Homepage Forums Story, Art, Song, Self Expression Awareness to government and other countries

Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #3833
    AvatarAeronaut
    Member

    Big Type!

    Brian, the easiest thing in the world is to think, and therefore act, precisely what those who think little, if at all, do. The product here is not the hardware, but the engineering services before, during, and after the sale. I mentioned these companies because several of their existing markets, such as MRI and CAT scanners, not to mention fission reactors and jet engines, give them a vested interest in leading the pack out of the starting gate.

    But who’s to say if any of them can dominate any of the add-on markets?

    #3838
    AvatarBrian H
    Member

    Aeronaut wrote: Big Type!

    Brian, the easiest thing in the world is to think, and therefore act, precisely what those who think little, if at all, do. The product here is not the hardware, but the engineering services before, during, and after the sale. I mentioned these companies because several of their existing markets, such as MRI and CAT scanners, not to mention fission reactors and jet engines, give them a vested interest in leading the pack out of the starting gate.

    But who’s to say if any of them can dominate any of the add-on markets?

    What’s your point? What do they have to offer, and what would they want for it? Please take on board what Eric asserted in the video: throwing more money at the project than he has envisaged/requested is pointless, as each major datum uncovered in the RnD process determines which of several branches in a decision/exploration tree come next. Trying to force-march by exploring all branches of the tree at once is virtually un-do-able, and would yield very little in time saved anyway.

    Once Eric has a licenseable design in hand, they can get one and leverage their existing markets and staff skills to their hearts’ content. What do you have to “sell” them now? Anything resembling the exclusivity which would be the SOLE benefit they would want or could use by “getting in early” is a major no-no, and desperately dangerous. Remember what happened to the EV1!

    There are plenty of smaller outfits which would qualify as “early adopters” and would have a far more collegial approach to hastening and helping development.

    (BTW, what in what I’ve said suggests that I thought marketing hardware was the point? :-S )

    I remain convinced that you have not thought through Eric’s original plan, and the reasons for it. It is radical, hardly “what others think and do”. It means throwing the opportunity to make the “hardware” open to all qualified comers world-wide simultaneously. This guarantees vigorous competition in adoption, implementation and technological innovation, IMO.

    The place where I believe “early adopters” and partners would help is in making sure that there is no “fund-raising gap” between the conclusion of the proof-of-science research and the onset of the generator RnD project. I suspect that Eric already has a number of qualified assurances in hand or close to it that such funding would flow quickly if his team can do controlled p-B fusion with the projected low-to-moderate X-ray emission and low neutron emission claimed. That’s the key.

    #3857
    AvatarAeronaut
    Member

    What others think, say, and do is what the mass media used to be about. Nowadays there’s a bunch of splinter media that can be monitored in places like Google Trends. This is beginning to be referred to as “the global consciousness”. Our goal ultimately is to influence this. Ford was all over Google Trends the morning after the Knight Rider pilot, for instance. In the short term, early adopters will have very brief exclusivity relative to how early they got in and how fast the bandwagon gains momentum. I submit that it’s foggy, so we don’t really know much about the hill, other than it is there, and very little effort should be needed to get the bandwagon rolling.

    While the instant credibility these heavy hitters can lend FF is desirable, they are mentioned only as candidates for an open-source license. I personally favor the collegial collaboration model that software had back in the Day, when Microsoft was still known (to some geeks, anyway) as a place that wrote interpreters and assemblers.

    No way, no how, do I advocate letting any one corporation other than LPP controlling FF, and I apologize if I ever did give the impression that I do.

    What we have to sell is a device (concept, actually) that can help real people solve real problems while the scientific and engineering challenges are being minimized, which may turn out to be never. By offering blueprints with the license, the early adopters can raise the bar on green vs. greenwashing.

    Its all about separating the dreamers from the doers.

    #3864
    AvatarBrian H
    Member

    Aeronaut wrote: What others think, say, and do is what the mass media used to be about. Nowadays there’s a bunch of splinter media that can be monitored in places like Google Trends. This is beginning to be referred to as “the global consciousness”. Our goal ultimately is to influence this. Ford was all over Google Trends the morning after the Knight Rider pilot, for instance. In the short term, early adopters will have very brief exclusivity relative to how early they got in and how fast the bandwagon gains momentum. I submit that it’s foggy, so we don’t really know much about the hill, other than it is there, and very little effort should be needed to get the bandwagon rolling.

    While the instant credibility these heavy hitters can lend FF is desirable, they are mentioned only as candidates for an open-source license. I personally favor the collegial collaboration model that software had back in the Day, when Microsoft was still known (to some geeks, anyway) as a place that wrote interpreters and assemblers.

    No way, no how, do I advocate letting any one corporation other than LPP controlling FF, and I apologize if I ever did give the impression that I do.

    What we have to sell is a device (concept, actually) that can help real people solve real problems while the scientific and engineering challenges are being minimized, which may turn out to be never. By offering blueprints with the license, the early adopters can raise the bar on green vs. greenwashing.

    Its all about separating the dreamers from the doers.

    I’m trying to sift from what you write the answer to my question: “what is to be gained with public support and awareness?” It is very hard to sell a concept to the non-conceptual public, or to businesses. You, and to some extent Rezwan, seem to be prepared to have the Society batter its brains out trying to do both. For what? Eric’s research will or will not succeed. If it succeeds, it will be easy to attract potential early adopters to fund $3-5Million worth of engineering refinement. What is NOT worth doing is turning that over to someone else to accomplish, for example. That is an open invitation to loss of control, or being “squelched”.

    But as a side note, there is something I haven’t mentioned before, because it isn’t quite yet an issue: once something is demonstrated to be possible, it is not necessary to divulge the secrets of how it’s done to have others duplicate or surpass your results. The CERTAINTY that it is possible is enough. I am not saying this is a threat to LPP; rather on the contrary, I am saying that once Eric succeeds in Phase I, you can be sure that within a few years somewhere someone or someones will have a working FF generator. And then everyone will be hell-bent to duplicate that. SO: LPP’s plan to be absolutely open and free-handed with licenses is the best way to keep some leadership and influence; attempting to control the information is bootless.

    #3866
    AvatarAeronaut
    Member

    Brian H wrote:

    I’m trying to sift from what you write the answer to my question: “what is to be gained with public support and awareness?” It is very hard to sell a concept to the non-conceptual public, or to businesses. You, and to some extent Rezwan, seem to be prepared to have the Society batter its brains out trying to do both. For what? Eric’s research will or will not succeed. If it succeeds, it will be easy to attract potential early adopters to fund $3-5Million worth of engineering refinement. What is NOT worth doing is turning that over to someone else to accomplish, for example. That is an open invitation to loss of control, or being “squelched”.

    But as a side note, there is something I haven’t mentioned before, because it isn’t quite yet an issue: once something is demonstrated to be possible, it is not necessary to divulge the secrets of how it’s done to have others duplicate or surpass your results. The CERTAINTY that it is possible is enough. I am not saying this is a threat to LPP; rather on the contrary, I am saying that once Eric succeeds in Phase I, you can be sure that within a few years somewhere someone or someones will have a working FF generator. And then everyone will be hell-bent to duplicate that. SO: LPP’s plan to be absolutely open and free-handed with licenses is the best way to keep some leadership and influence; attempting to control the information is bootless.

    Dang it Brian, you’re making me think! 🙂
    Public support and awareness will be required in order to loosen regulatory issues despite the entrenched lobbying of several industries. But in an elegant campaign design, it happens as a cascading byproduct, not the direct target.

    We don’t sell anything. Selling is hard work, compared to making it easy for leaders with specific problems to buy FF heaters. Hmmm…. maybe I should target boiler manufacturers as well as end user companies. Since boiler operators have to be licensed, I’m sure the manufacturers do, too. The hardest part of this will be getting them to believe they really can run almost anything they can build for less than $10 a year in fuel costs. Maybe I should lead with a $10,000 annual fuel bill…….

    This market is engineers, marketers, and salespeople, not physicists and scientists. They read blueprints, not patents and physics constants. I’m sure they’ll also be highly motivated to further develop their competitive edge by making making the boiler power its own pumps and fans, then ramp up into powering more of the building.

    I had a gig cleaning a very old industrial boiler room a few years back. Cleaner, quieter, smaller have to be important benefits. (I almost said selling points- old habits die hard).

    The PC was an incredibly constipated design for its day. IBM controlled the architecture- the specification- and reaped branding benefits that were off the charts. Google is one of many competing search engines. Since the goal never was to concentrate manufacturing, I fail to see how “control” is an issue.

    #3867
    AvatarBrian H
    Member

    Aeronaut wrote:

    I’m trying to sift from what you write the answer to my question: “what is to be gained with public support and awareness?” It is very hard to sell a concept to the non-conceptual public, or to businesses. You, and to some extent Rezwan, seem to be prepared to have the Society batter its brains out trying to do both. For what? Eric’s research will or will not succeed. If it succeeds, it will be easy to attract potential early adopters to fund $3-5Million worth of engineering refinement. What is NOT worth doing is turning that over to someone else to accomplish, for example. That is an open invitation to loss of control, or being “squelched”.

    But as a side note, there is something I haven’t mentioned before, because it isn’t quite yet an issue: once something is demonstrated to be possible, it is not necessary to divulge the secrets of how it’s done to have others duplicate or surpass your results. The CERTAINTY that it is possible is enough. I am not saying this is a threat to LPP; rather on the contrary, I am saying that once Eric succeeds in Phase I, you can be sure that within a few years somewhere someone or someones will have a working FF generator. And then everyone will be hell-bent to duplicate that. SO: LPP’s plan to be absolutely open and free-handed with licenses is the best way to keep some leadership and influence; attempting to control the information is bootless.

    Dang it Brian, you’re making me think! 🙂
    Public support and awareness will be required in order to loosen regulatory issues despite the entrenched lobbying of several industries. But in an elegant campaign design, it happens as a cascading byproduct, not the direct target.

    We don’t sell anything. Selling is hard work, compared to making it easy for leaders with specific problems to buy FF heaters. Hmmm…. maybe I should target boiler manufacturers as well as end user companies. Since boiler operators have to be licensed, I’m sure the manufacturers do, too. The hardest part of this will be getting them to believe they really can run almost anything they can build for less than $10 a year in fuel costs. Maybe I should lead with a $10,000 annual fuel bill…….

    This market is engineers, marketers, and salespeople, not physicists and scientists. They read blueprints, not patents and physics constants. I’m sure they’ll also be highly motivated to further develop their competitive edge by making making the boiler power its own pumps and fans, then ramp up into powering more of the building.

    I had a gig cleaning a very old industrial boiler room a few years back. Cleaner, quieter, smaller have to be important benefits. (I almost said selling points- old habits die hard).

    The PC was an incredibly constipated design for its day. IBM controlled the architecture- the specification- and reaped branding benefits that were off the charts. Google is one of many competing search engines. Since the goal never was to concentrate manufacturing, I fail to see how “control” is an issue.
    As Rematog pointed out earlier, https://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewreply/2050/, you aren’t getting boiler level heat out of an FF generator, and the rig necessary to exploit its heat is far more costly than just using the electrical output to do the job. 2 pure electric FFs cost far less than 1 FF plus heat-recycling superstructure. Using the FF as a boiler heat source is like using a car motor to help your carriage horses run faster. The FF heater is a huge and hopeless deflection of effort and time and attention, IMO.

    #3868
    AvatarAeronaut
    Member

    Rematog made a rock-solid case for FF not being able to power a 3,000 PSI+, 21 stage turbine generator. He also priced out a He to air heat exchanger. I’m proposing a He to water heat exchanger.

    “Boiler” and water heater are terms that are often used interchangeably in factories. Depending on the application, the industrial water heating industry could see FF as a more fuel-efficient and eco-friendly way to make hot water and/or low-pressure steam. These outfits are already geared up to make multi-million dollar water heaters, so FF could look like a fairly minor design change, rather than a huge capital investment.

    If the fusion pans out, great. If not, they still gain a competitive edge until the rest of the industry has to follow suit or look like outdated greenwashers.

    #3870
    AvatarRezwan
    Member

    Brian H wrote:
    I’m trying to sift from what you write the answer to my question: “what is to be gained with public support and awareness?” It is very hard to sell a concept to the non-conceptual public, or to businesses. You, and to some extent Rezwan, seem to be prepared to have the Society batter its brains out trying to do both. For what? Eric’s research will or will not succeed. If it succeeds, it will be easy to attract potential early adopters to fund $3-5Million worth of engineering refinement.

    My motivation: “Eric’s research will or will not succeed.”

    If it does not: We still have a lot of work to do. The concept of aneutronic fusion is interesting to me. It may be harder to achieve. Eric may be on his proverbial first light bulb. It may take two more, five more, 700 more attempts. We may go through this two years and not achieve it, but get a better understanding.

    In any case, the concept of aneutronic fusion is inherently compelling. Clean nuclear energy. One way or another, it must be achieved. Part of my drive for public support is to get people to see that this is a door we (humanity) need(s) to batter down – something that human ingenuity must be applied to.

    That’s why the focus of educational outreach is both on the concept of aneutronic fusion and on the issues around fostering innovation and experimentation in key areas, even if it seems too difficult. Or impossible.

    It’s like that Sufi tale:

    The Mullah is looking around outside his house.
    A neighbor stops and asks, “what are you looking for”?
    “I’ve misplaced my keys.”
    So the neighbor helps him look. Now they are both looking around in the street.
    “So, around where did you lose them?”
    “In the basement.”
    “The basement? Then why are we looking out here in the street?”
    “There’s more light here”.

    Right now, aneutronic fusion is in the basement of human consciousness. We’ve only got a handful of people trying to crack it. Everyone else finds it too difficult, so they’re up on the street rummaging around energy dead end compromises like oil and hydro and conservation and nuclear fission.

    This frustrates me. Aneutronic fusion is the “holy grail” of energy. So we need to get busy. It’s the true energy challenge of our generation, and I don’t see us putting the appropriate amount of attention into it.

    Clean, cheap, abundant energy forever. Won’t happen by itself.

    So, my motivation is that I’m in this for the long haul. The outreach and education is insurance – encouragement to keep making it happen. If Eric doesn’t get it right away, I still want people working toward it.

    But, ideally, Eric will crack aneutronic fusion in the next two years with the DPF and his innovations.

    That brings us to scenario 2. Success! Fusion age! I’m not sure how well humanity will handle it. I have a bit of fear about the whole transition.

    At least we all need some warning, and some time to think things through. This is the other motivation for outreach: to lessen the shock a bit. By the time it happens, I want people to feel it’s long overdue. As it could happen in 2 years, that’s not much time.

    Also, I’m just trying to wrap my own head around the possibilities. Which makes this all speculative thought experiment.

    In a sense, this is naive. Human ability to predict anything is sketchy, at best. The black swan that would be unleashed with fusion – well, these meager attempts to contemplate it seem pretty weak.

    So, two contrasting motivations based on the outcome of success or failure.

    #3871
    AvatarAeronaut
    Member

    Very, very well put, Rezwan, especially the first light bulb analogy.

    Here’s a few links that only begin to explore industrial steam boilers in Google.

    http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/progsregs/nox/docs/bessette.pdf is about 2 pages describing the vast differences between industrial and utility steam loads.

    http://www.thomasnet.com/products/steam-boilers-6132807-1.html The online Thomas Registry. The full text of the 4th ad is quoted below. Looks like just what we’re looking for to expand awareness until the second scenario.

    Miura Boiler, Inc. – Rolling Meadows, IL
    Manufacturer
    http://www.miuraboiler.com/Steam-Boilers
    Company Profile: Custom manufacturer of boilers including steam boilers suitable for industrial applications. High pressure steam gas/oil boilers specifications include models ranging from 100 hp to 300 hp, 150 maximum operating psig, heat output ranging from 2,343,000 btu/hr to 10,050,000 btu/hr, main steam outlet…
    Steam Boilers Product Catalog with CAD:

    #3872
    AvatarBrian H
    Member

    Rezwan wrote:

    I’m trying to sift from what you write the answer to my question: “what is to be gained with public support and awareness?” It is very hard to sell a concept to the non-conceptual public, or to businesses. You, and to some extent Rezwan, seem to be prepared to have the Society batter its brains out trying to do both. For what? Eric’s research will or will not succeed. If it succeeds, it will be easy to attract potential early adopters to fund $3-5Million worth of engineering refinement.

    My motivation: “Eric’s research will or will not succeed.”

    If it does not: We still have a lot of work to do. The concept of aneutronic fusion is interesting to me. It may be harder to achieve. Eric may be on his proverbial first light bulb. It may take two more, five more, 700 more attempts. We may go through this two years and not achieve it, but get a better understanding.

    In any case, the concept of aneutronic fusion is inherently compelling. Clean nuclear energy. One way or another, it must be achieved. Part of my drive for public support is to get people to see that this is a door we (humanity) need(s) to batter down – something that human ingenuity must be applied to.

    That’s why the focus of educational outreach is both on the concept of aneutronic fusion and on the issues around fostering innovation and experimentation in key areas, even if it seems too difficult. Or impossible.

    It’s like that Sufi tale:

    The Mullah is looking around outside his house.
    A neighbor stops and asks, “what are you looking for”?
    “I’ve misplaced my keys.”
    So the neighbor helps him look. Now they are both looking around in the street.
    “So, around where did you lose them?”
    “In the basement.”
    “The basement? Then why are we looking out here in the street?”
    “There’s more light here”.

    Right now, aneutronic fusion is in the basement of human consciousness. We’ve only got a handful of people trying to crack it. Everyone else finds it too difficult, so they’re up on the street rummaging around energy dead end compromises like oil and hydro and conservation and nuclear fission.

    This frustrates me. Aneutronic fusion is the “holy grail” of energy. So we need to get busy. It’s the true energy challenge of our generation, and I don’t see us putting the appropriate amount of attention into it.

    Clean, cheap, abundant energy forever. Won’t happen by itself.

    So, my motivation is that I’m in this for the long haul. The outreach and education is insurance – encouragement to keep making it happen. If Eric doesn’t get it right away, I still want people working toward it.

    But, ideally, Eric will crack aneutronic fusion in the next two years with the DPF and his innovations.

    That brings us to scenario 2. Success! Fusion age! I’m not sure how well humanity will handle it. I have a bit of fear about the whole transition.

    At least we all need some warning, and some time to think things through. This is the other motivation for outreach: to lessen the shock a bit. By the time it happens, I want people to feel it’s long overdue. As it could happen in 2 years, that’s not much time.

    Also, I’m just trying to wrap my own head around the possibilities. Which makes this all speculative thought experiment.

    In a sense, this is naive. Human ability to predict anything is sketchy, at best. The black swan that would be unleashed with fusion – well, these meager attempts to contemplate it seem pretty weak.

    So, two contrasting motivations based on the outcome of success or failure.

    Interesting thoughts! Are you familiar (I am somewhat sketchy on them, though I’ve read a bit of their material) with the Bussard Polywell steady-state confinement attempts to do p-B fusion? I believe they’re working with a $10m cheque-book in hand or SLT, and have made claims of being ready to go into production in about 10 years. I don’t personally believe steady-state fusion can be sustained with human-scale containment, much less aneutronic steady-state. Some version of the nano-pulsing FF uses seems to me to be the only feasible way forward.

    Brian H.

    P.S. Here is Polywell’s budget projection:

    EMC2 Fusion Development Corporation has been formed as a charitable research
    and development organization in frontier energy technologies with emphasis on fusion.

    Fusion R&D;Phase 1 – Validate and review WB-6 results:
    1.5 – 2 years / $3-5M

    Fusion R&D;Phase 2 – Design, build and test full scale 100 MW Fusion System:
    5 years / $200M

    Successful Phase 2 marks the end of fossil fuels

Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.