Slashdot Mirror

Take a solar cell and slap one of these babies on it http://www.johnsonems.com/?q=node/2

JTEC. Use this, drop the alternator as well as the serpentine belt and move towards an all electric system. This would allow them to move a GAS car to an electric powered steering (or perhaps a motor driving hydraulic pump), a heatpump that would also go into an electric car. This would allow a car company to more easily move towards electric cars.

Our missions to the moon before can be compared to what others did in moving from Europe to Americas. Basically, exploratory at first, followed by settlement later. We probably have spent far too long on the ISS, but many lessons have been learned. Probably one of the most important is the cost of doing this is expensive and needs to come down. Part of that is by recycling. That is what is happening NOW with the last few trips and the next few. Once we recycle air and water with little loss RELIABLY, then we will see costs drop. While mars will be about cheap none solar energy, the moon will be all about reliable recycling systems. The energy will not be cheap, but much more so than mars. The moon will use solar on the poles with nukes to follow. But to be honest, I have been wondering if thermal would be a better idea. JTEC strikes me that it can use temp differences just in the soil at the poles. For example, storing heat on one side of berm of over 100C, while on the other side of the crater would be -200C. That is a pretty good differential.

Does anyone remember this solid state engine from the super soaker guy?
That might be a better method to turn heat to electricity.

Also there are some blanket claims in the article that really need some more detail:
"...It can use any fuel, from biodiesel to natural gas; it burns clean; it can even be programmed to turn on so the battery and car are all warmed up by the time you get in."

I assume that the fuel is being burned as a method used to heat the stirling engine. How can this be claimed to be burning clean? The methods used would need to be explained in detail to be convincing of any major innovation here.

Skip making it complex and costly. This guy has the easy to build and maintain system. Simply uses gradiants rather than mechnical. As such, not likely to die when need most. Also, it would be useful if they put up several of these. They are going to need back-ups and the ability to grow.

Allow that to heat a different carrier,and you have a binary system. That approach is used in Chena Alaska. It allows for lower temps to work. But to be honest, I have been wondering about Johnson's system. Seems like that would do a better job since it bypasses large mechanical systems.

Johnson Thermoelectric Energy Conversion System? Seriously, this one is being developed to operate at lower temps. I wonder if this new one will work better or not? But it sure would be useful to add one (or both) of these to say power plants to absorb some of the heat and continue generating more electricity.

This page has a flash animated diagram of how it works, with wiggly lines going in the top on one side, and coming out the bottom on the other side, and black blobs zooming along one way and meandering back on the bottom. I don't know if that really helps people understand the device, but here it is: http://www.johnsonems.com/jhtec.html I think that diagram would be much better if it had labels on it, like "wiggly lines are heat, black blobs are hydrogen ions, and electricity comes out where the plus and minus signs are".