Consensus Statement from Global Scientists

The Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere at Stanford University has produced a statement on Maintaining Humanity's Life Support Systems in the 21st Century.  520 scientists have already signed and any concerned citizen can sign as well.

I know a signature doesn't accomplish much, but it is just one more way to try to bring attention to the issues.

Solar Energy Breakthrough?

These stories seem to come along every so often.  Inventor Ronald Ace is applying for a patent on what he calls a "solar trap" which he claims will revolutionize energy production.  Mr. Ace seems to have a solid track record for invention.  Those privy to the details seem to see potential even if claims are exaggerated.

I hope it is an important contribution.  But the idea is still untested.  And there's always the matter of bringing production up to scale.  These stories are always more popular than discussing the kinds of responses Kunstler writes about.

Update (May 10):  Comments to the original story from Mr. Ace.

You will get your wish and the Solar Trap will be demoed by unquestionable independent credentials. Of course you are correct in doubting such an achievement. All that I'm willing to do for you at this time is say that thermo laws and mathematics must be trusted. When the math predicted what is now being claimed, I absolutely doubted it too - so much so, that a crude set up was prototyped in a matter of a few hours and the central physics prediction (math) was actually measured and found to be within small margins of error - that is instead of what was expected by "common sense" was mathematically and physically verified to be improved by on the order of 1000-fold. That was the physics heart of the invention. It was tested several times and in different ways and with vastly different materials, all producing the same results as predicted mathematically. Thus, there is little doubt at this time to mistrust the math when extrapolated to other higher temperature materials. The math is the same.

And for everyone with a sound physics grounding, it should be known that all materials transform themselves into excellent blackbody emitters at very high temperatures - the very worst thing that a high temperature solar collector needs! The Solar Trap is therefore, NOT a new or hypothetical material. That will not work! Nonethelss, the solar trap does NOT become a blackbody emitter at high temperatures because of the cunning/clever/sneaky quite simple innovation referred to and tested above - no matter HOW hard it is to believe, at this secret stage. Remember. None of us believed it too. That's not the issue now. The issue now simply becomes prototyping many different prototypes ranging from simple hot water rooftop heaters that are 10-fold more efficient than common units that you know, all the way to powerplant temperatures, still maintaining unheard of 90-98% efficiency. PS. You should also know that simple prior art rooftop units fall to near zero efficiency at 160F to, roughly 220F for the best units. How can we compare for you 0% vs our ~98% efficiency performance? That's why we say "roughly 10-fold better." This largely overcomes the expected T to the forth power phenomenon. At even higher rooftop collection temperatures (many hundreds of degC), how do we compare minus prior art efficiencies to nearly 100%? See the problem? No wonder some have so much doubt. So did I !!

Obviously, we'll do all that - allow others to "kick the tires" - and be built AND tested by highly reputable scientists that you will not slightly doubt. I am not asking you to believe this. Frankly, I don't care. But I do very much care about solving this solar barrier, and in the process - save lots and lots of other things that you surely would not imagine now. BE PATIENT! This is just a tiny news release. It's not a scientific thesis. Allow many foreign patents to be secured/positioned first - for America, ok? Wave a flag when you're convinced..

Then the doubters can have their curiosities satisfied. Be patient! It's just a really cool innovation given to us all without violating any physics foundations. I expect that you'll get a kick from it too. I hope that you'll say "Well I'll BE!! How simple is THAT?"
Ron Ace, inventor.

PS. I'd love to share the neat operation. International patents are at stake. That's the law. Sorry.

Update (May 11):  I overlooked this story on a potential breakthrough for energy storage.

Update (May 17):  Pete Danko offers a reaction to Ace's announcement.

Update (May 27):  Chris Clarke offers six questions to evaluate extraordinary claims for renewable energy.

Update (December 16):  The University of Houston has achieved the breakdown of water into hydrogen and oxygen gas using cobalt oxide nanoparticles and sunlight.  But efficiency is low and the nanoparticles degrade quickly.

Update (February 13, 2014):  A milestone in fusion energy research.

Update (March 1, 2014):  Some recent stories on solar energy.

Update (March 8, 2014):  The potential of spherical solar energy collectors.

Update (October 17, 2014):  Lockheed Martin says they are on track for a fusion reactor within ten years.  But fusion always seems to be "a few years away" and any new technology still needs time to ramp up to a scale that matters.

Update (August 28, 2016):  The Department of Energy is making efforts to develop wave technology.

Update (December 30, 2019):  Boron powder is being touted as the latest breakthrough in fusion energy. I hope it works, but it's always a question of how soon something like that can be scaled up.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/08/190683/patent-filing-claims-solar-energy.html#.UYqcaj5uhhk#storylink=cpy

Climate Change and End Times

A study by David C. Barker and David H. Bearce shows that people who believe in end times as described in the Bible are more resistant toward policies to slow climate change.  As Rep. John Shimkus says, "the Earth will end only when God declares it to be over."

So how do you overcome this mindset?  Just labeling light bulbs as being good for the environment makes conservatives less likely to buy them.  It's a clash of "realities" -- one based in fact and the other a fantasy.  I'm not religious and I try not to judge negatively those who are, but what can you say when the consequences are so severe?

Update (May 9):  Coming surprises and 99 rebuttals for climate change deniers.

Update (July 11):  Robin Globus Veldman takes a critical view of the Barker/Bearce study.