Shocking news from CERN! saved for last 🙂
The opposite of a free energy device that makes more than it consumes is a Government that consumes far more than we make. The first doesn’t exist, and the later won’t exist for long. (GB)
Show me the math
There’s a large number of YouTube videos showing devices that make more energy than they consume. What’s amazing is how many emails I get that confuse the PMG with these devices, and how anxious people are to buy one to power their homes for free! Have they no time to think? Are they likely to vote for the person who promises them the impossible dream? I think so.
Perhaps the best place to develop or test your critical thinking skills is to make assessments of popular AGW claims and apply some logic.
Here’s a statement to think about: “Rising sea levels are caused by humans. But falling sea levels are caused by natural forces”.
Does NASA need a cause more than ever? No doubt, No Shuttle, lots of time to twittle their thumbs.. just how many work there? With this thought in mind, consider reading this article:
http://papundits.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/sea-levels-dropped-in-2010/
A big part of convincing people to support mega-sized government and carbon trading, (they are bound together) is to get voters to >believe< not only that there’s a threat, but that there is a ‘turn key’ cost-effective Green Energy solution that will support an economy. The actual solutions are not necessary for the plan to sell Mega Sized Government to succeed, and perhaps that’s the reason so many of our government sponsored green energy investments are NOT viable.
There are countless articles out there that discuss the merits of free electricity from solar PV, it’s free all right, and in areas like where I live, it takes more than 30 years to break even on your PV investment! Yes, there are ways for the DIYer to improve on the return, and areas where Solar PV works better, but far from free, and not likely to power the economy we need to keep millions of people from starving.
Here’s a mention of some research from CERN what a suprise, but don’t expect our inept media to report on it..
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100102296/sun-causes-climate-change-shock/
George B.
The idea of break-even on investment favors off gridders. We can do things for preference and it’s a legitimate reason. Beyond reproach even. When someone asks what’s the payback period I ask what’s the payback period on their car? How come (their car minus my car) > my off grid system? What’s the return on a car that costs more than a used economy car? Same for homes.
Bill, a large percentage of the cost of an install is avoided by the average DIYer. This often makes all the difference. Another important factor is the DIYer will perform the maintenance required, and this can make all the difference. I remember a big wave of worthless installs made here in the Pacific Northwest years ago. A Scam Artist installed thousands of trough type tracking solar collectors which were totally unsuitable for our area. They sold for $6000, with a $6000 Federal Subsidy paid, our money squandered. You could drive through neighborhoods and see these collectors parked over to to the east, waiitng for the sun to rise… broken for months or years, and the owners none the wiser!
There is a lot of monkey business thrown in to these larger corporate installs, and when I ask people whether they support such projects, I normally receive the same answer, “I support it because it makes jobs.” I think the more thoughtful approach to analyzing the value of the investment is to know where the bulk of the money goes. We can not rely on a lazy media that expects to be hand fed to investigate and report on the robbing of the public treasury.
Another characteristic of a DIYer is they are generally far more secure because they don’t live from paycheck to paycheck. They are NOT driven to consume just to keep up with their neighbors. This allows them a clearer view of reality. Imagine a third generation welfare recipient bad mouthing those who make those checks possible. Dependence will blind you!
Well, I guess it never ends. This morning I retrieved from the mail box my “Kentucky Living” magazine distributed by the FARMERS RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE. First up on Page 12 was “Electric vehicles—if adopted—could reduce petroleum fuel consumption by 70 to 90 percent” (Very large print) —Plugging in: A consumer’s guide to the Electric Vehicle, by Electric Power Research Institute (much smaller print)” –No story, no comments no nothing except as listed.
The following is my email to “Kentucky Living” (I thought it might fit with the preceding posts)
I’m very disappointed and somewhat irritated at your “note” at the top left corner of page 12, September issue. You place a ridiculous statement in your magazine that apparently came form the Electric Power Research Institute. I don’t register on line any more because I already spend too much time deleting unwanted emails and NO, you can’t unsubscribe from all of them! Next time please give us a hint whether or not you even believe it and just a little bit of support for your position—please.
I am bone weary of the fantastic claims of cheap electricity, vehicles that run on next to nothing, super capacitors that that will make batteries obsolete and the fantasy that unlimited free electricity is just beyond the next government research grant. Seventy to 90 percent—really? If your editor actually believes that I don’t need to be reading your magazine anymore. I’ll give you 50 years to reduce 30% and you won’t make it. Just where and how do you propose to generate all the electricity all these vehicles will use? Didn’t you hear our president promise to bankrupt all the coal fired power plants? Don’t you think he means it? Have you read the new EPA regs? How does Kentucky generate most of its electricity? I thought it was from coal.
If you’re counting on windmills you should read “Wind Energy Economics in the State of Washington” at:
http://www.mnforsustain.org/windpower_schleede_g_washington_state_windpower_study.htm
OR
If you want to buy in to the fantasy of turning all our highways and parking lots into solar panels (Yes it was a government research grant) go to http://www.wimp.com/solarhighways/. and watch their 9-minute video.
Only a year ago last May Solyndra, a San Francisco solar facility, was touted by President Obama and his administration as a prime example of how green technology could deliver jobs. As I sit here at the keyboard, local radio news announces that “Even with government subsidies Solyndra is handing out yellow envelopes with pink slips in them.” Gentlemen, they are now bankrupt! Hooray for solar!
Now back to the Capacitor
EEStor Ultracapacitors:
In January 2007 EEStor stated in a press release “EEStor, Inc. remains on track to begin shipping production 15 kilowatt-hour Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) to ZENN Motor Company in 2007 for use in their electric vehicles. Ask google how many have been delivered to date.
The following is how the EESU is claimed to compare to electrochemical batteries used for electric cars:
NOTE: go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor
I couldn’t get their chart to align here–unreadable. Sorry.
No degradation from charge/discharge cycles. (In other words they last forever.)
Source Wikipedia
The kicker here is the “Commercially Available” line—or “When it sounds too good to be true …..”
Harold,
It really is about robbing the public treasury, people who make no investment in thinking for themselves are so easy to fleece. And those most thankful for the lucrative grants and subsidies are loyal to their benifactors. The only people who lose are the Tax Payers and rate payers, a double hit for most of us. I’m not used to seeing outfits like the FREC hoodwinked.. Sign up for the Powersouth monthly news bulletin, a great source of REAL news and real science.
Cosmic rays have nothing to do with our weather. You need to understand the interaction they have with matter not weather!