[zapkitty]

Rezwan wrote: Thanks Benf for this link: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/10/ceres-20111024.html
These are the folks to have the conversation with to test the message.

Given the society’s origins and its acknowledged bias *(that I share) how much emphasis should be on fusion vs neutronic fusion vs aneutronic fusion? As in my stuff above? more aneutronic?

[zapkitty]

jamesr wrote: I think the first layout with the logos at the bottom worked better.

One comment: Although it may seem to clutter it slightly I think we should include citations wherever possible on any promotional material to back-up any claims made (such as the corporate coffee spending in this case). For reports & press releases they can be detailed directly in a footnote. For more graphical flyers & posters etc maybe the easiest way is to include a QR code graphic linking to a URL of the fuller referenced report on the website.

Been a long while since my flyer days but I was thinking the same.

Also, I was assuming that the EV flyer was monoichrome and small color images often don’t translate well to small grayscale images.

We can build up a library of flyer-friendly text samples and images…

My html approximations of the flyer aren’t worth the effort. For whiteboarding in the forum just plain text and relevant images. Save the formatting for the actual document file 🙂

And I reflexively converted to .doc but would anyone have trouble with an openoffice document in its native format? Attached is an updated sample flyer with a simple cite and a QR’d society url.

Edit: well… the forum won’t attach an openoffice .odt file… there’s one vote not in favor… u all get a .doc instead…

When the flyers are online we can add a direct link to the online version of the flyer in the QR… and we can add the complete cites as well 🙂

Attached files

fusionflyerprint.doc (21 B) 

[zapkitty]

benf wrote: Here’s a version attached….When the flier is finalized I would send copies to the car magazines and Autoblog website. Even though they mostly promote muscle cars and exotic cars, they occasionally highlight developments with alternatives. Green Car Congress is another website that might take notice…

Nice job 🙂

But it seems a bit too aneutronic-FF specific in contrast to the text because the neutronic contenders do have some waste… it’s just nothing like the unending nightmare that is fission waste.

[zapkitty]

… only 5 hours late… fell asleep…

attached is an actual printable version of a flyer… text approximatiom follows…

[strong]GRIDLOCKED[/strong]

22% BY 2035? EVs ARE BETTER THAN THIS

[em]The EV Market Is Gridlocked[/em]

A serious constraint on EV market growth is that projected grid capacity and extent cannot power a world of EVs recharging at will. Even optimistic growth estimates for renewables will still require enforcement of off-peak recharging. That will hurt market growth for decades.

GET FUSION

[em]Objectives In Mirror Are Closer Than Than They Appear[/em]

Times change. Fusion may be much closer, much smaller and much cheaper than many have thought. What is new is that various small companies are now investigating various methods of avoiding obstacles that have hampered the “Big Fusion” projects. Several of these fusion contenders are working to fuse standard fuels at standard temperatures but in smaller, more manageable configurations. Other contenders are researching advanced fusion fuels at even higher temperatures in even smaller devices.

[em]Fusion Unlocks The Market[/em]

The grid needs power and the grid needs to grow wherever and whenever it can do the most good.The result from any successful fusion contender would be the sustainable, safe power of fusion delivered in small commercial installations built wherever they are needed as they are needed. And the contenders expect research results in years at most – not decades. Any and all of their fusion technologies, if successful, could easily power and grow a global distributed grid that can handle an all- EV world. But these small companies all have one thing in common: they need you.

[em]Coffee, Tea… or EVs Everywhere?[/em]

The research budget of a typical fusion contender is less than what a large corporation spends on coffee supplies and yet funding for more agile fusion solutions has been nonexistent. The contenders need investment, especially from investors who’d like some answers within years, not decades.

The potential payoff? Even the most basic form of fusion would solve grid power issues permanently. Each successful contender would have its advantages and disadvantages compared to the others but any one of them would leave all non-fusion power sources in the dust. EVs would be everywhere because sustainable power on demand would be everywhere.

It is research and there can be no guarantees but consider diversifying investment into at least some of these companies… because even one success will change the world.

The Focus Fusion Society
[em]https://focusfusion.org[/em]

Attached files

fusionflyerprint.doc (19 B) 

[zapkitty]

hmmm… time slips by and the event is this weekend.. my try at a final cut will be up by 7:00 am eastern today. I’ll make the tag a society url … anyone else going to try their paw at one? 🙂

[zapkitty]

Thanks for the update! 🙂

[zapkitty]

amanasleep wrote: There is an independant variable which will continue to prevent EV’s from penetrating fully, focus fusion or no: Battery charging rates. Currently, the most advanced batteries safe enough for consumer use cannot be charged quickly, regardless of power supply, with most taking hours to acquire a charge. EV batteries that can be charged fully in under 5 minutes are probably a necessary precurser to EV adoption by the world consumer.

Nope! More like 30 minutes (Leaf) to 45 minutes (Volt) from empty to full charge… [em]if[/em] you have the power.

And you can “top up” when you get to work or other destinations… you don’t need to drain the battery pack first before you recharge it.

Got Grid? 🙂

The current EVs can already take a full charge much faster than the 4-6 or 8 hours often quoted.. it’s just that the fast charging gear needs ~220-240 volts at ~40 amps and thus the companies are aiming [em]those[/em] chargers at commercial installations or aftermarket accessories for residential users.

And the reason for that is, of course, the current state of the grid.

Got Grid?
Get Fusion

[zapkitty]

Even optimistic market projections have only ~20 percent EVs by 2030. That’s just from cost (which will go down) and range anxiety… which can be defined as being unable to recharge when you need it.

And those projections handwave a populace compliant in an off-peak recharging regime. Most people are unaware that in a ~20 percent future the grid can’t recharge their EVs during the daytime while they are at work… and when they discover this that percentage goes down even further.

Investing in inexpensive fusion contenders then becomes a smart move by those who have a stake in a rapidly growing distributed grid.

Yes, fusion really would unlock the EV market.

[zapkitty]

Brian H wrote: I’d be cautious about using buzz phrases like “agile fusion” without defining them. They cause unconsciousness and loss of interest!
:shut:

That’d be sad because just about anything other than ITER would be a more agile fusion solution 🙂

[zapkitty]

… objects in tandem mirror are closer than they appear…
Edit: 10:11 AM …forgot to set indent on the flyer doc… 3 downloads already? smokin’… 🙂

THE EV MARKET IS GRIDLOCKED
– GET FUSION –

A serious constraint on EV market growth is that the grid cannot power a world of EVs recharging at will. Even optimistic growth estimates for renewables will still require enforcement of off-peak recharging. That will hurt market growth for decades.

x ============insert graphic here============
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x ============insert graphic here============

[em]Fusion Unlocks The Market[/em]

Times change. Fusion may be much closer, much smaller and much cheaper than many have thought. What is new is that small companies are now investigating various methods of avoiding obstacles that have hampered the “Big Fusion” projects. Several of these contenders would fuse standard fuels at standard temperatures but in smaller, more manageable configurations. Other contenders are researching advanced fusion fuels at even higher temperatures in even smaller devices.

The result from a successful contender would be the sustainable, safe power of fusion delivered in small commercial installations much sooner. The contenders expect research results in years at most – not decades. These fusion power units could power up and grow a global distributed grid to handle a world of EVs. And these small companies all have one thing in common: they need you.

[em]Coffee, Tea… or EVs Everywhere?[/em]

The research budget of a typical fusion contender is less than what a large corporation spends on coffee supplies and yet funding for agile fusion solutions has been nonexistent. The contenders need investment, especially from investors who’d like some answers within years, not decades.

The potential payoff? Even the most basic form of fusion would solve grid power issues permanently. Each successful contender would have its advantages and disadvantages compared to the others but any one of them would leave all non-fusion power sources in the dust. EVs would be everywhere because sustainable power on demand would be everywhere.

It is research and there can be no guarantees but consider diversifying investment into at least some of these companies… because even one success will change the world.

x ============insert tag here============
x
x ============insert tag here============

Attached files

fusionflyer.doc (15 B) 

[zapkitty]

Ooops…

Rezwan, what’s the tag?

Just a society url?
An invitation to a fusion klatsch at the event? (who buys the coffee?)
A demand for a socialist revolution?

[zapkitty]

Brian H wrote: Heh. The ‘coffee supplies’ comment was hyperbole (I think!) I have no idea if they spend millions per annum on coffee …

Coffee supplies, and they definitely do… google “office coffee service”. It’s a necessary expense for enhancing employee productivity 🙂

http://www.vendingtimes.com
(2008 figures)

Per company average – $1,891,000
19 percent of ompanies spend over $1,000,000
15 percent of ompanies spend over $2,000,000

(… adjusts drip rate of caffeine IV…)

[zapkitty]

This variant needs more trimming but this much allows a small but legible graphic…
Edit 10/16/2011 05:20 PM: small stuff
Edit 10/17/2011 12:02 PM: … nibble… shift… nibble… shift…

UNLOCK THE EV MARKET – GET FUSION

[em]The EV Market Is Gridlocked[/em]
A serious constraint on EV market growth is the inability of the grid to support at-will recharging. Even optimistic growth estimates for renewables will still require rigid enforcement of off-peak recharging… and that hurts market growth and it will do so for decades.

x ============insert graphic here============
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x ============insert graphic here============

[em]Fusion Unlocks The Market[/em]
Yes, conventional wisdom has it that fusion is “huge and expensive with results always decades away…” But fusion may now be much closer, much smaller and much cheaper.

What has changed is that small companies are now investigating methods of avoiding the obstacles that hamper the “Big Fusion” projects. Several of these fusion contenders would use the same fuels at the same temperatures as the ITER and NIF efforts but in smaller, more manageable configurations. Other contenders are researching advanced fusion fuels at even higher temperatures in even smaller devices.

And each of the contending fusion methods would result in smaller and cheaper commercial installations much sooner than the “Big Fusion” projects. And the contenders expect research results in years at most – not decades. Smaller, cheaper fusion power units. [em]These[/em] would be the units that could power up and expand the grid to handle a world full of EVs. And these small companies all have one thing in common: they need you.

[em]Coffee, Tea… or EVs Everywhere?[/em]

The research budget of a typical fusion contender is less than what a large corporation spends on coffee supplies but the funding for more agile fusion solutions has been nonexistent. The contenders need investment, especially investment from people who are not afraid to rock the twin boats of current government fusion research and current energy suppliers. Investors who’d like some answers within years, not decades.

The potential payoff? Even the most basic form of fusion would solve EV power issues permanently and safely. Each successful contender would have its advantages and disadvantages compared to the others but any one of them would leave all non-fusion power sources in the dust. EVs would be everywhere because the power to charge them as needed would be everywhere.

It is research and there can be no guarantees but diversifying investment into at least some of these companies could be worthwhile… because even one success will change the world.

[zapkitty]

While waiting for feedback I’m making experimental cuts for a preliminary one-sheet layout… I’m thinking that we can get away with just one illustration: a simple graphic comparing current EV market growth estimates with with the market enabled by a global switch to EVs.

That would be placed after the first paragraph.

Then we explain how the success of one or more of the fusion contenders makes that growth possible.

And then the need for investment.

… back to the trimming… it’s gonna be brutal 🙂

[zapkitty]

Still needs serious trimming and condensing… comments, critique needed.

Worldwide conversion to electric vehicles ASAP?
[em]Not Enough Juice For The Grid And Not Enough Grid For The Juice[/em]
Change the rules: Get Fusion

A serious constraint on EV market growth is the inability of the current grid to support recharging when and where it is convenient. Current renewable energy sources can’t grow the grid fast enough for a worldwide conversion to EVs in less than decades and will still require rigid enforcement of off-peak recharging.

So a worldwide switchover to EVs without waiting for the grid and recharging habits to catch up needs cheap and sustainable power ASAP.

One answer to that is power from fusion.

How can this be possible? While conventional wisdom says that fusion is “always decades away” in fact it may be much closer, and much cheaper, than you think.

What changed? The scant funding afforded to fusion has almost all been channeled into government-sponsored “Big Fusion” projects such as ITER and NIF. These try to tackle big problems with big hardware in big installations… and they have equally big research costs to show for it. So various small companies are investigating methods of avoiding the big obstacles that the big projects wrestle with. And it so happens that each of the proposed alternative fusion methods would result in much smaller and much cheaper commercial installations much faster than their “Big Fusion” counterparts… and their research costs are much less as well.

None of these alternative efforts are “Cold Fusion”. They are aiming for the real deal and several of them would use the same fuels at the same temperatures as the ITER and NIF efforts but in smaller, more manageable configurations. Other companies are reaching even further ahead using advanced fuels for fusion at even higher temperatures in even smaller devices. And the companies expect tangible results in years at most, not decades.

So small private projects are underway researching smaller, cheaper fusion power units. These would be the units that could be easily added to a rapidly growing distributed grid to support a swift worldwide conversion to EVs. And these small companies all have one thing in common… they need you.

The research budget of a typical fusion contender is less than what a larger corporation budgets for coffee supplies, but while government investment in “Big Fusion” is anemic at best the funding for more agile fusion solutions has been nonexistent. The contenders need investment, especially investment from people who are not afraid to rock the twin boats of current government fusion research and current energy suppliers, and whose needs are for results in years, not many decades.

Are such alternative studies worth the effort?

Yes, they are. Even the most basic forms of fusion power under study should solve humanity’s power issues permanently… and safely. Each of the contenders would have its advantages and disadvantages compared to the other fusion methods but any and all of them would leave non-fusion contenders in the dust.

It is research and there can be no guarantees but diversifying investment into at least some of these companies could be worthwhile… because if even one of them succeeds then it will change the world forever.

[Author]

Posts