OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

This is the place for any magazine-related discussions that don't fit in any of the column discussion boards below.
toejam
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 1:01 am
Location: n.c.
Contact:

Re: OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

Post by toejam » Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:09 am

http://www.keelynet.com/energy/teslafe1.htm
this a good link on overunity and alternate energy stuff

toejam
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 1:01 am
Location: n.c.
Contact:

Re: OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

Post by toejam » Thu Aug 19, 2004 4:21 am

Engineers of Hitachi Magnetics Corp. of California have stated that a motor run solely by magnets is feasible and logical but the politics of the matter make it impossible for them to pursue developing a magnet motor or any device that would compete with the energy cartels.
this was taken from the above site.Maybe the guys that started this topic going have something after all.

dyarker
Posts: 1752
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Izmir, Turkiye; from Rochester, NY
Contact:

Re: OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

Post by dyarker » Thu Aug 19, 2004 7:52 am

Like the Thiess/Hooker advanced the storage battery at the bottom of Toejam's link; they ALWAYS forget something. It may be a more efficient battery than any types we currently have ... BUT, they didn't mention the energy it takes to get the magnesium out of the sea water in the first place! It WILL be greater than what comes out of the battery later.<p>Cheers,
Dale Y

toejam
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 1:01 am
Location: n.c.
Contact:

Re: OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

Post by toejam » Thu Aug 19, 2004 8:13 am

that is the same arguement i have against hydrogen powered autos, not to mention the storage problem of hydrogen.I much preferred mr Tesla's motor.

toejam
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 1:01 am
Location: n.c.
Contact:

Re: OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

Post by toejam » Thu Aug 19, 2004 9:49 am

something i'm not sure about is the efficiency of the magnesium extraction process, or that of it converting it back to electricity, but i know a well designed electric motor is at least twice as efficient as it's otto cycle competitor. A gas motor uses 1/3 of its energy to create mechanical power and the other two thirds go to global warming along with the exhaust gasses they produce.

dyarker
Posts: 1752
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Izmir, Turkiye; from Rochester, NY
Contact:

Re: OPNIONS WANTED sounds too good to be true

Post by dyarker » Thu Aug 19, 2004 9:04 pm

I've got no problem with hydrogen and electric vehicles for the environment. It is the "less energy" claims that are BS. The actual energy consumption goes up some, but a central electric or hydrogen plant can be made cleaner than a vehicle engine. For one thing weight isn't a concern. The exposive force of gaseline is greater(?) than hydrogen. Hydrogen has a lower flash point. Slow release tanks well help safety. In case of an accident (no fire), the hydrogen will blow away faster than a puddle of gaseline on the road. Trade-offs.<p>Power satelites for electricity would cut the 2/3s waste heat burning oil or coal.<p>I wonder how many good ideas are lost by the proponents being caught in a lie?<p>When I was a kid the U.S. was going metric. One of the public service anouncememts said metric is more accurate than inches, gallons, grams, etc. More BS. Want accuracy, add a digit right of the decimal point. We didn't go metric out of stubborness. The BS was ammunition for the stubborn side. Still a good idea. Had we converted back then, metric would be "natural" to more than 1/2 the population. In another 40 years you'd have to go to a museum (or www dot oldstuff dot gov) to learn there are 5280 (?) feet in a mile.<p>[exit soap box mode] :D<p>[ August 19, 2004: Message edited by: Dale Y ]</p>
Dale Y

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests