I want to hear it.

I am looking for alternative energy ideas. Alaurentia is very motivated right now to find some kind of self-sufficiency from the large energy corporations. And so I am open to new methods anyone might have.

Of course we have solar panels and geothermal energy and water/air turbines. Those I already know of. But affordable solar panels only have about 20% of efficiency. Coils (such as those in turbines) only have 10% efficiency. I am looking for something new. Though I have been told that over-unity devices are impossible, I do think that it's possible to come very close to it, and so I am listening to any ideas you guys might have.

a reply to: TaninimLong

This site is very good and is most likely the kind of technology you are looking for:

Revolution Green

a reply to: dfnj2015

Interesting website; however, is there any particular article that you found most relevant regarding energy generation?

I would hold tight and keep an eye on upcoming US Mil Announcements.

Over unity does exists.

PesWiki is a good site to look at. peswiki.com...

I don't know if you are on LinkedIn but Nigel Cheese is a man to follow / talk to.

I have a Jo-Cell that puts out a small voltage with no input source. Built for fun and to prove idea.

Although, I think we are few years away from the upscaling of certain exotic tech.

Tesla had some exciting projects - John Trump knew.

There are plenty of mavericks in sheds around the world who have been suppressed or suicided.

Stan Meyer for one.

Good luck with your search - I think it will bear fruit eventually.

a reply to: TaninimLong

a reply to: YesTodayTomorrow

Hmm! Interesting.

a reply to: TaninimLong

I'm not really well informed about the particulars, but you might check into industrial hemp as a replacement for fossil fuel uses (where necessary/appropriate). Hemp is a virtually nontoxic renewable resource with many industrial applications, requires little (if any) pesticides or fertilizers, the roots and stalks can be re-tilled into the soil for nutrients, and it reportedly burns very cleanly.

Maybe someone else can give you better information or point you in the right direction.

Good luck!

Try here

Hemp Earth - doing some radical thinking....

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: TaninimLong

I'm not really well informed about the particulars, but you might check into industrial hemp as a replacement for fossil fuel uses (where necessary/appropriate). Hemp is a virtually nontoxic renewable resource with many industrial applications, requires little (if any) pesticides or fertilizers, the roots and stalks can be re-tilled into the soil for nutrients, and it reportedly burns very cleanly.

Maybe someone else can give you better information or point you in the right direction.

Good luck!

Since no big splashes here in the states aren't making any headway, perhaps I can go to the Reservations and rally my people around Hemp, therefore creating a quick, cheap workforce to brute force Hemp into the markets.

Can you imagine? Hemp saving the last vestiges of Native Americans? The irony in that being Native Americans tendered the land, conquered and now rise up with the Weeds to reclaim what was once theirs...

a reply to: Arnie123

Can you imagine? Hemp saving the last vestiges of Native Americans? The irony in that being Native Americans tendered the land, conquered and now rise up with the Weeds to reclaim what was once theres....

What a great idea! I can imagine... and now I'd like to do more than imagine. I think that could be very beneficial for Native Americans. And it would definitely serve them (and everyone) at least as well -- if not better -- than casinos.

originally posted by: TaninimLong
But affordable solar panels only have about 20% of efficiency.

As long as they are affordable, why would you care about efficiency? It is free energy after all.

Coils (such as those in turbines) only have 10% efficiency.

No idea what you mean here. What coils?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: graysquirrel

Can you provide any evidence of your contraption doing anything (a video maybe as it is a bit harder to trick with than photos)?

a reply to: moebius

I'm still working on improvements. Be patient.

I am thinking about experimenting with using a Fresnel lens to focus heat and spin a Stirling engine.
This would run a generator that would charge a battery.

originally posted by: TaninimLong
Though I have been told that over-unity devices are impossible, I do think that it's possible to come very close to it, and so I am listening to any ideas you guys might have.

It depends on how you define over-unity.

I am reluctant to use the word "impossible" but over-unity of a closed system would violate the laws of physics as we know them, which may not be perfect but they seem to be generally reliable models.

If however you consider an open system, over-unity is then possible because energy can then be transferred into or out of the system, and that's what a heat pump can do, an example of an over-unity device operating with an open system:

The coefficient of performance, COP, of a heat pump

The total energy input to the system includes the natural energy from the environment and most heat pump installations have a COP greater than 1.0. In other words, more useful energy at the higher temperature is obtained from the system than was supplied to it through the use of electricity or fossil fuels. Theoretically it is possible to obtain a COP in the order of 20, but in practice values of between 2 and 3 are normal for space heating applications in a temperate climate.

Also an open system would be geothermal, which could also provide an open-system over-unity performance for heating or cooling, but over-unity or efficiency can't be the only goal. A sensible approach should evaluate the initial investment in the geothermal system to determine if it's really more economical if you're trying to minimize your energy costs.

Or if you take environmental concerns into account, maybe you're willing to spend more on energy for geothermal to reduce the pollution from burning coal etc.

Solar panel efficiency should improve above 20%, but again there are other considerations, like the cost of the solar panels and the life and maintenance costs. If you spent a lot on 40% efficient solar panels that only lasted 3 years, it might have been cheaper to buy your energy from fossil fuel sources. As for environmental impact, I'm not sure since there are environmental impacts from solar panels too:

How Green Are Those Solar Panels, Really?

Fabricating the panels requires caustic chemicals such as sodium hydroxide and hydrofluoric acid, and the process uses water as well as electricity, the production of which emits greenhouse gases. It also creates waste. These problems could undercut solar's ability to fight climate change and reduce environmental toxics.

The article then explains some solar panel producers pollute more than others, so if you're concerned about the environment, you might want to take that into account. If solar panels can be made with minimal pollution, long life and good efficiency, I think they will be a good alternative, but they aren't always a better alternative if some of those areas are lacking which can be the case today, though we should see improvement in the future.

Why does your thread title not mention the subject of alternative energy? It seems like a really bad and non-descriptive title.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

You make very good points. Thank you for bringing thse to my attention.

By "Alternative" I mean pretty much anything that's not the same old heat-driven or water-driven or air-driven turbine. I don't want anything radioactive either.

a reply to: graysquirrel

Does it work? If so, how much energy does it produce?

a reply to: TaninimLong

Of course it works. The apparatus I am working on as of this post only produces a miscall amount of air flow work. This is by no means the upper limit of the technology.

You can build a coil with just the right resonant frequency, at the correct octave, as to pick up electromagnetic radiation emitted from celestial objects. Like a secondary coil of a transformer, with the primary coil being a star or the center of the universe. Planetary scale electromagnetic induction, or a super large radio antennae.

Tesla did it, but his writings confused you all.

On the other hand, I don't think people are ready for another ark yet.

originally posted by: graysquirrel
a reply to: TaninimLong

Of course it works. The apparatus I am working on as of this post only produces a miscall amount of air flow work. This is by no means the upper limit of the technology.

It's certainly possible to extract small amounts of energy from the atmosphere, and a working example is the ATMOS clock; my parents have one very similar to this one:


Atmos Clock
I understand how that works, using small changes in atmospheric conditions like temperature and pressure. It does have certain minimum requirements for changes, but they are always met in places where people ordinarily live. If however you put that clock in a temperature and pressure controlled environmental chamber, and held temperature and pressure steady, it would stop working. That particular technology won't scale very well and the energy extracted is so limited, much of the engineering in the clock is devoted to lowering friction as much as possible to allow the clock to get by on such small amounts of energy.

I reviewed your patent and am somewhat familiar with how real tornadoes work, but I don't see how your patent has much in common with a tornado to create an artificial tornado, since the patent doesn't claim to use the same mechanisms.

You provided a demo supposedly showing a displacement but if there is one, it's really, really small, so small I'm not sure I can really see it, so it's not very convincing yet but if you came up with a more visible displacement I'd be intersted in seeing that. As you can see I have no problem with small amounts of energy being extracted from the atmosphere, including the atmos clock and it's also possible to extract tiny amounts of electromagnetic radiation broadcast from television or radio stations. Using the latter you could possibly match the output of a watch battery and possibly power something like a digital watch or small sensor, but again this is a technology that won't scale well if you want more than the amount of power used by a digital watch where the tiny battery can last 7 years.

Here's an article about that technology:
New Printable Antenna Can Harvest Ambient Energy To Power Small Electronics

But since I understand how the atmos clock and the printable antennae work, if I wanted to do some tinkering to attempt to scale up small energy sources I'd probably try something like those where I know how they work so I can come up with ideas on how to scale them up. But since I can't figure out how your artificial tornado works, it's not something I could tinker with to try to scale up, and even though you've apparently had the idea a long time ago you haven't had much luck with that if I understand your comments correctly.

originally posted by: More1ThanAny1
You can build a coil with just the right resonant frequency, at the correct octave, as to pick up electromagnetic radiation emitted from celestial objects. Like a secondary coil of a transformer, with the primary coil being a star or the center of the universe. Planetary scale electromagnetic induction, or a super large radio antennae.

Tesla did it, but his writings confused you all.

On the other hand, I don't think people are ready for another ark yet.

I can't tell if you're joking or serious. We are spending billions of dollars on super large radio telescopes and arrays, but you can't change a fundamental fact of physics that the larger the wavelength, the lower the energy. So you'd likely not collect enough energy to even pay back your investment in the radio antenna before it failed. For example this 500m antenna under construction is not being built to collect energy, but even if it was, someday it will either fall down or have to be torn down due to rust etc and it wouldn't be able to collect enough energy to even pay for its construction costs before that happens.

Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical Telescope


So you seem to suggest building one even bigger to collect longer wavelengths, but the other problem with that idea besides the extremely low energy content of long wavelengths is that telescope at 500m is already significantly larger than the longest wavelengths which can penetrate Earth's ionosphere, somewhere between 25m-150m depending on how the ionosphere fluctuates with time of day and solar activity.

Conceivably, a larger array could be built in space above the ionosphere, but construction costs would soar astronomically and the even longer wavelengths have even less energy, so it's not likely to make any sense.



However if you want to put space construction projects on the table, a "Dyson Sphere" could actually make sense for an advanced civilization, which would not be a solid sphere but an array of satellites collecting extra energy from the sun. That's the last thing we need right now with global warming concerns but in 10,000 or more years when the next ice age comes, using satellites to collect more solar energy and send it to Earth could possibly help fight the cooler temperatures in the next ice age, and unlike long radio waves which have little energy, there's lots of energy coming from the sun, most of which misses the Earth.