Polywell = WMD?

If polywell fusion is developed, in what ways will the world change for better or worse? Discuss.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:50 pm

rexxam62 wrote:Who gives a shit if Polywell would puncture or become highly disruptive to petroleum producing countries? America today is meddling with all peice of shit 3d world nations around the world for one strategic reason:OIL. And the problems in middle east seems to only become more and more unstable the more America meddles around there. America should just leave the whole middle east once and for all and put all money and energy into things like the Polywell and other highly disruptive technologies to petroleum.

If America dont then Europe, Japan, China or someone else will and America will be left behind. But I think the total failure in Iraq can be the point that changes the whole game forever. Because America cannot go around the planet and fight these shit countries anymore unless it want to go totaly bankrupt. And even if it goes around the world trying to get the oil you have the problem that people like Chavez in Venezuela go and nationalise the petroleum.


The alternatives must precede the leaving.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:15 pm

rexxam62 wrote:Who gives a shit if Polywell would puncture or become highly disruptive to petroleum producing countries? America today is meddling with all peice of shit 3d world nations around the world for one strategic reason:OIL. And the problems in middle east seems to only become more and more unstable the more America meddles around there. America should just leave the whole middle east once and for all and put all money and energy into things like the Polywell and other highly disruptive technologies to petroleum.

If America dont then Europe, Japan, China or someone else will and America will be left behind. But I think the total failure in Iraq can be the point that changes the whole game forever. Because America cannot go around the planet and fight these shit countries anymore unless it want to go totaly bankrupt. And even if it goes around the world trying to get the oil you have the problem that people like Chavez in Venezuela go and nationalise the petroleum.


I don't think total failure in Iraq is likely.

BTW the GDP gain in 2005 was more than sufficient to fund the war.

We could carry on at the current rate (money wise) indefinitely.

In any case the Polywell should not be tied to politics. Even though its effect on politics will be tremendous.

The next big push for us will come next year. If Dr. B's experiments are positive we have to get the funds to rush construction.

So keep pumping Polywell at other sites. We are not finished.

rexxam62
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:13 pm

Postby rexxam62 » Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:02 pm

MSimon wrote:
rexxam62 wrote:Who gives a shit if Polywell would puncture or become highly disruptive to petroleum producing countries? America today is meddling with all peice of shit 3d world nations around the world for one strategic reason:OIL. And the problems in middle east seems to only become more and more unstable the more America meddles around there. America should just leave the whole middle east once and for all and put all money and energy into things like the Polywell and other highly disruptive technologies to petroleum.

If America dont then Europe, Japan, China or someone else will and America will be left behind. But I think the total failure in Iraq can be the point that changes the whole game forever. Because America cannot go around the planet and fight these shit countries anymore unless it want to go totaly bankrupt. And even if it goes around the world trying to get the oil you have the problem that people like Chavez in Venezuela go and nationalise the petroleum.


I don't think total failure in Iraq is likely.

BTW the GDP gain in 2005 was more than sufficient to fund the war.

We could carry on at the current rate (money wise) indefinitely.

In any case the Polywell should not be tied to politics. Even though its effect on politics will be tremendous.

The next big push for us will come next year. If Dr. B's experiments are positive we have to get the funds to rush construction.

So keep pumping Polywell at other sites. We are not finished.


No. We are far from finished. I want to push this technology as far as it can possibly go. I wont be satisfied until the whole petroleum industry is down on its knee's bleeding to death. Just like the Swede who created Skype brought down the telco's in the world to their bare knee's.

Angela Merkel and the EU want to reduce the CO2 use drastically and I will be on them with a blow torch that they do it with actions and no talking. I want them to push this with brute force. Just to get a domino effect going in the world that will force the adoption of new and highly disruptive technologies in the energy field all over the world and especially in USA.

And I do not want to go into a political discussion but Iraq is a total and utter failure that is spreding all over the Middle East like a wildfire at the moment. America has lost Middle East forever with the loss of Iraq. That is why Bush is willing to fight so hard over there even though it is going towards a total civil war all over Middle East (Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Lebanon). And if America withdraws the next 'Hitler' that will come to rule in Iraq will use their oil as a political tool and believe me that 'Hitler' will hate America even more than Osama Bin Laden did. And given what is going on in Venezuela and Russia I dont think America needs that last oil field in Iraq to be held against it as a political weapon. So the only alternative left for American politichians is alternatives. Polywell if it works will be so huge you cannot believe it.

rexxam62
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:13 pm

Postby rexxam62 » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:04 am

Sorry for the bad words. I have edited away the worst.

//Rexxam62

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Re: Polywell is a terrorists nightmare.

Postby Roger » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:46 am

ANTIcarrot wrote:
1) The middle east is economically dependent on the world buying it's oil. What woudl happen to the OPEC nations if demand for this export were slashed? The collapse of economies, .........


You have that completely BACKWARDS.The world is post peal oil. Demand being slashed is not the problem, supply is getting slashed.

Image


Middle East oil production is in decline. Saudi oil production is in decline.

Image

Demand in 3rd world countries is down, while we pay KSA a $4/barrel premium. economies are already on the road to collapse, due to the exact opposite scenario you described.

Your demonstrated ability to completely get something as fundamental as peak oil completely bass ackwards is quite remarkable. if you cant articulate geopolitcs in a post peak oil world, dont be surprised if you are not taken seriously on other topics here @ talk-polywell .

Now, who was talking about hooking up a reactor to the 3rd rail in...... what city was that? You'll need to park your "lone single truck".......
fairly close to the rails, Those 30KeV "cables" are real heavy... um... how long of a jumper cable are you going to need ?

I know in Manhattan most rail lines that have a 3rd rail, are in access denied formats, they have masonry walls about 50 ft high on both sides.


Were you planning on repelling down, or getting dropped by helo ?

Hint: stick to fertilizer and fuel oil. Put it on your VISA, its only 6k or 7k.





And I do not want to go into a political discussion


I dont come here to talk politics. Or economics.


If you people will kindly
STFU, then there is a far less likely chance a political discussion will occur.
Last edited by Roger on Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:53 am

As long as this is a political thread I think you ought to re-evaluate what is going on in Iraq. Your attitude is so six months ago.

The Democrats in Congress are hedging their bets. Perhaps, they know something you don't.

Perhaps this bit on Breaking Glass will change your mind:

http://badgersforward.blogspot.com/2007 ... glass.html

In any case you are correct about getting off oil. Except for your time frame. It will take 30 to 40 years. For at least 20 of those years we will need to keep the oil supplies coming.

In the mean time Polywell could make refining tar sands much cheaper. Making the transition much less painful.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:03 am

Roger,

Most of the decline in production has political causes:

Nigeria - outlaws attack infrastructure
Iran - not investing in field maintenance
Venezuela - not investing in field maintenance
Mexico - not investing in field maintenance

The reason for not investing? Other priorities. i.e. local and global politics. Which is usual when Oil Cos. are nationalized.

In any case the result is the same as your peak oil scenario.

BTW I got the above news from an oil geologist.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:13 am

MSimon wrote:
In the mean time Polywell could make refining tar sands much cheaper. Making the transition much less painful.

/Dude I know you hang @ TOD, Bituman with an EROI of 1.3 to 1, with a water requirement, help me here, of what? 4 to 1... 10 to 1...? Show me the water source for large scale production otherwise the EROI plummets into the negative.

And one doesnt exactly refine bituman, cracking the long chain molecules is not refining. I know you know better. The result is a significant amount of heavy metals and other impurities from the bituman.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:16 am

MSimon wrote:
In any case the result is the same as your peak oil scenario.



Yeah sure.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:30 am

Roger wrote:
MSimon wrote:
In the mean time Polywell could make refining tar sands much cheaper. Making the transition much less painful.

/Dude I know you hang @ TOD, Bituman with an EROI of 1.3 to 1, with a water requirement, help me here, of what? 4 to 1... 10 to 1...? Show me the water source for large scale production otherwise the EROI plummets into the negative.

And one doesnt exactly refine bituman, cracking the long chain molecules is not refining. I know you know better. The result is a significant amount of heavy metals and other impurities from the bituman.


The EROI doesn't matter. We are simply converting fusion to auto fuel. We are not talking about doing this for 10,000 years. May 20 or 50 years to ease the transition away from oil. There is a lot of above ground investment in oil. Better to wear it out than to scrap it. It lowers the capital investment profile. Which means more money for biotech.

Water? If it is import, desalinization of sea water could work.

What I meant by refining is conversion from ore to gasoline.

If energy is cheap extraction of heavy metals shouldn't be a problem.

Cheap energy changes everything.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:13 am

Cheap energy changes everything.

TO a point, Tar sands are supposed to be about 1.3 to 1, not very good but fine. If the EROI gets close to 1.1 to 1, its not worth clocking in your time card in the morning.

You'll be pumping sea water UP HILL.......

Bituman. its not ore, its tar like crud, mixed into soil and rocks, it has to be BOILED out. STEAMED out.

This entire process is energy intensive, a couple of variables going the wrong way and it takes more energy to make gas from bituman than the bituman yields.

Plus building 7 or 8 so polywell reactors in ALberta, might not be needed, Canada has to decide to build fission nukes there in the next year od so, or the whole deal goes down the tubes.

Without those fission nukes, this project will not amount to a hill of beans.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:37 am

Lots of problems no doubt.

However, I'm talking transitional.

If the energy is low cost it doesn't matter if the Energy Return On Investment is negative.

What counts is the cost per gallon.

Cheap energy changes everything.

rexxam62
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:13 pm

Postby rexxam62 » Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:13 am

Roger

First of all you should not come in here and tell other people 'Shut The frick Up'. Second if supply diminish with time you need to cut the demand for the thing you are using or pay higher prices for it. So no matter how you turn and twist things you need alternatives. But yes you are correct the whole middle east is peaking big time. I have read about 30 different technical papers on Middle East oil fields and everything seems to point to that peak oil is real and not just a 'investment issue'. Peak oil is probably the real reason Bush went into Iraq even though they knew very well in 94' what the consequences would be.

Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire C-SPAN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I

I live in Israel and I went to Iraq and have seen what is going on with my own eyes. It is a total catastrophy. How have we jews learned to live in a sea off hateful muslims that want to blow us up? We have realized that working with them is impossible hence the >>> Wall, Security fence or whatever you want to call it.

The thing is that America has spent about 1tr USD on Iraq. And my projections is that the petroleum in Iraq will have a value of about 25tr USD. But the American economy is doing really bad right now with the housing market in a recession that is making all kinds of banks, funds and other loan corporations go belly up. Again Bush needs to be honest here. If he havent managed to create calm after 3 years of fighting then what would he do diffrently now that makes him believe he will manage to do it now?

And I suspect he is going to try to cut a deal with the Democrats in order to stay in Iraq longer to get the oil. But again if Bush or the next Democrat does not build a huge wall around the oil fields so the sunnis, shias, kurds and others cannot get at it you wont manage to pump the oil peacefully. Period. Add to this you need to build this wall around the pipes unless you want terrorism against them either.

There has been some rumors that Bush is going to try this and pump up the oil and have it go from Iraq > Syria > Israel and store it in my home country. And I have nothing against this, but in order to make this happen Bush will need to make a deal with the Democrats to stay in Iraq longer and I wonder how the people voting for the Democrats will feel when they realize the Democrats have fooled them into believing they would withdraw from Iraq?

Btw MSimon spare me the propaganda, I know way to much to care about it at all.

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:43 pm

I live in America. The view is different here.

What ever the realities of Iraq it seems that the American people are not yet ready to give up. Thus the Dems are waffling on retreat.

The economy here is still booming. There may very well be trouble ahead (i.e. it is the last days of the bubble before the crash), however current conditions are excellent.

In any case - cheap energy changes everything.

A serious American recession will crash the demand for oil world wide. Prices could tank. My bet is that there is not only a housing bubble but an oil bubble (excess capacity based on market conditions). A drop in demand for oil could cause an unraveling. It has before.

In any case here is what my oil guy had to say:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2007/01/oil-outlook.html

BTW who benefits from the FUD that "we are running out of oil"? That has got to be good for at least $5 a bbl.

*

Let me add:

It is Bush's ambition to change the culture in the Middle East. A very large ambition to be sure. He has set the plan in motion. It has military and culture components. Some inadvertent:

Jewish Porn Sweeps Arab World

I think the cross cultural contacts are having an effect.

Well that is the long view with short term points of contact.

What about a middle view?

If we can push the program along and get power to the grid in 5 years and one or two TW of generating capacity built over the following 5 years. We will destroy the ME.

Plug in hybrids are just coming on to the market. That will mean most consumer trips (under 20 mi round trip) could be powered by the grid. However, we are going to need cheaper power and a beefed up grid.

I have a few things to say about that in the comments at:

http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2007/08/27/fusion-futures/

*

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:33 pm

So the next question is:

If oil prices crash what are we going to do with the ME?

Or even closer to home Mexico.

Every country that has oil as its economic base is going to be hurting.

Once the dimensions of the hurt become clear a mitigation plan can be devised.

Any ideas on what kind of disruptions and the responses to such a world wide change in energy generation? Might as well get ahead of the curve.

Current world electrical production is 1E12 Watts.

A 100 MW (electrical) Polywell produces 1E8 Watts. 10,000 of those could power the world. 100,000 and you make everyone American Middle Class (by today's standards).

Say we did it with 1,000 MW plants. 1,000 to = current worlds electrical power. 10,000 to lift the world out of poverty.

As I recall we use as much electrical energy as we use for transportation. So double the grid in America and we are home free. DC interties will be much more reliable than AC interties. Polywell will induce the production of large numbers of DC to AC converters. (conversion in the other direction is easy).


Return to “Implications”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests