|
There are currently, 204 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
IEA World Energy Outlook
Posted on Sunday, November 16, 2008 @ 12:46:12 GMT by vlad
|
|
The International Energy Agency has made a new comprehensive forecast of world energy from now until 2030. The conclusions are:
Current energy trends are patently unsustainable —socially, environmentally, economically
- Oil will remain the leading energy source but...
> The era of cheap oil is over, although price volatility will remain
> Oilfield decline is the key determinant of investment needs
> The oil market is undergoing major and lasting structural change, with national companies in the ascendancy
- To avoid "abrupt and irreversible" climate change we need a major decarbonisation of the world’s energy system
> Copenhagen must deliver a credible post‐2012 climate regime >
Limiting temperature rise to 2°C will require significant emission
reductions in all regions & technological breakthroughs > Mitigating climate change will substantially improve energy security - The present economic worries do not excuse back‐tracking or delays in taking action to address energy challenges
... Read full article here: http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/11/iea-world-energy-outlook.html
Note: Yes, that may be true for an "Evolutionary" technology development scenario. A "Revolution" in the energy science can change all that. Read the two posts below to see what I mean and what we need to do Now.
|
| |
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
|
Associated Topics
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by vlad on Sunday, November 16, 2008 @ 13:06:44 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security announced that it has created
the Journal
of Energy Security [www.ensec.org].
Quote from Ann Korin, (one of the founders):
"AGS and its supporters have long been dedicated to exploring the nexus between energy and security, the economic implications of oil dependence, the use of energy as a foreign policy tool, critical energy infrastructure protection, the need for alternative fuels development, and many other issues that cut across the energy security grain. The Journal of Energy Security will provide an important portal for energy professionals, security and foreign policy specialists, defense and security analysts, academicians and students to bring their message directly to a global audience."
How about supporting/trying the XSF path, ladies & gents at JES? A "close mind" during these times is anything but safe and smart!
|
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by Koen on Monday, November 17, 2008 @ 04:15:18 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | The only eXtreme Science that has proven itself recently: BlackLightPower. With a small scale blackLightPower generator one can heat the house/building from car-batteries (OU factor is at least 120% according to BLP, but not sufficiently tested/confirmed by independent research).
The electrical energy input of a BLP generator might be the output of Peltier elements, that convert a portion of the BLP heat energy back to electricity, for instance http://www.rti.org/news.cfm?objectid=9EC1AC18-EFDE-0039-CD338F6EF15B9122
This can only work if the commercial OU factor of BLP is big enough. This would be an elegant way of creating a 'standalone' BLP generator without need for external electricity.
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by nanotech on Monday, November 17, 2008 @ 07:43:49 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) | Another system that has proven itself is the Lyne Atomic Hydrogen Furnace. You can also use atomic helium which gains even more energy. This has been replicated by Alexander Frolov in Russia and others. It uses the same basic principle as Blacklight Power (whether Mills realizes it or not): Energetic interactions with the subatomic ether.
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by vlad on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 @ 22:47:40 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | Koen, you above all, should understand better what my proposed XSF is all about: a badly needed new "Institution" designed to encourage scientists and experimenters to go beyond "innovation" (evolutionary improvements to existing technologies) into breakthrough "inventions" (revolutionary quantum leap advances in science and technology). Don't you people see the tremendous benefit such an independent, professional, reputable (honest/fair in evaluating facts) and democratic (open) body of progressive people, recognized world wide, can do for the rapid advancement of our society?
You and I, as well as many of our ZPEnergy readers (FE enthusiasts) know very well that BlackLightPower is where it is today (has proven itself recently) because it was/is very well funded and staffed. But this is the exception, of course ... and says nothing about the validity of many other technologies out there nobody managed to test/prove them properly. The XSF would "weed" the scams and those who have nothing (they would never agree to testing) from those who strongly believe/know that their claims are real, and are eager to prove it. Certainly, it may not be so in the end, but nevertheless, scientists can still learn a lot from the ingenuity in problem solving that is often present in ordinary but intelligent people.
I'm not saying solar, wind, geothermal, etc. energy and conservation measures are not good and should not be encouraged. These things already happen on much larger scale in Europe than in the US and Canada and there is no shortage of investment and supporters in the mainstream science, business and media for them. But that is not what the XSF wants to take care of ... we want to promote the "Cinderellas" of alt sci-tech, those beautiful but ignored products of human imagination and ingenuity that can change our future almost like magic, like it happened before and will happen again, and the XSF wants to make sure it is not too late!
I'm still in shock why people don't see it my way and don't flock to join and help the XSF to become a tremendous accelerator of human progress????
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by Koen on Thursday, November 20, 2008 @ 05:13:14 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | Vlad, I would like to join your XSF. My slogan anyway is: "Physics theory should only describe what is already measured; it should not be a religion that rules out all that is not described by it".
My proposal for research: what evidence is there for a long range longitudinal electric wave in vacuum? (or, was Tesla right?) If such waves exist, then this changes the way we think of ZPE as well. I made a background theory of generalised electrodynamics, for proving that the Classical Theory of Electrodynamics is dogmatic and artificially limited.
The only problem is, I don't have much money and time :-) to do experiments. There are some promising measurements already, that of Monstein-Wesley of longitudinal electric wave, and that of prof. Ignatiev, and Karavashkin.
Of course there are shortrange (1/r²) longitudinal Coulomb fields that can vary in time, but this is not the same as a long range (1/r) longitudinal electric wave field.
Tesla's wave and science is usually ruled out "because of the conservation of charge". This is the usual semi-scientific bullshit of scientist who don't know the difference between a conservation law and a continuity law. What they actually mean is this: because of the continuity of motion of electric charges, one cannot induce Tesla's longitudinal electric waves.
But then, does electric charge moves only continuously? What about quantum teleportation and tunneling? Especially during high voltage discharges, one can expect a lot of electron tunneling going on over potential energy barriers. This constitutes discontinous movements of electric charge, thus sources of Tesla's infamous radiation.
You know, I went to a Dutch university trying to explain all this to a senior scientist of age 67 (the junior Dutch doctors in physics hardly know the Maxwell equations). The man had no patience at all to listen to my story of this general misconception of "continuity equation". Then he tried to explain the single wire transportion of energy by means of transversal electro-magnetic waves, which is ridiculous because this requires a "return wire" in the form of "ground". His assumption/explanation of single wire energy transport cannot be proven in practise. Nobody ever measured the current in the "ground return wire". One could disprove this assumtion easily by comparing a vertical single wire energy transmission with a horizontal single wire energy transmission.
I gave up on pushing my XS ideas. Usually people don't even know what I am talking about, or confuse the conservation law with the continuity law. I only see wrong pro and contra arguments on the existance of Tesla's longitudinal wave on the internet.
By the way, my theory shows a strong link between longitudinal Ampere forces (as "predicted" by Ampere's original force law) and Tesla's longitudinal wireless electric waves. So the evidence for longitudinal Ampere forces is also evidence for longitudinal electric waves and scalar field effects.
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by RBM on Saturday, November 22, 2008 @ 13:43:46 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) | Koen,
Thanks for this entry. First, I hope you are successful in pursuing your theories.
Additionally, I have always wondered how the exteme work of Tesla could be so roundly dismissed by so many so called scientists. The charges of 'the religion of science' seems to ring true.
Are the Maxwell equations you refer to the abreviated form or the 20 equation 20 varialble unabreviated form ?
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by Koen on Sunday, November 23, 2008 @ 22:49:02 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | No, actually Maxwell's 20 equations can be cast into a vector notation form (without loss of information, despite of Bearden's claim that Maxwell's original theory was not fully expressed by the modern vector notion form of the theory).
My theory is an extension of Maxwell's theory, by adding an extra scalar field component. It is this scalar field which enables us to describe longitudinal electric field waves and longitudinal Ampere forces (as scalar field effect on moving charges). This scalar field was not present in Maxwell's original theory, despite of what Tom Bearden is writing about this subject).
My theory is also expressed in the short vector form, but can easily be expressed into seperate x, y, z component equations, just like Maxwell did.
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by RBM on Monday, November 24, 2008 @ 16:03:51 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) | Thanks for the reply, Koen.
Your extension of a single scalar field to Maxwells abreviated equations seems insuficient to me.
Having said that, it still commands an experiment to prove or disprove. That's how science works ;)
But what I really would like to see is Maxwells full form developed and put to experimentation !
|
]
Re: New Energy Security Journal (Score: 1) by Koen on Thursday, December 04, 2008 @ 22:23:24 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | 1) at least my theory is testable, while many other theories are not testable. 2) there is already qualitative experimental proof for the described scalar field effects, such as the longitudinal electric wave in vacuum (experiments by Ignatiev, Wesley&Monstein) and the longitudinal Ampere force (experiments by Ampere and others, see for instance http://www.df.lth.se/~snorkelf/Longitudinal/Slutdok.html ).
My scalar field theory is the only classical field theory that predicts such forces and waves.
A riddle: according to official theory, the electric potential 'Phi' is 'retarded' and has the speed of the light wave, while light waves (transversal electro-magnetic waves) are described only in terms of the magnetic potential 'A'. Why is it concluded Phi spreads with the speed of light waves, while it is not 'light waves'? Could Phi spread with a speed much higher than c? Does it have an internal waves structure (described by Whittaker)?
Fields and potentials for the transversal electro-magnetic light wave: Phi = 0 (electric potential is zero) E = - dA/dt, (electric field is minus the time differential of the magnetic potential) B = rot(A) (magnetic field is the rotation of the magnetic potential)
|
]
|
|
Re: IEA World Energy Outlook (Score: 1) by Koen on Sunday, November 16, 2008 @ 22:49:19 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | Even without turning to eXtreme Science, the developments in PV technology are so good that we can solve our energy problem with this technology alone.
Big problem is: hardly any money is invested in new silicium factories and PV pannel factories. The main reason for the current high solar-grade silicon prices is the lack of production capacity and out-dated manufacture methods. New companies like RSI promise to produce solar-grade silicon that is 1/3 the price of 'traditional' made solar-grade silicon. Every country in the world should have a few solar-grade silicon factories (construction of RSI type silicon factory costs about 50 million dollar). The raw material for silicon is everywhere on the planet, which means the trillion dollar military budgets to secure strategic energy rich areas can be used as well for the solar PV economy (every city on the globe a silicon & PV factory?). The total amount of money needed to setup the solar PV economy is down to nothing compared with the current military budgets. This gives new meaning to the word "security".
Actually our only problem are the bankers and their puppets: the politicians and industrial leaders. They (and their front organisations like the IEA) deliberately over-estimate the costs of the solar economy, in order to centralise power and control. Just look at their figures and energy prognosis, it shows they don't want a PV revolution.
|
Re: IEA World Energy Outlook (Score: 1) by malc on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 @ 00:40:58 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://web.ukonline.co.uk/mripley | Totally agree about the centralised control of energy and thus lack of distributed solutions. It's not just solar though. After all here in Scotland where it gets a little cold in winter! there is only 6 hours of daylight midwinter. A combination of domestic solar and wind is feasible. The "authorities" would tell you that this is not the case. Time after time so called experts state that the energy produced would not meet the domestic demand. For some reason they always quote peak demand, for example 7Kw and that generating this is impractical domestically. What they never ever mention is the ability to store energy overnight and through day whilst a house is empty and smooth out the peak requirements by drawing on stored (battery?) energy. A properly insulated house with multiple TV's computers etc etc midwinter can be supplied with a 1Kw source if stored.
|
]
Re: IEA World Energy Outlook (Score: 1) by Koen on Wednesday, November 19, 2008 @ 03:54:40 GMT (User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | Indeed, batteries are also key in the solar economy.
http://www.axionpower.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=30
This newly developed battery is a good solution for domestic energy storage. Only American and Asian companies innovate battery technology. Europe does not contribute to battery research, and this is one of the most important research and development subjects one can imagine, for a sustainable future economy.
This battery further proofs that the technology exists to make the transition to a solar economy within a few decades.
|
]
|
|
|
|