Jump to content

This would be a real game changer


Casper
 Share

Recommended Posts

If we consider how a telecommunication evolved over the years so fast, compared to that we should have been traveling in hovercrafts by now with solar energy, but the "the man" doesn't want that to happen I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The engineer in me is very excited at the prospect of something this innovative, but the cynic in me thinks that it's too good to be true. Ultimately plentiful energy devices like this have been promised before, so I won't be excited until working prototypes have been put in service and validated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The engineer in me is very excited at the prospect of something this innovative, but the cynic in me thinks that it's too good to be true. Ultimately plentiful energy devices like this have been promised before, so I won't be excited until working prototypes have been put in service and validated.

Often the problem with some of these innovative energy sources is that the devil is in the details.

Nuclear fission power is one example. The energy produced is abundant. The raw materials are sufficient given the conversion rates. But waste products are difficult to dispose of and due to safety concerns construction costs and timelines are much worse than originally projected.

Fusion holds promise but the challenges are huge and the costs to hurdle those may make it unfeasible.

Craig

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully not another Cold Fusion debacle.

Cold fusion gained attention after reports in 1989 by Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, then one of the world's leading electrochemists,[1] that their apparatus had produced anomalous heat ("excess heat"), of a magnitude they asserted would defy explanation except in terms of nuclear processes. They further reported measuring small amounts of nuclear reaction byproducts, including neutrons and tritium.[2] The small tabletop experiment involved electrolysis of heavy water on the surface of a palladium (Pd) electrode.[3]

The reported results received wide media attention,[3] and raised hopes of a cheap and abundant source of energy.[4] Many scientists tried to replicate the experiment with the few details available. Hopes fell with the large number of negative replications, the withdrawal of many positive replications, the discovery of flaws and sources of experimental error in the original experiment, and finally the discovery that Fleischmann and Pons had not actually detected nuclear reaction byproducts.[5]

By late 1989, most scientists considered cold fusion claims dead

(Emphasis in red is mine)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...