Potential Economic Impact of LENR Technology in Energy Markets

Thank you David. An interesting snapshot- as you say, it is a work in progress. The 'elephant in the room' is of course not directly addressed in this scenario. That is the huge and largely unexplored effect of the radical diversion/elimination of the vast rivers of money that currently flow backwards along the various power creation and distribtion networks and into the coffers of state or private 'natural monopolies'. Discussing and calculating the benefit of a few pounds more in the domestic purse is relatively easy, but I don't expect that the owners/distributors of our current energy sources will remain complacent while their assets are being thrown on the bonfire of progress.

A variety of economic and geological factors (like earthquake and tsunami risk) have encouraged Japanese power/engineering monopolies to take a different approach to distributed power systems - although these still depend (in most cases) on the gas network. It might make at least a partial model for the roll-our of domestic scale LENR. I recently wrote a paper on this topic for private circulation, below is a short extract, with some surprising statistics.

"Japan’s ENE-FARM program is arguably the most successful fuel cell commercialisation program in the world. ENE-FARM has supported the deployment of well over 120,000 residential fuel cell units and is providing proof that long term public-private partnerships can push new technology into the marketplace. New models coming on the market in 2015 are smaller, more efficient, cheaper and more easily installed than previous models. Models have been developed for apartment buildings as well as for homes and are being offered as a customer option by apartment complex developers, along with other appliance options. New units can operate independently if the power grid fails – a response to consumer concerns over electric power reliability in post-Fukushima Japan. While a number of companies have participated in development and early deployment, the main participants today are Panasonic and Toshiba, which offer PEM units, and Aisin Seiki, offering SOFC units. The PEM units are exceptionally durable, achieving greater than 60,000 hours while cycling daily, an achievement that a few years ago would have been regarded as wildly impossible.

Panasonic claims its 2015 model achieves 95% combined heat and electrical efficiency. Earlier models were estimated at 80% to 90%, and manufacturers compare those efficiencies to grid efficiency of 35% to 40%. The units operate in partnership with the grid, cycling on and off in response to the home’s demand for electricity and hot water. The overall result is a reduction of as much as 50% in household CO2 emissions, and a consumer electricity cost savings of ¥60,000 to ¥75,000.

Osaka Gas, which is offering fuel cell units in combination with rooftop solar power for new homes, claims even better performance, a 57% reduction in household CO2 and a consumer savings of ¥129,000."

(Current exchange rate, $1 = 112 Yen)

To add a little new information about the scale and ambitions of Japanese fuel-cell (heat and power) project:-

"The Japanese government has a long term goal of 5.3 million fuel cell installations by 2030. The total, industrial and commercial, CHP system capacity reached 9.5 GW in 2011 and a targeted capacity of 22 GW is predicted by 2030.

In order to meet 15% of the domestic electricity demand using CHP by 2030, an investment of approximately US$60 billion is required. Major companies like Panasonic, Eneos (JX Nippon Oil & Sanyo), Aisin Seiki Co. Ltd and Toshiba (have) successfully commercialized PEMFC CHP systems...."

There is a chance, slim but a chance, they would throw money like this at a promising LENR system. Fingers Crossed!

And hopefully many of them will be redeployed installing and servicing millions of LENR systems. Motor-cars destroyed the buggy-whip industry, but somehow the economy survived.

Quote from axil

Who services a battery? You just replace it and get a deposit for your old one.

Thus (a) Not true of large battery packs. (b) Has nothing to do with the price of cheese.

The automatisation process is core to the long movement replacing work by capital, slaves with machines,n employees with IT... AI will continue...

My interpretation of the problem, being in contact with liberal (mean free market, free lifestyle here) and with marxist/statist cultures, is that the marxist model of industrial revolution introduced this vision of economy, quire real in Western developped economy :

• separation of population who earn their life from wages or from capital (at least mentally, because pension fund are capitalist income)
• concentration of capital in few wealthy hand.(No more really true because of investment fund, where contributers are pensioner, insured people, bank client)

In poorer emerging economy, and before industrial revolution, people were much more paid for their capital, or their work, and often for working with their capital as entrepreneur (eg: farmer exploiting their land, fisher exploiting his boat).

today situation of poor people in emerging countries is surprisingly more capitalist that people imagine, but probably the kind of capitalism that is repressed in france, like AirBnb, Heetch,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…hird-world_b_6751634.html

what is important is to give access to the capital to everybody.

An industrial revolution allows to redistribute the wealth, destroying old capital, and creating new one.

If the regulation, corruption, complexity, is too strong there is risk that capital concentrate in few competent and influential hands. This is what QE have caused in finance, a very regulated domain where only the biggest could compete. Fintech are trying to attack the domain, but it will not be easy as gouvernement defend big actors against challengers (in the name of unemployment, LOL).

Micro-capitalism;, micro-entrepreneurship, is the only way to avoid a catastrophe, and I'm not over-optimistic about that.

Our future is to exploit IA, IT, bots, not to be exploited by them... Will most of us be able to exploit a machine that does all the job?

You are right, it looks like agrarian reforms.

However currently most state intervention reinforce paradoxically the monopoly by adding complexity, requiring lawyers, experts, IT infrastructure.

The direction is the anti-trust laws, but given the power of big actors, and their (hidden through "employment" risk) popularity, it seems hard.

Anyway, it can work with platforms.

If you see Uber (not best example) and similar , flixbus, airbnb, it allows small player to harness their unstructured power.

Note that the value of AirBnB is ridiculous compared to the value of all the houses and rooms it allows to enter market.

Imagine that GE or EDF harness homemade LENR power in a billion of household, it could be a giant, but a dwarf compared to their "prosumers".

Prosumers should be the rule in future world.

In some emerging economies, prosuming is natural.

You buy a car not only to travel, but to rent it to your neighbor who drive neighbors to the nearby cities...

Imagine that you buy your PC not only to play, but also to mine bitcoins, or solve protein folding (Qarnot sell radiators who work for Grid Computers in researsh)...

I agree Eric. 2 for me and 1 for you is not sharing, it's exploitation.

Sharing economy sometime is just micro-capitalism (sometime not, just saving money together), where you exploit your hidden capital, instead of being forced to sell your arms for wages...

The alternative is just being used in a hierarchy, obeying. This is the prefered model of manypolitic organization I agree, because instead of fighting to optimize your work and be paid for it, you can revendicate to the boss and get an increase.

Robots just mean the capital will be more productive, thus cheaper. The big question is if it will need big centralized units like Intel CPU foundries, and distributed production like AirBnB.

IT, mobile economy, 3D printers, blockchains, but also amazon-like platforms, make possible a future where individual can do business only mastering a small part of the supply chain, like a worker in a big factory, but being your own boss.

Note that producers is also a client and if the producers have to produce for cheap, the client he is will buy for cheap. What is to avoid is a platform in a monopolistic position, not because it takes the least commission and gives the most advantages to both producers and consumers, but just abuse of locked clients.

A platform who don't treat well it's producers, like one that don't treat well it's clients, should pay the bill... The emerging Uber workers unions is really a great thing, and a things to follow. Even best is the alternative platforms who hire the disgusted drivers.

In a way the problem is exactly the same as with a 19th century company, except now people can move, and clients can click on link beside.

Note also that sharing economy is today the "butter in the spinach" for many outsiders in France, both allowing cheaper consumption, but also small benefit for little pleasure in life.

It gives a little chance for some people to have control on their life, while all else is fixed by a locked society (talking for France), with no other way to improve.

We are in a transition mode... Failure of previous model is causing people to play with the rules...

Some think about basic income, to give a safety net so that people can afford to take risk (not the usual vision in France), to get education, to acquire capital and start a business...

Some think about a basic wealth, like was the small land given to farmers... some think of basic loan...

Some think the basic income (or wealth) can just pay itself (through simple taxes) by the activity it creates when it unlock initiatives (not just allowing inactivity)...

if the future is not micro-capitalist, then it will be a service future, where the mass of salaried people gives human service, art, fun to the one owning the robots who produces foods and goods.

This should mean that the price of those jobs will grow until it have the same value as the robots production. There is sociological resistance today to pay service at high price, but things may evolve.

and once people get well paid for making the capitalist happy, why not buy some capital and create micro-capitalism... like buying a food machine, a car bot, a share of US Robotics.

There can be sociological resistance, and regulation, to oppose that.

In France "sharing" economy (home capitalism) is fought desperately, and since long we practically have prevented people to invest retirement fund in shares, to push state bonds. The results is that here people are mostly rent-owner who ignore it, working in a foreign owned company.

LENR, as it is naturally smallscale, promote more than many other technology a microcapitalism, or an autarcic, model. Anyway it can be implemented the Soviet way, with big powerplants, if regulation prevent local usage. My bet is that it will be the first rank of regulation, to forbid local production.

That is the claimed position, but they defend also the established big business.

One example of such behavior is finance, where big regulation promotes big actors, preventing newcomers and access by small players or even people...

Neoliberalism is a myth, there is crony capitalism (mercantilism too), very common like is finance today, where states protect you, and banal capitalism where you pay your mistakes, that common people experience locally.

Maybe we are going too far from the subject... This question is hotter than reality of LENR and will never be solved by evidences. Future will say who is right.

Today I am just happy for the Chinese who get out of absolute poverty, even if all is not easy.

they will love to have cheaper energy, to dump their wood stove, and coal electricity.