Mental, brilliant article as usual. While reading your writing I thought to myself, "surely this must be an article out of The Onion." It seems only yesterday that the democratic politicians were vehemently against nuclear and now some are openly encouraging it. I suppose we can take solace in knowing we were pro-nuke, "before it was cool."
Keep banging out these insightful and educational pieces.
Please accept my apologies for being so late to this party. An excellent piece and up to your accustomed standards. Thank you.
Seeing the picture of Hanoi Jane got me to thinking. Since the release of China Syndrome and Jimmy Carter's headlong embrace of coal, the US has installed 107 GW of coal plants. (EIA, 2017). Collectively, these plants have produced over 17 TWH of energy over the years, and emitted quite a large number of tons of carbon dioxide, which Jane and her cronies believe have caused catastrophic weather extremes.
OK, now that the picture has been painted, a question: if California is suing Exxon Mobil for wreaking climate havoc, why aren't they suing Jane Fonda at the same time and for the same purpose? Her link to climate change is as palpable as any fossil fuel, if not more so for the fear and loathing her work perpetrated? It would be entirely appropriate to add Barry Commoner and Ralph Nader to that lawsuit (Bernie Sanders, AOC and Markey would be good add-ons as well). Have any of the academic climate modelers evaluated a "global warming scenario" where those 107 GW were instead nuclear, having essentially zero emissions?
We exist in an age where finger-pointing and scapegoating are accepted as legitimate forms of argument and where tactical science, as Roger Pielke, Jr. has labeled it, becomes standard practice. Ever being the contrarian, I'm simply asking, albeit sarcastically, what if rational thought would have prevailed in 1979? Of course, rational thought is as much a rarity these days as it was then, so perhaps I ask too much.
Yes, yes, yes...I know the saying "if pigs had wings they'd be eagles," but my question is more to the point of underscoring the consequences of a policy decision, and to reaffirm yet another "old saying:" the dildo of consequences seldom arrived lubed!
We're not so sure about her influence. Don't want to give her too much credit. Timing was fortuitous. Had the movie never been made, but TMI accident had occurred, it probably would have had the same effect. "Environmentalists" were already after nuclear hard, and the oil/gas/coal business wasn't apt to stand in their way or lend a hand to nuclear. So, her effect was limited in our view. Timing, on the other hand, did help (hurt?).
In our part of the world, we say "if pigs had wings they'd fly". But we don't go as far as saying they'd be eagles. ;)
I was making a point - as a severely wounded and now severely physically disabled US Navy Vet - who has seen the horrors of what comes from Dictatorships: - that the other individual involved - obviously knows nothing of the subject of my post.
Considering of the all "stuff" being injected into this upcoming US election here in the US by these people - all being led a certain individual who has stated that he will overthrow the US Constitution
-who he swore to protect as US President:
--- I take offense and don't back down.
I will be more "careful" in the future - as I am enjoying being a part of the discussion - and want to keep it civil on both sides.
My aim is to get it to Germany (and the rest of Europe) ASAP -- especially after reading and digesting the Draghi report.
I do not want to see Europe becoming just a POD MOD "customer" - instead of having all of the economic benefits of having it manufactured all around Europe "...as needed - where needed...".
I state this because potential funding is being finalized elsewhere close to Europe.
What people in Europe could do - if they are really interested - is to get their respective EC members working on "modifying" the existing EC / EIC Accelerator program as written.
Right now - the EIC Accelerator program is "properly" set up for finding and mentoring and funding new ideas - or incubating start-ups.
However - contrary to what the literature "infers? -- it has no provision to allow for a proposal for funding be submitted - by a fully developed / fully vetted project.
Neither does the Horizon Europe Funding Program for that matter.
It is set up to ask for proposals for "only those subjects - it picks out" -- "outside topics need not apply"
The POD MOD Project goes back over 60+ yeas and is fully vetted.
The circuitry used in the POD MOD has been working for over 124 years - in every AM and FM radio manufactured since Tesla invented the thing in 1900.
It doesn't need the paperwork / the "expert" examination by bureaucrats that have no knowledge about Radio Technology.
So if someone might want to "get involved" in "changing things so that Europe can get POD MOD units manufactured and installed in Europe - as the prices quoted and with the benefits -- act - just don't sit.
Sorry to rebutt you Evan -- but your incorrect on two counts.
1.) You are incorrect on the phase angle inside the resonant tan circuit -- it's in-phase DC riding on the sinusoidal AC voltage waveform "in the tank" -- because when two impedance values are "balance" - it is only the resistance value of the conductive material making up the inductor coil that controls the phase -angle - and resistance doesn't have a phase-angle.
I was taught Conventional Theory just like you.
But what I was taught - and find even worse now -- is that there is no "looking into what is being taught" - because what is t aught "works".
Its' the "looking forward" part where Tesla's works "really stand-out".
For instance -- do you know of there are two Tesla based ways of increasing an incoming voltage level - while maintaining the incoming amperage level -- which a step-up voltage transformer cannot accomplish.
I've done both of them - and in fact - one of them is how the POD MOD "selectively" develops all of the higher output voltage levels.
There isn't a single voltage transformer in the POD MOD.
I found -- and have had proven in 1984 -- by "...Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc (est. 1896 - so they've been around awhile and know what they are doing) / tested at their facility / using their test equipment / "tested "their way" - that the 60 Hz resonating tank circuit - described below - continuously developed 293% "over-unity power producing to the 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC moto being used as the non-changing load.
Specifically:
If you make the motor's armature windings the "inductor" of the tank circuit (measuring the uH 'inductive reactance" value beforehand while the motor is unconnected, and then calculate the uF value needed to bring the combination to resonance at 60 Hz - by connecting that value capacitance using motor-run capacitors -- you end up with a 60 Hz resonant tank circuit - "with a 60 Hz AC motor in it" -- works great every time.
And if you want to make it "load-following" - instead of just a single - fixed load setup - you add a variable inductor in line with the armature windings (which is proprietary - but works great) -- and you still have a resonant 60 Hz tank circuit.
I appreciate your honesty in disclosing your financial position here - and I would greatly appreciate having more discussions with you - so that you can make an educated decision as to that financial position - for your economic future.
To that -- I highly suggest that you get a copy of two specific college-level textbook: -- the first named "Electricity One - Seven"/ edited by Mr. Harry Mileaf / the 1966 copyrighted edition - and second -- "Basic Electronics / Fourth Edition - written by Mr. Bernard Grob.
They ae both available on Amazon - but be sure to get the specific edition -- because in the Grob book - newer editions have been "edited" to reflect the "new thinking" - which is both incorrect and backwards - and a subject for another day.
The Mileaf textbook specifically - has a 55 page Chapter on Resonance alone - with 5 specific pages of text / spreadsheets/ and visual graphs - that totally obliterate the "notion" that you can't produce "over-unity" -- because Classic Physics has never dealt with the fact that
--- "maximum impedance to current flow..." which is what I was originally taught. -- actually defines that fact that the resonant tank circuit itself - electrically reduces the input power level - while
--- "minimum impedance to current flow..." -which is also what i was originally taught -- actually means that, at resonance,:
--- when the two opposing impedance values "balance out - not "cancel-out" as is commonly taught -- - when you are using 400+ strands of #36 Gauge Litz Wire (which has proven to be capable of "actually producing 160 Amps) for the extremely low uH "inductor coil" in the tank - along with a
--- capacitor pack that is "physically capable of "storing 160 Amps per half cycle - you have it.
I've done it dozens of times over the decades this way - but that is not the way that the finalized POD MOD now works.
I have found that there is a huge hole in the supposedly iron-clad position taken on "how to "non-magnetically" or "resistively" - get continuously produced electric power out of a resonating tank circuit - by actually doing it -- not theorizing about it.
And that is also proprietary information.
I will be more than happy to send you both the Northwest Laboratories test affidavit and the 5 pages on resonance from the Mileaf book - if you contact me via email at scotsman7@comcast.net.
You can also Google the Patent, US 5,146,395 - and when you take the additional descriptive definitions on how the that version of the POD MOD works - you will se that it is really plain old "boiler-plate" electronics - that has mostly been forgotten.
I didn't post what I have been posting - just to get attention.
All of my posted results -- are from designing and building the units - and going into a lot of dead-end box canyons along the way.
I know that test results always are correct - because it originally powered the AC motors over the years - and that is now in solid-state form -- with the same - just much larger "over-unity" results.
The small modular reactors are the ones I'm the most excited about. When people ask about safety I just point out that we've got dozens of reactors floating around in navy ships with zero incidencts for hundreds of thousands of operational hours in combat zones.
It would be great if we could overcome our fear. Here's a complementary essay on the same topic.
Great promise. But, complicated. New fuels, different civil infrastructure designs/requirements. For some, the overnight capital cost per Mwe looks like it may be as high or higher than the large light water pressurized reactors like AP-1000s.
I apologize for my obvious ignorance, but in your first graph I initially cried "foul!" as I wondered how generation could possibly be greater than capacity. But then I saw that the former is measured in MWh while that latter is MW. Asking for your help to explain the difference. Thanks
One is capacity and the other is real power delivered. Watts is the rate of energy a machine is capable of either using or delivering. Watt.Hours integrates the total energy delivered over time.
I like "hard green". They acquire and optimize land for a specific set of species. And all of their projects benefit other species as well. Ducks Unlimited does a very nice job of this. I've been to their HQs in Memphis to discuss projects with them. There are many other examples of habitat preservation across wide landscapes having massive effects.
The groups I support are Trout, Unlimited and Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. I quit the Sierra Club, the Nature Conservancy, and several others.
Here is a real-life paper on the waste isolation pilot plant in NM. Also I worked on what we called Yucky Mountain Waste repository in Nevada. That was always political, never scientific. Then there's the nuclear power plant in NC. The is the media report on that follows. I neither trust the government (having worked for them), nor the media, but perhaps you do. It is no doubt easier to be cavalier about possible radiation exposure with cancer as a result if you don't have experience of it.
RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- Wake County reported emergency sirens went off at the Duke Energy Harris Nuclear Plant in southwest Raleigh Monday morning.
There is no emergency, officials said, and the public needs no protective action.
A Duke Energy spokesperson told ABC11 the plant is operating safely.
My mother and sister died from cancers. They lived very close to TMI in York, PA. My husband died from 2 cancers. I have had cancer with a recurrence. We both worked for Los Alamos National Lab and visited the Nevada Test Site, he more often than I.
The government admits culpability with their EEOIC programs (energy employees occupational illness compensation). I want to post something from CCNS, a local group that monitors LANL nuclear activities. It's long. Maybe I'll post it as a note.
Sorry for your and the family's cancer bouts. Know how rough that is. Is the DOE/govt. paying any of those claims (medical bills, wage loss benefits) in relation to cancer claims as a result of the work/in the course of the work at those labs/test sites?
Oh, TMI neither paid for anything nor admitted culpability. I have to admit I haven't followed up closely to find out if there were statistically increased cancer deaths after the melt down. St George Utah in the path of the fallout from the Nevada Test Site had had statistically significant increases in cancers and deaths.
You may decide that everyone in my family gets cancer. My late husband and I moved away from PA in 1966. Two of my sisters moved away before TMI. Neither of them got cancer, FWIW. Of course, my husband and I are not related by blood, so that's not relevant either.
Thanks for the look at the history of nuclear over the last half century. Not being much of a moviegoer, I never watched "The China Syndrome" - didn't have any idea what it was about until now. Despite there still being lots of opposition to nuclear, I'm encouraged by recent signs of a trend toward bipartisanship. It would be great if a sensible relaxation of regulations and permitting led to lower costs and faster builds.
I’m not sure the pushback will amount to much. Nukes have been a forbidden topic all these years, but as soon as the big tech companies need power, it becomes ok? I realize that I’m in full conspiracy mode, but it’s no coincidence that when the “information managers” wanted to change the message, the message changed in an instant. This is separate from the point about whether nuclear is needed and safe (it is). But I’m not going to climb on board with these scoundrels just because I like the new message.
Fair enough. They give you good reason to be suspicious.
In this case, it could be as simple as the fact that no politician is going to survive an election when the lights go out to your house in order to provide juice to Big Tech/AI. So, AI had to figure something else out.
What they will figure out first is the low hanging fruit and the long-term solution to their growing power needs. The LHF are places like Palisades, TMI, etc. and nat gas. They all realize that there is zero chance of nonreliables ever providing the 8760 hours of high quality electricity the need each year. The Renewable Energy Certificates were a feel-good facade.
It is indeed interesting that you use Classic Physics as the basis for this -- because Classic Physics got three thing wrong when it stated that:
"...no power supply can produce more output power than input power... "inferring that 'over-unity power production' was impossible...":
1.) it "stated" the position - well before Nikola Tesla began his seminal work on "AC power" - first discovering multi-phase AC power in 1882 - and then, between 1890 and 1894:
2.) discovered / invented and US Patented all of the information (some unclaimed - but in the text) needed to "electronically develop" - all of the clean electricity the world would ever need.
It's all there.
"We just didn't look for it" -- because Classic Physics got the "substance of the position correct:
--- it just used "verbiage" - which is what most people go by - that was totally incorrect --
--- subsequently:
--- "... we were been taught that "over-unity power production was impossible - by Classic Physics - see #1 above.
3.) Had the stated position been stated:
--- "...no power supply can develop more power than it is physically and electrically capable of producing..." -- both the position and the statement - would have been correct -- and we wouldn't be in the Global Warming / Climate Change situation we have created for ourselves by continuously burning fossil-based fuels through today.
A series of professional laboratory tests / conducted on Sept. 10th. 1984 - by Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc. (est. 1896) -- at their facility / with their test equipment / tested "...their way.." conclusively proved that the "position" was valid -- but the "verbiage" was incorrect.
It proved that because tests were made on a 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC power system, i.e. a 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC motor driving a 60 Hz AC power generator / with was powering a 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC motor as the load.
The "pure", i.e., no harmonics or electric noise - perfect sinusoidal AC waveform:
--- 120 VAC / 60 Hz / 0.06 A (60 mA) power continuously delivered to the 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC load motor:
--- was 293% over the 75 VAC / 60 Hz / 0.03 A (30 mA) input power connected to the120 VAC / 60 Hz AC drive motor.
Why-- because the 120 VAC 60 Hz output power - developed by the 60 Hz AC power generator:
--- WAS NOT - the power directly delivered to the AC load motor.
The AC generator's 120 VAC / 60 Hz / output - became the input power to a "60 Hz resonant tank circuit" - made up of the armature windings of the AC load motor, and:
--- a calculated capacitor bank that had ben connected across the two input power leased to the AC load motor.
The "60 Hz. resonant tank circuit" became the power source for the AC load motor:
--- causing the 60 Hz AC generator based "load" value to it's drive motor to be decreased - :
--- to where the 120 VAC / 60 Hz / wall-jack power "connected to the AC drive motor:
--- had to be decreased to the 75 VAC value:
--- so that the 60 Hz power generator could revolve at the correct RPM to produced both the required 60 Hz input frequency - and required 120 VAC voltage value - to the "resonating 60 Hz tank circuit".
A resonating tank circuit ALWAYS develops (internally it's:
--- "...absolute maximum power level..." - while ALWAYS simultaneously causing the "connected input power level" to be reduced to it's:
--- "...absolute minimum power level..." -- full stop.
This has been taking place:
--- in every "radio station to radio station tuning circuit", i.e., the "tank circuit" - in every AM or FM radio manufactured since Tesla invented the radio and applied for his US Patent for the radio - on Mar. 20th. 1900:
--- over 124 years ago.
Classis Physics has yet to correct the incorrect "verbiage" it's original stated position.
A present day / US developed and US Patented (US 5,146,395):
--- solid-state / 2.5 cu. ft. / 30 lb. / less than $2000 per unit / modular;
--- "stand-alone"- it has it's own on-board "start-up" power source / eliminating any "recharging" or external power source or power grid connection;
--- which can have multiples of units connected together for a higher output power level -- just like batteries;
--- with a "selectable" / continuous / output power level up to and including:
--- 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps - with equals
--- 230,400 Watts; 230.4 kW; or .2304MW - how ever described:
The power supply can be installed either;
a.) "at" any existing or new "stationary" location; i.e., any home; apartment; office-space (per floor - per occupant); commercial; or industrial site --world-wide, or;
b.) "in" any existing or new "movable" vehicle, of any size, shape, and weight - be it battery or internal combustion engine powered - on land / sea / or in the air as a propeller; rotor; or hi-bypass jet powered private or commercial aircraft - making available
b1.) unlimited range of travel and / or movement, and
b2.) unlimited time of travel and / or range.
The power supply technology is going to Europe:
--- at the official request of EC President Ursula von der Leyen - for funding through the EC / EIC Accelerator for Breakthrough / Disruptive Technology:
because:
--- every US Government Agency / US University / and US commercial entity contacted over the 60+ year history of the Project: -- refused both financial and or technical aid.
In fact: -- US/DOE-IPO Title 17 prohibits the US Government from funding any power supply that isn't either "commercialized" or "accepted" - both terms undefined -- but you get the drift.
Also -- through the Project's Europe partner -- it is being readied for manufacturing and installation for use throughout the Middle East and Africa markets.
It is going to "hit the fan" here in the US and UK electric bill paying consumer markets:
--- when they find out that their respective Governments have denied them the:
--- long term leased / universal / set-billing rate with with no increases of:
--- $0.10 "...per hour... - $72 per 30 day month per unit / for all of the clean electricity each location can use.
So while people "wax eloquent" about the features of "Nukes", both Fission and mini Fusion:
--- which is nothing more than an incredibly expensive / super long term nuclear waste producer "tea pot" - (I worked in the initial Yucca Mountain Depository design - until it was discovered that it was being located over a very deep fresh water source - and shut down);
--- to make steam / to end up turning a revolving AC multi-phase AC power generator:
--- which Tesla also invented and US Patented:
you just might want to think twice about advocating for spending all of that money and time -- as they won't be needed.
The US Patent can be Googled - and both a fuller explanation on the Northwest Labs test results - and expanded definition of how and why the design in the Patent works - is available - if you contact me via email - at scotsman7@comcast.net
As to "Robert Incognito" -and his "comment" on FEMA's response to Hurricane Helene:
--- go back and suck-up more of your MAGA cool-aid - or cheap beer -- because I'll bet no one saw you "get off your couch" and go down there to help.
Sorry but I have to correct you. I am an RF Electronics Engineering Technician. It is true that a resonant circuit can be measured to have vastly greater current or voltage circulating within it than is being supplied. But you cannot extract useful work aka. power from it. The current and voltage are 90 degrees out of phase with each other, giving a power factor close to zero. Trying to extract power introduces resistance and massively drops the notional amplification, or what we technologists call the Q factor of the circuit. There are many patents that contradict the laws of physics and thus will never result in useful technologies. Disclaimer: I do own shares in Nuscale, the company that is probably closest to cranking out hundreds of SMRs on a production basis, so I might be biased. But any basic text book on radio technology will tell you the same thing.
You were doin' fine till the end. Keep it civil and don't make it personal or your comment gets deleted.
As to the technology that you detailed, we'll be watching for this revolution in Europe. As bad as they've screwed up energy/environmental policy they damn sure need it. Send it to Germany first.
Unfortunately, with everything corrupt in the US government, there will be safety issues due to regulatory incompetence and lack of morality where self gain is valued above all else. Also, misinformation and disinformation censorship will prevent and checks and balances or accountability since in government results don’t matter (see the FEMA response to hurricane Helene).
If this nascent momentum ever actually takes hold, and if there are safety issues, it's not obvious to us government corruption will necessarily have anything to do with it. We're going to take the high road and assume the NRC will proceed with abundant caution (with no changes to applicable CFRs they won't be doing anything too dynamic).
Having actually finished only Vogtle 3&4 in the last couple decades in the U.S., we don't have the experienced labor force. Same with nuclear engineers. China's universities have hoards more nuclear and petroleum engineers than U.S. universities presently.
When you don't play golf for a long time, your ability is not as sharp. It won't take a conspiracy to cause safety issues necessarily. But, don't look for them. Look at the number of hours of safe operation across 94 operating reactors. We can do this.
Nice article. A ray of hope. You probably thought about this, but I believe the nuclear movement will also have another rich and powerful enemy in the green grifting mega companies that are developing solar and wind, much like the oil companies in the 60’s and 70’s.
Oh the spinning green crucifix and sun catcher companies will work hard to stop nuclear. But don't forget about natural gas. They want to badly be the stable base load and balancing for wind and solar. And with fracking, they'll do so a lot quicker than we'll license and build nuclear reactors for some time yet. Same goes for AI's electricity demand.
Well, I think the mega solar and wind companies will start backing off from new projects if the subsidies get reduced, and there's a groundswell of pressure building against those subsidies, coinciding with the groundswell of change toward favoring nuclear.
Great article.
Can I get a source on that list of nuclear power stations that were canceled after 1980?
By the way, I also have an article about how Greens have increased carbon emissions:
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/how-greens-increased-carbon-emissions
Mental, brilliant article as usual. While reading your writing I thought to myself, "surely this must be an article out of The Onion." It seems only yesterday that the democratic politicians were vehemently against nuclear and now some are openly encouraging it. I suppose we can take solace in knowing we were pro-nuke, "before it was cool."
Keep banging out these insightful and educational pieces.
Too kind. Thanks!
We are thoroughly enjoying it.
Bravo!
Thank you!
Please accept my apologies for being so late to this party. An excellent piece and up to your accustomed standards. Thank you.
Seeing the picture of Hanoi Jane got me to thinking. Since the release of China Syndrome and Jimmy Carter's headlong embrace of coal, the US has installed 107 GW of coal plants. (EIA, 2017). Collectively, these plants have produced over 17 TWH of energy over the years, and emitted quite a large number of tons of carbon dioxide, which Jane and her cronies believe have caused catastrophic weather extremes.
OK, now that the picture has been painted, a question: if California is suing Exxon Mobil for wreaking climate havoc, why aren't they suing Jane Fonda at the same time and for the same purpose? Her link to climate change is as palpable as any fossil fuel, if not more so for the fear and loathing her work perpetrated? It would be entirely appropriate to add Barry Commoner and Ralph Nader to that lawsuit (Bernie Sanders, AOC and Markey would be good add-ons as well). Have any of the academic climate modelers evaluated a "global warming scenario" where those 107 GW were instead nuclear, having essentially zero emissions?
We exist in an age where finger-pointing and scapegoating are accepted as legitimate forms of argument and where tactical science, as Roger Pielke, Jr. has labeled it, becomes standard practice. Ever being the contrarian, I'm simply asking, albeit sarcastically, what if rational thought would have prevailed in 1979? Of course, rational thought is as much a rarity these days as it was then, so perhaps I ask too much.
Yes, yes, yes...I know the saying "if pigs had wings they'd be eagles," but my question is more to the point of underscoring the consequences of a policy decision, and to reaffirm yet another "old saying:" the dildo of consequences seldom arrived lubed!
Thanks, Barry.
We're not so sure about her influence. Don't want to give her too much credit. Timing was fortuitous. Had the movie never been made, but TMI accident had occurred, it probably would have had the same effect. "Environmentalists" were already after nuclear hard, and the oil/gas/coal business wasn't apt to stand in their way or lend a hand to nuclear. So, her effect was limited in our view. Timing, on the other hand, did help (hurt?).
In our part of the world, we say "if pigs had wings they'd fly". But we don't go as far as saying they'd be eagles. ;)
Thank you for the heads-up.
I was making a point - as a severely wounded and now severely physically disabled US Navy Vet - who has seen the horrors of what comes from Dictatorships: - that the other individual involved - obviously knows nothing of the subject of my post.
Considering of the all "stuff" being injected into this upcoming US election here in the US by these people - all being led a certain individual who has stated that he will overthrow the US Constitution
-who he swore to protect as US President:
--- I take offense and don't back down.
I will be more "careful" in the future - as I am enjoying being a part of the discussion - and want to keep it civil on both sides.
My aim is to get it to Germany (and the rest of Europe) ASAP -- especially after reading and digesting the Draghi report.
I do not want to see Europe becoming just a POD MOD "customer" - instead of having all of the economic benefits of having it manufactured all around Europe "...as needed - where needed...".
I state this because potential funding is being finalized elsewhere close to Europe.
What people in Europe could do - if they are really interested - is to get their respective EC members working on "modifying" the existing EC / EIC Accelerator program as written.
Right now - the EIC Accelerator program is "properly" set up for finding and mentoring and funding new ideas - or incubating start-ups.
However - contrary to what the literature "infers? -- it has no provision to allow for a proposal for funding be submitted - by a fully developed / fully vetted project.
Neither does the Horizon Europe Funding Program for that matter.
It is set up to ask for proposals for "only those subjects - it picks out" -- "outside topics need not apply"
The POD MOD Project goes back over 60+ yeas and is fully vetted.
The circuitry used in the POD MOD has been working for over 124 years - in every AM and FM radio manufactured since Tesla invented the thing in 1900.
It doesn't need the paperwork / the "expert" examination by bureaucrats that have no knowledge about Radio Technology.
So if someone might want to "get involved" in "changing things so that Europe can get POD MOD units manufactured and installed in Europe - as the prices quoted and with the benefits -- act - just don't sit.
Sorry to rebutt you Evan -- but your incorrect on two counts.
1.) You are incorrect on the phase angle inside the resonant tan circuit -- it's in-phase DC riding on the sinusoidal AC voltage waveform "in the tank" -- because when two impedance values are "balance" - it is only the resistance value of the conductive material making up the inductor coil that controls the phase -angle - and resistance doesn't have a phase-angle.
I was taught Conventional Theory just like you.
But what I was taught - and find even worse now -- is that there is no "looking into what is being taught" - because what is t aught "works".
Its' the "looking forward" part where Tesla's works "really stand-out".
For instance -- do you know of there are two Tesla based ways of increasing an incoming voltage level - while maintaining the incoming amperage level -- which a step-up voltage transformer cannot accomplish.
I've done both of them - and in fact - one of them is how the POD MOD "selectively" develops all of the higher output voltage levels.
There isn't a single voltage transformer in the POD MOD.
I found -- and have had proven in 1984 -- by "...Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc (est. 1896 - so they've been around awhile and know what they are doing) / tested at their facility / using their test equipment / "tested "their way" - that the 60 Hz resonating tank circuit - described below - continuously developed 293% "over-unity power producing to the 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC moto being used as the non-changing load.
Specifically:
If you make the motor's armature windings the "inductor" of the tank circuit (measuring the uH 'inductive reactance" value beforehand while the motor is unconnected, and then calculate the uF value needed to bring the combination to resonance at 60 Hz - by connecting that value capacitance using motor-run capacitors -- you end up with a 60 Hz resonant tank circuit - "with a 60 Hz AC motor in it" -- works great every time.
And if you want to make it "load-following" - instead of just a single - fixed load setup - you add a variable inductor in line with the armature windings (which is proprietary - but works great) -- and you still have a resonant 60 Hz tank circuit.
I appreciate your honesty in disclosing your financial position here - and I would greatly appreciate having more discussions with you - so that you can make an educated decision as to that financial position - for your economic future.
To that -- I highly suggest that you get a copy of two specific college-level textbook: -- the first named "Electricity One - Seven"/ edited by Mr. Harry Mileaf / the 1966 copyrighted edition - and second -- "Basic Electronics / Fourth Edition - written by Mr. Bernard Grob.
They ae both available on Amazon - but be sure to get the specific edition -- because in the Grob book - newer editions have been "edited" to reflect the "new thinking" - which is both incorrect and backwards - and a subject for another day.
The Mileaf textbook specifically - has a 55 page Chapter on Resonance alone - with 5 specific pages of text / spreadsheets/ and visual graphs - that totally obliterate the "notion" that you can't produce "over-unity" -- because Classic Physics has never dealt with the fact that
--- "maximum impedance to current flow..." which is what I was originally taught. -- actually defines that fact that the resonant tank circuit itself - electrically reduces the input power level - while
--- "minimum impedance to current flow..." -which is also what i was originally taught -- actually means that, at resonance,:
--- when the two opposing impedance values "balance out - not "cancel-out" as is commonly taught -- - when you are using 400+ strands of #36 Gauge Litz Wire (which has proven to be capable of "actually producing 160 Amps) for the extremely low uH "inductor coil" in the tank - along with a
--- capacitor pack that is "physically capable of "storing 160 Amps per half cycle - you have it.
I've done it dozens of times over the decades this way - but that is not the way that the finalized POD MOD now works.
I have found that there is a huge hole in the supposedly iron-clad position taken on "how to "non-magnetically" or "resistively" - get continuously produced electric power out of a resonating tank circuit - by actually doing it -- not theorizing about it.
And that is also proprietary information.
I will be more than happy to send you both the Northwest Laboratories test affidavit and the 5 pages on resonance from the Mileaf book - if you contact me via email at scotsman7@comcast.net.
You can also Google the Patent, US 5,146,395 - and when you take the additional descriptive definitions on how the that version of the POD MOD works - you will se that it is really plain old "boiler-plate" electronics - that has mostly been forgotten.
I didn't post what I have been posting - just to get attention.
All of my posted results -- are from designing and building the units - and going into a lot of dead-end box canyons along the way.
I know that test results always are correct - because it originally powered the AC motors over the years - and that is now in solid-state form -- with the same - just much larger "over-unity" results.
Hope to hear from you.
The small modular reactors are the ones I'm the most excited about. When people ask about safety I just point out that we've got dozens of reactors floating around in navy ships with zero incidencts for hundreds of thousands of operational hours in combat zones.
It would be great if we could overcome our fear. Here's a complementary essay on the same topic.
https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/nuclear-meltdown
Great promise. But, complicated. New fuels, different civil infrastructure designs/requirements. For some, the overnight capital cost per Mwe looks like it may be as high or higher than the large light water pressurized reactors like AP-1000s.
I apologize for my obvious ignorance, but in your first graph I initially cried "foul!" as I wondered how generation could possibly be greater than capacity. But then I saw that the former is measured in MWh while that latter is MW. Asking for your help to explain the difference. Thanks
One is capacity and the other is real power delivered. Watts is the rate of energy a machine is capable of either using or delivering. Watt.Hours integrates the total energy delivered over time.
Thanks much
Why is the Bright Green Line … RED?
Are they Communist, like Red China?
Why is the GOP … RED?
Are they Communist, like Red China?
I'm red/green color blind. So maybe that's it?
I supported many "environmental" groups over the years. I became a big skeptic during covid. When you start from a flawed premise, you can't get a good solution. Here's this. https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1131756865089046&set=a.607926074138797
Donning my tin foil hat, I submit this link.
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-john-coleman-obit-20180121-story.htmll
And this. https://www.newsweek.com/nobel-prize-winner-who-doesnt-believe-climate-crisis-has-speech-canceled-1815020
Anyone who believes that the "science is settled" is fooling himself.
I like "hard green". They acquire and optimize land for a specific set of species. And all of their projects benefit other species as well. Ducks Unlimited does a very nice job of this. I've been to their HQs in Memphis to discuss projects with them. There are many other examples of habitat preservation across wide landscapes having massive effects.
The groups I support are Trout, Unlimited and Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. I quit the Sierra Club, the Nature Conservancy, and several others.
Here is a real-life paper on the waste isolation pilot plant in NM. Also I worked on what we called Yucky Mountain Waste repository in Nevada. That was always political, never scientific. Then there's the nuclear power plant in NC. The is the media report on that follows. I neither trust the government (having worked for them), nor the media, but perhaps you do. It is no doubt easier to be cavalier about possible radiation exposure with cancer as a result if you don't have experience of it.
link for WIPP https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-105057.pdf
RALEIGH, N.C. (WTVD) -- Wake County reported emergency sirens went off at the Duke Energy Harris Nuclear Plant in southwest Raleigh Monday morning.
There is no emergency, officials said, and the public needs no protective action.
A Duke Energy spokesperson told ABC11 the plant is operating safely.
My mother and sister died from cancers. They lived very close to TMI in York, PA. My husband died from 2 cancers. I have had cancer with a recurrence. We both worked for Los Alamos National Lab and visited the Nevada Test Site, he more often than I.
The government admits culpability with their EEOIC programs (energy employees occupational illness compensation). I want to post something from CCNS, a local group that monitors LANL nuclear activities. It's long. Maybe I'll post it as a note.
Sorry for your and the family's cancer bouts. Know how rough that is. Is the DOE/govt. paying any of those claims (medical bills, wage loss benefits) in relation to cancer claims as a result of the work/in the course of the work at those labs/test sites?
Oh, TMI neither paid for anything nor admitted culpability. I have to admit I haven't followed up closely to find out if there were statistically increased cancer deaths after the melt down. St George Utah in the path of the fallout from the Nevada Test Site had had statistically significant increases in cancers and deaths.
I keep making typos. Time to go to bed.
Yes. They are huge programs. They pay out a sum, then they pay out for impairment, then they pay out for HHA and nurses. etc etc.
You may decide that everyone in my family gets cancer. My late husband and I moved away from PA in 1966. Two of my sisters moved away before TMI. Neither of them got cancer, FWIW. Of course, my husband and I are not related by blood, so that's not relevant either.
Thanks for the look at the history of nuclear over the last half century. Not being much of a moviegoer, I never watched "The China Syndrome" - didn't have any idea what it was about until now. Despite there still being lots of opposition to nuclear, I'm encouraged by recent signs of a trend toward bipartisanship. It would be great if a sensible relaxation of regulations and permitting led to lower costs and faster builds.
You bet. Fingers crossed.
I’m not sure the pushback will amount to much. Nukes have been a forbidden topic all these years, but as soon as the big tech companies need power, it becomes ok? I realize that I’m in full conspiracy mode, but it’s no coincidence that when the “information managers” wanted to change the message, the message changed in an instant. This is separate from the point about whether nuclear is needed and safe (it is). But I’m not going to climb on board with these scoundrels just because I like the new message.
Fair enough. They give you good reason to be suspicious.
In this case, it could be as simple as the fact that no politician is going to survive an election when the lights go out to your house in order to provide juice to Big Tech/AI. So, AI had to figure something else out.
What they will figure out first is the low hanging fruit and the long-term solution to their growing power needs. The LHF are places like Palisades, TMI, etc. and nat gas. They all realize that there is zero chance of nonreliables ever providing the 8760 hours of high quality electricity the need each year. The Renewable Energy Certificates were a feel-good facade.
It is indeed interesting that you use Classic Physics as the basis for this -- because Classic Physics got three thing wrong when it stated that:
"...no power supply can produce more output power than input power... "inferring that 'over-unity power production' was impossible...":
1.) it "stated" the position - well before Nikola Tesla began his seminal work on "AC power" - first discovering multi-phase AC power in 1882 - and then, between 1890 and 1894:
2.) discovered / invented and US Patented all of the information (some unclaimed - but in the text) needed to "electronically develop" - all of the clean electricity the world would ever need.
It's all there.
"We just didn't look for it" -- because Classic Physics got the "substance of the position correct:
--- it just used "verbiage" - which is what most people go by - that was totally incorrect --
--- subsequently:
--- "... we were been taught that "over-unity power production was impossible - by Classic Physics - see #1 above.
3.) Had the stated position been stated:
--- "...no power supply can develop more power than it is physically and electrically capable of producing..." -- both the position and the statement - would have been correct -- and we wouldn't be in the Global Warming / Climate Change situation we have created for ourselves by continuously burning fossil-based fuels through today.
A series of professional laboratory tests / conducted on Sept. 10th. 1984 - by Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc. (est. 1896) -- at their facility / with their test equipment / tested "...their way.." conclusively proved that the "position" was valid -- but the "verbiage" was incorrect.
It proved that because tests were made on a 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC power system, i.e. a 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC motor driving a 60 Hz AC power generator / with was powering a 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC motor as the load.
The "pure", i.e., no harmonics or electric noise - perfect sinusoidal AC waveform:
--- 120 VAC / 60 Hz / 0.06 A (60 mA) power continuously delivered to the 120 VAC / 60 Hz / AC load motor:
--- was 293% over the 75 VAC / 60 Hz / 0.03 A (30 mA) input power connected to the120 VAC / 60 Hz AC drive motor.
Why-- because the 120 VAC 60 Hz output power - developed by the 60 Hz AC power generator:
--- WAS NOT - the power directly delivered to the AC load motor.
The AC generator's 120 VAC / 60 Hz / output - became the input power to a "60 Hz resonant tank circuit" - made up of the armature windings of the AC load motor, and:
--- a calculated capacitor bank that had ben connected across the two input power leased to the AC load motor.
The "60 Hz. resonant tank circuit" became the power source for the AC load motor:
--- causing the 60 Hz AC generator based "load" value to it's drive motor to be decreased - :
--- to where the 120 VAC / 60 Hz / wall-jack power "connected to the AC drive motor:
--- had to be decreased to the 75 VAC value:
--- so that the 60 Hz power generator could revolve at the correct RPM to produced both the required 60 Hz input frequency - and required 120 VAC voltage value - to the "resonating 60 Hz tank circuit".
A resonating tank circuit ALWAYS develops (internally it's:
--- "...absolute maximum power level..." - while ALWAYS simultaneously causing the "connected input power level" to be reduced to it's:
--- "...absolute minimum power level..." -- full stop.
This has been taking place:
--- in every "radio station to radio station tuning circuit", i.e., the "tank circuit" - in every AM or FM radio manufactured since Tesla invented the radio and applied for his US Patent for the radio - on Mar. 20th. 1900:
--- over 124 years ago.
Classis Physics has yet to correct the incorrect "verbiage" it's original stated position.
A present day / US developed and US Patented (US 5,146,395):
--- solid-state / 2.5 cu. ft. / 30 lb. / less than $2000 per unit / modular;
--- "stand-alone"- it has it's own on-board "start-up" power source / eliminating any "recharging" or external power source or power grid connection;
--- which can have multiples of units connected together for a higher output power level -- just like batteries;
--- with a "selectable" / continuous / output power level up to and including:
--- 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps - with equals
--- 230,400 Watts; 230.4 kW; or .2304MW - how ever described:
The power supply can be installed either;
a.) "at" any existing or new "stationary" location; i.e., any home; apartment; office-space (per floor - per occupant); commercial; or industrial site --world-wide, or;
b.) "in" any existing or new "movable" vehicle, of any size, shape, and weight - be it battery or internal combustion engine powered - on land / sea / or in the air as a propeller; rotor; or hi-bypass jet powered private or commercial aircraft - making available
b1.) unlimited range of travel and / or movement, and
b2.) unlimited time of travel and / or range.
The power supply technology is going to Europe:
--- at the official request of EC President Ursula von der Leyen - for funding through the EC / EIC Accelerator for Breakthrough / Disruptive Technology:
because:
--- every US Government Agency / US University / and US commercial entity contacted over the 60+ year history of the Project: -- refused both financial and or technical aid.
In fact: -- US/DOE-IPO Title 17 prohibits the US Government from funding any power supply that isn't either "commercialized" or "accepted" - both terms undefined -- but you get the drift.
Also -- through the Project's Europe partner -- it is being readied for manufacturing and installation for use throughout the Middle East and Africa markets.
It is going to "hit the fan" here in the US and UK electric bill paying consumer markets:
--- when they find out that their respective Governments have denied them the:
--- long term leased / universal / set-billing rate with with no increases of:
--- $0.10 "...per hour... - $72 per 30 day month per unit / for all of the clean electricity each location can use.
So while people "wax eloquent" about the features of "Nukes", both Fission and mini Fusion:
--- which is nothing more than an incredibly expensive / super long term nuclear waste producer "tea pot" - (I worked in the initial Yucca Mountain Depository design - until it was discovered that it was being located over a very deep fresh water source - and shut down);
--- to make steam / to end up turning a revolving AC multi-phase AC power generator:
--- which Tesla also invented and US Patented:
you just might want to think twice about advocating for spending all of that money and time -- as they won't be needed.
The US Patent can be Googled - and both a fuller explanation on the Northwest Labs test results - and expanded definition of how and why the design in the Patent works - is available - if you contact me via email - at scotsman7@comcast.net
As to "Robert Incognito" -and his "comment" on FEMA's response to Hurricane Helene:
--- go back and suck-up more of your MAGA cool-aid - or cheap beer -- because I'll bet no one saw you "get off your couch" and go down there to help.
Sorry but I have to correct you. I am an RF Electronics Engineering Technician. It is true that a resonant circuit can be measured to have vastly greater current or voltage circulating within it than is being supplied. But you cannot extract useful work aka. power from it. The current and voltage are 90 degrees out of phase with each other, giving a power factor close to zero. Trying to extract power introduces resistance and massively drops the notional amplification, or what we technologists call the Q factor of the circuit. There are many patents that contradict the laws of physics and thus will never result in useful technologies. Disclaimer: I do own shares in Nuscale, the company that is probably closest to cranking out hundreds of SMRs on a production basis, so I might be biased. But any basic text book on radio technology will tell you the same thing.
You were doin' fine till the end. Keep it civil and don't make it personal or your comment gets deleted.
As to the technology that you detailed, we'll be watching for this revolution in Europe. As bad as they've screwed up energy/environmental policy they damn sure need it. Send it to Germany first.
Unfortunately, with everything corrupt in the US government, there will be safety issues due to regulatory incompetence and lack of morality where self gain is valued above all else. Also, misinformation and disinformation censorship will prevent and checks and balances or accountability since in government results don’t matter (see the FEMA response to hurricane Helene).
If this nascent momentum ever actually takes hold, and if there are safety issues, it's not obvious to us government corruption will necessarily have anything to do with it. We're going to take the high road and assume the NRC will proceed with abundant caution (with no changes to applicable CFRs they won't be doing anything too dynamic).
Having actually finished only Vogtle 3&4 in the last couple decades in the U.S., we don't have the experienced labor force. Same with nuclear engineers. China's universities have hoards more nuclear and petroleum engineers than U.S. universities presently.
When you don't play golf for a long time, your ability is not as sharp. It won't take a conspiracy to cause safety issues necessarily. But, don't look for them. Look at the number of hours of safe operation across 94 operating reactors. We can do this.
Yes, you are correct.
Nice article. A ray of hope. You probably thought about this, but I believe the nuclear movement will also have another rich and powerful enemy in the green grifting mega companies that are developing solar and wind, much like the oil companies in the 60’s and 70’s.
Lots of windmill remorse is starting to surface. I remain hopeful that I will be buying some very cheap, lightly used real estate very soon.
Oh the spinning green crucifix and sun catcher companies will work hard to stop nuclear. But don't forget about natural gas. They want to badly be the stable base load and balancing for wind and solar. And with fracking, they'll do so a lot quicker than we'll license and build nuclear reactors for some time yet. Same goes for AI's electricity demand.
Well, I think the mega solar and wind companies will start backing off from new projects if the subsidies get reduced, and there's a groundswell of pressure building against those subsidies, coinciding with the groundswell of change toward favoring nuclear.
Hope you are right, Al.
They're going to fight the loss of subsidies.
"If we die, you all die" kinda thing.