Slashdot Mirror

The Earth receives an incredible supply of solar energy. The sun, an average star, is a fusion reactor that has been burning over 4 billion years. It provides enough energy in one minute to supply the world's energy needs for one year. In one day, it provides more energy than our current population would consume in 27 years. In fact, "The amount of solar radiation striking the earth over a three-day period is equivalent to the energy stored in all fossil energy sources."

All useable power except nuclear comes from the sun, nuclear comes from long dead exploded suns. We can ignore the Casandra effect or ZPE. Gasoline is just plants using the sun eaten by animals and then slow cooked under pressure, or still solar. Hydro, Wind, Bio-Gas, Bio-Diesel, Napthaline, whatever, all solar.

But the evil petro-demon really is dead.

"Algae are used to separate hydrogen from water to produce clean-burning hydrogen to power vehicles and power plants. Because algae are not inherently proficient at this process, researchers genetically engineer algae to more readily produce hydrogen."

Foremost among the production methods being considered is what has become known as solar hydrogen. Solar hydrogen refers to any method of production that uses the power of the Sun to produce and collect usable hydrogen. This can be accomplished by various methods. The most likely approaches are:

* Energy collection by solar "gensets," parabolic solar collectors that focus and concentrate the light energy of the Sun
* Applying the collected energy to a Stirling-cycle heat engine, which in turn drives an electricity-producing generator to power an electrolysis system
* Using the heat from collected solar energy to "crack" hydrogen directly from hydrogen bearing sources like water, natural gas, and organic bio-mass, such as municipal and agricultural waste.

Maybe a lot of inventions related to our own survival could not see the light because of the actual state of the patenting system.

There are more on this here

According to the United States Department of Energy Office of Power, the most daunting problem associated with current hydrogen production is the energy needed to produce it and to provide for energy losses in the hydrogen-to-application chain. Using existing conventional technology, "hydrogen requires at least twice as much energy as electricity -- twice the tonnage of coal, twice the number of nuclear plants, or twice the field of PV panels -- to perform an equivalent unit of work. Most of today's hydrogen is produced from natural gas, which is only an interim solution since it discards 30% of the energy in one valuable but depletable fuel (natural gas) to obtain 70% of another (hydrogen). The challenge is to develop more appropriate methods based on sustainable energy sources, methods that do not employ electricity as an intermediate step." (14)

The most cost-efficient method currently employed in the industrial manufacture of hydrogen is steam hydrocarbon reforming, where natural gas is treated with high temperature steam, causing a chemical breakdown of the natural gas releasing hydrogen. Other methods start with the gasification of low sulfur coal in an extremely high temperature industrial furnace, and the subsequent chemical "scrubbing" of this gas to extract hydrogen, along with carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Both of these technologies produce hydrogen at an acceptable price for the role hydrogen currently plays in manufacturing, but are not nearly competitive with gasoline or natural gas in terms of providing economic energy for transportation or any other energy-oriented application. In industrial applications where extremely pure hydrogen is needed, electrolysis is the preferred method of production. Using electricity to chemically decompose water into its component elements of hydrogen and oxygen, electrolysis is very energy intensive and cannot compete economically on a large scale with other methods at this time due to the cost involved in generating electricity for the process.

My recommendation is: those who are uncertain of their HTML coding abiliities should stick to plain-text and simply give the URLs:

• NASA BPP, proposal summaries (not sure if that was the intended link -- but you can search NASA yourself I suppose>)
• LLNL: Condensed Matter, abstract
• AntiGravity Research Conference
• Ning Lees Research (actually "Skeggs & Ning Li on Gravitational Modification")
• Nasa pumps 600k into research and has had tests
• AEI: John Hutchinson's Theories
• Japanese Anti-Gravity Experiment

That's all I have to contribute. Despite all the debate, "build your own UFO" looks like a fun thing to distract myself with some weekend.

We do have anti gravity.Scientists call it super conductivity. Super Conductivity
A technology NASA has right now which is called gravity shield. NASA only spent 600k on research, but the military could have spent hundreds of millions researching this.

QuoteIn response to the propulsion challenges specified by NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics (BPP) program, the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center proposes to empirically explore the possibility of iinducing gravity modification through Josephson junction effects in magnetized, high-Tc superconducting oxides. Our technical goal is to critically test emerging physical concepts and provide rigorous empirical confirmation (or refutation) of anomalous effects related to the manipulation of gravity by magnetized type-II superconductors. Because the current empirical evidence for gravity modification is anecdotal, we propose, as a first step, to design, construct, and meticulously carry out a discriminating experiment. Our approach is unique in that we will construct an extremely sensitive torsional gravity balance to measure gravity modification effects by radio-frequency-pumped type-II superconductor test masses. Analysis indicates that an effective change in mass of less than 1 percent would be readily detectable by state-of-the-art differential capacitance transducers. The entire project is to be completed in 12 months. If uncontested positive effects can be detected, it would seem to imply a fundamentally new method for creating motion without propellant. This goes directly to the heart of BPP goal 1 which has the stated aim of reducing or eliminating the need for mass ejection from spacecraft propulsion systems."

This was in 1999. Its 2002. That was NASA, a government entity, so if NASA has anti gravity, the military has it too.

Gravity can be manipulated provided you have enough energy to do so, in lab experiments we've shown anti gravity works

Examples
Nasa



Ning Lees Research
Nasa pumps 600k into research and has had tests
Theories

http://www.totse.com/en/fringe/gravity_anti_grav it y/antigrv1.html

As you see, theres many anti gravity experiments which have been done in labs, its its done in a lab, chances are the military has prototype aircraft based on it. With so many theories of how it can be done, do you actually think none of these theories were successful? If any of them were our government would classify it.

Try this URL instead:
http://www.altenergy.org/2/renewables/hydrogen_and _fuel_cells/hydrogen_and_fuel_cells.html

As new technology goes toward high performance, low emission, zero pollution technologies to produce power.
I like Peter F. Hamiltons (read his books) ideas - most of his tech is powered by fuel cells - all of them running a combination of He3 and deuterium (heavy hydrogen)...
Interesting! Are we slowly progressing towards cold fusion? I found spectrum tech. corp., they seem to have a patent on some fuel for fuel cells, called HOD (Hydrogen-Oxygen-Deuterium). They've been mentioned a few places...
Also I stumbled across something called PPC - Patterson Power Cell - It seems that Mr. Patterson believes that his tech will make fossil fuels obsolote - that would be really cool! Read more here
Try doing a google search for "deuterium fuel cell" - You'll get a lot of interesting hits!