Posts by Zephir_AWT

Transitioning the Australian grid to 100 per cent renewables and swapping all petrol cars for electric ones would drop annual electricity costs by over $1,000 per year for consumers, a new study by researchers at the University of Sydney has found.

Whereas in nearly every country on the world introduction of "renewables" has increased prices of electricity. The "renewables" are supposed to generate more energy than they consume - this is their very meaning. So that they should never demand subsidizes (generated by burning of fossils, BTW) - but to generate profit from their very beginning. It's as simple as that.

Not to say, that "renewables" aren't renewable at all, as they drain raw sources and many consumables due to their limited life-time. For example biofuels only convert soil into desert. Wind plants in Germany don't make enough money for their scrapping, not to say recycling even after twenty years of their (di)service. This is a big comedy for economics and huge disaster for life environment.

Green stimulus can repair global economy and climate, study says. Oh come on - this is snake oil selling by snakes..

For instance Tesla already makes more profit from carbon tax evasion i.e. $133 million by selling regulatory credits thanby selling cars ($105 million). These money go from governmental subsidizes into renewable fuels, which already collects 93% of federal energy subsidies which were whooping $7.047 billion in fiscal year 2016, i.e. more than ten times more than fossil fuels subsidizes and one hundred times more than let say for education! And these subsidies don’t include state or local subsidies, mandates or incentives. This is more than enough of money, which would attract interests of another industrial mafia - this time "renewable" one. No need to say, these money don't make a dent in steadily rising carbon dioxide concentration in atmosphere and they just increase fossil fuel consumption in its very consequence.

Quote

We need to keep up massive gains for solar and wind.

Whole twenty years of "renewable" didn't leave a single dent on carbon dioxide levels. One doesn't have to be genius for to recognize, that this strategy doesn't work.

The so-called "renewables" just convert fossil-fuel crisis into raw source crisis. A shift to "renewables" will only replace one non-renewable resource (fossil fuel) with another (metals and minerals). Right now wind and solar energy meet only about 1 percent of global demand; hydroelectricity about 7 percent. To match the power generated by fossil fuels, the construction of solar energy farms and wind turbines will gobble up 15 times more concrete, 90 times more aluminum and 50 times more iron, copper and glass.

To put things into simple perspective, just the production of cement for concrete production consumes about 2% of total energy consumption. 15-times more concrete would thus consume about 30% of fossil fuel energy, which we are consuming today - just for building pillars of wind plants. Another 2 percents of energy is consumed into production of aluminum. Well, for 100% replacement of fossils by "renewables" we would need 2 x 90 = 180% of energy consumption today - and we are already in the red numbers: the implementation of "renewables" would increase our fossil energy consumption two-fold once when we consider only the concrete and aluminium needed for it!

Quote

Electric cars are 80-90% efficient, while a gasoline car only use 20 to 25% of the gasoline for propulsion, rest is heat losses

But efficiency of electricity production in plants is only 40 - 45%. Charging cycle consumes another 16 - 20% and Tesla batteries drain spontaneously by speed 5 miles per day. In this moment the energy efficiency of electric cars doesn't look so bright. And we still don't talk about energy required for manufacturing and recycling batteries.

As a general rule, if some "environmentally clean" solution should supersede fossil fuel solution, it also must get cheaper in terms of TCO, i.e. Total Cost of Ownership. I mean cheaper without any subsidizes, mandates and incentives. Do you know, that for example Tesla has made profit $105 million by selling cars - but even more, i.e. $133 million by selling regulatory credits? Even with it, its cars are getting way more expensive for their users, than gasoline cars of the same class. This is cost of hidden energy, required for raw sources, required for production of electric cars and their batteries. Just because this energy is exerted somewhere else (for example in China), it's cost won't disappear: it adds to total price of Tesla car ownership.

Quote

Denmark is now developing a 20 MW offshore wind turbine which do not use rare earths in the generator. So the technology is getting even more environmental friendly.

This is also nice example. Denmark sports with largest portion of renewable electricity in its portfolio "thanks" to its offshore wind plants. Not quite occidentally it also has most expensive electricity from whole EU. How is that possible, if it generates electricity "for free"?

Quote

Energy payback time for wind and solar is now months

Only with massive subsidizes. The belief of yours doesn't explain, why for example wind plants in Germany won't generate enough of money for their scrapping even after decades of run..

Richard Feynman(?): "Shut up and calculate!"

Quote

I just watched this whole movie, and I'm too devastated to say anything.

After then you could enjoy this 1, 2, 3, 4

Quote

Conclusion - the AMA are a bunch of idiots? Or have zero integrity?

They wait for development of coronavirus vaccine (or at least its sufficiently convincing simulacrum). And make no mistake - they're very consistent in this attitude, because vaccines are business model which promises highest profit and lowest risk with best evasions for lack of success.

Some people objected, that alleged flame could be actually RF arc as they don't see any hydrogen released from test tubes. But evolution of hydrogen occurs at the very end of test tube only (standing EM wave establishes itself) and evolving hydrogen can be ignited with lighter. Anyway, because of fascinating mechanism this phenomena deserves replication on its very own.

Quote

When performed with pulsed currents, the electrolysis of water led to some kind of reactions which are not described in high school manuals.

In 2007 radio-engineer John Kanzius developed an apparatus for cancer treatment by polarized radiowaves in 13 MHz frequency range. During desalination tests of his device with tube filled by marine watter (~ 3% solution of NaCl) he observed an evolution of hydrogen, which can be ignited by lighter (video 1, 2). Experiments were confirmed and replicated (1, 2) by Rustum Roy, a materials scientist at Pennsylvania State University. During it the excess of energy has been also observed and the production of hydrogen did run with higher than Faradaic efficiency reportedly.

scheme of John Kanzius experiment  photos of John Kanzius experiment

As far I'm concerned, John Kanzius published two papers (1, 2) in cooperation with another famous scientist Dr. Rustum Roy. The second published paper describes how having confirmed the observation on YouTube (3, 4) in John Kanzius’ lab in Erie, Philadelphia, the radiation source was brought to Roy’s microwave lab at Penn State University for a series of experiments. The maximum power for most experiments was about 300 W and the frequency of the polarized radio frequency beam was in the range of 13.56 MHz. The radio wave was aimed at pyrex test tubes containing solutions of 0.1 to 30 percent salt (NaCl), held upright by a Teflon stand and individually introduced into the RF (radio frequency) cavity. The gases at the top of the liquid surface were lit by means of a lighter. The solutions typically sustained a continuous flame till the water was exhausted. The temperature of the flame was about 1 800 C. Deionized water either in Silica glass or in PTFE (not shown here) do not ignite. At 3 percent NaCl (about sea water concentration), the results presented in the YouTube were confirmed. Larger flame sizes of about 4-5 inches were obtained with higher salt concentrations. Immediately after the power is turned on, the flammable gas can be ignited, and it extinguishes instantly as the power is turned off. The smallest flame was sustained at 1 percent NaCl (see figure bellow). They also showed that the Raman spectrum of the saline solutions before and after exposure to RF field differ dramatically in the 3000 to 3500 cm-1 region indicating that the structure of the water after exposure to the RF field has been very substantially changed, specifically with respect to the O-H bond.

Figure1 (Burning water at different NaCl concentrations; a, 0.3 percent; b, 3.0 percent; c, 30 percent) John Kanzius in Penn State University Lab

What is striking for me is the size of flame produced with input RF power just 300 Watts. IMO the flame generated provides more energy than energy supplied and this impression was later confirmed with John Kanzius himself, but without exact COP numbers given. He died of leukemia in 2009, so he unfortunately didn't manage to finish his work.

In 1982, a team of chemists at Western Illinois University reported the room-temperature decomposition of water vapour into hydrogen peroxide and hydrogen using radio frequency waves with around 60 percent yield [S Roychowdhury et al, Plasma Chem. Plasma Process., 1982, 2, 157]. They too used precisely the same frequency of 13.56 MHz - no coincidence really, since this is a common frequency for radio frequency generators. And in 1993 a Russian team reported the apparent dissociation of water into hydrogen and hydroxyl radicals using microwaves [V L Vaks et al, Radiophys. Quantum Electron. 1994, 37, 85]. Neither paper was cited by Kanzius and Roy.

Note that the John Kanzius device doesn't actually split water into a hydrogen and oxygen, as this mixture (so-called the Brown gas) is highly explosive and it definitely doesn't burn with quiet incandescent flame. I presume, it splits the water into hydrogen and peroxide radicale insted. Peroxide radical recombines into a hydrogen peroxide, which has higher boiling point, so it remains in solution and only hydrogen escapes. But such a splitting is interesting the more, as the mixture of hydrogen and peroxide radical shouldn't form side-to-side during single reaction, as first component is of reductive and later one of oxidative nature. I'm explaining it with equilibrial conditions of reaction in similar way, like the formation of hellium-4 during cold fusion. Note also, that electrolytic splitting of water is well-known. But, as takes at least 1.23V to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. But 13.56 MHz RF beam delivers at most 10-8 of the energy required, i.e. we are facing Coulombic barrier of the same range like with cold fusion. I'd guess it's because of the same mechanism.

There are already many well resolved but not explained effects related to homeopathic concentrations: from placebo over oligodynamic behavior, hormone disruptor toxicology of diluted water solution to Petkau effect and hormesis.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Research on Zika conspiracies! : We find that elevated levels of conspiracy thinking are correlated with both concern over Zika and belief in Zika-related conspiracy theories. For example, a person scoring the maximum on the conspiratorial thinking scale is estimated to believe in .61 Zika conspiracy theories while a person scoring the minimum is estimated to believe in only .06 Zika conspiracy theories.

Not quite surprisingly even the Nature study didn't mention this simple map: Zika distribution closely matched GMO mosquitoes (source). What we should think about the rest of study, after then? The tendency to deny instead of investigate belongs into signs of pathological skepticism. In particular because another study show, there's nothing wacky about conspiracy theorists: Their doubts are is rooted in evolution – not ignorance. They're just not biased by financial interests of researchers and companies involved in research.

Quote

Potholer has made a interesting nonpolitical piece where he just point out the importance to listen to science and what science has to say on matters.

Only when no financial interests are at stake, which gets increasingly rare. Look, you're at LENR forum: most of us knows pretty well, what the so-called mainstream science is all about..

Quote

There was a neutron scattering experiment of water tat did show an average bond density of H_1.5O. A reproduction at a different temperature failed.

This is because water depolymerizes with heating fast and it returns into original oligomeric state relatively slowly. The famous Mpemba effect is based on this behaviour: the water not only "remembers" presence of chemical near wall of its vessels (intensive dynamization is thus required) but also its thermal history. But it all manifest itself at few nanometer scale only: above it the water retains all its bulk properties. See also: The subtleties of blue tint of water

Well - and which memo follows from it for theory of homeopathy? Organic molecules like proteins are rigid and sticky, so that they remain attracted to walls of vessels, creating long-distance morphogenetic field of water molecules, which surrounds them like thin gel-like layer.

Quote

The carpet in my house stores information. Who was there, where they walked, what kinds of shoes they wear, what the spilt on it, and what the cat dragged in

Your grumpy comparison of water to carpet is actually quite good one ..;-) due to presence of extradimensional forces acting between fibers. The fibers of carpet maintain their position a long time after some external force reoriented them. In similar way like water molecules the filaments of carpet are sticky and they exhibit so called thixotropy, i.e. gel-like behaviour at short distances. It means, as a whole the fibres of carpet appear arranged randomly, but at proximity they exhibit small domains, which deform in unison. Because once filament bends, a whole row of neighbouring ones must deform as well so that their mutual geometry remains preserved. Their mutual orientation and deforms will thus survive a much longer, than the orientation of individual filaments forming them. The skeptic calculations, which estimate life-time of macroscopic structures inside water molecules by life-time of conformal changes of individual water molecules (Debye relaxation time in range of 8 picoseconds) may be thus completely wrong.

Action at a distance: DNA-looping and initiation of transcription The DNA action at distance is experimentally well proven effect. And its explanation can be based on very trivial aspect of DNA molecule, which contains positively and negatively charged sites at distance and which consists of rigid backbone. This creates "morphogenetic field" consisting of dipole forces, because positive and negative charges attract at distance, the charges of the same polarity repel at distance. The strength of these dipole forces remains inversely proportional to square-root distance, so that these forces don't overlap and compensate mutually.

Simple toy with magnets demonstrating the lock-key behavior of morphogenetic field around magnets arranged by opposite polarity. It keeps another magnets around itself at separate distance. The water environment may enhance this effect because water molecules are polarizable and they form deformable nanoclusters, which mediate dipole polarization at large distance by rearranging water molecules according to structure of positive and negative charges nearby.

Nanoparticles could damage DNA at a distance, study suggests Lab tests show that metal nanoparticles can affect DNA without actually coming into contact with it – though the results are difficult to extrapolate to the human body. The oligodynamic activity of metal dispersions (nanosilver) could have origin in just this effect.

Prof. Luc Montagnier: Can Water Store Information? Somewhat surprisingly the answer of this question may be related to cold fusion mechanism too..