That is looking more and more probable as an outcome in that region. If we don't do
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
Jones Beene wrote: It is all about infrastructure, 'stepping stones', stop-gap solutions, and the ramping up of domestic farm production with what we have now - in anticipation of what we will have in two to three years time. As Pimentel has pointed out, if we were to convert every scrap of new plant growth in the U.S. into fuel -- every leaf, branch and food crop -- this would supply less than half of our energy needs. Our entire food crop would not supply 20% of the automobile fuel we need. Plantlife grown in natural conditions in North America does not capture enough energy, period. All the technology in the world will not change this fact. Growing algae in tanks is another matter. A 25-gallon tank of fuel has as much energy as one adult consumes in a year. In a world in which thousands of children die every week from starvation, for the U.S. to convert food into automobile fuel is unspeakable. It is inhuman. It is like gathering up the corpses of those dead children and burning them for fuel. Of course we did not kill them directly, but our irresponsible decisions and our lunatic disregard for basic economics and physics contributed to their deaths. As for developing improved ethanol, if we were to redirect the money we spend doing that to improved automobile efficiency and plug-in hybrids, we could easily cut our consumption to 20% to 50%, saving far more than ethanol can every supply. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Lots of press reports about cold fusion
R.C.Macaulay wrote: Howdy Jed, Positive in that 5 reports are now in print, negative in the words laced within the reports. Yup. But please note that 4 out of 5 says something good about CF, in addition to the usual negative garbage. Google Alerts brings me dozens of articles about cold fusion every year. There are few positive ones from places like ZPEnergy, but as I recall, for the past several years every single one of the mainstream articles was completely negative. The ones in Time magazine and the Washington Post the I featured in the LENR-CANR News section are typical. See: http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm These 5 articles are way ahead of the Post. At least they do not accuse us of fraud! The Wired article is whacky, but at least it includes the photo from BARC. Yes, the message is present but flavored with negatives and attitude of skepticism, a product of our modern university systems . . . I do not think this is a modern attitude. You will find similar attitudes in the newspapers and journals discussing Pasteur's germ theory in the 1860s, or the Wright brothers in 1906. See also: [A] most futile attempt and totally impossible to be carried out. - Benjamin Disraeli describes the proposed Suez Canal in 1858 The Panama Canal is actually a thing of the past, and Nature in her works will soon obliterate all traces of French energy and money expended on the Isthmus. - Scientific American, 1891 I will ignore all ideas and new works and engines of war, the invention of which has reached its limits and for whose improvement I see no further hope. - Julius Frontinius, chief military engineer to the Roman Emperor Vespasian, 1st century A.D. I think this is human nature. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Ultra low momentum neutron catalyzed nuclear reactions
Please excuse the multiple postings. I forgot to delete vortex-l from the 'To' address box. Harry
Re: [Vo]: Lots of press reports about cold fusion
I wrote: I will ignore all ideas and new works and engines of war, the invention of which has reached its limits and for whose improvement I see no further hope. - Julius Frontinius, chief military engineer to the Roman Emperor Vespasian, 1st century A.D. That's supposed to be I will ignore all ideas for new works . . . To take a similar example from last week's news, NASA just closed down their $4 million per year Institute for Advanced Concepts office in Atlanta. As far as I know, this was their only venue for researching space elevators . . . exotic propulsion systems and miniature robots for exploring Mars. In other words, from now on they only plan to use German rocket technology invented in the early 1940s. This is called slamming the door on the future. See: http://www.ajc.com/search/content/news/stories/2007/03/24/meshnasa0324a.html The quotes from Frontinius and the others come from the book Cerf, C., The Experts Speak. Here is another gem: Most improbable and more like one of joules Verne's stories. - British Adm. Sir Compton Dombile reacting to the story Danger! By Sir Arthur Colin Doyle , in which Doyle warned that England was susceptible to a submarine blockade by a hostile nation, 1914. Note that England nearly lost WWI because of the German submarine blockade, mainly because of bungling and ineptitude, such as delaying the use of convoys. Twenty years later during WWII, the British military officers repeated nearly every mistake they had in WWI. See: Gray, E. A., THe U-Boat War 1914-1918, 1994:Leo Cooper Note also that during 1942, the U.S. officers and civilian leadership repeated most of the mistakes made by the British in anti-submarine war, plus they added several new mistakes that only Americans would make, such as leaving the lights on along the East Coast, especially in Florida. This back-lighting extended a few hundred kilometers out to sea, covering most of the active shipping lanes, making it dead simple for the German U-boat captains to find and target U.S. ships. It was like shooting fish in a barrel. The Germans later called it the Happy Time. In 8 months they sank 609 ships, losing only 22 U-boats. At that rate, they would have won the war in a walk. History teaches us that stupidity has always been common. - Jed
[Vo]: 2 out of 3 ain't bad.
The effects are real, a nuclear reaction is involved but may be the nuclear reaction is not of the fusion kind after all. 2 out of 3 ain't bad! ;-) Harry Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:37:58 -0500: Hi, [snip] In your opinion, is the theory of Ultra low momentum neutron catalyzed nuclear reactions the best theory to date? [snip] I think that if you read Ed Storms new book, you will have a good idea of what is a better theory. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
Jed Rothwell wrote: As Pimentel has pointed out ... Utterly meaningless. The guy is an antiquated and misguided zealot with zero credibility among the decision makers on either side of the aisle- as witnessed by the massive changes already underway. As for developing improved ethanol, if we were to redirect the money we spend doing that to improved automobile efficiency and plug-in hybrids, we could easily cut our consumption to 20% to 50%, saving far more than ethanol can every supply. Of course hybrids are a big part of the solution. It is not either/or, and it is definitely NOT about improving ethanol. We should be focused precisely on the twin goals of fueling advanced hybrids with butanol, biodiesel, or algoil -- ...which fuels are more like 'anti-ethanol' than 'improved ethanol' -- and we should be heavily taxing Arab oil, at the point of entry, and oil company profits via the elimination of all allowances and incentives, in order to accomplish these twin goals. Ethanol will gradually fade from view and go out of use, in the next 5-7 years, under the weight of its own inefficiency, and with no need for sham arguments. Advanced biofuels, on the other hand, like butanol and algoil are here to stay. Jones
[Vo]: The new watt-coms, a new era is approaching
SUBJECT: The new watt-coms, a new era is approaching Good news in AE RD arena: See: http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/trilliondollar-prize-turns-dotcom-into-wattcom/2007/03/30/1174761748983.html http://tinyurl.com/2fvtj4 Excerpts: SILICON Valley's dotcom era might be giving way to the watt-com era. Out of the ashes of the internet bust, many technology veterans have regrouped and found a new mission in alternative energy: developing wind power, solar panels, ethanol plants and hydrogen-powered cars. It is no secret that venture capitalists have begun pouring billions into energy-related start-ups with names such as SunPower, Nanosolar and Lilliputian Systems. ... This time around, entrepreneurs say they are not expecting such quick returns. In the internet boom, the mantra was to change the world and get rich quick. This time, given the size and scope of the energy market, the idea is to change the world and get even richer - but somewhat more slowly. Those drawn to the alternative-energy industry say they need time to understand the energy technology, and to turn ideas into solid companies. After all, in contrast to the internet boom, this time the companies will need actual manufactured products and customers. There are real business models and real products to be sold in established markets and growing economics, says George Basile, who has a doctorate in biophysics from the University of California, Berkeley, and specializes in energy issues. ... They are all, plainly, following the money. In the first three quarters of 2006, venture capital firms put $US474 million into a broad range of valley start-ups in energy storage, generation and efficiency, according to Cleantech Venture Network, an industry trade group. Energy was by far the fastest-growing area, and the amount was on par with what was put into telecommunications and biotechnology. ... Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
I for one never understood CORN being used. grow something with a higher fruit yeild per acre, and sugar yeild per pound. On 3/30/07, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Recent negative comments on Vortex on this subject are short-sighted and counter productive, despite the fact that ethanol itself is not a desirable transportation fuel. It is all about infrastructure, 'stepping stones', stop-gap solutions, and the ramping up of domestic farm production with what we have now - in anticipation of what we will have in two to three years time. The Agriculture Department said that US farmers intend to plant 90.5 million acres of corn this summer, the highest level since 1944, when the USA was in effect feeding most of the War-ravaged World. ... and up from 78.3 million acres year-ago levels, which was already high historically - an increase of over 15% year to year. Much of this will go into ethanol/butanol. It is not clear what percentage of that will also employ corn cellulose, which can double the yield per acre planted. In reality, the corn to ethanol process is only viable today because of Federal subsidies and tax breaks. These are the result of political support of farm belt congressional representatives and politically powerful farming organizations and major agricultural corporations. Many observers have noted that when push comes to shove in the USA, the farm lobby is more powerful than the oil lobby. In fact a great deal of allow farm land is owned by big-oil. These subsidies are not unlike supports given to oil producers in the past - but still the trend to ethanol would be alarming - except for two extremely bright spots in alternative energy RD, closely related to corn-to-ethanol which do make excellent sense: Algoil (biodiesel from algae) and cellulose-to-butanol (and cross-over technologies). We are only one to two years away from a major shift to these lab-proven technologies, however, and no further breakthroughs are required - just implementation of what we have (and sorting out of overlapping patent and IP rights) ... Therefore - the most valuable outcome of our current National fascination with the conversion of corn to ethanol is that it, and the infrastructure which is derived from it, may prove to be the direct stepping-stone along the efficient real path leading us to a sustainable carbon-neutral energy future, one that will provide us with increased home-based energy supplies and significantly reduce our input of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere - but *without* ethanol itself, in the longer time-frame. That 'real path' to self sufficiency is - and remains - under the same name: bio-fuel but it is not ethanol per se: it is cellulose-to-butanol -- or as an even better alternative: algoil. These are being produced now in pilot-plants and can take-over the entire infrastructure from ethanol easily. Here is some information which is more authoritative than DoA: the corn growers association: http://www.ncga.com/news/notd/2007/march/031507a.asp Highlights: 1) Three billion gallons of new ethanol production capacity will come online in 2007. This is almost as much as total production in 2004. 2) NCGA President McCauley: The industry is a lot closer to manufacturing ethanol from corn cellulose than many people think. Corn cellulose will become as important to the ethanol industry as corn starch already is. 3) The switch to Butanol. Butanol is a significantly better fuel than ethanol, and in principle (and in labs now) it can be 100% substituted using special fermentation yeasts... although for political expediency butanol is being plugged as 'complementary, not competitive. BP announced that it will invest $500 million into butanol in a partnership with DuPont and UC Berkeley to develop the new technology for butanol. Other oil companies are on-board because butanol is also being made as we speak from petroleum AND from coal. IOW it is the only transportation fuel which makes great economic sense to both the farmer, the oil driller, and the coal miner. With those three lobbies, its ultimate success is all but guaranteed. In most ways, butanol is superior to gasoline, as it is cleaner, safer, and less toxic. It is more expensive than gasoline now - but that is partly a function of low demand, which can change overnight - once the switch is mandated - at the pump. Unlike fuel ethanol, or even the 15% blend - with butanol zero changes to an auto engine are required to sue butanol. With more efficient hybrid autos, and with cellulose-to-butanol from the farm belt and Algoil from lake and offshore aquaculture (and flooded deserts) the USA can become self-sufficient in transportation fuel before the end of the decade. All that is required in political will-power and the active participation of big-oil - instead of active hindrance. We may need to be self-sufficient very soon as a practical matter - if the Hawks in DC and the UK decide to take-out the Iranian oil fields as
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
leaking pen wrote: I for one never understood CORN being used. grow something with a higher fruit yeild per acre, and sugar yeild per pound. The decision for growing corn is not 'ordered' at even a regional level but is made at a much lower level - the individual farmer. From the perspective of the farmer - all the variables for corn are known through years of experience - and if the price is right, he will grow it. Much higher yields for cellulose are available with other crops, but from the farmer's perspective, it is too risky to grow these, as the variables are not well-known - and the price he can secure is not firm. Things change however - in a farmer's-cooperative-association - where the decision is based on how much total fuel they can sell from the available crops - and the risk/reward is shared. That systemic change is expected to happen soon with state encouragement in selected areas, and it is unlikely that corn will be the choice. As for sugar - that product may be irrelevant now that cellulose can be converted, and the net yield of sugar (beets are used in Europe) is always going to be 50-75% less per acre than raw cellulose. Jones
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
Jones Beene wrote: As Pimentel has pointed out ... Utterly meaningless. The guy is an antiquated and misguided zealot . . . Because he does biology, and presents quantitative, reality-based arguments, I suppose. I agree that in the new era of fact-free touchy-feeling truthiness this kind of thing is unacceptable. Policy can be as crazy as you like as long as it feels good, and looks good in TV advertisements featuring yeoman farmers standing proudly in the sunset. with zero credibility among the decision makers on either side of the aisle- as witnessed by the massive changes already underway. You mean the massive mistakes now underway. Billions of dollars being thrown away on a technology that cannot work even in principle, and that will certainly result in the deaths of millions of innocent people by starvation, and the destabilization of Mexico, China and many of other countries, not to mention a drastic increase in food prices here in the U.S. Yet another Bush administration triumph, along with Afghanistan, Iraq and hurricane Katrina. The decision makers also pay attention to food producers and consumers. These people also have political power. The Coca-Cola Company, for example, does not appreciate it when the government pays other people a huge subsidy to waste Coca-Cola's raw materials. People have come to realize that a huge giveaway program to the oil industry -- massive, subsidized waste and grotesque inefficiency -- is not in their interest. They have been complaining in recent months. I predict they will put a stop to this madness before half the U.S. food crop is burned up every year as a gift to OPEC. Advanced biofuels, on the other hand, like butanol and algoil are here to stay. Sure, as soon as we can grow them on Mars, I suppose. Here on planet Earth we barely have enough room to grow enough food. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
Theres direct cellulose conversion now? I'm behind on the technology, obviously. On 3/30/07, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: leaking pen wrote: I for one never understood CORN being used. grow something with a higher fruit yeild per acre, and sugar yeild per pound. The decision for growing corn is not 'ordered' at even a regional level but is made at a much lower level - the individual farmer. From the perspective of the farmer - all the variables for corn are known through years of experience - and if the price is right, he will grow it. Much higher yields for cellulose are available with other crops, but from the farmer's perspective, it is too risky to grow these, as the variables are not well-known - and the price he can secure is not firm. Things change however - in a farmer's-cooperative-association - where the decision is based on how much total fuel they can sell from the available crops - and the risk/reward is shared. That systemic change is expected to happen soon with state encouragement in selected areas, and it is unlikely that corn will be the choice. As for sugar - that product may be irrelevant now that cellulose can be converted, and the net yield of sugar (beets are used in Europe) is always going to be 50-75% less per acre than raw cellulose. Jones -- That which yields isn't always weak.
[Vo]: Re: Biofuel Bonanza
Jones Beene wrote:- the Hawks in DC and the UK decide to take-out the Iranian oil fields as punishment. That is looking more and more probable as an outcome in that region. If we don't do it, the Brits or the Israelis are fully capable alone Hey, us Brits COULD do it, but it is unthinkable that we would - we're not mad and our Government has recovered from their search for WMD madness - shame that another Gubmint hasn't...
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
leaking pen wrote: Theres direct cellulose conversion now? Yup. Only this year has the Rumpelstiltskin effect g come into fruition - with at least three companies moving from pilot plants to full production. One leading contender is called Dyadic. They are a bit tight-lipped, but the plant pictured here has been in operation for several months now : http://www.dyadic-group.com/pdf/DyadicAd.pdf Here is an story on them last year from Business Week: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_51/b4014081.htm BTW in Grimm's fairy tale, Rumpelstiltskin spins straw into gold. There are various ways to do this with biomass. Cellulose ethanol generally exhibits a net energy content three times higher than corn derived ethanol based on the weight of input raw material. The economics of this are staggering. Dyadic, started doing this commercially a few months ago by converting Distiller's Grain - since it is in effect free as a low value co-product of corn fermentation. Their enzyme process and those of other competitors will work on many kinds of biomass, but the enzymes need to be tailored to specific raw materials, like corn stalks or saw grass. There are literally millions of acres in the mid-west where wheat straw is left standing in the field, after harvest benefiting no one. The US Department of Agriculture says that wheat straw hemicellulose can be easily hydrolyzed enzymatically by using 'Viscostar' from Dyadic, and that alone could provide several billion gallons of new cellulose ethanol with zero effect on food - since it is now unused straw from growing wheat. Same with rice straw and cotton stems and other waste crops. Of course there is massive biofuel potential in forests, especially in Canada. None of this has any effect on food cost - as does corn. But hey, you have to learn to crawl before you can run, and that is where we are now in the process of dumping Arab oil in favor of energy self-sufficiency. Thank heavens these far-sighted (and lucky) scientists and inventors neglected to read what's-his-name... Jones
[Vo]:
Taylor J. Smith wrote: By their works you shall know them. Before we dismiss the the Oil Gang as bumbling fools . . . Nobody dismisses them! . . . remember that making ethanol from corn requires a net increase in oil consumption and helps keep the price of oil up in the face of the world oil glut. Exactly. It is a gift to OPEC, as I said. The other issue, control, is still a challenge to the Oil Gang. They are making progress in Iraq as the oil fields are turned over to American companies -- at the cost of American lives and tax dollars -- but they still are no closer to breaking the Russian grip on Kazakh oil than they were before 911. . . . PS Look for action to take out the Iranian oil fields. I doubt they would go that far. I am no friend of oil companies. I agree they are ruthless. Books such as Yurgen's The Prize described the immense power they now wield. But we should remember something: In the late 19th century, the US was dominated by trusts and railroad companies to a greater extent than we are now dominated by big oil or hospitals and insurance companies. The biggest, most ruthless corporation back in 1890 was the Pennsylvania Railroad. Go back and read history books, newspapers and magazines from that era, and you will find that people were terrified of the power of large corporations. Many people feared they would destroy capitalism, uproot democracy, and enslave the nation. The large corporations had senators and congressmen in their pockets. The robber barons were beyond the law. Their income was a greater multitude of the average worker salary than the worst of today's corporate CEOs. Yet by 1932, the railroads' power was broken, and by the mid-1960s the Pennsylvania Railroad vanished. Perhaps these trusts and railroads might have destroyed capitalism and democracy, but the nation took action to prevent this, and then the laws of economics began to operate normally, and the problem was ameliorated. Not fixed -- big corporations still do cause mischief. Looking at the railroads in particular, I think the following series of events brought them down: 1. At the turn of the 20th century antitrust laws were passed and then vigorously enforced Roosevelt and Taft. (Taft did not get the credit he was due for this.) The same kind of intervention will inevitably occur in our dysfunctional healthcare system. Sooner or later, the Congress will step in and keep the insurance companies from bankrupting GM and GE. Our political system will not stand by indefinitely watching one industry sector run roughshod over others, while it robs millions of voters. Powerful corporations always overreach in the end. 2. Henry Ford began making cheap, mass-produced automobiles in 1908. A small, unnoticed, incremental technological improvement came out of nowhere and threatened the railroads most profitable business. We all know the same thing could happen to the oil companies with cold fusion, and I think they are so slow moving and filled with hubris, I doubt they would try to prevent it in time. 3. By the 1920s, the politicians took note of automobiles and began spending huge amounts of tax money on highways and road improvements -- which is, we should admit -- grossly unfair competition to the railroads. Unfair or not, by the 1920s railroads began to lose business, and political power. 4. Railroads began to lay off workers as their business declined and the technology became less labor-intensive. Then when the depression struck they fired huge numbers. Then they were hit by the same problem General Motors suffers from today: large numbers of pensioners. Fortunately for the railroads, one of FDR's first acts as president was to rescue them by reforming their pension system. It says a lot that by the 1930s railroads and fallen so far that instead of running the government, they needed the government to rescue them. 5. In the postwar era, massive highway building and the rise of airlines took away the last vestiges of excess political power that the railroads once had. Of course railroads are still powerful and they still command a lot of attention from Congress but no more than any other multi-billion-dollar industry, such as semiconductors. In a capitalist society with a strong, active central government, no corporation or industry can maintain undue power over the rest of society for long. They are too tempting a target for the competition. The government will bash them, or the competition will. WallMart's success gives rise to Target. Dell will not dominate for long before HP or some other computer company comes along. Sooner or later, Google or some other corporation -- a or combination of corporations, customers and government regulators -- will teach Microsoft a lesson. To take one more example, from the 1960s through 1985 IBM held a tremendous share of the computer business. This was partly because IBM was very
[Vo]: OFF topic was: Re: Biofuel Bonanza
Oh? Have you had the pleasure of watching V, the Vendetta? Never heard of it before but Wikipedia brought me up to date. Seriously, it was only the Iraqi potential use of WMD in 45 minutes that got our Government on side. When that proved to be a lie, everything else since has just been face saving and bullshit.
Re: [Vo]: Biofuel Bonanza
This may make wood alchohol production useful again, as you can now break down both the lignin AND the cellulose. On 3/30/07, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: leaking pen wrote: Theres direct cellulose conversion now? Yup. Only this year has the Rumpelstiltskin effect g come into fruition - with at least three companies moving from pilot plants to full production. One leading contender is called Dyadic. They are a bit tight-lipped, but the plant pictured here has been in operation for several months now : http://www.dyadic-group.com/pdf/DyadicAd.pdf Here is an story on them last year from Business Week: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_51/b4014081.htm BTW in Grimm's fairy tale, Rumpelstiltskin spins straw into gold. There are various ways to do this with biomass. Cellulose ethanol generally exhibits a net energy content three times higher than corn derived ethanol based on the weight of input raw material. The economics of this are staggering. Dyadic, started doing this commercially a few months ago by converting Distiller's Grain - since it is in effect free as a low value co-product of corn fermentation. Their enzyme process and those of other competitors will work on many kinds of biomass, but the enzymes need to be tailored to specific raw materials, like corn stalks or saw grass. There are literally millions of acres in the mid-west where wheat straw is left standing in the field, after harvest benefiting no one. The US Department of Agriculture says that wheat straw hemicellulose can be easily hydrolyzed enzymatically by using 'Viscostar' from Dyadic, and that alone could provide several billion gallons of new cellulose ethanol with zero effect on food - since it is now unused straw from growing wheat. Same with rice straw and cotton stems and other waste crops. Of course there is massive biofuel potential in forests, especially in Canada. None of this has any effect on food cost - as does corn. But hey, you have to learn to crawl before you can run, and that is where we are now in the process of dumping Arab oil in favor of energy self-sufficiency. Thank heavens these far-sighted (and lucky) scientists and inventors neglected to read what's-his-name... Jones -- That which yields isn't always weak.
Re: [Vo]: OFF topic was: Re: Biofuel Bonanza
Nick Palmer wrote: TB Oh? Have you had the pleasure of watching V, the Vendetta? Never heard of it before but Wikipedia brought me up to date. Missed that one too but the theme sounds very similar to 'Brazil', no? All of the fascination with future Brit dystopia probably derives from the Burgess classic - 'A Clockwork Orange' ... Kubrick's movie was even more graphic and disturbing ... hey, the music composer even switched sexual orientation shortly thereafter (no kidding- Walter Carlos did become Wendy Carlos, for whatever reason)
[Vo]: Fw: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday March 30, 2007
-Forwarded Message-from Akira Kawasaki From: What's New [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mar 30, 2007 2:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday March 30, 2007 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 30 Mar 07 Washington, DC 1. INTELLIGENT DESIGN: THE LHC WILL DO REAL CREATION SCIENCE. In November, on schedule, protons will begin circulating in the 27km ring of the Large Hadron Collider. After 15 years and $3.8B, the LHC is nearing completion at CERN in the tunnel used for LEP. The largest and most complex scientific instrument ever built, the LHC involves the collaboration of more than 2,000 physicists from 34 countries. The primary objective is to find the Higgs boson, the particle that catalyzed the creation of mass from energy to form the universe. Nobel laureate Leon Lederman called it the God particle. It is the only particle predicted by the Standard Model of particle physics that hasn't been found, but physicists are confident that the Higgs will be found by the LHC. There will likely be much more. Supersymmetry (susy) predicts a boson superpartner for each fermion. According to a story in New Scientist, there were hints of both the Higgs and susy in results from the Tevatron. In any case, we are on the threshold of spectacular advances in understanding the creation of the universe. Better a God particle than a God 2. SECRET DESIGN: CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE ACCORDING TO OPRAH. Why is The Secret suddenly the number-one best seller? When I first heard that The Secret by Rhonda Byrne is at the top of the NY Times bestseller list I didn't believe it. Besides, I look at the best seller list in the Sunday Times every week, and I hadn't seen anything called The Secret in either Fiction or Nonfiction. But there is a category called, Advice, that the NYT only posts on the web. You can think of it as books for people who watch daytime television. The great champion of The Secret is Oprah Winfrey. The Secret is a new-age theory about how to get rich, or layed, by just wanting it badly enough. It works for Oprah. The Secret quotes world renowned quantum physicist Dr. John Hagelin, who explains it this way, Quantum mechanics confirms it. Quantum cosmology confirms it. The universe emerges from thought and all of this matter around us is just precipitated thought. Well, so much for the Higgs. There is a tendency to attribute anything weird to quantum mechanics. 3. PAUL C. LAUTERBUR: MRI IMAGING INVENTOR DIED YESTERDAY AT 77. A chemist at the University of Illinois, Lauterbur shared the 2003 Nobel prize with British physicist Sir Peter Mansfield. A call had just issued for increased use of MRI imaging in women with a high risk of developing breast cancer. 4. DARK MATTER: A MOVIE BASED ON A PHYSICS TRAGEDY WINS PRIZE. In 1991 at the University of Iowa, a physics PhD graduate who was not chosen for an academic prize, killed five people at a physics department meeting. Physics departments everywhere initiated policies aimed at recognizing the severe pressure graduate students are under. A film based on the incident has now won the Alfred P. Sloan prize for best feature dealing with science. THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University of Maryland, but they should be. --- Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.bobpark.org What's New is moving to a different listserver and our subscription process has changed. To change your subscription status please visit this link: http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnewA=1
Re: [Vo]: Katharine Sanderson - Nature
I don't think they were there. At 10:43 PM 3/29/2007 -0500, you wrote: Perhaps Physics Today will carry something in its April issue... Harry
Re: [Vo]: The Oil Gang -- The Empire continues its assault
Taylor J. Smith wrote: Jed wrote: ``Against this backdrop, Washington is consumed with ethanol euphoria. President Bush in his State of the Jack Smith PS Look for action to take out the Iranian oil fields. My comment Tonight on the Glenn Beck Show, Glenn's guests will be answering the question: How does what's happening in Iran relate to Bible prophecy? --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: [Vo]: OFF topic was: Re: Biofuel Bonanza
On 3/30/07, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick Palmer wrote: TB Oh? Have you had the pleasure of watching V, the Vendetta? Never heard of it before but Wikipedia brought me up to date. Missed that one too but the theme sounds very similar to 'Brazil', no? Hmmm, maybe. Think Phantom of the Opera, Count of Monte Cristo, 1984, Clockwork Orange, Superman, Batman, Les Miserables, . . . I could go on. A very eclectic statement on society. One you liberals would love!!! T
Re: [Vo]: 2 out of 3 ain't bad.
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:50:53 -0500: Hi, [snip] The effects are real, a nuclear reaction is involved but may be the nuclear reaction is not of the fusion kind after all. 2 out of 3 ain't bad! ;-) [snip] Even addition of a neutron is a form of fusion, though most wouldn't classify it as such. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
