The free energy debate

[Vagrant0]

There won't ever be 'free' energy, even should technology advance to the point where such a thing would be feasible. It would get shut down by government imposed regulations. That would be just one less thing the powerful won't be able to hold over everyone's head as a means of control. And the people with power aren't going to give it up willingly. It was Tesla's original goal to transmit free electricity to the globe, and if anyone alive could have figured out a way to make it happen, he probably could have if he had proper funding and support. One of history's top 3 genius minds, IMO. His IQ was probably off the scale. Apparently he planned on tapping into the energy in Earth's upper atmosphere, and transmitting it through a network of towers. I'm not even sure if such a thing is possible.

Erm, just to point out something here...

 

Free in this sense does not relate to a monetary cost. There will always be people wanting to earn something for their patents, manufacturing costs, or servicing costs, this is not a matter of debate.

 

Instead, free in this sense is energy which, in the process of generating that energy, has either no or very little material costs or few hazardous byproducts per unit of energy generated. This is essentially "free" energy in that it is not tied to limited resources in order to continue generating that energy. Unfortunately relatively few of these have had any practical application, and the ones which have also have expensive manufacturing costs.

[Beriallord]

 

Instead, free in this sense is energy which, in the process of generating that energy, has either no or very little material costs or few hazardous byproducts per unit of energy generated. This is essentially "free" energy in that it is not tied to limited resources in order to continue generating that energy. Unfortunately relatively few of these have had any practical application, and the ones which have also have expensive manufacturing costs.

 

 

One of the cheapest forms of energy from a monetary cost position is coal. They haven't figured out how to produce energy cheaper than coal that produces less pollution. Instead they're trying to rig the energy costs to make coal more expensive, which they've done. The power around here is generated by mostly coal, and pre-Obama, electrical power was very cheap around here. Its nearly tripled since then only due to government regulations. The later isn't a true solution to more viable forms of energy. The simple explanation would be we simply don't have the technological means at the moment to produce a cheaper form of energy than coal can. The left is trying to 'force' innovation artificially while putting a huge strain on the ones struggling the most to pay the bills seems to be sticking it to the 'proletariat' rather than helping them. That's because they take campaign donations from special interests who have a monetary incentive in pushing 'green energy'. Neither the left or the right have viable energy solutions for the future. The conversion process of transferring heat into usable electrical energy still relies on the same methods we used 100 years ago, of using that heat to generate steam, which can be converted into electricity by machines. Even nuclear power plants produce energy like this. That's an obstacle that is going to have to be overcome to meet future energy demands.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Beriallord

[dpgillam]

I hate economics because a very large portion of the pseudo-science is garbage. But there is one point it makes that is very true: that which you subsidize will continue.

 

There have been no real innovations in "green" technology since the 70s, and its for a very simple reason. Thats when the lobbyists paid the government to write standards for the various equipment of each type. So everyone focused on how to work best and game the system under the govt regulations, rather than looking for better solutions period.

 

Its very much the difference between handing you a plot of dirt and saying "be productive" versus handing you the same plot of dirt and saying "built a better convenience store."

 

Ironically, we're finding one of the best low-environmental-impact energy generators is the undershot water-wheel, very similar to whats used in Skyrim. And its been around since the ancient Greeks, with a slightly more primitive version used by the ancient Egyptians.

 

There are versions built for use in central africa that can produce enough power to run 2 large US houses off of a simple stream (5 gal/min flow produces over 5KWH of electricity) But there are no subsidies for it, so it isnt developed.