[Aeronaut]

I’ve also been dissecting the latest copy of Scientific American Earth 3.0 this weekend, which makes the case that there is a 6 trillion dollar energy market that’s screaming bloody murder that current technologies won’t be able to squelch the demand for more power at less carbon. This is editorial and VC sentiment, btw.

Carbon taxes will happen, if not this year, then in 2010. Glass and aluminum industries will be clobbered by these.

What I propose is target the early adopters, and sell them something like a kit plane- which has to be clearly labeled “EXPERIMENTAL”. Think how many corporations have 2M$ or more tied up in diesel generators that seldom get used, lol. Think they might be receptive? I sure do.

[Aeronaut]

Brian H wrote:

Here’s another eyeopener: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordTool

Click the button to get Google’s opinion of what focusfusion.org is about, and the only clear themes are nuclear power, followed by energy. Looks like we need to pick some keywords that we want to be known for.

😉 How about quick-clean-cheap fusion power?
By “quick” I mean: if you consider the time it takes to design, approve, fund, and build ONE fission plant, you’re probably looking at 15 years. In half that time, FF generators will be in production. Once begun, the race is over. The cost of one 1150MW nuclear plant is about $3.5bn to $7bn. For that amount of money, you could site, insure, and emplace 7-14,000 FF generators, at least, producing about 10X as much power. With NO follow-on waste storage and disposal costs. In the 7 or 8 years of production by 25 factories, that would require only about 60/yr per factory.

And the power costs would be at least 10x lower, of course.

Excellent summary, Brian. I’ll work that into one or more articles to bypass the search engines and drive mass opinion at the business executive level, submitting these articles to print media like business magazines and newspapers.

Here’s the gotcha- the catch 22 or chicken and egg with the search engines- we need to use keywords that a lot of people type into the search engines most days, while choosing keywords that don’t have a lot of other sites competing for them. Nobody, but nobody (statistically speaking), will look at Google’s 2nd page.

The more competitive the keyword- say green energy or alternate energy, the more links we need to build, meaning the longer its going to take to get on page one, unless we use PPC (Pay Per Click) advertising, which can be an expensive gamble.

A much safer $380 gamble is to write and pay the highest level promo fee at PRWeb.com . This press release could announce that we have the capacitors in hand, are building the breakeven machine, and licenses can be obtained at [web address and/or phone #] The reason for the promo fee is that it guarantees the press release is picked up by API, Google News, the blogosphere, podcast , et al.

In short, it guarantees the news story becomes front page news, and the resulting traffic influx is in-freaking-credible.

Another cheap way to get targeted traffic is to advertise on StumbleUpon. Each visitor only costs a flat rate 5 cents, so you can get 1,000 viewers for only $50.00. If those visitors deem ff.org to be in-freaking-credible, most of them will mark it thumbs up and it just might spread through the web like wildfire.

[Aeronaut]

Twitter just might be doable. Facebook’s demographic is over half the nation, with a large segment over 35, but you’ll be bombarded by trivial emails from others asking you to join their group(s). The whole key to the Web2.0 (social) sites is to build a following so you can direct them to other webpages of interest. If you have the dedicated staff, like a 60 person small online research/publishing firm, then it can be an effective strategy.

Co-ordinating media opportunities like articles, press releases, and videos are proven ways to build awareness of anything- FF, the blog, the twitter page, the facebook page, I’m sure you can see this devolving into the nth dimension as Eric mentioned.

[Aeronaut]

Brian H wrote:

About the cooling, we’ve been discussing this in the https://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewthread/283/

In a nutshell, FF runs 50% efficient, which means that the 5MW electrical output is roughly matched by another 5MW of thermal energy to find a use for. This means that for some applications it could be pitched as a 9 or 10MW reactor.

So there is a need for efficient thermal conversion here. Interesting …

I’ve read the patent and dissected the Google video since the above post. Eric is actually predicting 42% efficiency in the Google Talk video.

The best plan outline that I can see right away is to pitch it as an energy source that will generate 4.2MW of electricity and 5.8MW of heat (~20MBTU)/hr at temperatures of around 400 degrees F for building and low-temperature process heating, to minimize the thermal pollution.

In short, the ideal prospect owns a large pre-existing heatsink like a factory.

[Aeronaut]

Here’s another eyeopener: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordTool

Click the button to get Google’s opinion of what focusfusion.org is about, and the only clear themes are nuclear power, followed by energy. Looks like we need to pick some keywords that we want to be known for.

[Aeronaut]

Sorry if I got carried away with the technical end that is only the beginning of the hard core marketing version.

The simple way to do article marketing is to ignore the search engines entirely, and submit quality articles directly to the publication that you want to bring readers from, such as the Journal, USA Today, etc.

It helps to do your homework and contact the right editor or column directly, rather than send it blindly to their electronic mail room.

The content from one article can be repackaged as an MP3 for podcast directories, an MP4 for YouTube, and so on. There are specialized directories for web templates, screensavers, wallpapers, ringtones, and just about any type of file format you can easily create content for.

[Aeronaut]

That was the tactical view. The reason to publish articles to the article directories is to get readers from within the article directories themselves. Many of these readers publish blogs and web sites. Some also publish in print or other mass media. Hit a nerve, or otherwise really enlighten an influential blogger, and your article can be read by thousands within a week. This is why I mentioned controversial sub-topics in my last post.

The other reason to submit articles to article directories is to get the article indexed in the search engines, which means that when people type in “reduce co2” for instance, your article’s title and a short summary appear in the search engine results pages, which extends our reach beyond the article directory.

Your article’s title is the most critical part of article marketing- the headline, or title, which must include the keyword that you want to be visible in the search engines. It also has to be intriguing enough so that human readers will pick your article to read.

70% of the decision to read more (or to buy if you’re marketing a product) is made at the headline.

Here are some keywords that I analyzed a few months ago, and look fairly easy to rank well for:

Electric Source
Electricity Grid
Electric Consumption
Electric Resources
Reduce Emissions

Here are 2 more with a bit more competition, but still within our reach:

Emissions Credit
Reduce CO2

Here’s a sample of a workable title:

3 Easy Ways You Can Reduce CO2 Emissions Today.

Your resource box could read something like “To learn more about how to reduce co2 emissions, visit https://focusfusion.org” where our targeted search term, co2, is the clickable anchor text.

[Aeronaut]

Many thanx, Rezwan. I just posted a mini-tutorial over there giving a rough demo of what article marketing is, what it looks like, and how it works.

[Aeronaut]

Thanx, Rezwan. Man was that quick!

Article Marketing revolves around providing your readers with useful information, around 300 to 500 words. Well-written articles build a relationship of trust and authority with the reader, while not over-informing. Each article is used as bait to get the reader to click through to FF and/or inner pages such as Aaron”s tutorials or forum pages.

The all-important links are allowed only at the end of the article in what is known as the Author’s Bio Box or Author’s Resource Box. Links should be avoided in body copy, as should overt mention of specific people and companies. The acid test is to ask yourself if it reads like an ad. If the answer is yes, it needs to be rewritten.

Since FF is such a “small” part of the overall political, economic, social, and environmental landscape (or minefield), each article can target one or more of the tradeoffs involved in implementing something non-FF. Say backing up each kw of wind farm with one kw of gas-fired generation. Tradeoffs like water consumption and building new transmission lines out to the wind farms give us an almost unlimited source of controversial, unique articles that mention FF only in the resource box, after you’ve built your credibility and got ’em riled up enough to need to take the action of clicking one of the bio box links.

EzineArticles.com and IdeaMarketers.com are two of my favorite traffic generators. They also have some clout with Google, who currently controls around 60% of the general search market. What I’m leading into is called Search Engine Optimization, or SEO.

SEO comes down to getting a site to the top of Google and/or Yahoo for specific keywords and search phrases. What’s important to the general search engines? Hyperlinks, and the visible part that you click to go to a page. This is called Anchor Text. The more incoming links a page has, and the more authority each has (submitting articles to EZA and IM take care of this automatically), the higher it will rank in G and Y, give or take too many constantly changing variables to even mention here. SEO is a multi-million dollar industry that boils down to the information in this paragraph. The phrase you’re targeting is the clickable text).

Why can people make millions selling ideas this simple? Because the industry specializes in cloaking itself in a veil of mystery and confusion, so that when you Google SEO you’re given options of which persuasive sales letters you “want” to read.

Writing persuasive copy is how people gain wealth and influence over others. It became a science in the 1920s when practitioners such as Elmer Wheeler, Claude Hopkins, and Robert Collier were in their prime, right about the time that radio was going commercial.

I’ll do some keyword research and competitive analyses. My guess is that we own the keywords FocusFusion, Focus Fusion, and FF, but I’ll also be looking for easy to rank for related keywords in the “how to reduce” arena. These keywords can often rank “above the fold” in Google’s top 3 or 4 results and often hold that position for a year or more with no maintenance, all in return for writing and publishing one article.

Any particular terms you’d like to own, Eric?

For more information about article marketing and SEO, visit http://ez-onlinemoney.com/blog , where you can get 3 free downloads on these subjects from Josh Spaulding, my mentor. I recommend beginning with his book the $5 minisite formula.

[Aeronaut]

Nobody ever said it was going to be easy, Eric. By the same token, why make it harder than it needs to be?

I got a copy of Scientific American Earth 3.0 at WalMart yesterday. Page 64 starts a short excerpt from Auden Schendler’s new book “Getting Green Done”, which gives “my” concept the name of Asymmetric Warfare. In short, our job is to find out how we can make our small actions have a disproportionally large impact.

Article marketing, targeted to Fortune 1,000ish CEO and board members, seems the logical place to start. Targeting the WSJ and Inc Magazine can reach the new generation CEOs that little or none of the world has heard of. Yet.

[Aeronaut]

Thanx for the link, Tasmodevil. I read the entire comment under it and was struck by the similarities to FF’s situation- except no transparency. Both have patents, both can have a huge impact on energy, and thus the entire economy. I especially liked the part about doing an experiment- maybe something from the A&M;collaboration.

The claim about 500 miles is BS- it can only apply to drivers who conscientiously drive slow, plan their changes in speed, all the factors of stretching the range of any vehicle. As a ferinstance, my 2000 Focus wagon can get around 32 MPG by driving in the 40 to 45 MPH range on long drives like I was making coming home from 2nd shift around 1:30 on a long country road.

It seldom happens that way in real life, and the trip to work was often racing the clock. No savings there!

[Aeronaut]

From my experiences with grant research and writing about 15 years ago suggest that it will take at least 1 full-time staffer to figure crud like the above out and navigate all the flaming hoops, only to be hamstrung by government regulations once we’re awarded the 2M$. Don’t see it being worth the effort, or the risks, myself.

[Aeronaut]

It gets even better, Jimmy. When the PC came out, whoda thunk the Internet would be this big, and within that niche, that Google and Search Engine Optimization were even possible.

That’s the type of disruptive change that we’re looking at here, because the Space Elevator will debut around the time that FF reaches a commercial level of maturity. Incremental improvements to the tether strength make it just a matter of time. Raising the guesstimated 10 to 50G$ is considered the huge challenge over there.

Just for fun and games, let’s postulate a world where FF provides over half the world’s electric and heat needs, its light enough for large aircraft (lighter than the full fuel load), that the heat output can almost replace jet fuel, AND we have a Space Elevator.

Now that’s disruptive growth. Its a whole ‘nother economy that exists on to Visionaries and Utopians, lol. My guess is that with 100 of the right type of visionary on board, we’re off to the races!

The alternative is to sell to every man, woman, and child in most of the world, from the beginning instead of the end-game, where the snowball effect morphs into the bandwagon effect.

Something else I’m considering in my plan is marketing to people that haven’t even been born yet. I.e.- a 100+ year marketing plan.

[Aeronaut]

Excellent analysis, Jimmy. The only part I’m not convinced about is that the general public alone will be enough to overcome entrenched opposition with existing lobbying relationships.

I know how constipated my plan is, because I spent several days modeling it on my whiteboard a few months ago. Its based on how John F Kennedy’s campaign was organized, and comes down to creating and delivering upon the perception that the FF community, both here and in the business world, delivers the best value in return for the least [ personal fear of this group ] risk.

Rematog had a really great idea in the cooling load thread about Division of Responsibility. Somebody (Siemens, GE, Westinghouse) has to sell all the transformers, at least until they see the insatiable reactor market. Who’s going to make those x-ray collectors? that’s not for DIY’ers, any more than the Gyrotrons to convert the ion stream into pulses. In this model, FF becomes the hub of hundreds, maybe thousands of aftermarket parts and services, in addition to the industries that we haven’t even thought of yet, just like the PC did back in ’81.

[Aeronaut]

I’ll have to bring red tape next time I do an epoxy floor, lol. Also, we’ll need an export license and some FAA certifications to get the flight weight and space versions off the ground legally. Hope I’m not forgetting anything.

[Author]

Posts