Sustainable Energy, USA and worldwide

@Lady Momus: Wow. Considering that America's already farming natural gas from animal waste, you have to be a special kind of fraud to fail that one.

I heard he got framed by the italian oil lobby/mafia but I have no proof for this claim.

Edit: Oh and I also got the thing with the EU-patent wrong: The process of using "Hydrogen and Metal for gaining Energy through a core-reaktion" was patented by Francesco Piantelli, but the patent for Rossis e-cat that supposedly uses this principle is still pending. source: http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=de_EP&FT=D&date=20110928&CC=EP&NR=2368252A1&KC=A1

edited 9th Jul '13 9:20:42 AM by Kiefen

It's kind of funny how every fraud out there seems to be the victim of a conspiracy...

Yeah, "offering home generators" sounds less like "I've got something ready to go" and more like "Lemme scam as many people as I can before I take the money and run!".

If someone's selling you something without offering to explain how it works - or at least explaining it when asked - chances are they're trying to scam you. If they can't tell you how their product works it probably doesn't work at all. There are some exceptions to this - for instance, the mechanism behind the placebo effect is not known, yet it does work. But if there's no plausible mechanism you should at least ask for independent research that proves that at least it does work.

Bragging about "pending" patents is also a red flag. Anyone can have a patent "pending." Even an accepted patent is not absolute guarantee that the product is real, but a "pending" patent is worthless. Especially if the cited "pending" patent is from many years ago it's probably been refused but the person you're talking to won't admit it.

Claims of being at the very bleeding edge of science are to be met with skepticism. If you're suspicious of something try to find (or ask for) a peer-reviewed paper on the subject. If no reputable, peer-reviewed publication has published anything about that subject by the authority that the seller is appealing to they're probably trying to scam you. If such an article does exist you should read the summary - if only to see if the article actually says what the seller claims that it says.

You should look for reviews, but not from any source cited by the seller. Google makes this easy. A dishonest seller will cherry-pick, misquote, or possibly even fabricate reviews.

If you're being sold something that is allegedly being "suppressed" by some kind of "establishment" you're probably talking to a fraud.

If the cited authority or seller has been convicted or suspected of fraud before they're probably doing it again. It's possible that someone might've been sued and proven innocent, but a history of fraud or accusations of fraud is a sign that you should be skeptical.

You should also try to find articles debunking the claims of the seller. Such articles might themselves be dishonest but you should check them out to see for yourself. If there are no such articles it's possible that the product is so new and/or obscure that no critic has publicly evaluated it yet; but if it's old and popular there should be something on the Internet about it, whether it works or not.

"sigh" My poor communication skills made me look like a gullible fool once again.

Maybe my initial post sounded a bit too over enthusiastic, I wrote that from my mobile phone during the lunchbreak so I missed to express my own skepticism against "a man and his magical box". And then I kept digging myself deeper and deeper.

edited 9th Jul '13 4:02:37 PM by Kiefen

Eh, ain't gonna hold it against you. (I am gonna hold it against Rossi though.)

Wasn't sure where to put this, but this thread was the closest.

New Thermocell Could Harvest 'Waste Heat' from Power Stations and Even Vehicle Exhaust Pipes

   NECROMANCY   

So with my college starting anew, a new semester project emerged: I am to research on nuclear energy.

I couldn't help but remember that someone in here mentioned a documentary about just that. Pandora's Promise or something?

So yeah, anyone saw that documentary? Would you recommend it?

Unfortunately I haven't.

Lab-Made Complexes Are 'Sun Sponges'

Copypasting this from the solar power thread.

New Connection between Stacked Solar Cells Can Handle Energy of 70,000 Suns

Not that those do much good when we lose so much of solar energy just by it going through the atmosphere.

CPV is what it's useful for.

Scotland's tidal energy potential is greater than a nuclear power plant

1.9 GW is the peak power of the freaking Hoover Dam. Dayum.

I'm finding that the problem with installing renewable power is that, until we get sufficiently powerful storage devices, we're stuck having to create an equal installed power of cogeneration plants, like, in factories and such.

I've also found out that's it's really vital to use less fossil fuels if we want to start using electric cars and such, because otherwise the amount of carbon emitted per amount of actual mechanical energy expended might be greater if you use an electric or fuel cell car as opposed to a Diesel engine. Which sucks. Then again, this may depend on the way you drive; if you do a lot of accelerations, the efficiency of a combustion engine drops dramatically, while that of an electric engine remains the same (roughly speaking; there are... subtleties).

Don't you mean the Hoover Daaaaayum?

I dunno how much of that power is due to the hydrology in that particular strait.

This will interest you.

"...New storage approaches include improvements to existing lithium ion batteries and schemes to store energy as huge volumes of compressed air Large-scale electricity storage promises to be a game-changer, unshackling alternative energy. in vast geologic vaults. Another idea is to create a network of small, energy-dense batteries in tens of millions of homes. Under such a “distributed storage” scheme, utility computers could coordinate electricity flows over a “smart grid” that continually communicates with — and adjusts the flow of power to and from — local batteries. This would even include batteries in future plug-in hybrid or all-electric vehicles.

And one 2008 breakthrough could even fulfill chemists’ long-held dreams of producing a squeaky-clean and storable fuel by using excess electricity generated from renewable sources to cheaply produce hydrogen, which could then be used in fuel cells to power homes and cars."

Hmm, actually, I think i've heard the opposite- you replace the combustion engine motor with an electric one, which is more efficient, swap the petrol refinement and distribution infrastructure with electricity distibution and replace many small enginges with one big one and if it was the same fuel, the electric one has the natural advantage. Except petrol isn't used in power stations so there is fuel like for like replacement. You would be using coal (which is worse and goes against the electric car) or natural gas (which is better and works in its favour).

After writing this, I did a simple google search. Actually wikipedia is just fine. I found references to a European study and an American one where they look at the energy generation mix in those particular locations. In the European one they say at a minimum, you'd still be looking at a 10% advantage over diesel; in the USA is varies by location but it's never really better to look at a normal gas car. [1] [2].

I don't follow these two steps. What do you mean, many small engines?

You have cars that run on natural gas? I mean, it's possible with a Gasoil engine but it's not really optimal, is it?

Sorry, after reading the USA study, I switch into American English. In that last sentence, I mean "gas cars" as in gasoline = petroleum. Yes it is stupid and confusing.

Although you can have cars that run on natural gas. Ever heard of the Pickens Plan?

Edit: I neglected your first question- I mean that thousands of small fuel burning engines in vehicles is a less effect conversion of that same fuel into usable energy that a single large power plant. A car engine may convert only about 20% of its fuel, losing a lot of energy as heat, while a power station can be around 60% [1]. Overall a natural gas car is only half as good as an electric vehicle powered by a natural gas plant. [2].

edited 24th Jan '14 9:01:46 AM by SomeSortOfTroper

Is gasoline the same as gas-oil?

Now I'm even more confused.

Hm...

Hilarious poster, though. When you ride alone, you ride with Hitler! Maybe they could do that with Bin Laden; we could use the reduction in CO 2 emissions. Oh, nevermind, I forgot he's dead. So is Saddam. Nobody takes NK seriously. So... who's the bogeyman?

Just slap a turban on a manaquin and it'd work on a lot of people...

Necroing this thread for some awesome news! Researchers at a facility in California have managed to squeeze hydrogen into helium!

We've been running short of the stuff anyway.

Hey, is it normal helium that gets created, or some isotope? Because It'll be funny as hell if the helium in balloons started being the waste from reactors