Big Energy and Big Conspiracy

February 5, 2010

My friend Cameron Atwood and I frequently discuss the underlying causes by which certain technologies are brought to market, where others never see the light of day. Here’s a small piece of a recent chat for anyone interested.

Cameron Atwood: Hey, Craig. Here is a link to YouTube videos featuring “free energy” inventions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu8LaVH-pn0.

Craig Shields: Thanks, but I’m deeply skeptical. It’s funny, I believe in certain conspiracy theories and not others.  Regarding “free energy,” I have lots of Ph.D. level friends in industry who share my rock-solid belief in the conservation of energy.  The world’s brightest minds have been trying to beat this law for centuries. The idea that some guy who also sells a Ginsu Knife or a Pocket Fisherman has made a breakthrough here doesn’t hold water with me.  The concept that this guy is a fraud seems a million times more likely.  

CA: Craig, do you know that there are studies that show hemp oil cures many types of cancer? The AMA isn’t beating a path to the fields to grow and process it — and neither are the pharma companies.

There are dozens of ulcer ‘treatments’ still being pushed on the market, even though bismuth salts (Pepto Bismol) kills the H. Pylori virus that is the main causative factor nearly all ulcers.

Carburation techniques and engine designs have been known for decades that would result in powerful vehicles running on the highways at 80 to 100 MPG, yet they don’t exist in this country because of the influence of Big Oil.

Los Angeles once had the best public transportation system in the world, and it was ripped out by competing interests including GM, Gulf and Firestone.

Cargill and ADM keep the government focused on corn ethanol when switchgrass and algae are proven superior – and as you’ve pointed out, solar-thermal is the very best form of entirely free energy just waiting to be harnessed.

In all these cases, We the People were and are quite effectively prevented, dissuaded, diverted from beating a path to the better choice.

I know there are millions of penny-ante charlatans out there hawking pie-in-the-sky, to-good-to-be-true solutions to all sorts of everyday challenges.

However, I also know that there are plenty of affluent and greedy bastards out there along with them who are constantly doing all they can to continue preventing, dissuading, diverting the public and concealing, bribing and destroying the best solutions to a wide array of life’s most troubling difficulties.

CS: If it doesn’t make them profit, the corporations are apt to suppresses it; I really don’t think there is no question about that.  But the world of venture capital is at least as anxious to make a profit as the execs in the corporate boardrooms. And then you have the world of angel investors, most of whom honestly care about the world around them — of which there are thousands all over the world.  Trust me, there are millions of people who would run 100 MPH towards clean, cheap energy. 

By Craig Shields | Posted in Renewables - Science | Tagged , | Comments (0)

Conservation of Energy – It’s Not Just a Good Idea; It’s the LAW

November 24, 2009

PhotobucketI’m always amazed at a phenomenon that I presume to be coincidence – that similar things all seem to happen at the same time. No sooner do I publish a few posts of the conservation of energy than a young reader in North Carolina writes asking for help on a subject that has this concept at its very core. See conversation below:

Reader: I’m 19 and a student at ITT-TECH of Highpoint, NC. I’ve had ideas for the past year or so for a renewable energy business related to vehicles using HHO Cells as a fuel source. I have experimented with these types of cells enough to know how much potential they have for our future. I was wondering if there is any capital out there for these types of businesses, and if so where should I start, I don’t have a business plan yet but I feel that I can write one myself and was wondering if you had some tips. Thanks.

Craig: Sorry, I don’t think I’ll be able to help directly here.  Raising capital is not easy, and I wouldn’t know how to go about it outside of the traditional manner: writing a cogent business plan and circulating it to potential investors.  Having said that, I’m interested in the subject too.  Can you send me a link to a site that explains this clearly and credibly, please? Best of luck to you, my young friend.

Reader: Here are just one of the few hho cell businesses out there right now. http://www.punchhho.com/. This site offers cell kits that are designed to increase gas mileage; you have to install these cells yourself and not ever seeing one of these before it could be difficult, not to mention dangerous if you don’t know what your doing. You have to do modifications to your vehicle to get it to work properly depending on what type of vehicle you have, some are easier than others to outfit with this technology. My idea is to start a business that not only makes the cells but makes the components to convert your make and model of vehicle to a hybrid or use hho as its only fuel source. There are parts that can be made to simplify the application of these cells and make them more efficient. If you have any futher questions let me know.

Craig: Thanks.  From a pure physics point of view, I can see that this could improve gas mileage if it somehow acts as a catalyst and causes the gas to burn more completely; I’m aware of additives that have this effect.  But from the standpoint of burning the hydrogen and oxygen,  you’re going to use more energy in performing the electrolysis than you are going to get back from the combustion of the gases.  This is a straightforward consequence of the conservation of energy. 

Reader: Correct, but it is possible to make a cell that produces more power than it consumes. These cells are measured in MMW (Milliliters per Minute per Watt), anything above 5 MMW is extraordinarily efficient….People become really skeptical when you tell them you could run a car on water. But its a lot easier than it seems, the technology is here it just has to be applied. it would be no different than upgrading to the newest cell phone, or the lastest music media, we went from tapes to cds to ipods with no problem, why shouldn’t we go from gas to hho without a problem. We’ve been running on gasoline for far to long, its time for a change.

Craig:  I join the other skeptics, for the reasons I’ve outlined (coincidentally) in a very recent post on the conservation of energy. If you can demonstrate a working model of this or any other device that produces more energy that it consumes, you will be the first person in the history of the world to do so.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Renewables - Science | Tagged , | Comment (1)

Renewable Energy and Basic Physics

November 20, 2009

PhotobucketMy old friend Peter Buzzard commented on my post “Molten Salt Energy Storage“:

“Craig, do you know if a Stirling engine would be more efficient than making steam for a turbine?”

To which I reply:

I don’t know know much about Stirling engines; I need to learn about these.  But it sounds like you may be comparing apples and oranges.

I’m sure you’re aware that devices that simply store energy (e.g., molten salt, batteries, capacitors) and devices that convert energy form one form to another (e.g., motors, turbines) are two different things. And as far as the latter is are concerned, electric motors, even using the technology of the very first ones 120+ years ago, are quite efficient; in fact, the AC induction motors that are used in today’s electric vehicles are close to 90% efficient. What’s not to like about that?

Thus, it seems to me that the real question is how to generate, store, and distribute the electricity.  Coincidentally, I was writing my book’s chapter on basic physics last night, in which I noted the following about the conservation of energy:

Once one really wraps his wits these basic ideas, one is in a terrific position to understand most discussions of energy. Here are two examples to make this clear:

Hydrokinetics: Every day, the energy from the sun evaporates water into steam that is later condensed into clouds, the precipitation from which forms rivers, some of which are in high altitudes. The kinetic energy of the water flowing back downhill can be converted into electrical energy. But the conservation of energy tells us that the most electricity one can possibly hope to generate from this water is the potential energy it had before it started to flow (which equals the weight of the water times the height of the elevation from which it fell). This is for this reason that hydrokinetics cannot provide a significant amount to the overall energy picture, regardless of how many dams, how efficient the turbines, etc.

Solar: On the other hand, the earth receives 6000 times more energy from the sun every day than mankind currently uses for all its purposes: transportation, heating, air conditioning, etc. Put another way, if we had the capability of capturing and distributing 1/6000th of the sun’s energy, we would not need to burn another lump of coal, spilt another atom, or pump another ounce of gasoline. This fact alone forms the rationale for our interest in solar energy.

I encourage readers to review all assertions about different forms of power generation — renewable or otherwise – to this discussion on the conservation of energy. When someone says, “This car runs on water,” ask yourself: water? Isn’t water already “burned” hydrogen and oxygen, i.e., the result after these two elements release energy by joining together? That’s like saying, “Let’s build a fire using those ashes for fuel.” Sorry, they’ve already been burned, meaning that the chemical energy that was once stored in the carbon bonds of the wood has already been converted into the heat, light, and sound of a fire. The ashes are the low-energy result of that process.

I got an email from a friend announcing a miracle car that runs on air. As it turns out, it actually runs on compressed air. The energy required to compress the air is stored in a tank and converted into kinetic energy. Trust me, there is not one bit of energy delivered to that car’s wheels that didn’t going into compressing the air in the first place.

At the end of the day, I think the energy direction of the planet is very clear:

Generation: solar, especially concentrated solar power (CSP).

Storage: molten salt (Note that storage is somewhat less important for solar than say, wind, as solar tends to be generated in congruity with times of peak need). Note also that solar it’s already heat energy; there is no need to convert it to something else.

Transmission: High voltage direct current (HVDC). This requires a build-out of our ancient power grid, but we need to do that anyway.

Thanks again for writing, Peter.  I hope this was useful.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Renewables - Science | Tagged , , , | Comment (1)

OK, the Conservation of Energy Isn’t a “Law.” But Can I See a Working Model of a Counter-Example?

September 20, 2009

PhotobucketSteele Braden responds:

I know this is hard for us guys schooled in the “old” physics thinking, but the longer I investigate and experiment, the more anomalies I turn up regarding accepted physics “laws.” Remember, it was impossible for man to fly with his own body power — until somome flew accross the English channel. Remember the sound “barrier”? Travelling to the moon was a permanent science fiction.

Great points, all. It’s funny; I had just written a piece advising the authors of business plans to “keep it real,” in which I explain: if you’re going to challenge conventional wisdom, do it convincingly.  I review submissions for what are essentially perpetual motion machines at the rate of about one per week. And by the way, I read each of them carefully and with no derision, because I’m sure that eventually, mankind will come to an understanding of the cosmos that will make all us 2009 people look quite foolish, as paradigmatic breakthroughs have been doing since the dawn of civilization. Having said that, understand that if your invention suggests 1 Watt in and 2 Watts out, you’re presenting this idea to people who have been taught since they were babies that you’re a liar or a fool.

I believe that many of the so-called laws will, in fact, be broken. Yet I have trouble believing that somewhere, right now, there is a machine that is running above 1.0 efficiency, based on a principle that no one can explain. Sorry to sound cynical, but I need to see it.

I’ll make you a deal: If you can give me clear reason for hope that I can see the first working model of such a device, I’ll take my wattmeter (to support my skepticism) and a bottle of really good champagne (to celebrate the gift to the world if I’m wrong) anywhere in the world for the demonstration.

Again, I hope we can keep the dialog open. I know that there are many people who are far more ardent scientists than I who will be thrilled to know that legimate science has broken yet another “law.” Please keep me informed.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Renewables - Science | Tagged , , | Comments (0)