After reading your site,I thought your readers would be interested in looking at these energy technologies and EPS's theoretic base for ball lighting.
Aneutronic Fusion: Here I am not talking about the big science ITER project taking thirty years, but the several small alternative plasma fusion efforts.
There are three companies pursuing hydrogen-boron plasma toroid fusion, Paul Koloc, Prometheus II, Eric Lerner, Focus Fusion and Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems
Vincent Page (a technology officer at GE!!) gave a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research , which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion
He quotes costs and time to development of P-B11 Fusion as tens of million $, and years verses the many decades and ten Billion plus $ projected for ITER and other "Big" science efforts
A resent DOD review of EPS technology reads as follows:
"MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and EPS have jointly authored numerous professional papers describing their work. (Delphi is a $33B company, the spun off Delco Division of General Motors)." and "Cost: no cost data available. The complexity of reliable mini-toroid formation and acceleration with compact, relatively low-cost equipment remains to be determined. Yet the fact that the EPS/MIT STTR work this technology has attracted interest from Delphi is very significant, as the automotive electronics industry is considered to be extremely demanding of functionality per dollar and pound (e.g., mil-spec performance at Wal-Mart-class 'commodity' prices)."
EPS, Electron Power Systems seems the strongest and most advanced, and I love the scalability, They propose applications as varied as home power generation@.ooo5 cents/KWhr, cars, distributed power, airplanes, space propulsion , power storage and kinetic weapons.
It also provides a theoretic base for ball lighting : Ball Lightning Explained as a Stable Plasma Toroid http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Ball%20 Lightning%20Explained.pdf The theoretics are all there in peer reviewed papers. It does sound to good to be true however with names like MIT, Delphi, STTR grants, NIST grants , etc., popping up all over, I have to keep investigating.
and according to Clint Seward it supports his lightning models and fusion work at Electron Power Systems
lightning produces thermonuclear reaction This new work By Dr.Kuzhevsky on neutrons in lightning: Russian Science News http://www.informnauka.ru/eng/2005/2005-09-13-5_65 _e.htm is also supportive of Electron Power Systems fusion efforts.
Vincent Page (a technology officer at GE!!) gave a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research , which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion (Below Is an
Please look at this low cost alternative CO2 Sequestration system.
The integrated energy strategy offered by Terra Preta Soil technology may provide the only path to sustain our agricultural and fossil fueled power structure without climate degradation, other than nuclear power.
I feel we should push for this Terra Preta Soils CO2 sequestration strategy as not only a global warming remedy for the first world, but to solve fertilization and transport issues for the third world. This information needs to be shared with all the state programs.
The economics look good, and truly great if we had CO2 cap & trade in place. These are processes where you can have your Bio-fuels, Carbon Sequestration and fertility too.
There is an ecology going on in these soils that is not completely understood, and if replicated and applied at scale would have multiple benefits for farmers and environmentalist.
Terra Preta creates a terrestrial carbon reef at a microscopic level. These nanoscale structures provide safe haven to the microbes and fungus that facilitate fertile soil creation, while sequestering carbon for many hundred if not thousands of years. The combination of these two forms of sequestration would also increase the growth rate and natural sequestration effort of growing plants.
Here is a great pyrolysis process , ( http://www.eprida.com/hydro/ ) which could use existing infrastructure to provide Charcoal sustainable Agriculture , Syn-Fuels, and a variation of this process would also work as well for H2 , Charcoal-Fertilizer, while sequestering CO2 from Coal fired plants to build soils at large scales , be sure to read the "See an initial analysis NEW" link of this technology to clean up Coal fired power plants.
If pre Columbian Indians could produce these soils up to 6 feet deep over 20% of the Amazon basin it seems that our energy and agricultural industries could also product them at scale.
Harnessing the work of this vast number of microbes and fungi changes the whole equation of EROEI for food and Bio fuels. I see this as the only sustainable agricultural strategy if we no longer have cheap fossil fuels for fertilizer.
We need this super community of wee beasties to work in concert with us by populating them into their proper Soil horizon Carbon Condos.
I thought you may be interested in the new technology I high light to deal with this largest problem of them all, Climate Change, Energy and Space propulsion.
There are three companies pursuing hydrogen-boron plasma toroid fusion, a form of aneutronic fusion , Paul Koloc, Prometheus II, Eric Lerner, Focus Fusion and Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems http://www.electronpowersystems.com/ . A resent DOD review of EPS technology reads as follows:
"MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and EPS have jointly authored numerous professional papers describing their work. (Delphi is a $33B company, the spun off Delco Division of General Motors)."
Vincent Page (a technology officer at GE!!) gave a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research , which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion (Below Is an excerpt). He quotes costs and time to development of P-B11 Fusion as tens of million $, and years verses the many decades and ten Billion plus $ projected for ITER and other "Big" science efforts:
"for larger plant sizes Time to small-scale Cost to achieve net if the small-scale Concept Description net energy production energy concept works: Koloc Spherical Plasma: 10 years(time frame), $25 million (cost), 80%(chance of success) Field Reversed Configuration: 8 years $75 million 60% Plasma Focus: 6 years $18 million 80%
Desirable Fusion Reactor Qualities
Research & development is also needed in the area of computing power.
Many fusion researchers of necessity still use MHD theory to validate their designs.
MHD theory assumes perfect diamagnetism and perfect conductance.
These qualities may not always exist in the real world, particularly during continuous operation.
More computing power is needed to allow use of a more realistic validation theory such as the Vlasov equations.
ORNL is in the process of adding some impressive computing power.
Researchers now need to develop more realistic validation methods up to the limits of the available computing power.
Governments need to fund these efforts."
I feel in light of the recent findings of neutrons, x-rays, and gamma rays in lightening, that these threads need to be brought together in an article.
You may see my efforts with my "A New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy" article:
About a year ago, I came across EPS while researching nano-tech and efficient home design. I started a correspondence Clint Seward, Eric Learner, and Paul Kolac, sending them science news links which I felt were either supportive or contradictory to their work. I also asked them to critique each other's approaches. I have posted these emails to numerous physics and science forums. Discussion groups, science journalists, and other academics, trying to foster discussion, attention, and hopefully some concessus on the validity of these proposed technologies. My efforts have born some fruit. Clint and Joe Dwyer at FIT have been in consultation on Clint's current charge transport theory for cloud to ground lightning.
This post is a plea to the science writers among you to craft a story covering aneutronic fusion, the P-B11 efforts, Eric's high temperatures and x-ray source project, Clint's lightening theories, and DOD review, and Paul's review by GE. The minimal cost and time frame for even the possibility of this leap forward seems criminal not to pu
Well GE evidently doesn't think Eric's a crackpot:
Vincent Page , a technology officer at GE, has given a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research, which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion . 1.) Prometheus II http://www.neoteric-research.org/ , 2.) Field Revered Configuration, and 3.) Focus Fusion http://www.focusfusion.org/about.html
He quotes costs and time to development as ten million, and years verses the decades projected for ITER and other Big science efforts.
The learning curve is so steep now, and with the resources of the online community, I'm sure we can rally greater support to solve this paramount problem of our time. I hold no truck with those who argue that big business or government are suppressing these technologies. It is only our complacency and comfort that blind us from pushing our leaders toward clean energy.
for larger plant sizes Time to small-scale Cost to achieve net if the small-scale Concept Description net energy production energy production energy concept works Koloc Spherical Plasma 10 years $25 million 80% Field Reversed Configuration 8 years $75 million 60% Plasma Focus 6 years $18 million 80% Desirable Fusion Reactor Qualities
Research & development is also needed in the area of computing power.
Many fusion researchers of necessity still use MHD theory to validate their designs.
MHD theory assumes perfect diamagnetism and perfect conductance.
These qualities may not always exist in the real world, particularly during continuous operation.
More computing power is needed to allow use of a more realistic validation theory such as the Vlasov equations.
ORNL is in the process of adding some impressive computing power.
Researchers now need to develop more realistic validation methods up to the limits of the available computing power.
Governments need to fund these efforts.
I've posted Paul Allen, Jeff Bezos, Scaled Composites, and so many others trying to shout out the potential of these alternative aneutronic fusion efforts with my article "A Manhattan Project for Clean Energy" http://cleanenergy.blogstream.com/
I am glad to see the interest in Vincent Page's presentation, and I feel in light of the recent findings of neutrons, x-rays, and gamma rays in lightening, that these threads need to be brought together in an article.
You may have seen my efforts with my "Manhattan Project" article, which got published on Sci-Scoop but rejected on Slashdot. (I've tried posting it on OSEN but for some reason I can't log in.)
About a year ago, I came across EPS while researching nano-tech and efficient home design. I started a correspondence Clint Seward, Eric Learner, and Paul Kolac, sending them science news links which I felt were either supportive or contradictory to their work. I also asked them to critique eachother's approaches. I have posted these emails to numerous physics and science forums. Discussion groups, science journalists, and other academics, trying to foster discussion, attention, and hopefully some concessus on the validity of these proposed technologies.
My efforts have born some fruit. Clint and Joe Dwyer at FIT have been in consultation on Clint's current charge transport theory for cloud to ground lightening.
I have had several replies from editors, producers, and journalists expressing interest. From organizations as varied as PBS, Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, New Energy News, the Guardian (U.K), and the San Francisco Chronicle. However, none of this professional interest has resulted in a story yet.
This post is a plea to the science writers among you to craft a story covering aneutronic fusion, the P-B11 efforts, Eric's high temperatures and x-ray source project, Clint's lightening theories, and DOD review, and Paul's review by GE. The minimal cost and time frame for even the possibility of this leap forward seems criminal not to pursue. If you read my Manhattan article, you may have noticed that I am not a writer. I am a landscape designer and technology gadfly wondering why this technology has never been put in the public eye.
My hope is that someone, more skilled, would step up to give a shout out about these technologies. Please contact me for copies of my correspondence with the principles, interesting replies and criticisms from physics discussion forums and academic physicists who have replied to my queries.
Vincent Page , a technology officer at GE, has given a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research, which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion . 1.) Prometheus II http://www.neoteric-research.org/ , 2.) Field Revered Configuration, and 3.) Focus Fusion http://www.focusfusion.org/about.html
He quotes costs and time to development as ten million, and years verses the decades projected for ITER and other Big science efforts.
The learning curve is so steep now, and with the resources of the online community, I'm sure we can rally greater support to solve this paramount problem of our time. I hold no truck with those who argue that big business or government are suppressing these technologies. It is only our complacency and comfort that blind us from pushing our leaders toward clean energy.
for larger plant sizes
Time to small-scale Cost to achieve net if the small-scale
Concept Description net energy production energy production energy concept works
Koloc Spherical Plasma 10 years $25 million 80%
Field Reversed Configuration 8 years $75 million 60%
Plasma Focus 6 years $18 million 80%
Desirable Fusion Reactor Qualities
Research & development is also needed in
the area of computing power.
Many fusion researchers of necessity still
use MHD theory to validate their designs.
MHD theory assumes perfect diamagnetism
and perfect conductance.
These qualities may not always exist in the
real world, particularly during continuous operation.
More computing power is needed to allow use of a more realistic validation theory
such as the Vlasov equations.
ORNL is in the process of adding some impressive computing power.
Researchers now need to develop more realistic validation methods up to the
limits of the available computing power.
Governments need to fund these efforts.
There is another method to producing neutrons that fits my lightning model that I have described to you.
It is well known that electron beams have been used extensively to produce neutrons, above electron energies of 10 MeV, well within the voltages reported in the lightning event. (An Internet search produced several articles that reported this). I do not pretend to have researched this extensively, and do not know the actual target molecules or the process, but it appears plausible from what the papers report, and is consistent with my lightning model.
The proposed method you sent to me is a lot more complex, and I would have to say I can not agree with the article as written without experimental results.
Clint "
For a list of other alternative Fusion players and new nano-solar approaches please see my article : A new Manhattan Project for Clean Energy at http://www.sciscoop.com/main/2
Maybe, Here are two replies I've gotten after posting this lightng news:
From Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems Home Page http://www.electronpowersystems.com/
"Hi Erich,
There is another method to producing neutrons that fits my lightning model that I have described to you.
It is well known that electron beams have been used extensively to produce neutrons, above electron energies of 10 MeV, well within the voltages reported in the lightning event. (An Internet search produced several articles that reported this). I do not pretend to have researched this extensively, and do not know the actual target molecules or the process, but it appears plausible from what the papers report, and is consistent with my lightning model.
The proposed method you sent to me is a lot more complex, and I would have to say I can not agree with the article as written without experimental results.
Clint"
And a physic prof at JMU , Joe Rudmin:
"Erich:
Neutrons are produced in many events, including sono-luminescence--the collapse of bubbles in boiling and in ultrasonic cleaning. As one fusion power scientist said "It's easy to get neutrons. You can release them by scuffing your feet." There are even table-top nuclear fusion sources. Also, the goal isn't just to get heat. There are vast amounts of heat in the ocean. The problem is to get thermodynamic "free energy"--energy which can be converted to work, or electricity. The problem of controlled fusion is to find a way to produce nuclear fusion which produces more electric energy than it consumes. Actually, we can even do this with existing Tokamak fusion reactors. But no engineers have come up with a design for a fusion system, which can produce electricity any where near as cheaply as fission, solar, wind, or fossil-fuel sources. We have actually passed scientific feasibility. But aren't close to economic feasibility.
--jwr"
Cheers , Erich
We have been heating the earth since the agricultural revolution with the positive result of providing 10,000 years of warm stability. But since the Industrial revolution we have been pushing the biosphere over the brink. Life forces have done this before -- during the snowball earth period ( Cryogenian Period ) in the Neoproterozoic toward the end of the Precambrian - but that life force was not sentient!
Slashdot Mirror
After reading your site,I thought your readers would be interested in looking at these energy technologies and EPS's theoretic base for ball lighting.
.ooo5 cents/KWhr, cars, distributed power, airplanes, space propulsion , power storage and kinetic weapons.
.
Aneutronic Fusion: Here I am not talking about the big science ITER project taking thirty years, but the several small alternative plasma fusion efforts.
There are three companies pursuing hydrogen-boron plasma toroid fusion, Paul Koloc, Prometheus II, Eric Lerner, Focus Fusion and Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems
Vincent Page (a technology officer at GE!!) gave a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research , which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion
He quotes costs and time to development of P-B11 Fusion as tens of million $, and years verses the many decades and ten Billion plus $ projected for ITER and other "Big" science efforts
Here are the links:
http://www.electronpowersystems.com/
A resent DOD review of EPS technology reads as follows:
"MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's
chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing
that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and
EPS have jointly authored numerous professional papers describing their
work. (Delphi is a $33B company, the spun off Delco Division of General
Motors)."
and
"Cost: no cost data available. The complexity of reliable mini-toroid
formation and acceleration with compact, relatively low-cost equipment
remains to be determined. Yet the fact that the EPS/MIT STTR work this
technology has attracted interest from Delphi is very significant, as the
automotive electronics industry is considered to be extremely demanding of
functionality per dollar and pound (e.g., mil-spec performance at
Wal-Mart-class 'commodity' prices)."
EPS, Electron Power Systems seems the strongest and most advanced, and I love the scalability, They propose applications as varied as home power generation@
It also provides a theoretic base for ball lighting : Ball Lightning Explained as a Stable Plasma Toroid http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Ball%20 Lightning%20Explained.pdf
The theoretics are all there in peer reviewed papers. It does sound to good to be true however with names like MIT, Delphi, STTR grants, NIST grants , etc., popping up all over, I have to keep investigating.
Recent support has also come from one of the top lightning researcher in the world, Joe Dwyer at FIT, when he got his Y-ray and X-ray research published in the May issue of Scientific American,
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colI D=1&articleID=00032CE5-13B7-1264-8F9683414B7FFE9F
Dwyer's paper:
http://www.lightning.ece.ufl.edu/PDF/Gammarays.pdf
and according to Clint Seward it supports his lightning models and fusion work at Electron Power Systems
lightning produces thermonuclear reaction
This new work By Dr.Kuzhevsky on neutrons in lightning: Russian Science News http://www.informnauka.ru/eng/2005/2005-09-13-5_65 _e.htm is also supportive of Electron Power Systems fusion efforts
Vincent Page (a technology officer at GE!!) gave a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research , which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion (Below Is an
Please look at this low cost alternative CO2 Sequestration system.
u ll/442624a.html
h tm
e rra-preta.html
d f
The integrated energy strategy offered by Terra Preta Soil technology may
provide the only path to sustain our agricultural and fossil fueled power
structure without climate degradation, other than nuclear power.
I feel we should push for this Terra Preta Soils CO2 sequestration strategy as not only a global warming remedy for the first world, but to solve fertilization and transport issues for the third world. This information needs to be shared with all the state programs.
The economics look good, and truly great if we had CO2 cap & trade in place. These are processes where you can have your Bio-fuels, Carbon Sequestration and fertility too.
Nature article: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v442/n7103/f
Here's the Cornell page for an over view:
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehm...r_home.
This Earth Science Forum thread on these soil contains further links ( I post everything I find on Amazon Dark Soils, ADS here):
http://forums.hypography.com/earth-science/3451-t
The Georgia Inst. of Technology page:
http://www.energy.gatech.edu/presentations/dday.p
There is an ecology going on in these soils that is not completely understood, and if replicated and applied at scale would have multiple benefits for farmers and environmentalist.
Terra Preta creates a terrestrial carbon reef at a microscopic level. These nanoscale structures provide safe haven to the microbes and fungus that facilitate fertile soil creation, while sequestering carbon for many hundred if not thousands of years. The combination of these two forms of sequestration would also increase the growth rate and natural sequestration effort of growing plants.
Here is a great pyrolysis process , ( http://www.eprida.com/hydro/ ) which could use existing infrastructure to provide Charcoal sustainable Agriculture , Syn-Fuels, and a variation of this process would also work as well for H2 , Charcoal-Fertilizer, while sequestering CO2 from Coal fired plants to build soils at large scales , be sure to read the "See an initial analysis NEW" link of this technology to clean up Coal fired power plants.
If pre Columbian Indians could produce these soils up to 6 feet deep over 20% of the Amazon basin it seems that our energy and agricultural industries could also product them at scale.
Harnessing the work of this vast number of microbes and fungi changes the whole equation of EROEI for food and Bio fuels. I see this as the only sustainable agricultural strategy if we no longer have cheap fossil fuels for fertilizer.
We need this super community of wee beasties to work in concert with us by populating them into their proper Soil horizon Carbon Condos.
After reading Some Like It Hot
I thought you may be interested in the new technology I high light to deal with this largest problem of them all, Climate Change, Energy and Space propulsion.
There are three companies pursuing hydrogen-boron plasma toroid fusion, a form of aneutronic fusion , Paul Koloc, Prometheus II, Eric Lerner, Focus Fusion and Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems http://www.electronpowersystems.com/ . A resent DOD review of EPS technology reads as follows:
"MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's
chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing
that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and
EPS have jointly authored numerous professional papers describing their
work. (Delphi is a $33B company, the spun off Delco Division of General
Motors)."
Vincent Page (a technology officer at GE!!) gave a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research , which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion (Below Is an excerpt).
He quotes costs and time to development of P-B11 Fusion as tens of million $, and years verses the many decades and ten Billion plus $ projected for ITER and other "Big" science efforts:
"for larger plant sizes
Time to small-scale Cost to achieve net if the small-scale
Concept Description net energy production energy concept works:
Koloc Spherical Plasma: 10 years(time frame), $25 million (cost), 80%(chance of success)
Field Reversed Configuration: 8 years $75 million 60%
Plasma Focus: 6 years $18 million 80%
Desirable Fusion Reactor Qualities
Research & development is also needed in
the area of computing power.
Many fusion researchers of necessity still
use MHD theory to validate their designs.
MHD theory assumes perfect diamagnetism
and perfect conductance.
These qualities may not always exist in the
real world, particularly during continuous operation.
More computing power is needed to allow use of a more realistic validation theory
such as the Vlasov equations.
ORNL is in the process of adding some impressive computing power.
Researchers now need to develop more realistic validation methods up to the
limits of the available computing power.
Governments need to fund these efforts."
I feel in light of the recent findings of neutrons, x-rays, and gamma rays in lightening, that these threads need to be brought together in an article.
You may see my efforts with my "A New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy" article:
http://www.scienceforums.com/earth-science/3665-a- new-manhattan-project-clean-energy.html
About a year ago, I came across EPS while researching nano-tech and efficient home design. I started a correspondence Clint Seward, Eric Learner, and Paul Kolac, sending them science news links which I felt were either supportive or contradictory to their work. I also asked them to critique each other's approaches. I have posted these emails to numerous physics and science forums. Discussion groups, science journalists, and other academics, trying to foster discussion, attention, and hopefully some concessus on the validity of these proposed technologies.
My efforts have born some fruit. Clint and Joe Dwyer at FIT have been in consultation on Clint's current charge transport theory for cloud to ground lightning.
This post is a plea to the science writers among you to craft a story covering aneutronic fusion, the P-B11 efforts, Eric's high temperatures and x-ray source project, Clint's lightening theories, and DOD review, and Paul's review by GE. The minimal cost and time frame for even the possibility of this leap forward seems criminal not to pu
Well GE evidently doesn't think Eric's a crackpot:
Vincent Page , a technology officer at GE, has given a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research, which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion . 1.) Prometheus II http://www.neoteric-research.org/ , 2.) Field Revered Configuration, and 3.) Focus Fusion http://www.focusfusion.org/about.html
He quotes costs and time to development as ten million, and years verses the decades projected for ITER and other Big science efforts.
The learning curve is so steep now, and with the resources of the online community, I'm sure we can rally greater support to solve this paramount problem of our time. I hold no truck with those who argue that big business or government are suppressing these technologies. It is only our complacency and comfort that blind us from pushing our leaders toward clean energy.
for larger plant sizes
Time to small-scale Cost to achieve net if the small-scale
Concept Description net energy production energy production energy concept works
Koloc Spherical Plasma 10 years $25 million 80%
Field Reversed Configuration 8 years $75 million 60%
Plasma Focus 6 years $18 million 80%
Desirable Fusion Reactor Qualities
Research & development is also needed in
the area of computing power.
Many fusion researchers of necessity still
use MHD theory to validate their designs.
MHD theory assumes perfect diamagnetism
and perfect conductance.
These qualities may not always exist in the
real world, particularly during continuous operation.
More computing power is needed to allow use of a more realistic validation theory
such as the Vlasov equations.
ORNL is in the process of adding some impressive computing power.
Researchers now need to develop more realistic validation methods up to the
limits of the available computing power.
Governments need to fund these efforts.
Erich Knight
I've posted Paul Allen, Jeff Bezos, Scaled Composites, and so many others trying to shout out the potential of these alternative aneutronic fusion efforts with my article "A Manhattan Project for Clean Energy" http://cleanenergy.blogstream.com/
o n-independently.htm
I am glad to see the interest in Vincent Page's presentation, and I feel in light of the recent findings of neutrons, x-rays, and gamma rays in lightening, that these threads need to be brought together in an article.
You may have seen my efforts with my "Manhattan Project" article, which got published on Sci-Scoop but rejected on Slashdot. (I've tried posting it on OSEN but for some reason I can't log in.)
About a year ago, I came across EPS while researching nano-tech and efficient home design. I started a correspondence Clint Seward, Eric Learner, and Paul Kolac, sending them science news links which I felt were either supportive or contradictory to their work. I also asked them to critique eachother's approaches. I have posted these emails to numerous physics and science forums. Discussion groups, science journalists, and other academics, trying to foster discussion, attention, and hopefully some concessus on the validity of these proposed technologies.
My efforts have born some fruit. Clint and Joe Dwyer at FIT have been in consultation on Clint's current charge transport theory for cloud to ground lightening.
I have had several replies from editors, producers, and journalists expressing interest. From organizations as varied as PBS, Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, New Energy News, the Guardian (U.K), and the San Francisco Chronicle. However, none of this professional interest has resulted in a story yet.
I have been responding to all of the articles that filter in via my Google alerts on "fusion power". The most recent was the "Happy News" article by Kris Metaverso.
http://www.happynews.com/news/11222005/Cheap-fusi
This post is a plea to the science writers among you to craft a story covering aneutronic fusion, the P-B11 efforts, Eric's high temperatures and x-ray source project, Clint's lightening theories, and DOD review, and Paul's review by GE. The minimal cost and time frame for even the possibility of this leap forward seems criminal not to pursue. If you read my Manhattan article, you may have noticed that I am not a writer. I am a landscape designer and technology gadfly wondering why this technology has never been put in the public eye.
My hope is that someone, more skilled, would step up to give a shout out about these technologies. Please contact me for copies of my correspondence with the principles, interesting replies and criticisms from physics discussion forums and academic physicists who have replied to my queries.
Thanks for any help
Erich J. Knight
Vincent Page , a technology officer at GE, has given a presentation at the 05 6th symposium on current trends in international fusion research, which high lights the need to fully fund three different approaches to P-B11 fusion . 1.) Prometheus II http://www.neoteric-research.org/ , 2.) Field Revered Configuration, and 3.) Focus Fusion http://www.focusfusion.org/about.html He quotes costs and time to development as ten million, and years verses the decades projected for ITER and other Big science efforts. The learning curve is so steep now, and with the resources of the online community, I'm sure we can rally greater support to solve this paramount problem of our time. I hold no truck with those who argue that big business or government are suppressing these technologies. It is only our complacency and comfort that blind us from pushing our leaders toward clean energy. for larger plant sizes Time to small-scale Cost to achieve net if the small-scale Concept Description net energy production energy production energy concept works Koloc Spherical Plasma 10 years $25 million 80% Field Reversed Configuration 8 years $75 million 60% Plasma Focus 6 years $18 million 80% Desirable Fusion Reactor Qualities Research & development is also needed in the area of computing power. Many fusion researchers of necessity still use MHD theory to validate their designs. MHD theory assumes perfect diamagnetism and perfect conductance. These qualities may not always exist in the real world, particularly during continuous operation. More computing power is needed to allow use of a more realistic validation theory such as the Vlasov equations. ORNL is in the process of adding some impressive computing power. Researchers now need to develop more realistic validation methods up to the limits of the available computing power. Governments need to fund these efforts.
Dear Folks:
I posted this news to Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems Home Page http://www.electronpowersystems.com/
here is his reply:
"Hi Erich,
There is another method to producing neutrons that fits my lightning model that I have described to you.
It is well known that electron beams have been used extensively to produce neutrons, above electron energies of 10 MeV, well within the voltages reported in the lightning event. (An Internet search produced several articles that reported this). I do not pretend to have researched this extensively, and do not know the actual target molecules or the process, but it appears plausible from what the papers report, and is consistent with my lightning model.
The proposed method you sent to me is a lot more complex, and I would have to say I can not agree with the article as written without experimental results.
Clint "
For a list of other alternative Fusion players and new nano-solar approaches please see my article : A new Manhattan Project for Clean Energy at http://www.sciscoop.com/main/2
Cheers,
Erich J. Knight
Maybe, Here are two replies I've gotten after posting this lightng news: From Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems Home Page http://www.electronpowersystems.com/ "Hi Erich, There is another method to producing neutrons that fits my lightning model that I have described to you. It is well known that electron beams have been used extensively to produce neutrons, above electron energies of 10 MeV, well within the voltages reported in the lightning event. (An Internet search produced several articles that reported this). I do not pretend to have researched this extensively, and do not know the actual target molecules or the process, but it appears plausible from what the papers report, and is consistent with my lightning model. The proposed method you sent to me is a lot more complex, and I would have to say I can not agree with the article as written without experimental results. Clint" And a physic prof at JMU , Joe Rudmin: "Erich: Neutrons are produced in many events, including sono-luminescence--the collapse of bubbles in boiling and in ultrasonic cleaning. As one fusion power scientist said "It's easy to get neutrons. You can release them by scuffing your feet." There are even table-top nuclear fusion sources. Also, the goal isn't just to get heat. There are vast amounts of heat in the ocean. The problem is to get thermodynamic "free energy"--energy which can be converted to work, or electricity. The problem of controlled fusion is to find a way to produce nuclear fusion which produces more electric energy than it consumes. Actually, we can even do this with existing Tokamak fusion reactors. But no engineers have come up with a design for a fusion system, which can produce electricity any where near as cheaply as fission, solar, wind, or fossil-fuel sources. We have actually passed scientific feasibility. But aren't close to economic feasibility. --jwr" Cheers , Erich
We have been heating the earth since the agricultural revolution with the positive result of providing 10,000 years of warm stability. But since the Industrial revolution we have been pushing the biosphere over the brink. Life forces have done this before -- during the snowball earth period ( Cryogenian Period ) in the Neoproterozoic toward the end of the Precambrian - but that life force was not sentient!