"That's all I have to say about this place!"

 
 

 • MAIN PAGE
 
 • LUNCHES
       Lunch Index
       Food Reviews
 
 • MAIL
       Current Mail
       The Mail Archive
       Join Mailing List
       Send Us Mail!
 
 • BOOKS
 
 • USER GROUP
       Java/C++ SIG
       Mac SIG
       Web SIG
       Book Reviews
       O'Reilly News
       Java Diary
       Forum

 
 • TOPICS
       Relativity
       Cydonia
       Gas Temp
       Gravity
       Black Holes
       Stephenson
       Dreamcast
       SETI@Home
       Sailing
       Gulf War II
       Climbing
 
 
 
 

 
 

Main Page | Lunches | Current Mail | E-mail Us! | Discussions | Books | About

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Bussard Fusion: Looking for Funding

George was telling me about a lecture he watched on the web by Robert Bussard, an aging physicist (perhaps best known for designing the Bussard Ramjet) who recently came very close to a fusion power system which generates more power than is put into it.

His small company Energy Matter Conversion Corporation (EMC2!) was funded by the U.S. Navy until recently, and he and his colleagues did not discover the amount of success they had achieved until weeks after they were forced to shut down their lab.

The reactor is constructed using six rings assembled into a box. Each ring contains copper windings, allowing a magnetic containment field to be created when power is applied. Here's a concise story at Defense News that does a pretty good job of outlining the project and its uncertain future (it looks like the U.S. Dept. of Energy doesn't like competition).

If you really want some in-depth information, check out the paper by Bussard: The Advent of Clean Nuclear Fusion: Super-performance Space Power and Propulsion.

Labels: , ,

Monday, July 18, 2005

Biodiesel: Not the answer, either?

A new study from Cornell and California-Berkeley says that it takes more fossil fuel to make ethanol than the ethanol itself will yield.

Supporters of ethanol as a renewable energy source have claimed in the past that only 60% of the yielded energy is needed to produce ethanol, but the new study challenges that number.

"The researchers included such factors as the energy used in producing the crop, costs that were not used in other studies that supported ethanol production, said Pimentel" [one of the study's authors].
Not wasting any time, the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association issued a press release refuting the results, stating:
"Over the past decade, only two studies, both of which were conducted by Cornell University entomologist David Pimentel, have found the net energy balance of ethanol to be negative. The overwhelming majority of scientists... have argued Pimentel's studies use outdated data and a flawed methodology."

One thing that had not occurred to me before was this: How much fossil fuel energy is expended to produce petroleum fuels? Is it a productive formula?

Labels:



Main Page | Lunches | Current Mail | E-mail Us! | Discussions | Books | About


Copyright © 2008, Paul Wren. Some rights reserved.
 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.