Engineering Analysis of the E-Cat Test (Mike the Engineer)

The following was submitted to this thread by Mike the Engineer

Warning: long epistle follows. Sorry, but readers will understand my excitement.
The test results are to me quite compelling. I will note the calculated COP includes all the heat loss from the wires supplying the current. Based just on delivery of power to the reactor I get more like a 5.6 number. In real life you won’t design your power supply wires to be glowing red hot. Bigger diameter wires and also you will recover that heat. You wouldn’t have a 5.6 COP due to inefficiencies in delivering power, but it would be greater than the 3.9.

Implications: Eventual energy independence for the USA. Clean non-polluting energy, certainly reducing carbon footprint. Electric bills cut in half, at least. This aids the entire economy. Europe will not have to be extorted by the Russians. I don’t see everyone going off the grid right away, but we will have cheaper electricity (50% cheaper?) and eventually will use less of it. Don’t see this as a replacement for gasoline in cars, just yet. But perhaps conversion to a modern Stanley Steamer some day. No flying cars. Jets and airplanes will still need aviation fuel. Coal, solar and wind will be hardest hit. No new nuclear plants built. Natural gas will still be in demand. Liquid hydrocarbons gradually trend down.

Okay, here is my engineering analysis: It appears you need to maintain electric power to the reactor, not just an initial jump start. This means you have a heavy power system (or else you stay connected to the grid). Efficient but heavy. This limits on aviation and also at least initially on cars.

Certainly can operate up to 1400 C, which is plenty good to extract work efficiently. I see a simple way to convert most of our existing power plants to the e-cat. Use a set of these reactor rods to heat all incoming air to very hot temps, say 2300 F. Hotter if the reactors can take it. Turn off your burners and force circulate this hot air through existing power plant boilers. You’ll make your steam, just like you used to. Steam will go to drive the same turbines to spin them and make electricity to the grid. Additionally, this is now a closed air circuit. You can recirculate this now cooler air back to the front and reheat. No loss of heat to the stack. You might need some natural gas for the superheaters. All your pollution control equipment can be dismantled. This would be a straightforward conversion easily performed by any number of engineering firms. Quick payback on capital investments as well.

With little or no costs for fossil fuel I would estimate your electricity cost might halve? From 14 cents to 7 cents per kilowatt hour. The entire economy would get a boost. Someone could check me on this. Other ways t o extrac t work would be, if it were possible, to weld or bond external jacket around these rods and directly heat your water. If jacket can be made of a material such that jacket can be welded to contain high pressure high temp water, then you have an even more direct transfer of heat. Molten salt would be a third alternative.
For home use I don’t see us going off the grid, you would need a miniature steam plant, unless there is some way to efficiently and directly convert heat to electricity, we don’t have that yet, unless Stirling engines could be used. But right now you would have a high efficiency energy source coupled with a low efficiency engine (Stirling). Needs more research.

However – clearly these reactors could clearly be used for direct heating of homes and office buildings and hot water. That’s non-trivial. Could it be used for air conditioning? Perhaps. There are refrigeration cycles that use heat for A/C. However, they’re inefficient and relatively capital intensive compared to other refrigeration technologies. But … perhaps. Overall effect would be to reduce your electric needs from the grid even more.

Benefits will not be immediate. More research needed. But IH doesn’t have to do all this by themselves. Once they can demonstrate a stable and safe product, they just manufacture the reactor components to sell, and /or license manufacture of reactors to trusted third parties. The American engineering system will figure out everything else. Implementation will take time however.

  • John

    Why do you believe only americans can do everything??

    • Just because he exhibited confidence in American engineers does not mean he thinks nobody else can do it. Why did you read it that way?

      • John

        Im American and I see clearly that america (MIT) postponed this for too long time. And I see clearly that this invention (If it really works, and I still don’t believe) is an ITALIAN invention because they insisted on Pons and Fleishman being right.

        • I’m American too, but I just don’t see any of this as a nationalistic thing. Rossi is Italian working in a newly minted American company that’s dealing with the Chinese and being triple checked by Swedes. Whatever. The world needs this tech. May the boldest win and spread it far and wide.

    • Ophelia Rump

      The propaganda machine keeps telling us that while it feeds us a mixture of dumb and emotional syrup. It’s no more our fault than anyone else who is being fed by a propaganda machine. You probably have your own brand.

      Welcome to the monkey house.

  • John

    Why do you believe only americans can do everything??

    • Just because he exhibited confidence in American engineers does not mean he thinks nobody else can do it. Why did you read it that way?

      • John

        Im American and I see clearly that america (MIT) postponed this for too long time. And I see clearly that this invention (If it really works, and I still don’t believe) is an ITALIAN invention because they insisted on Pons and Fleishman being right.

        • I’m American too, but I just don’t see any of this as a nationalistic thing. Rossi is Italian working in a newly minted American company that’s dealing with the Chinese and being triple checked by Swedes. Whatever. The world needs this tech. May the boldest win and spread it far and wide.

          • AstralProjectee

            As a whole in general I think America is a great place for freedom of expression of especially new ideas. Russia can’t even move past freedoms of expression for the LBGT community. I live in America and would never want to life in China or Russia for fear of being censored.

        • mike

          Amen pal.

      • mike

        Yea I think he was refering to the fact that it was an american company who bought Rossi’s invention. Even though it was a european discovery, it was an american company ponying up the money to take the risk. Does it really matter though?energy problem will be gone soon, everywhere, period. Yay.

    • Ophelia Rump

      The propaganda machine keeps telling us that while it feeds us a mixture of dumb and emotional syrup. It’s no more our fault than anyone else who is being fed by a propaganda machine. You probably have your own brand.

      Welcome to the monkey house.

      • mike

        I feel you O.

    • Bento

      America has a secret weapon.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK0Y9j_CGgM

  • Jag Kaurah

    If you can heat air, could we not use gas turbines to generate electricity?

    • Yes or even a fuel mixture. Rossi mentioned a while back that Industrial Heat had already started some R&D on some jet engines and also using turbines to generate electricity.

      • Jag Kaurah

        Exactly

        So the limitations mentioned disappear over time

      • BroKeeper

        GE through the US Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE), developed
        a nuclear direct air cycle heated jet engine in 1955 with a 2.5 MW thermal
        nuclear reactor. This program produced the successful X-39 engine, two modified General Electric J47s with heat supplied by the Heat Transfer Reactor Experiment-1 (HTRE-1). This project ended after 6 years and about $1 billion devoted to the attempted development of a nuclear-powered aircraft had ended in 1961 mainly due to many nuclear safety concerns.

        We now understand there is a IH E-Cat Connections to GE/North Carolina Company through Power Generation Services, Inc as posted earlier in the E-Cat World “The Industrial Heat Web of Connections includes GE”.

        Even though it is not a partner in Power Generation, a Jan. 28, 2014, PoGens press release notes that GE’s Digital Energy business made a strategic investment in the company. Soon after Andrea Rossi announced on March 11th he was working on a jet engine: “Rossi: Testing with Industry Specializing in Jet Engines”.

        Jet/Turbine engines can be used for either propulsion or electric power generation both major interests of GE.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Water has a better thermal transfer rate, that is why steam is used. Air thin. Water dense.

  • Jag Kaurah

    If you can heat air, could we not use gas turbines to generate electricity?

    • Yes or even a fuel mixture. Rossi mentioned a while back that Industrial Heat had already started some R&D on some jet engines and also using turbines to generate electricity.

      • Jag Kaurah

        Exactly

        So the limitations mentioned disappear over time

      • Brokeeper

        Agreed, GE through the US Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE), developed
        a nuclear direct air cycle heated jet engine in 1955 with a 2.5 MW thermal
        nuclear reactor. This program produced the successful X-39 engine, two modified General Electric J47s with heat supplied by the Heat Transfer Reactor Experiment-1 (HTRE-1). This project ended after 6 years and about $1 billion devoted to the attempted development of a nuclear-powered aircraft had ended in 1961 mainly due to many nuclear safety concerns.

        We now understand there is a IH E-Cat Connections to GE/North Carolina Company through Power Generation Services, Inc as posted earlier in the E-Cat World “The Industrial Heat Web of Connections includes GE”.
        http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/04/21/the-industrial-heat-web-of-connections-includes-ge-others/

        Even though it is not a partner in Power Generation, a Jan. 28, 2014, PoGens press release notes that GE’s Digital Energy business made a strategic investment in the company. Soon after Andrea Rossi announced on March 11th he was working on a jet engine: “Rossi: Testing with Industry Specializing in Jet Engines”. http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/03/23/rossi-testing-with-industry-specializing-in-jet-engines/

        Jet/Turbine engines can be used for either propulsion or electric power generation both major interests of GE.

        • AstralProjectee

          This should be posted as a thread here at e-catworld. Admin?

          • Brokeeper

            Thanks Astra.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Water has a better thermal transfer rate, that is why steam is used. Air thin. Water dense.

  • Curbina

    I think this is an analysis that applies to a short to middle term scenario, and assumes that no one else than IH is developping LENR based technology. Under those assumptions is very accurate. But I am counting in other’s being able to develop in paralell and speed up the massification.

    Other assumption was that the COP reported was the highest possible, thus narrowing the relatively fast achievable uses. Anyway, it’s a good and realistic analysis, one that I think we can expand as we get to know more about the tech capabilities.

  • Ophelia Rump

    You can always generate hydrogen to power you flying car. Try not to get depressed.

  • Ophelia Rump

    You can always generate hydrogen to power you flying car. Try not to get depressed.

  • Daniel Maris

    If the electricity is cheap enough you can make your hydrocarbon aviation fuel from air (supplying carbon via carbon dioxide) and water (for the hydrogen) thus avoiding drilling, refining and all the rest of it.

  • Daniel Maris

    Perhaps we should give the phases of development some names:

    Primary Phase/Hot Water Phase – Use in industries such as food processing and for domestic heating.

    Secondary Phase/Electric Generation Phase – Used to generated electricity at grid level.

    Tertiary Stage/General Usage Phase – Home E Cats/LENR powered automobiles, ships, trains and planes.

  • If Darden’s plan is realistic and he can destroy thermal coal use in industry over the next decade or so, I dont see this having any detrimental on the ongoing and quick expansion of solar and wind which is already cheaper than coal and gas in many places and only getting cheaper. Eventually, in a couple decades, power generation will be a nice mix of renewables with a smattering and ecat electrical power generation. And nothing is going to stop battery powered electric motors from a absolutely dominating transportation by 2025. I do expect that ecat technology will be adapted for heating buildings soon enough as well. Of course economically speaking, unconventional fossil fuel extraction will be a lost cause as well as oil prices will be too low to support anything but conventional 100 to 1 EROEI ratios. I also expect energy intensive carbon neutral biofuel production to get a big boost from ecat adoption into the industrial markets.

  • As I stated previously, I believe that the real COP of the latest E-Cat in SELF-SUSTAIN MODE (the normal mode for commercial operation) is in the 8 to 12 range. In that mode electricity is only applied to the E-Cat about 25% of the time. The fact that the new E-Cat needs no lead shielding tells me that they have learned more about the nature of the reaction and have found ways to make the reaction produce more heat with less energy input. I believe they will release the new COP numbers after the 1 megawatt industrial plant has been in operation for a long enough time for its control systems to be perfected and finalized. At that time I would hope that the installed reactor performing useful work that makes the owner money will attract attention from the US television news media. I expect prime time interviews with both Rossi and Darden. I would predict that local TV news will to be first, followed by one of the major national television networks.

  • LENR4you

    by Mike the Engineer: “Stirling engines could be used. But right now you would have a high efficiency energy source coupled with a low efficiency engine (Stirling). Needs more research”
    Yes, combustion powered Stirling engines are low efficient. Why?
    Because you need a high working Temperature difference for a good CARNOT efficiency. And therefore you are losing a lot of energy with the hot exhaust gases. -> low efficiency from fuel to electricity.
    With LENR there is no combustion anymore.
    With LENR there are no hot exhaust gases.
    The efficiency is near CARNOT.
    Example:
    Thot=1400 Kelvin
    Tcold=400 Kelvin
    -> CARNOT eff. = 1- Tcold/Thot = 1-400/1400=0,714!!!!
    With LENR powered Stirling Engine there should be a heat to electricity efficiency of about minimum 45%!
    LENR4you

  • LENR4you

    by Mike the Engineer: “Stirling engines could be used. But right now you would have a high efficiency energy source coupled with a low efficiency engine (Stirling). Needs more research”
    Yes, combustion powered Stirling engines are low efficient. Why?
    Because you need a high working Temperature difference for a good CARNOT efficiency. And therefore you are losing a lot of energy with the hot exhaust gases. -> low efficiency from fuel to electricity.
    With LENR there is no combustion anymore.
    With LENR there are no hot exhaust gases.
    The efficiency is near CARNOT.
    Example:
    Thot=1400 Kelvin
    Cold=400 Kelvin
    -> CARNOT eff. = 1- Tcold/Thot = 1-400/1400=0,714!!!!
    With LENR powered Stirling Engine there should be the heat to electricity efficiency of about minimum 45%!
    LENR4you

  • Sandy

    Mike the Engineer: Could the “skinny” E-Cat that was tested recently be used to power a nitinol motor that turns an electric generator? This type of electric generation system might be used to power a private residence and charge an electric automobile. Could such a system be practical and cost-effective?

    See this nitinol motor report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKmYqUSDch8&spfreload=10%20Message%3A%20JSON%20Parse%20error%3A%20Unexpected%20EOF%20(url%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DoKmYqUSDch8)

    • Ophelia Rump

      If the COP is 6 or above and temp 150 C you can power a traditional Steam Piston at only 20% efficiency and generate heat and electricity for your home, and sell back to the utility for a profit.

    • Omega Z

      I always thought that a 2 wheel space station with a shared center hub would be idle. Using nitinol to provide rotation by alternating nitinol bands in the shade side to sunlit side. Only the hub portion would lack gravity allowing for experiments. Also the hub would be stationary for docking. This gravitational effect wouldn’t require the expenditure of energy.

  • Buck

    I have a simplistic question.

    Why is it a naive idea to use alumina cement to attach 2-3 thermal couples to the central body of the reactor?

    The researchers spoke with concern of the specific design of the main body which enhances heat dissipation. If the attachment points reduced the heat dissipation capabilities then they could reduce the input power and still attain a target temperature.

    ??

    • Warthog

      There were already thermocouples in the reactor. Their primary purpose was to control the current fed to the E-Cat by the electronic Triac circuitry, but there is absolutely NO reason that they could not also be used for measuring purposes.

  • Linda

    This is great, I love this analysis. But we need to explore something that few have dared explore till now; the Deflation effect of the ecat.

    The problem is, as every good Capitalist economist knows, deflation leads to the “Crisis of Capitalism”.

    This is what is behind the endless QE and the manipulation of markets. Deflation will break Capitalism. Greater and greater efficiency leads to short term advantage for consumers, but long term pain for capitalists. Prices fall, as do profits. Capitalists need profits to survive. If Capitalists can no longer make a profit, what can they do but go bust?

    Imagine the global deflationary effects of LENR. When energy efficiency spreads across the civilisation, we are looking at massive, inexorable deflation, as prices fall by half or more, as this article correctly suggests.

    I’ll spare you the Marxist analysis, and instead give you a pop culture illustration; when the Star Trek universe discovered how to harness anti-matter reactions, limitless free energy wiped out the market economy. Free energy as we know eventually leads to transmutation, which leads to replicators, which leads to… you guessed it… the end of money. That’s Capitalism, game over, because really, when you can get whatever you want from a hole in the wall, who needs it?

    I am a Techno-Socialist, I proudly admit it. I am working toward a world without want or work, without scarcity, poverty, property crime or greed. I don’t believe we need to necessarily “take” from anyone to achieve this. As a Techno-Socialist, I believe that technology should be used to improve the conditions of all, equally; to raise everyone up, not lower everyone to the lowest common denominator.

    Most of you here seem to be cut from the same cloth. Except many of you don’t seem to have thought through the full implications of LENR, and accepted its inevitable conclusion.

    LENR will end Capitalism, and when that day comes, most of us will be truly delighted that it did. Some of us however may regret the loss of the “game” of greed and exploitation, the feeling of wealth and power we get when we contemplate the conditions of the poor people we walk past every day. Many of us have mistakenly confused and conflated “Capitalism” with “nationalism” and American power. We need to see these base considerations for the shabby ideological dead ends they are, and embrace a brighter future.

    LENR will bring Capitalism to a gentle close, if elitism, chrony capitalism, or our addiction to endless-war doesn’t destroy us first.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Reducing fuel costs to near zero is a stimulus. Consumers buy more, so producers must sell more. It is an increase in purchasing power of every dollar. There is more competition among dollars to buy goods of the same volume of availability, driving the adjusted price of goods up as the actual price decreases, increasing profitability while increasing purchasing power, thus driving higher production. Win, Win, Win.

      • Linda

        If I have access to unlimited free energy, I could theoretically build a machine capable of printing anything in the realm of nature, atom by atom. It might be slow, but I could print a bar of gold as easily as a peach, a pizza or a palace.

        If I could do that, can you explain to me how Capitalism adds any value in that scenario? Or why I would need a job, or money, or a Capitalist to sell me anything so that I can live to slave another day?

        We have 3D printers now that can almost do this on a microscopic scale. With Moore’s Law, and LENR, we can expect to see Replicators in our lifetimes. With LENR, I can generate megawatts of power in my basement. Can you tell me what possible use I would have for a grasping middle man trying to interject themselves uselessly into this transaction?

        Capitalism is finished. Eventually, the pace of democratising and socialising technology will make everything free, and work unnecessary. When that happens, Capitalism will vanish. No one will weep, except the elites who, like the Confederates of old, were forced to give up their slaves because their antiquated system was unsustainable.

        Slaveholders used to argue, like the other writer, that their system was “natural” and had always existed. But now we consider slavery to be a universal evil. As hard as it is to imagine now, we will soon look on Capitalism the same way.

        • Mike the Engineer

          Linda,

          Discussions of economic philosophy is important, but I know I will not have time to discuss in any meaningful detail. Perhaps we can have some kind of general agreement: You see with the Ecat an enormously transformative good. I see a positive good, but not transforming the essence of society or human nature. We both see good and positive things coming out of this, perhaps we can agree at least on that much?

          • lenr is disruptive, not at the technology level (it is quite conservative in a way, just heat, no radiation, no revolutional need), but at the business model level.

            some business were based on the need to have a big capital, big political network, big knowledge of safety, big workforce in one place, …

            LENR don’t need that. it is disruptive like internet is for tourism. and soon like AirBnb and Blabla car is for tourism.

          • Linda

            Yes.

          • Omega Z

            Reality is it will be a mixed bag. Somethings will be more distributed at smaller scale. Other will not & can not be. Energy distribution will be the biggest redistributed item.

            Minerals will be mined when & where as always as will the refinement of them. Even with LENR, It will be cheaper to ship 1 million tons of Iron then It’s equivalent 50 million tons ore.

          • Linda

            Yes 🙂
            But please see my other posts in this thread on Slavery.

        • what is finished is the centralized taylorist capitalism, based on the PROBLEM that to reduce the cost of goods you needed HUGE factories, that needed centralized direction and big capital.

          3D printers, internet, google search, E-bay, Uber, Blablacar, AirBnb, allows individual to be part of the big market…
          LENR add the possibility to participate the market of energy.

          centralised capitalism will die soon, and we will be back to the capitalism I see in emerging countries, a circle economy , a local economy of exchanging services…

          GW power plant are dead. gigantic taxi companies, will be replaces by self entrepreneurs (maybe already) connected by a platform like uber.

          the next revolution maybe is when laws will prevent any platform to take over the others, and maybe will force them to interoperate… net neutrality in a way.

          this is the real capitalism that economic-liberal (libertarian) demand, unlike the usual conservatism capitalism that DJ lords demand.

          the capitalism for everybody. the capitalism of the poor.
          not easy to prevent concentration, and despite state do the opposite today, this is the only role of the state to ensure that no big actor takeover the freedom to be a capitalist.

          this principle you will laugh is among the rule of LENR cities ecosystem…
          prevent a takeover by someone who don’t need the others…

        • Omega Z

          There is a difference between a dreamer & someone lost in fantasy.
          You have a machine that with a touch of a button or the sound of your voice replicates to your hearts desire.

          But Nature is real & the Sun Spits a Massive Solar Flare. The Earth is hit by a EMP that destroys all you electronic toys. You are helpless. you no longer know how to do for yourself.
          The Perfect Mass Extinction Event of Humanity.

          No Worries. I mean Humanity may set itself up for such an event, But your fantasy fails at another level.

          E=Mc2.
          When your replicator makes the parts for that car you’ll want, You’ll need like 30 tons of Nickel to produce the energy for that 1.5 ton car given the reality of efficiencies Your 3D printer will like wise need material to operate.

          All these resources will still need extracted from the earth with huge machines & processed in facilities to make it all available & useable.
          All provided by the “using your interpretation” Capitalist system.
          And all the things you want to make is part of a free market system. Another philosophy that is alien to Socialism.

          Ironically, What you ask for would be provided/developed by that System you dislike do much, A Free Market, Capitalist system. The system that provides incentive for people to excel.

          As to corruption & greed, Has nothing to do with democracy, capitalism, or Socialism. To be rid of that would require getting rid of people. Note China goes on a corruption eradication from time to time. This is the corrupt removing the previous corrupt.. Nothing changed.

          • Obvious

            AFAIK, the world has been going to hell in a hand basket, in someone’s opinion, for as long as there has been hell and baskets.

          • bachcole

            Somethings get better while other things get worse.

        • LCD

          The lack of really cheap energy isn’t preventing us from building replicators, it’s the laws of physics.

    • Omega Z

      Wrong Wrong Wrong.
      Do you know how much the computer you used to post this would have cost you in 1980.
      NOTHING. Only a few Corporations & Governments would be able to afford it. Thru technical advances, costs were reduced allowing more people to afford them. Deflation as you call it occurs around us all the time.

      The term Capitalism is simply/complex. Simple as in acquiring/formation of Capitol. Usually associated with the accumulation of Money to build/make something. Complex because it can actually refer to many things. Money, people, labor, resources of all types. In the past, China’s greatest capitol was manpower. They’ve used that capitol to create another. Money. This money allows building/buying things

      You will find Capitalism practiced in all system. Socialist or otherwise. The main difference is whether it’s primarily practiced by society as a whole(The West) or state sponsored.(99% in North Korea) How’s that working for them.

      Capitalism wasn’t some Greedy persons creation. it is a Natural Phenomenon that society uses to grow & benefit from that some academic gave a label to.
      If Capitalism should end, Society will soon follow.

      The introduction of LENR will possibly propel society to the point where there is enough resources to go around for all, But there will always be some with more. Technology will change the system, but Capitalism will exist as long as people do.

      The system you rail against allows personal gain. You have shades of gray from poor to rich. In a socialist system you have the few elites & everyone else is poor. With no incentive, things level to the bottom. Once you understand Human Nature, you will understand why Socialist systems that some think so great will never sustain itself. Even tho you have people game, abuse, & take advantage of the western economic system, It works because it takes advantage of human nature.

      When I was younger, An old farmer passed on some wisdom to me. He said When you have the option, you should always work with nature. You’ll usually fair well. When you fight nature, you nearly always get your a$$ handed to you. As a farmer, he dealt with nature daily. I’m sure he learned that lesson the hard way. He knew what he was talking about…

      • Linda

        “Capitalism good, Socialism bad,” is not really an answer.

        You haven’t addressed the core problem; limitless free energy allows zero cost production, making price zero, profit zero, and unmet needs zero. There is therefore zero need for Capitalism in the long-run. Because LENR.

        Your thinking is too short term. Capitalism is finish.

        • Omega Z

          “limitless free energy allows zero cost”
          Come back to reality.

          Oil, Gas, Coal all start out free provided by nature.
          As are Nickel & Lithium.
          None are limitless free zero cost.

          All Cost=Labor & ROI then Taxed.
          I don’t know what you interpretation of Capitalism is,
          But Without some form of Capitalism, Society is Finished.

          • Linda

            See, this is what I find amazing, that you live in a society that believes that Capitalism is the only possible system. It is not.
            As I mentioned to someone else, those who supported slavery and lived in the Slave States could not imagine a world where in which slavery did not exist. They quoted the Bible where it talked about slavery in casual terms, and called it a “natural institution”. They regarded black people as having no souls, because of course if they had souls, it would be immoral to imprison them and beat them, and we can’t allow even the thought that slavery is wrong, because we need it to maintain our society.
            Well, they actually were wrong. About everything. And now everyone knows it, and no one would dare publically dispute it, because slavery has been completely repudiated, and it is indefensible. Though no doubt, in quiet whispers, morally bankrupt elites do long for and discuss its return, and outside of America, slavers still sell people and children for money.
            Capitalism will soon come to be viewed in the same way as Slavery. It is unimaginable now, but it will happen, and soon. Abolitionists were regarded as terrorists in the southern states, and crazies in the North. But they were right. And they won. And we are all happier because of the work they did, although there is still a long way to go to achieve the full emancipation of black people in America.
            Most people do not wilfully stand on the wrong side of history. They usually do so for blindness or lack of imagination. Have a good hard look at Capitalism and ask yourself, “What if I’m wrong? What if this system of exploitation that I am defending is actually immoral?”

          • LCD

            Lol I don’t think you have a clue what capitalism is. If capitalism is a bad thing then rewarding people for hard work is a bad thing.

            I think you are confusing capitalism and the free market economy with so called corporate America and the issues that they bring up.

            Capitalism can still work just fine without so called corporate America.

            I’m actually not really sure what you are confusing it with, but you seem passionate about it and seem to want good things for society, but I’m sorry getting rid of capitalism is not on my list of things like “slavery”

          • Linda

            Thanks. 🙂

            Now let me put a challenge to you – if corruption is the problem, and not Capitalism, tell me how you can get the corruption out of Capitalism in a way that does not leave you with something looking a lot like old-style Socialism?

            I would suggest to you that it is impossible to have Capitalism without corruption. The temptation to greed and exploitation will always be there, and there will always be someone too weak to resist that temptation. That is a fundamental fact about Capitalism, you must admit.

            By way of contrast, Techno-Socialism doesn’t attempt to remove corruption from Capitalism. Instead, it solves the classical problem of economics by satisfying the needs and wants of people through technology and automation, NOT market forces.

            Market forces are incapable of satisfying human needs and wants in an equitable fashion, because markets are not equal. But technology, which can create abundance, and automation, which can create incredible efficiency to liberate us from drudgery are truly capable of eliminating the need for free markets altogether, by creating such abundance that the notion of a “profit motive” becomes completely redundant.

            Talk about cool, let me tell you what, that is a society I would give anything to live in! And if you thought about it honestly, I think you would too. 🙂

          • LCD

            I share your desire to live in a world like star trek. I really do. But unfortunately it’s going to take a lot more than the ecat to get us to that point.

            Capitalism doesn’t cause corruption, people do. There is no government without some type of corruption. And to be honest I’d rather live in the USA than in any other place in the world. But it doesn’t mean I’m satisfied with our society, I’d like to see it change for the better. The free market economy however, is not something on my list of things to change.

          • bachcole

            And, of course, there is plenty of corruption in communist societies, but Linda’s response will be that there has never been a national communist system? And I will say, why is this? No matter how much they try, they just can’t seem to make communism work on a national level. This is because, given the current level of human nature, it won’t work on a national level. It won’t work on a national level because most people do not love strangers. Communism only works when people are willing to sacrifice for those that they know and love. Most people can’t just sacrifice for some socialist ideal. It does not work. Most people won’t do it.

          • LCD

            I would probably say that most people hate helping out people who don’t care and will be happy to do nothing.

          • bachcole

            I sure as hell don’t. My number 1 gripe about Obamacare is that I and my wife bust our a$$e$ to stay healthy, then I NOT ONLY have to pay for people who do nothing to help their health, and who NOT ONLY engage in self-destructive behavior, BUT who also castigate us for trying to build health, to our faces, believe it or not. That really frosts my cookies!

            Thank you for allowing me to vent my rage at socialized medicine.

        • people forget that we have the same deflation with mecanisation and taylorism…
          price of goods like cars that were as expensive as planes, falled to what we know today.
          price of spoon that were sign of wealth, get to penny.

          we will simply find new way to be more happy, luxury, tourism, sharing of time, food… and energu willbe cheap…
          money is a measure of work , because you exchange it for something you value that someone cannot do without some effort that make him ask you some work in exchange…

          we have survived to the deflation of cost… thsi does not me monetary deflation.
          this mean that today middle class can have vacation by plane, and poor people can have a car or a moped.

        • Warthog

          Nope. The energy isn’t free. It will still take investment (capital) to extract the raw materials, process the raw materials, design (or redesign improved) products, get those products built, and get them to customers.. There will NEVER be any such thing as “zero cost production”. Much LOWER cost production, yes, but zero….no.

          Capitalism has one significant advantage……it works. No other economical system has done so, except in very small (and often religious) communities.

          • Linda

            Capitalism seems to work. But it is an illusion.

            You think it works because western civilization externalizes all of the true costs of production to far away places. You never see the true cost of production. Not unless you travel, or you lift the rock.

            The factories that make our computers spew arsenic into remote rivers with names we cannot pronounce. Old people die of asphyxiation in China, where you can barely breath
            for the pollution caused by coal fired power plants making GI Joes and Barbies for our ungrateful kids. Meanwhile, children in India go blind pushing computer chips onto circuit boards for us to use and throw away a year later. Wretchedly poor Brown people crawl over smoking garbage mountains picking through our trash, in a scene from hell that would never be allowed in America.

            The bill for all of that ecological devastation is coming due soon, and then we will see that the last 250 years of our history have been run at a catastrophic loss.

            Maybe LENR can save us. Maybe. But our chances are not good. Because we just aren’t learning fast enough.

          • Warthog

            “You think it works because western civilization externalizes all of the
            true costs of production to far away places. You never see the true
            cost of production. Not unless you travel, or you lift the rock.”

            Mah-larkey. The US is the ultimate proof that THAT supposition is bologna. Precisely WHERE did the USA “externalize all of the true costs of production overseas”. And it was the US that finally put the final spike in it by supporting former colonies becoming independent countries, much to the chagrin of their WWII allies, Britain and France.

            “The bill for all of that ecological devastation is coming due soon, and
            then we will see that the last 250 years of our history have been run at
            a catastrophic loss”

            LOL. THE worst environmental track record has NOT been garnered by capitalist countries, but by socialist ones (with the exception of Western Europe).

          • bachcole

            Successful communism requires a loving social environment, a loving social envirnoment where people are willing to sacrifice. That is what real love does; it sacrifices. And socialist idealism will not generate real love. If it did, socialists wouldn’t hate capitalists so much. True love cannot be manufactured by ideology. This is why families and small groups (usually religious) work well with communism. But millions or even hundreds of millions of people? No way, not now, not with the current level of human consciousness.

          • Linda

            There is a lot of truth in what you say, though I’m not sure about the role of “love” necessarily. Also, “sacrifice” is not really the correct word either, and “altruism” is also not helpful. We need to find the exact right aspect, because clearly, there is a perfectly rational case to be made individuals combining their efforts and prospering collectively, through uniting for a common purpose.

            Humans prosper by combining their assets and deferring (a good word) their direct self-interest for greater gain through collective action. When you shop as a person, you pay full retail. But when a “company” or group shops, they get big discounts, due to economies and efficiencies of scale. This applies to almost everything, including collective bargaining, collective security etc. This is why Capitalism are usually determined to smash Unions, so that they can use their overwhelming economic power against weak individuals.

            About the size of society, Socialism was tragically diverted into competition with Capitalism in Imperialist struggles during the 20th century, and lost. Socialism and Capitalism both are corrupted by large concentrations of power. Therefore, you are correct, smaller societies are essential for successful Socialism. Techno-Socialism has as a precept that single social structures should ideally be between the size of a village and the size of an ancient city/state. Multiple city/states can combine together into a Confederation for collective security and to form a common-wealth. But Federations are dangerous, and almost always lead to Imperialism and militarism. As we now see. Some of the first acts of the new United States after the ratification of the Constitution involved military adventures and acquisition of territory. This is not isolated to US history; even the Australians are learning this the hard way now, with their Federal system.

            All said and done, to live in a Techno-Socialist City-State would be an absolute joy! 🙂

      • bachcole

        What he said.

    • John

      A socialist telling americans what to do. after they spent so much money bringing europe to a endeless crisis… now there is also techno socialists? Jesus another kind of ISIS to fight with. why? your assumption that Lenr is your political weapon? please give us a break

      • Linda

        How do you read

        “working toward a world without want or work, without scarcity, poverty, property crime or greed…”

        and arrive at

        “ISIS… fight… weapon?”
        That is completely insane.

        • orsobubu

          Linda, now you can understand what I told you some post above.

          • Linda

            I see. Yes.

    • Mike the Engineer

      I am replying above, if you are still following this thread.

    • LCD

      LENR will absolutely not bring capitalism to a close. It will create a reneissance period. In your analysis you mis state one very important point. Almost free energy will lead to lower prices but you also say matter of factly lower profits, however you fail to provide any evidence that that would be the case.

      Simply put lower costs do not mean lower profits, in fact it’s quite the opposite.

      • Linda

        You can read some of the other posts I’ve made here, but if you want a good summation, here’s Jeremy Rifkin…

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5-iDUcETjvo

        Reduced costs lead to lower profits according to the way “marginal costs” and relative economic efficiencies give such short-lived competitive advantage. The first person to use a new technology gets near maximal advantage from it, but then it gets out, and his competitors start to use it, and finally everyone is using it, and eventually, everyone is back to competing on price, but at a new lower level resulting in a resumption of deflationary pressures.

        But that’s not the real killer – the real killer is what Rifkin talks about, the elimination of entire markets due to truly disruptive technologies. A commodity becomes so cheap that it’s not worth metering or tracking. Music became such a commodity, and it only has a price now because “free market” capitalist record companies used their last profits not to compete honestly, but to buy lobbiests in Washington. The market for music would have been completely free and completely democratised, were it not for the “fusion of corporations and the state” which has become business in America today.

        Capitalists try hard, but eventually, the convergence on zero price due to technology can no longer be resisted, and profits are eliminated completely from whole sectors. Energy will be next, thanks to LENR. But unlike music, this is a true fundamental of the economy. You can’t get much more fundamental than power. With near limitless free power, you can do almost anything, at almost no cost.

        This is the future, and it is rushing toward us at incredible speed.

        • orsobubu

          Linda, in the last two years I tried to explain about the same things here, also I didn’t spare them the marxist analysis, I hope you’ll be more lucky than me. I’m interested in ask you some details about your work in the effort toward techno-socialism. thanx.

          • Linda

            Thank you Orsobubu, for your comment and your encouragement. I am working on a book, but am not ready to publish. If you have an email address I can contact you on, I will let you know about progress.

            Regards!
            Linda

          • orsobubu

            You can write to me at [email protected].

          • Linda

            Great, thanks! I’ll let you know when I’ve finished 🙂

    • PappyYokum

      You apparently don’t understand either capitalism or deflation.
      Let us take capitalism first. Capitalism involves the employment of resources to produce goods. A capitalist owns productive resources which he lends to others in exchange for the increase in productivity those resources produce. For example, a hammer is loaned to a carpenter who builds something faster with the hammer than without one. The result is the carpenter’s productivity increases. He is able to build more in less time. In exchange for the increased efficiency, the carpenter pays the part of the difference back to owner of the hammer. Now the carpenter can buy his own hammer, two and lend one out to another carpenter for part of the other carpenter’s increase in productivity. Profits are tied to increased production and reduction in costs.
      Deflation is a general drop in prices; It is not a general drop in profits.
      Let us say LENR causes the cost of energy to drop. Sunshine is free. Wind is free. Geothermal energy is free. Solar panels are not. Wind turbines are not. Geothermal wells with pumps are not. Just because energy may be abundant and free, using it may not be.
      About 150 years ago, animals and steam engines running on wood supplied most power to move things around. These were replaced by coal, natural gas,and oil because they were cheaper, and better than horses and wood. That didn’t make things free. There was deflation during this time and it didn’t destroy capitalism.
      All LENR will do, if this is real, is free resources currently being used for energy production to do something else. If fuel for your car is free or nearly free, the car and tires, etc will not be. The free market is a big auction for resources. The steel in that car could go into a boat or refrigerator or a building girder. It will go the highest bidder. If that steel becomes cheaper to produce, that will not destroy the auction, the bid will just get lower.
      The big Keynesian fear about deflation is people will not make purchases – delaying them until the price drops more. According to them, this slows the economy. This is nonsense. The real problem with deflation is it helps lenders and harms borrowers. They like inflation because lenders are screwed and borrowers can pay back loans with diluted money. The government is a big debtor so it hates deflation. It likes borrowing because it can buy more votes with borrowed money than it loses with redistributed tax revenue. Borrowing becomes a net political gain. Controlling the supply of money makes that borrowing well very deep.
      When you see the price at the pump drop, do you rejoice? Do you believe the end of capitalism is on its way? No. What if you own lots of gasoline that you bought on credit to resell as at a tight margin? Let’s say you go bankrupt as a result. Does all of that gasoline disappear? No. It doesn’t. It just changes hands. What if it became worthless as fuel because of LENR? It will just get used for something else for which it has a new higher value – like a solvent, or insecticide.
      If you are a lender, deflation is good. Capitalists are lenders. If you are a borrower, it is bad. LENR can’t cause deflation because the money supply is controlled by the central bank. LENR won’t destroy capitalism because resources will always be rented by those that need to employ them from those that own them.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Reducing fuel costs to near zero is a stimulus. Consumers buy more, so producers must sell more. It is an increase in purchasing power of every dollar. There is more competition among dollars to buy goods of the same volume of availability, driving the adjusted price of goods up as the actual price decreases, increasing profitability while increasing purchasing power, thus driving higher production. Win, Win, Win.

  • Ophelia Rump

    If the COP is 6 or above and temp 150 C you can power a traditional Steam Piston at only 20% efficiency and generate heat and electricity for your home, and sell back to the utility for a profit.

  • Omega Z

    Wrong Wrong Wrong.
    Do you know how much the computer you used to post this would have cost you in 1980.
    NOTHING. Only a few Corporations & Governments would be able to afford it. Thru technical advances, costs were reduced allowing more people to afford them. Deflation as you call it occurs around us all the time.

    The term Capitalism is simply/complex. Simple as in acquiring/formation of Capitol. Usually associated with the accumulation of Money to build/make something. Complex because it can actually refer to many things. Money, people, labor, resources of all types. In the past, China’s greatest capitol was manpower. They’ve used that capitol to create another. Money. This money allows building/buying things

    You will find Capitalism practiced in all system. Socialist or otherwise. The main difference is whether it’s primarily practiced by society as a whole(The West) or state sponsored.(99% in North Korea) How’s that working for them.

    Capitalism wasn’t some Greedy persons creation. it is a Natural Phenomenon that society uses to grow & benefit from that some academic gave a label to.
    If Capitalism should end, Society will soon follow.

    The introduction of LENR will possibly propel society to the point where there is enough resources to go around for all, But there will always be some with more. Technology will change the system, but Capitalism will exist as long as people do.

    The system you rail against allows personal gain. You have shades of gray from poor to rich. In a socialist system you have the few elites & everyone else is poor. With no incentive, things level to the bottom. Once you understand Human Nature, you will understand why Socialist systems that some think so great will never sustain itself. Even tho you have people game, abuse, & take advantage of the western economic system, It works because it takes advantage of human nature.

    When I was younger, An old farmer passed on some wisdom to me. He said When you have the option, you should always work with nature. You’ll usually fair well. When you fight nature, you nearly always get your a$$ handed to you. As a farmer, he dealt with nature daily. I’m sure he learned that lesson the hard way. He knew what he was talking about…

  • Omega Z

    I always thought that a 2 wheel space station with a shared center hub would be idle. Using nitinol to provide rotation by alternating nitinol bands in the shade side to sunlit side. Only the hub portion would lack gravity allowing for experiments. Also the hub would be stationary for docking. This gravitational effect wouldn’t require the expenditure of energy.

  • Omega Z

    “limitless free energy allows zero cost”
    Come back to reality.

    Oil, Gas, Coal all start out free provided by nature.
    As are Nickel & Lithium.
    None are limitless free zero cost.

    All Cost=Labor & ROI then Taxed.
    I don’t know what you interpretation of Capitalism is,
    But Without some form of Capitalism, Society is Finished.

  • Mike the Engineer

    I am replying above, if you are still following this thread.

  • Mike the Engineer

    I didn’t realize my comment had been placed into a separate thread. I missed the chance to comment. Interesting comments below. Regarding Linda and deflation:

    First, there isn’t infinitely free energy. there will be capital costs and operating costs. What does seem to be indicated is we could have inexpensive energy. For example, even if fuel costs are zero, your bill from the power company won’t go to zero. The electric grid has to be maintained. The machinery has to be maintained. If you bought your own self contained power unit some day to go off the grid, that will cost money. Such a system would surely cost several thousand dollars. A car that never had to get gas again, would surely cost even more than our current cars. it would still have to be maintained.

    If energy costs less then money will be freed up for other activities, including research and investment. Cheap energy means most manufactured products and many commodities will be cheaper as well. Cheap energy means processes that weren’t feasible before can be installed. Research that before was too expensive can now be tested out. When an entire economy experiences a drop in energy costs, increased manufacturing will result. The entire economy now has more disposable income. In a reasonably open economy this will boost other business and capitalist activities. Cheaper energy will also permit increased travel which in turn will facilitate new businesses and new interactions.

    Another way of looking at this is to ask what if energy becomes very expensive. High energy costs are a drag on any economy. We can look at Europe for this. There are several reasons for Europe’s woes, but expensive energy doesn’t help them. If cheap and clean energy were to be widespread throughout Europe this would be a tremendous boost to their economy.

    Finally, the ultimate problems of the human condition are not external. Our problems lie within. Greed and lust for power are conditions that no economic system can cure. This is a spiritual problem, not an economic one.

    • Linda

      Thank you for your very considered answer.

      Jeremy Rifkin talks about Zero Marginal Cost in great detail, referring to the “eclipse of capitalism.”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5-iDUcETjvo

      Rifkin is no Socialist, but he is dead-on with his analysis, that these technological trends will swamp Capitalism and reduce it to a footnote of history. He doesn’t call it Techno-Socialism, he calls it the Collaborative Market Commons. But of course it doesn’t take a genius to realise he’s just rebranded very deep rooted socialist constructs which should be obvious. Capitalism will not be able to compete with this paradigm.

      Essentially, what you are referring to is a short-term reallocation of resources much like we have already experienced because of technology. But we have to dare to look beyond that interim phase.

      Techno-Socialism goes beyond this to envisage a world where technology replaces all drudgery, and incredible abundance will obviate scarcity and make “money” and “profit” Capitalism completely redundant.
      If this is a completely inexorable trend, why do I even bother mentioning it? Because it is still possible that this soft power revolution may be diverted. In the 1960’s, when it was apparent that increasing peace and productivity should lead to ever more leisure for workers, the elites acted quickly to soak off all of this increased productivity. Now workers work harder than ever before, and we all live in near-poverty or precarity.
      The dramatic energy efficiency created by LENR exists as a potential catalyst to a better world, but the elites are unlikely to allow this. It is vitally important that you *see* the potential and understand what could be, so that you can help prevent the diversion of LENR to the service of oppression.

      • psi2u2

        Linda, thanks for bringing Rifkin’s analysis into the discussion here. I agree, his prophecies may seem too good to be true, but they are backed by significant evidence and should be looked upon by all forward thinking persons as an ideal to strive for. Markets will always be with us, and that is all well and good, but there are other, equally important cooperative values that deserve nourishment and development in the “non-profit” sector.

        • Linda

          Thank you too, for your comment and your support.

  • Mike the Engineer

    Linda,

    Discussions of economic philosophy is important, but I know I will not have time to discuss in any meaningful detail. Perhaps we can have some kind of general agreement: You see with the Ecat an enormously transformative good. I see a positive good, but not transforming the essence of society or human nature. We both see good and positive things coming out of this, perhaps we can agree at least on that much?

    • lenr is disruptive, not at the technology level (it is quite conservative in a way, just heat, no radiation, no revolutional need), but at the business model level.

      some business were based on the need to have a big capital, big political network, big knowledge of safety, big workforce in one place, …

      LENR don’t need that. it is disruptive like internet is for tourism. and soon like AirBnb and Blabla car is for tourism.

      • Omega Z

        Reality is it will be a mixed bag. Somethings will be more distributed at smaller scale. Other will not & can not be. Energy distribution will be the biggest redistributed item.

        Minerals will be mined when & where as always as will the refinement of them. Even with LENR, It will be cheaper to ship 1 million tons of Iron then It’s equivalent 50 million tons ore.

  • BroKeeper

    Thanks Astra.

  • GordonDocherty

    For those who are dwelling on the “end of the world as we know it”, this is not nearly the same as “end of the world”. The e-cat does not now mean the end of the world. Instead, it means that we now have the opportunity to lift hundreds of millions (and eventually billions) out of poverty – think everyone living at standards as high or higher than “the West” does now, without breaking the planet.

    Of course, the e-cat does mean a reduction in energy scarcity, so for those whose regimes based on repression, things won’t look so rosy. Why? Well, with even a moderate imagination, EDUCATION ACROSS THE WORLD, and the courage to now reach for the stars, the economic future for all now looks very bright indeed.

    No, it is not in economics that “negative” consequences will be seen, but rather in the repatriation of power away from repressive regimes. This is where the “fall-out” from the e-cat will be most felt: it is want, ignorance and malice that are the cornerstones of the repressive regime – and it is scarcity, denial of access to eduction and oppression of ideas and ideals (that is, ‘fair play’) that are the means by which they achieve it.

    Now, the e-cat and the internet are not panaceas against repression, but they are certainly powerful weapons against it. In the end, there will be those with a lot to lose – but only those who are already elitist, divisive, despotic and diabolical in their nature, surely no bad thing for the rest of humanity. Shocking and unbelievable as it may be for “the few”, the world was not actually created just as their plaything for them to indulge in their degenerative behaviour and primitive impulses driven by greed and power. Thankfully, just occasionally, something comes along that saves humanity from the worst excesses of those who fall into the trap of seeing themselves as (demi-)gods, and indeed, as any supernova-generated gamma ray burst pointing in our direction would soon prove, was not “theirs” at all, but rather a planet on which they live with 7Billion other individuals as a very small life-form indeed…

  • GordonDocherty

    For those who are dwelling on the “end of the world as we know it”, this is not nearly the same as “end of the world”. The e-cat does not now mean the end of the world. Instead, it means that we now have the opportunity to lift hundreds of millions (and eventually billions) out of poverty – think everyone living at standards as high or higher than “the West” does now, without breaking the planet.

    Of course, the e-cat does mean a reduction in energy scarcity, so for those whose regimes are based on repression, things won’t look so rosy. Why? Well, with even a moderate imagination, EDUCATION ACROSS THE WORLD, and the courage to now reach for the stars, the economic future for all now looks very bright indeed.

    No, it is not in economics that “negative” consequences will be seen, but rather in the repatriation of power away from repressive forces and regimes. This is where the “fall-out” from the e-cat will be most felt: it is want, ignorance and malice that are the cornerstones of the repressive regime – and it is scarcity, denial of access to eduction and oppression of ideas and ideals (that is, ‘fair play’) that are the means by which they achieve it.

    Now, the e-cat and the internet are not panaceas against repression, but they are certainly powerful weapons against it. In the end, there will be those with a lot to lose – but only those who are already elitist, divisive, despotic and diabolical in their nature, surely no bad thing for the rest of humanity. Shocking and unbelievable as it may be for those who believe themselves to be above the rest of humanity, the world was not actually created just as their plaything for them to indulge in their degenerative behaviour and primitive impulses driven by greed and power. Thankfully, just occasionally, something comes along that saves humanity from the worst excesses of those who fall into the trap of seeing themselves as (demi-)gods, and indeed, as any supernova-generated gamma ray burst pointing in our direction would soon prove, was not “theirs” at all, but rather a planet onto which they happen to be born as a very small life-form indeed… with 7Billion other individuals sharing the same space.

    With those who see the 7Billion not as a plague, but as a “huddle of humanity” with potential for TRULY great things, the e-cat is a blessing indeed.

  • people forget that we have the same deflation with mecanisation and taylorism…
    price of goods like cars that were as expensive as planes, falled to what we know today.
    price of spoon that were sign of wealth, get to penny.

    we will simply find new way to be more happy, luxury, tourism, sharing of time, food… and energu willbe cheap…
    money is a measure of work , because you exchange it for something you value that someone cannot do without some effort that make him ask you some work in exchange…

    we have survived to the deflation of cost… thsi does not me monetary deflation.
    this mean that today middle class can have vacation by plane, and poor people can have a car or a moped.

  • what is finished is the centralized taylorist capitalism, based on the PROBLEM that to reduce the cos of goods you needed HUGE factories, that needed centralized direction an d big capital.

    3D printers, internet, google search, E-bay, Uber, Blablacar, AirBnb, allows individual to be part of the big market…
    LENR add the possibility to participate the market of energy.

    centralised capitalism will die soon, and we will be back to the capitalism I see in emerging countries, a circle economy , a local economy of exchanging services…

    GW power plant are dead. gigantic taxi companies, will be replaces by self entrepreneurs (maybe already) connected by a platform like uber.

    the next revolution maybe is when laws will prevent any platform to take over the others, and maybe will force them to interoperate… net neutrality in a way.

    this is the real capitalism that economic-liberal (libertarian) demand, unlike the usual conservatism capitalism that DJ lords demand.

    the capitalism for everybody. the capitalism of the poor.
    not easy to prevent concentration, and despite state do the opposite today, this is the only role of the state to ensure that no big actor takeover the freedom to be a capitalist.

    this principle you will laugh is among the rule of LENR cities ecosystem…
    prevent a takeover by someone who don’t need the others…

  • Omega Z

    There is a difference between a dreamer & someone lost in fantasy.
    You have a machine that with a touch of a button or the sound of your voice replicates to your hearts desire.

    But Nature is real & the Sun Spits a Massive Solar Flare. The Earth is hit by a EMP that destroys all you electronic toys. You are helpless. you no longer know how to do for yourself.
    The Perfect Mass Extinction Event of Humanity.

    No Worries. I mean Humanity may set itself up for such an event, But your fantasy fails at another level.

    E=Mc2.
    When your replicator makes the parts for that car you’ll want, You’ll need like 30 tons of Nickel to produce the energy for that 1.5 ton car given the reality of efficiencies Your 3D printer will like wise need material to operate.

    All these resources will still need extracted from the earth with huge machines & processed in facilities to make it all available & useable.
    All provided by the “using your interpretation” Capitalist system.
    And all the things you want to make is part of a free market system. Another philosophy that is alien to Socialism.

    Ironically, What you ask for would be provided/developed by that System you dislike do much, A Free Market, Capitalist system. The system that provides incentive for people to excel.

    As to corruption & greed, Has nothing to do with democracy, capitalism, or Socialism. To be rid of that would require getting rid of people. Note China goes on a corruption eradication from time to time. This is the corrupt removing the previous corrupt.. Nothing changed.

    • Obvious

      AFAIK, the world has been going to hell in a hand basket, in someone’s opinion, for as long as there has been hell and baskets.

  • Warthog

    Nope. The energy isn’t free. It will still take investment (capital) to extract the raw materials, process the raw materials, design (or redesign improved) products, get those products built, and get them to customers.. There will NEVER be any such thing as “zero cost production”. Much LOWER cost production, yes, but zero….no.

    Capitalism has one significant advantage……it works. No other economical system has done so, except in very small (and often religious) communities.

  • LCD

    LENR will absolutely not bring capitalism to a close. It will create a reneissance period. In your analysis you mis state one very important point. Almost free energy will lead to lower prices but you also say matter of factly lower profits, however you fail to provide any evidence that that would be the case.

    Simply put lower costs do not mean lower profits, in fact it’s quite the opposite.

  • Warthog

    “I see a simple way to convert most of our existing power plants to the
    e-cat. Use a set of these reactor rods to heat all incoming air to very
    hot temps, say 2300 F. Hotter if the reactors can take it”

    I think one can glean hints from the overall configuration of the tested “Hot-Cat” that this is precisely the intended initial mode of use. Note that the “cooling fins” on the alumina shell are oriented perpendicular to the axis of the reactor. This implies that the direction of coolant flow will also be perpendicular to said axis. And I think the fact that the current research is apparently totally focussed on a reactor housing DESIGNED TO WORK IN AIR also points in this direction.

    If the reactor was intended to be used “in a pipe”, the “fins” would be protrusions oriented parallel to the reactor axis.

    It also appears to me that the reactor is intended to be supported on both ends (larger diameter caps on both ends), again hinting that coolant flow will come in from the “side” of the “-Cat”.

  • Warthog

    “I see a simple way to convert most of our existing power plants to the
    e-cat. Use a set of these reactor rods to heat all incoming air to very
    hot temps, say 2300 F. Hotter if the reactors can take it”

    I think one can glean hints from the overall configuration of the tested “Hot-Cat” that this is precisely the intended initial mode of use. Note that the “cooling fins” on the alumina shell are oriented perpendicular to the axis of the reactor. This implies that the direction of coolant flow will also be perpendicular to said axis. And I think the fact that the current research is apparently totally focussed on a reactor housing DESIGNED TO WORK IN AIR also points in this direction.

    If the reactor was intended to be used “in a pipe”, the “fins” would be protrusions oriented parallel to the reactor axis.

    It also appears to me that the reactor is intended to be supported on both ends (larger diameter caps on both ends), again hinting that coolant flow will come in from the “side” of the “-Cat”.

  • Linda

    Thank you Orsobubu, for your comment and your encouragement. I am working on a book, but am not ready to publish. If you have an email address I can contact you on, I will let you know about progress.

    Regards!
    Linda

  • Linda

    I see. Yes.

  • psi2u2

    Linda, thanks for bringing Rifkin’s analysis into the discussion here. I agree, his prophecies may seem too good to be true, but they are backed by significant evidence and should be looked upon by all forward thinking persons as an ideal to strive for. Markets will always be with us, and that is all well and good, but there are other, equally important cooperative values that deserve nourishment and development in the “non-profit” sector.

  • Edward Mayes

    Have you took into consideration the E-CAT is capable of running at higher tempertures and in self-sustaining mode?

    • Omega Z

      Not at higher temperatures
      At lower input for short intervals.
      Power on 25% of the time & off 75% of the time.
      The time intervals will vary.

      • Edward Mayes

        Thanks

  • Omega Z

    Not at higher temperatures
    At lower input for short intervals.
    Power on 25% of the time & off 75% of the time.
    The time intervals will vary.

  • LCD

    I share your desire to live in a world like star trek. I really do. But unfortunately it’s going to take a lot more than the ecat to get us to that point.

    Capitalism doesn’t cause corruption, people do. There is no government without some type of corruption. And to be honest I’d rather live in the USA than in any other place in the world. But it doesn’t mean I’m satisfied with our society, I’d like to see it change for the better. The free market economy however, is not something on my list of things to change.

  • LCD

    The lack of Free energy isn’t preventing us from building replicators, it’s the laws of physics.

  • LCD

    I would probably say that most people hate helping out people who don’t care and will be happy to do nothing.