Page 1 of 6

Gates looking for energy solutions

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:29 am
by flying_eagle
Bill Gates gets it about AGW, no carbon, and new cheap energy technology being needed.http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/02/12/bill ... tml?hpt=T2
Since he wants to spend money, anybody told him about Polywell? :D

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:59 am
by MSimon
We will need other energy sources in 50 or 100 years.

CO2 is not the reason:

CO2 is irrelevant

The earth is homeostatic.

Re: Polywell. There is nothing to invest in at the moment. Unless some one wanted to head out on their own.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:19 am
by MSimon
It is a good thing Bill is so smart. Otherwise you would need a really big computer to tell exactly what forms of energy will be required at any given place or time ten or 50 years hence.

I'll bet he can't even tell me what will be needed next week.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:40 am
by CaptainBeowulf
Well, although a lot of us are AGW skeptics, there are useful things here:

1. Realistically looking at building reactors that burn nuclear waste - something that's been talked about here. While nuclear waste doesn't terrify me, I don't particularly like it. I tend to think that no matter how well it's stored underground, it may eventually contaminate groundwater. It should be reused to make more power.
2. Better batteries. I think most of us want these. Think of all the uses, including in space travel. Also, fully electric cars, which can be powered from a nuclear power grid when oil does run out (the 50 to 100 year range). Current electric cars suck. Performance can actually be ok, but range and recharge time are poor (useless for my purposes - at least half of the time when I drive, I need to go hundreds of miles). Better batteries can fix that.

If he wants to invest in the right things for poor AGW-related reasons, I'm still happy to leverage that.

If he wants to put some of his foundation money into carbon sequestration research, well, it's his money... who knows, we might learn something interesting. Encourage him to put most of it into advanced fission and fusion research, and batteries.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:08 am
by Aero
Better batteries would be very nice, but the other side of the same coin is better electric motors. A break through in our understanding of physics could lead to motors which draw power from the vacuum giving coefficients of performance, COP of greater than 3. Use of this technology would extend the range of all electric vehicles by, well, 3 times for example.

Wait - don't scream at me yet. Do I really think the excess power comes from the vacuum? No, not as real power, but virtually? If it happens, it needs an explanation. Wait, don't scream yet. Do I really think that electric motors can develop efficiencies of 300%, No, but there is a strong indication that magnetic motors can do so. Just don't confuse the two, they are not the same thing.

Here is a patented method to switch the field of permanent magnets off. That is all that is needed to make magnetic motors work. http://www.google.com/patents?id=JcgdAA ... q=&f=false I have found 4 different magnetic motor designs using this method, Steorm is one of them. To see the Steorm method work, watch the video here. http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/html/steffecten.htm Other designs apply the switching currents differently but fundamentally to the same effect.

In a nut shell, magnetic motors differ from electric motors in the way that they overcome back EMF. Electric motors use the application of electrical power to overcome back EMF while magnetic motors switch off the back EMF. Because the power needed to switch off the back EMF is much less than the power needed to overcome it, magnetic motors can operate with a COP greater than one based on the input electrical power which is just the switching power.

General Motors just recently announced that they will invest $Billions in their own new electric motor manufacturing plant. I view that as a strong vote for the above and for other state of the art technology. Existing electric motor manufacturers are not up to state of the art. If they were, then there would be no profit margin for GM to hope to gain by building their own plant.

OK - now scream, or better, debate the above points.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:17 am
by MSimon
Ah no back EMF? Are you serious? But OK. Suppose it is true? It gains you nothing except a motor that works at lower voltage for the same power out. But the current goes up in proportion as the voltage goes down. Because you can't beat ohm's law. Or energy conservation. And entropy increase.

And if all these fabulous motors work so well why not hook one to a generator give it a start and make a fortune selling electricity to the electric company?

Why isn't the Navy doing this for their big superconductor motors?

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:20 am
by MSimon
I view the building and operating of nuclear power plants a vote of confidence in the psychic powers of Martians.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:49 am
by Aero
MSimon wrote:Ah no back EMF? Are you serious? But OK. Suppose it is true? It gains you nothing except a motor that works at lower voltage for the same power out. But the current goes up in proportion as the voltage goes down. Because you can't beat ohm's law. Or energy conservation. And entropy increase.

And if all these fabulous motors work so well why not hook one to a generator give it a start and make a fortune selling electricity to the electric company?

Why isn't the Navy doing this for their big superconductor motors?
In a magnetic motor, the idea of motor current and motor voltage do not apply. They are animated by permanent magnets, not electromagnets. The only required current is that for the switching coil. None of the energy in the switching coil returns directly from the output shaft. Think of it by analogy to the spark plug in your gasoline engine. The power of the spark has no effect on the power of the running engine. Likewise, the power of the switching coil has no effect on the power of the magnetic motor.

As for selling electricity to the electrical company, I don't think that's allowed except from designated equipment types (Solar). Anyway, I haven't gotten around to building a magnetic motor.

The Navy? I expect they are skeptical just as most are. But power density is another consideration and I don't see magnetic motors matching the performance of the big superconductor motors, not until a lot of technololy has been developed at least.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:17 pm
by KitemanSA
Aero wrote:
MSimon wrote:And if all these fabulous motors work so well why not hook one to a generator give it a start and make a fortune selling electricity to the electric company?
As for selling electricity to the electrical company, I don't think that's allowed except from designated equipment types (Solar). Anyway, I haven't gotten around to building a magnetic motor.
Ridiculous. Offer to sell a set amount of power to the power company at low rates, they will buy it. They need it, they will make a profit at it. Of course if something is consumed in your machine that makes the system stop after a while, then you can't sell a set amount of power. Maybe that is what is happening in such a system. Perhaps the "permanent" magnets aren't so permanent and some sort of energy locked in the material is being used up.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:18 pm
by MSimon
In a magnetic motor, the idea of motor current and motor voltage do not apply.
Yeah. Sure. And the fact that electric and magnetic fields are duals does not apply either. There is a Nobel Prize awaiting as soon as some one important finds out.

No coils or currents in the motor? Fine. Then why bring it up?

OK you can't sell power to the power company. Why not run your house with a total of 1 watt hour a month of electricity? Then you only have to pay line charges. And the heck with the power company all together. Just start it up with a couple of D cells and you are independent of the power company. You could build a heavy water extractor and sell that to rubes who are dumb enough to want to play with fusion and stuff like that. You could corner the market.

The fact that no one is running their house with one of these devices is a clue.

I have to tell you this, and it may come as a shock, but energy (or if you prefer mass-energy) is conserved. So explain again where the energy is coming from.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:24 pm
by MSimon
I have an idea. Why not set up a few solar cells on the roof so you can sell "solar" to the power company and run one of these gizmos in the basement and deliver real power in excess of what the solar cells generate?

.*

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:33 pm
by Helius
MSimon wrote:I view the building and operating of nuclear power plants a vote of confidence in the psychic powers of Martians.
Use your own Meaning.
The Kleen star of semantics;
Rorschach would be proud.

Edit: Dang, never try to do a Hiaku on the fly.

Re: .*

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 1:58 pm
by KitemanSA
Helius wrote:
MSimon wrote:I view the building and operating of nuclear power plants a vote of confidence in the psychic powers of Martians.
The Kleen star of semantics;
Use your own Meaning.
Rorschach himself would be proud.
Inside joke here??? :?

Re: .*

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:13 pm
by Helius
Inside joke here??? :?
It's not a stealth joke.
If it were as you question;
It would cease to be.

Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:06 pm
by MSimon
General Motors just recently announced that they will invest $Billions in their own new electric motor manufacturing plant. I view that as a strong vote for the above and for other state of the art technology. Existing electric motor manufacturers are not up to state of the art. If they were, then there would be no profit margin for GM to hope to gain by building their own plant.
It is simple: unless you need to save every ounce and milliwatt there is no point in designing a 10 KHz electric motor. Operating a modified 60 Hz motor from a switching supply is fine.

BTW this is all known technology. In the field. GM is just ramping it up.

http://www.acpropulsion.com/