US Condemns Bomb Attack on Iran Nuclear Scientist

choff · Post by **choff** » Sun Feb 12, 2012 8:19 pm

The hope would be that with the growing international isolation, the Iranian regime would be driven to crash fund leapfrog technology projects like the polywell. Much like the Nazi's were pushing advanced rocket and jet aircraft projects near the end.

I recollect Vahid mentioned the Iranian polywell would have 32 magnets, that would imply a reasonably large radius, possible breakeven attempt? Some good may yet come from the Iranian regime's death spin.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:35 pm

Ironically, if Vahid or EMC2 suceeds, that would be the slow-roll death blow for the Iranian regime. A steady decline in oil and gas money, eventually no longer enough revenue to sustain the regime.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:36 am

Well, from my understanding all the middle eastern countries are currently preparing for a time when their oil reserves will have perished. That is why they are building like crazy in Dubai and are trying to get businesses there. It will be interesting to see how that works out for them.
I think that the Iranian government would be wise to invest into alternatives to oil. That way they can run their country on polywells and sell the oil abroad.

hanelyp · Post by **hanelyp** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:47 am

choff wrote:I recollect Vahid mentioned the Iranian polywell would have 32 magnets...

Magnets on faces of a geodesic derivative of the octagon? I'm thinking that 30 magnets arranged on the faces of a Rhombic Triacontahedron might have better symmetry.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:29 pm

Skipjack wrote:Well, from my understanding all the middle eastern countries are currently preparing for a time when their oil reserves will have perished. That is why they are building like crazy in Dubai and are trying to get businesses there. It will be interesting to see how that works out for them.
I think that the Iranian government would be wise to invest into alternatives to oil. That way they can run their country on polywells and sell the oil abroad.

And how many of those "businesses" are actually profit makers? Most of the stuff is heavily supported by oil revenues, either directly or indirectly. Once you take the oil revenues out of the cash flow stream, the house of cards falls apart quickly. Some of the Dubai and UAE ventures collapsed during the last round of oil price depressions. Once you get below $95/barrel things start getting sporty. If you get down to $75/barrel, things (including governments) start to fail. No matter how pretty you dress it up, it is still an oil/gas economy.

It was not so long ago, US media was talking about going to war because gas at the pump was $3.50 a gallon. Oil execs got hauled in front of congress, posturing was made, gas prices went down. Well, now here we are again, $3.50/gal at the pump...
Why are we here? Because of the $95/barrel needs for the OPEC folks. They are really worried that oil will go low and stay low again for a while. It almost did a few of them in. $75/barrel is a scary thought for them.

These greedy idoits do not understand that they risk the global economic system, and thus the spiffy cars, estates, and private jets they fly around in. Spend, spend, spend baby. They are going to do themselves in one way or another.
There is no viable business venture in that area that can be sustained without massive underwriting and subsidised support. The new "Global Business Center", my rear end. Not now, not ever. Once the oil is gone, they are going to go back to herding goats and chopping each others heads off with swords. At least the ones that are stuck there. The rest will move to Hollywood and try and get their kids to become movie stars. Oh, some already did...

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:29 pm

It really strains belief (for a layman on the topic anyway) that they don't pull the rug from under the West by either succeeding at or ruling out e.g. fusion power.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:42 pm

See Hazlitt's quote. They have everything to lose. The best they can do is to try and discredit viable fission or fusion, or any other alternative global energy source other than oil/gas. The rub is that there is no way they could corner the market once the genie is loose. The best option is to undermine the market, and prolong oil use.

hanelyp · Post by **hanelyp** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:01 am

Related to mideast economies dependent on oil exports, http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot. ... turns.html
Apparently oil usage is sharply down with the rest of the economy. OPEC has to be hurting.
via http://www.transterrestrial.com/?p=40508

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:34 am

ladajo wrote:See Hazlitt's quote. They have everything to lose. The best they can do is to try and discredit viable fission or fusion, or any other alternative global energy source other than oil/gas. The rub is that there is no way they could corner the market once the genie is loose. The best option is to undermine the market, and prolong oil use.

I never heard from my fellow countryman and good acquaintance Acad. Tsintsdze http://www.ipm.ac.ir/Visitorpage.jsp?Vi ... =EP0100002 http://www.science.org.ge/members/Eng2/ ... ar%20E.pdf about any fusion related program in Iran. I think that he is better aware than Aslan or another man taking information from Iranian news agencies.
Fusion or other methods of energy producing can only decrease consumption of oil for heat or electricity production.
Iran as well as other oil country has lack of influence on processes.
And oil products use will prolong after construction of fusion power plants too. As by set of properties we do not know better motor fuel than gasoline or diesel fuel - no hydrogen or others.
Simply gasoline, diesel or jet fuel will be made from coal. We have not alternative of hydrocarbons as a feedstock of making of plastics or other petrochemical products. And coal here will also be the source of carbon and water will become the source of hydrogen. Like Germany made in WW2.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:08 am

Didn't a few people work out that (expected) middling performance from a Polywell would make hydrocarbon synthesis affordable?

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:33 am

Betruger wrote:Didn't a few people work out that (expected) middling performance from a Polywell would make hydrocarbon synthesis affordable?

If you would have cheap (on orders of magnitude) electricity then via water electrolyze you can produce cheap hydrogen. Technically there is not any problem for this process.
You can avoid using electricity at all and to use coal both for carbon source and for hydrogen production as well. From about 6 tons of coal you will get one ton of mix hydrocarbon. But in this case you will get large production of CO2.

Polywell or hydropower plant does not matter.
As at today's ratio between prices on electricity and natural gas now hydrogen in big quantities is produced from gas.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 12:54 pm

Interesting historical note. The Battleship Yamato was sunk with a full load of Soya based synthetic fuel. The Japanese (like Germany) pressed hard on natural fuels, leap into the synthetic realm and made some big progress. Kind of lost to history now...

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 7:37 pm

ladajo wrote:Interesting historical note. The Battleship Yamato was sunk with a full load of Soya based synthetic fuel. The Japanese (like Germany) pressed hard on natural fuels, leap into the synthetic realm and made some big progress. Kind of lost to history now...

I have a book, in which is described the process (Russian translation of UK chemists's book, who was in a mission studying Germany's technologies after victory), how they (Germanys) made catalysts, description of apparature, temperature, pressure. Now these all are industrial secret of such companies like Sasol or Shell Global Solutions.
Germanys made about 5 million tons of fuel annually spending about 30 million tons of coal.