A Tutorial on Net Energy and Its Relation to the Economy
This is the tutorial I presented in Syracuse NY at SUNY-ESF in April. You can download the slides here. The pdf file has much better resolution than you'll find here. What I will do here is provide some more commentary on the subject with each slide.
Figure 1.
And now, a man who needs no introduction...
The purpose of this tutorial was to provide people who were relatively new to the concepts of Biophysical Economics (which is almost everyone!) what the role of net energy is in economic activity. What I present here will be nothing new to long time readers. So you can browse through it quickly. New readers who have not spent any time reading my prior posts about BPE and net energy might find some of this instructive.
Figure 2.
This overview slide pretty much sums up what I planned to talk about.
Figure 3.
Everyone at the conference was familiar with peak oil and energy return on energy investment (EROI). But the issues of what net energy means to the productive/consumptive economy are much less well understood. In general most people have an intuitive, if not formal understanding of what net energy means. But it is still the case that many people have not really linked up the flow of net energy with the work that gets done in the economy. Hence I choose to focus on Net Energy. The most important points regarding net energy versus gross energy (i.e. the number of barrels of oil per unit time produced) are that: a) net energy available declines at a faster rate than oil production declines; and b) the peak of net energy flow has already passed us by and we are in serious decline already — much before the peak and decline of gross energy.
Figure 4.
It is somewhat surprising that many people do realize that net energy available to do useful (read economic) work is less than the gross energy available at the well head, yet they do not really spend much time thinking through how this net energy turns into useful work in economic activity. They have a vague notion of, say, manufacturing production driven by machines and those using up energy. But the nature of the connections and transformations is not as solid.
In this slide I tried to make the connection more solid in people's minds. Energy in specific forms (e.g. gasoline or electricity) are direct inputs to the machines that accomplish our economic work. Society and the markets may put a value on the end product of work, e.g. doing work to make a hamburger may be just as valued as doing work to make a screwdriver (the tool, not the drink). And they are priced accordingly. But the screwdriver will save energy resources in the future if it is used. Once the hamburger's calories are used up, that is the end of it. The only possible future economic value in a hamburger might be if it fed a person who used those calories to make a screwdriver!
Figure 5.
We begin to capture the essence of EROI when we understand that obtaining the energy that goes into the economy requires that we use up some of the gross energy (either directly or from stocks of already converted energy) to obtain that energy. In this slide I am showing the feedback of diesel fuel (or the equivalent of some other form) being used to run the processes of extraction, refining, and distribution. As a result of using some of the fuel to get more fuel, the net amount being delivered to society is much less than the amount of energy (in the form of diesel) in the original stock of oil gotten out of the ground. Net energy is highly refined energy (more power capacity per unit of weight or volume), making it very much more valuable than the raw oil from which it comes. But it also is less in total energy available simply because some of it was used up producing the net product.
Figure 6.
Net energy is not just net of production energy costs. We also have to take into account the energy used to create and maintain the capital equipment that is used to capture and convert the raw or gross energy into the final usable products. So we need to have some mechanism for accounting for all of this energy, properly amortized, and added to the operational energy costs. For example, we should consider the energy required to construct drilling rigs, pipelines, and refineries as part of the EROI computation. This is not an easy task since no accounting system actually counts Joules used per unit time. The closest we get is the cost accounting system that keeps track of allocated costs (e.g. labor, materials, capital equipment, and overhead — both direct and indirect costs) as a surrogate for energy. The logic is pretty simple. All of those items did, in fact, require energy inputs (from prior net flows used as investments) just as we think of capital invested in the same items that compose the cost structures in our economy. So dollar accounting can serve as a rough guide to energy accounting. But it is only a very rough guide since the causal linkage between money and energy has long ago been broken by financialization (creating ephemeral monetary wealth out of promises and bets!)
Figure 7.
This graphic (by no means telling the whole story) shows the kind of complexity involved in accounting for all of the energy transformations and uses that go into delivering usable energy to the end user. Every single item in each of these elements in the stream needs to be accounted for in order to have a real understanding of what our energy actually costs us. Again, the logic is simple. Every time energy is used to construct or operate these elements that is energy that will not be available to do end user work, the economic work that produces results for the consumers in society. This model requires that we separate energy uses into two basic domains. The first is the energy used to capture, convert, and deliver the energy we use in our lives. The second is the latter, the energy we actually use to move our vehicles, heat and light our homes, cook our food, take hot showers, etc.
Figure 8.
This slide sums that up and shows that the net energy to the economy, NEE, in the next time increment (t+1) is just the gross energy pumped at time t less the prior produced net energy that we use to invest in getting that NEE out. The dynamics are a bit more complicated than this simple formula suggests, but the basic idea is sound. Some day I will work on a more realistic dynamical equation.
Figure 9.
This slide just restates the point. What is very important to understand, however, is that the red, energy capture, conversion, and delivery (CCD) subsystem is subject to two interrelated forces that change the whole dynamic over time. These will be shown in the next slide. But it has to do primarily with the depletion of the fixed reservoir of gross energy (e.g. fossil fuels). The total input into the economy is very much dependent on these two forces.
Figure 10.
In this slide you may notice that the raw (gross) energy input to the CCD is smaller, representing the decline in resources over time. Next you can see the increased amount of energy being fed back into the CCD in order to attempt to compensate for the diminishing supply, but also as a result of the fact that such compensation involves doing harder work to get what can be gotten. The principle known as ‘Best First’ means that the easy to get at and pump oil (in this case) is taken first, leaving the harder to find and harder to pump/refine oil to the future. Then when the future arrives the energy cost of getting the stuff up and out goes up. It takes more energy to accomplish the same flow rate of the gross energy. This necessarily means a lower net energy to the economy flow rate since more had to be siphoned off to try to keep up gross flows. What I am showing here is the combined effects of post-peak gross energy and declining EROI (increasing marginal costs). Together these factors drive the supply of NEE downward at an accelerating pace.
Figure 11.
Just to be clear about work itself. All economic work IS biophysical work. That is everything that we do to produce goods and services can be broken down into work as defined in physics. What makes it economic work is that it is effort applied to changing the world and the stuff in it into forms and processes that serve human wants and needs. Fundamentally, anything that supports human life is economic work. It does not matter what dollar price is put on the output. The value is intrinsic to the usability of the good or service in supporting life. Illicit drug products may command a high dollar price in the marketplace. But clearly, such drugs do little to support life or improve our conditions. So there is no real relationship between drug prices and economic value. What has happened is that the historical energy cheapness of high-powered energy forms, like oil, have boosted us beyond the point of serving mere physiological needs to such a degree that we have mostly lost the sense of purpose of true economic work. Some of us cannot think of anything else to do but to turn to the effects of drugs to compensate for our sense of worthlessness.
Figure 12.
The simplest economic system is centered precisely on our ability to efficiently obtain food. If we succeed at this, not only do we maintain our biomass, but we have enough additional energy to provide our offspring with nourishment, thus increasing the total biomass devoted to the human genome.
The human situation is largely dependent on the production of tools (including clothing and shelter) and the mastery of fire (for cooking and heat). If a man learned to make a spear he became a more efficient hunter, able to chase down larger game and produce an essential surplus of food. This is humanity's econiche! The production of hunting, and later farming, tools and techniques is how we survive in the world. This is the absolute core of our economic life. It is also the origin of specialization which allowed the energy investment in creating tools to become more efficient. For most of humanity's history, the EROI of physical exertion was going up. When we learned to master mechanical work produced by water and later fire, our EROI went up still further, but one had to add in the energy content of the water and fire (and wind) in order to obtain a systemic EROI. In the historic world, the sources of energy were essentially boundless compared with the meager few humans and with their pre-industrial consumption rates.
But the high EROI for human biomass eventually led to an overabundance of human biomass! The evidence that suggests that human biomass far exceeds the normal ecological carrying capacity of the planet is very compelling. If we consider that the artificial carrying capacity produced by high EROI fossil fuels, coupled with machine power is what allowed us to go into this overshoot condition, and that after peak net energy that overshoot condition becomes operative, then the picture becomes rather dire. No species that found itself in an overshoot condition avoided population collapse.
Figure 13.
This is a graphical representation of that core of economics — our metabolism. Take special note of the indications of the Second Law of Thermodynamics at work; the heat loss from our bodies and the entropy increase that attends the decay of our “technological” productions. Also, note that our own bodies are designed to have energy CCD subsystems that, themselves, take energy to operate. So our external social and technical organization simply reflects this universal pattern of systems.
I've included, in this figure, the “extra” use of energy to enhance life through esthetics. At first this probably came from humans taking a little more time to produce a spear or clay pot that was decorated in some fashion. There was excess energy to use, and it could be directed at making things not just practical, but pleasing to the eye and spirit. Over time, as more energy could be siphoned away from basic physiology and reproduction, more technology and esthetics could be supported. In the industrial age, when the flows of super high-powered energies coupled with machines have significantly amplified our basic energy economy systems, we have invested significantly more into esthetics, or at least what started out as esthetics. Today we build McMansions and drive SUVs that are designed to please, but also boast of super abundance. They allow us to practice conspicuous consumption by channeling energy into ersatz esthetics — glitter and bling — just for the sake of consumption. So extraordinarily abundant was our extrasomatic energy available from fossil fuels that we not only produced overshot human biomass, but channeled considerable energy into these non-life supporting artifacts and services.
Figure 14.
Two of my pet peeves have to do with the general misapprehension of what efficiency means (and how that misapprehension contributes to digging us a deeper hole) and our general misapprehension of the value of increasing complexity as technology supposedly advances. It is the perception that technology generally increases the efficiency of work processes, but this is strictly a local perspective. It is true that increasing technological inputs to work processes can have a positive affect on productivity or the number of units of output per unit of human labor input. But productivity is not actually the same as efficiency per se. Moreover, the use of local productivity as a measure of efficiency misses entirely the fact that, at least in some cases (and I think this is increasingly the case), a marginal improvement in efficiency due to the technology utilized is lost in the global system when the energy inputs to produce that technology is taken into account. We are back to the EROI calculations wherein we should use the largest possible boundary to capture the true energy costs. As an example, I discovered years ago while working in the solar space heating business (1980s) that the rough amount of energy it took to build the solar collectors, pipes, pumps, etc. exceeded the usable energy gained to heat the work space! The solar systems were being dollar cost subsidized by the government (both federal and state) so the home/business owners were realizing what looked like a reasonable payback in terms of saved heating bills. So they were seeing a local optimization, so to speak. But what was really happening is that the governments were hiding the true costs of producing the systems. Even the leading solar collector manufacturers were selling collectors at a slim margin to a loss in order to increase their market shares. Everyone was absolutely convinced that with enough units being sold, economies of scale would kick in and bring the prices down to where the subsidies (and lost profits) could be forgone. Eventually the subsidies were removed simply because the systems were not proving out thermodynamically (i.e. they were delivering far less usable heat than everyone thought they would). And look what happened to that industry. I was fortunate enough to get out before the floor collapsed.
When work processes are first being developed even small improvements in technology can have large effects on efficiency AND productivity. As a result, our thinking goes that adding more technology (improvements) will further increase both. But increasing technological improvements follows a diminishing returns law just like any scaling problem. This relates to the second issue which Joseph Tainter (who gave the keynote address on Friday night) address with his thesis that increasing complexity reaches a point of diminishing returns. He casts this in a more general sense that when people are attempting to solve problems (societal as well as technical) they generally find solutions by increasing the complexity of the process. This applies to processes of governance as much as to processes of production. Growth and increasing complexity that comes with it eventually reaches a point where not only is the next unit of increase not paying for itself, but actually starts to decline in value. In other words, there is a peak of complexity (as well as size) after which adding more complexity, such as putting in more technology, actually produces a net loss to the global system. Since organizational entities like governments and businesses are largely self interested they will only see what looks like an improvement in local productivity and fail to note that the whole system in which they are embedded is worse off as a result.
Eventually, however, this pattern catches up with every entity precisely because they are embedded in the whole and long-term feedback loops will start to impact them each.
The ability to locally recognize a global deterioration can be easily masked in a system where the growth in availability of very high EROI energy sources is accelerating, as has been the case with fossil fuels over the last two hundred years. For example as local entities made wealth gains due to increasing use of machinery (most recently computing) they failed to see the deterioration of the environment that resulted. It has only been in the last fifty years that those effects became sufficiently obvious and interpreted for what they were by a few global-thinking individuals that we have started attempting to consider those “externalities” when accounting for total real costs. We really don't know how to do that effectively, but the thought is rising that we need to. Unfortunately, because of very long time lags in the feedback loops (e.g. the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere and oceans) our recognition comes too late to actually mitigate.
Figure 15.
This slide attempts to show the model of a biophysical macroeconomics view accounting for natural resources, including nature's ability to absorb high entropy wastes, and explicit energy flows. Note that while money, used as a message conveyor to signal work processes to produce, flows between standard neoclassical economic entities there is no such flows out to the resources to pay for nature's services. Money, operating in a market system, is just a way to coordinate the overall activities in the production systems. It is information flow, at root. See the next slide.
Figure 16.
A long time ago, when tokens were first being used to represent real wealth accumulation, money represented a claim on that wealth. But it also came to represent a claim on future new wealth in the sense that someone could use a current claim to purchase work to be done in the future. This worked simply because with high EROI systems (such as agriculture) the expectation that a greater gain in total wealth could be realized was basically sound. In other words, people could bet that the future would be marginally better than the present and take a risk by putting up some of their current claims on wealth to ‘invest’ in future production that would pay back the current claim plus some additional.
The basic pattern of accumulating (storable) wealth and using some of it to purchase productivity was possible in a world where expansion of the population and increasing access to natural resources was possible. It was also promoted by the fact that over the ages humans always managed to find ways to increase the total exosomatic energy flowing into their work processes. With the advent of fossil fuel-based work done by machines (with increasing technical efficiency) this pattern took off in spades.
Somewhere along the line (perhaps as early as in the 14th or 15th centuries, humans started losing the deeper meaning of money as representing a capacity to do work. Values became detached from real utility. Economic models, such as mercantilism and later capitalism, started treating the tokens of work as if they were the primary units of value. As energy continued to flow in increasing amounts and power, there was little regard paid to this understanding. At some point, the idea that money produces money (rather than money invested in work produces real wealth that would result in an increase in the number of tokens in circulation) took hold.
Now money is valued for itself. Monetary wealth, often only recorded on paper as a series of promises, has come to be the same as real wealth in the minds of most people. Fiat currencies work in a psychological space where money is perceived as wealth in and of itself. It is still true that having money allows one to buy real wealth (assets) and services, but this is only the case as long as everybody believes that money is worth something, even if they don't exactly know what. And it only works as long as one has a source of real income. Rents work only so long as the underlying assets are maintained (meaning doing real work to overcome entropy). Going to a job only works as long as the job exists and the products or services are in demand. Below I raise the issue of what happens to the value of money and the potential for income when energy flows diminish.
People being inventive with regard to how to develop “instruments” have now gone so far in this money is its own value game as to develop paper products (essentially still some kind of IOU) that act as real assets in their own right in the minds of their owners. That is, they are now seemingly creating money out of thin air by promising that there will be some solid asset (collateral in the future) that will provide the underlying value, but they don't even need to say what that will be! This is the world of finacialization gone wild. We turned a relatively simple method of investing in future real assets (including the origin of fractional reserve banking practices) into investing in some vague promise that gets paid off in created money. Today, financialized money transactions account for a significant fraction of the gross domestic product, as well as that measures growth, just because they do involve sales of pieces of paper valued at some nominal amount. The Wall Street and investment banker boyz are recognizing record profits from those sales, and duly awarding themselves giant bonuses for doing so. Yet it is all a fabrication. A dream. A belief in something that isn't real. All made possible because we have so long enjoyed the exponential rise (until recently) of energy flow capable of doing real work that made it seem like dreams could come true.
Figure 17.
This is short detour to explain something very fundamental and almost always under appreciated by the majority of people. Most people, especially the politicos, believe that alternative, renewable energy sources such as solar (PV and thermal), wind, waves, geothermal, etc. are going to simply replace fossil fuels and the economy will keep chugging along. At least some of them have the slightly more realistic belief that this is only feasible if we cut out a lot of wastage and increase efficiencies (but look out for what I said above about efficiencies). Here I focus on the fallacy of sustainability unless the wide boundary EROI of the energy CCD capital equipment is such that it can supply society with NEE and the feedback energy needed to replace and repair itself. We heard several papers at the conference that suggested this might not be the case. For example solar PV may have actual EROIs so low that there is no way they can be produced without subsidizing the energy needed with fossil fuels sources. In truth, this is exactly what is happening today. Much of the energy cost for manufacturing, delivering, and installing these systems is borne by still relatively cheap fossil energy. It is looking increasingly less likely that some of these alternative systems collecting what amounts to real-time solar flux will meet the sustainability test shown above.
And high EROI fossil fuels are running out!
Figure 18.
This slide expands my original bioeconomic dynamics model presented in “Economic Dynamics and the Real Danger”. In this I've modeled the addition of a crash effort (WWII mobilization level) to produce a sustainable alternative energy subsystem. This assumes that sufficient EROIs are achieved. Sufficient means technically feasible AND enough to produce a sustainable flow of NEE for a much smaller population of much less consuming people. The brown trace represents total assets in emergy value. This includes all human biomass as well as all of our artifacts, long lived as well as perishables. As you can see, the addition of sustainable sources still does not allow business as usual once fossil fuels and NEE from those fuels goes into decline. And note that the initial rate of decline does not appreciably change. It only starts to diminish as the alternative sources ramp up (at about 10% per year after the initial mobilization). This model, by the way, does not take into account the fact that we would have to divert significant amounts of NEE to build out these systems, which have very high front end costs. Eventually the NEE from alternatives will allow a settling into something akin to a steady state economy with total assets being maintained at a level significantly lower than exists today.
So this graph suggests bad news and good news. Yes we will suffer extreme disruption and probably massive loss of life as the NEE flow to society falls off rapidly. But we could also find a level of ‘equilibrium’ or a carrying capacity that is nothing like we have been used to, but definitely not Olduvai either.
But now, we must ask ourselves: How feasible is this kind of scenario? How likely is it that every citizen and the politicians will get it such that they commit to this kind of effort. It would mean extremely significant sacrifices on the part of every human alive today, and for the rest of their lives. It still wouldn't save everyone. And, most of all, it depends entirely on the technical feasibility of those alternatives achieving true sustainability with significant NEE left over. How likely does this seem? To technology cornucopians it will probably seem realistic. So the challenge to them is: Show us the energy. And I mean true NEE, not just the fact that the amount of solar energy falling on the Earth each day exceeds our energy needs for a whole year. Impressive as that might sound, it is a lot of hot air and wishful thinking. Only real capture and conversion with substantial NEE counts. My conjecture is that whatever sustainable technology we will be able to produce in the future (like water wheels!) our collective EROI will just be slightly better than basic photosynthesis (about 1-3% conversion to biomass). Agriculture, hunting, and forestry will be what the majority of people will be engaged in in the future. A few craftsmen will produce our water wheels, clothes, shelters, etc. And, I do suspect that given the amount of knowledge we do posses regarding how things work, and breeding techniques, etc. those alive will not need to live at mere subsistence. But that is another story.
Figure 19.
So here are the factors that define our predicament. We know that conventional oil production is at or near its global peak. Non-conventional oil, such as the stuff coming from Alberta's tar sands, is very costly in energy terms as well as environmental degradation (remember the externalities). The same can be said for non-conventional natural gas drilling (fracking). The extraction and delivery of coal is highly dependent on diesel fuel, hence oil. And all fossil fuels come from finite reservoirs of diminishing quality. That means the EROI for fossil fuels is already in steep decline. And that means the NEE is too.
In fact, the dynamics model shows that NEE peaks and declines years before the gross declines. This strongly suggests that the NEE from oil has already been in decline, perhaps since the 1990s. Indeed the inflection point when the accelerating increase of energy flow turned to a deceleration (forming the logistic or “S”-shaped curve) may have come as early as the 1970s. For these reasons I suspect very strongly that the global economic situation correlates with these phenomena. If we had some way of re-connecting money value with energy value we would find that real income growth rates started to decline in the 1970s. Indeed many people think that was the period when, in the OECD, pressure started to be felt on family incomes and people were starting to become poorer. That was a time when many families turned to two incomes just to keep up. Globalization, in effect the attempt to find low energy demand populations to do the labor, was a response to lowering NEE. Families in China and India require less high-energy goods and services for their lifestyles, as compared with American workers, for example. It became cheaper to ship materials to those countries and ship finished goods back to the OECD countries.
But as human nature is universal, now that these cheaper labor markets have gotten a taste of higher incomes and material goods that have been enjoyed in the west, guess what is happening. Companies that enjoyed cheaper labor have to re-think their tactics and logistics, if not their strategies. As oil prices, the major component of transportation these days, continue to rise, the economic advantage of globalization will diminish and relocalization will start to look like a better solution. The only problem is that the distribution of natural resources is not uniform in the world and the NEE to apply to getting them will be too low to make it cost effective.
Figure 20.
These are suggestions about what we will have to do as NEE declines further. It is not a given that these will even work. One thing is absolutely certain. From a material standpoint we will all be substantially poorer in the future since physical work can not be sustained at anything like the current levels. It isn't even certain that we can mitigate the effects of entropy on our fixed assets let alone produce new ones. And, in addition to that, what will we do to adapt to the effects of climate change? These are extraordinarily threatening times for humanity.
I don't hold out much hope that we humans will turn to and implement any of these suggestions in a timely fashion. The rate of decline of NEE plus the rate of increase in the climate chaos we are experiencing suggests to me that we will be past the point of no return by the time anyone with the power to do anything comes to the realization that something, indeed, needs to be done.
Figure 21.
This is serious business. We are going to be in major contraction. Actually we have already entered the era of contraction but the rate of it will increase significantly in coming years. Get yourselves to a potentially stable climate location, hopefully far from the madding crowds, and learn permaculture. The rest will be sheer luck.
A voice crying in the wilderness, albeit a voice of wisdom.
The mantra for the New Age:
"Drill, baby, drill". The colloquial term for the Fleet Marine Forces could be inserted to advantage in each of the spaces between those words.
Posted by: Robin Datta | May 01, 2011 at 08:33 AM
Sir, thank you for this excellent piece.
Posted by: viveik | May 02, 2011 at 09:46 PM
George,
It is unfortunate that there will not be enough Net Energy available, during the coming Collapse, .... So, efforts to rebuild or change the ways we live, ... will NOT be done, and many millions will die.
So, .. the continuing Mantra is, .. keep spending on useless things, that are not necessary, just to continue an unsustainable economic system.
Posted by: Scott | May 03, 2011 at 11:39 AM
George, you should be permitted an audience with the world's leaders and be encouraged to share your thoughts with the world.
China's growth trajectory is leading the Chinese on a collision course with Anglo-American oil empire, not unlike the periods during which the British went to war to contain the Russians and Ottomans in the 1850s, Germany during WW I-II, and the US cut off resources to Japan in the 1930s-40s, and the US fought two proxy wars against China and Russia in Korea and Vietnam.
But this time will be a last-man-standing contest for the remaining oil supplies and vital shipping lanes. China cannot be permitted to grow oil consumption and imports any further to match US oil imports with peak global oil production AND peak oil exports occurring.
China's growth is now a direct national security threat to the US in a way Al Qaeda/Radical Islam could only hope to be; and our own US firms are enabling and exacerbating the impeding security threat, ironically (or not).
Therefore, I will not be surprised to see China's growth abruptly halted in the months and years ahead coincident with US firms pulling out of China hundreds of billions of dollars, and eventually the US military imposing blockades, embargoes, and trade sanctions against China to cut of oil and other mineral resources desperately required by the Middle Kingdom.
And this would be coincident with China having reached the historical limit bound for growth of real per capita GDP as exhibited by the UK, US, Japan, and Asian Tigers during their rapid growth eras.
Posted by: Nemesis | May 04, 2011 at 11:31 AM
All,
Even if the powers to be understood this dilemma I doubt that they could actually do anything about it. In the end TPTB is just a name we give to those who we wish truly had the power to do something but in truth are as helpless as any.
We might easily be described as nature's way of increasing entropy on the earth by burning the stored energy in fossil fuels at the highest rate we can muster. We're just dumb instruments of the second law!
On the other hand, were we to become wiser husbanders of energy flow, we could be contributors to evolution.
George
Posted by: George Mobus | May 08, 2011 at 08:51 AM
Sorry guys... While we are all distracted and kept focused on the supply and demand of fossil fuels, other energy technology already exists that would bring big oil to their knees. Three devices have been invented and successfully demonstrated - and then the three healthy inventors suddenly dropped dead, just like four others. Their names are Stan Meyer, Dimitri Petronov, MIT Professor Gene Mallove, Aries M. DeGeus, Howard Rory Johnson, and a USAF Reservist named "Danny". No I am not a conspiracy nut. Just take your time to fully read the below story and related links, and you will see why we are kept addicted to oil...
Technology Suppression is real and it is costing consumers billions of dollars. The DoE is part of the problem, not the solution.
But if you are not willing to read for 30 minutes (the below and links), please don't make unqualified comments based on assumptions and guesswork. This is seriously some evil, foul, and criminal cover-ups in progress on the scale of World Trade Building 7. Judge for yourself...
http://www.apfn.org/Free_Energy/Magnetic_motor1.htm
http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/erik_masen_suppression.html
http://open.salon.com/blog/green_energy_reports/2011/07/01/thorium_plasma_battery_technology_-_wrongly_top_secret
http://www.top-alternative-energy-sources.com/stanley-meyer.html
http://peakoil.com/alternative-energy/plasma-battery-inventors-disappearing-regularly/
MAGNATRON, FUSION MAGNETIC MOTOR
by
Gerald Orlowski
Presented at the 3rd International Symposium on New Energy, April 25-28, `96 at Denver, CO.
Scientists from Descartes to Einstein sought to find the correct DESCRIPTION of the NATURE of all physical substance.
I believe Rory Johnson was one of the greatest visionaries of this century, and his operating Magnatron Fuel Cell motor was showing us the principle of attract-attract in motion - the nature of all physical substance.
Rory Johnson designed and operated a 525 HP fuel cell motor without any of the hardware that is presently used in current state-of-the-art electric motors, such as AC Induction series or compound wound DC motors which use the accepted principle of attract-repel, an energy form that doesn't utilize the magnetic field to its greatest advantage. He capitalized on the magnetic field to its greatest advantage by utilizing the principle of ATTRACT-ATTRACT.
There is no way to explain ATTRACT-ATTRACT using contemporary electrical theory, how his relatively small motor could produce this tremendous horsepower. Over the past 10 years, I used the Johnson hardware as a textbook to help gain an understanding about this NEW electrical-magnetic energy theory. Johnson capitalized on the magnetic field to its greatest advantage. He used a top and bottom rotor in his motor. First, the top rotor attracted, released, then the bottom rotor attracted, released. The action of attract, taking place between upper and lower magnets, using the windings to complete the attract field.
THIS ACTION is difficult to understand if present electrical theory is the knowledge base. I know this to be true because I listened to a teaching tape by Rory Johnson, and my mindset about electricity would not let me HEAR him. Surely as electricity was caused to be generated by ONE of the windings, the other winding used it. How else could it work? The answer to his statement that he RECYCLES a stabilized energy could not be understood if he somehow TAKES APART and then RE-ASSEMBLES the electron itself, UNBELIEVABLE!
Yes, Dr. Johnson was showing the world the `Principle of Motion" that had been sought by scientists from Descartes to this day. This is ATTRACT-ATTRACT.
Many `scientists of old' tried to say if the electron GETS FORMED, then it MUST have a core structure. For example, Dr. Heaviside stated the following, "As the Universe is boundless in one way toward the great, so it is equally boundless to the other way, toward the small; and important events may arise from what is going on in the inside of atoms, and again in the inside of ELECTRONS. How electrons are MADE has not yet been fully understood."
This subject is covered in greater depth later, but for now let us review my involvement with Rory Johnson and his 525 HP from Laser (Defraction Prism) Activated Motor that had a range of 100,000 mi. Operating on 2 lbs of deuterium and gallium.
After I saw the Magnatron motor, my life changed. I was no longer a happy camper working by myself in a wonderful, fully equipped research machine shop for the Greyhound/Armour Corp. In Arizona. While on a business trip, I saw this motor running in the showroom at the Magnetron Co. Located in Elgin. IL.
During my 15 years of electric motor repair, among the hundreds of motors I repaired, I rewound a 500 HP electric motor. That motor had wires exiting it that were the size of a garden hose. The Johnson motor being shown had NO wires. Surely this motor was unreal, a con-job to get money for dealerships. Yes, there he was. Rory Johnson standing next to his sealed self- contained Electric motor.
Upon returning to the Greyhound Towers and telling them what I had seen, they instructed me to call Mr. Johnson. Greyhound wanted Johnson to put forth a plan to install a motor in one of their buses for testing purposes.
I called Johnson. He was delighted that a Greyhound employee had seen the motor running, and replied that the testing idea was acceptable. He would set a time frame for just when a bus should be delivered to him.
Two years went by, with no business proposal from Johnson. Then, his former business partner, Mike Marzicola, called to say Johnson had passed away. He wanted me to work with him to get one of the motors running. I flew to Orange Co., CA, saw the motor took pictures, and put forth a plan to Greyhound. Subject to a contract with Marzicola, one of the old worn motors would be brought to the research shop. I would then very carefully reconnect the generator wires that Johnson had cut off prior to moving from Elgin, IL to CA.
Discussions with Marzicola brought out that the US government (given the authority by the Congress of `52) had issued a GRAB order to take Johnson's motors. Rumor has it, the DOE is run by US oil companies, and OPEC and they want no competition, period. Because of this grab order, Johnson had cut the generator wires then put his `total shop', with motors and all, on several U-Haul trucks and left Illinois in the middle of the night and went to Calif. To re-establish his business, but before he could get a motor running, he passed away.
Surely, g\Greyhound would agree to let me re-start one of Johnson's motors. The wonderful proposal put forth to greyhound was rejected by mail. Very agitated, I went to the top office at Greyhound demanding an explanation. I was met at the door with the comment, "We know why you are here." Knowing the potential savings to the bus company, surely they could have only one reason for rejecting the proposal. They must have believed I was not qualified to start up the motor.
The top legal advisor stated he was present when the Greyhound board met and discussed my written proposal. He stated the following, "At NO time was the thought put forth that you would not succeed. In fact, we discussed all of the hardware designed and constructed by you, and started the conversation from what happens when Greyhound has a running motor". We contacted a State Rep. Who felt this motor should not be allowed to be used in 4,000 + buses. The loss in tax dollars for fuel alone would be a very huge sum. He then asked me to leave, stating he was sorry that he had to tell me the reason the plan was rejected.
Telling Marzicola of the rejection, I offered to personally put in a few thousand dollars toward the parts to get one motor running. In return, I would be assigned the dealership for the Phoenix Metropolitan area. We signed legal papers in exchange for the money agreed on, and went to work. (I still have the signed dealership.)
The first thing I noticed was that someone had been working on repairing the motors. Three motors already had new commutator assemblies installed. Each assembly consisted of 3 commutator assemblies on one insulated tube with a metal case to secure it to the shaft.
One motor still had the old worn commutator assembly, as it had not yet been repaired. Out of curiosity, I took a string, held it to the center of the top shaft and stretched it to one of the stationary magnets on the motor not yet repaired. This winding was uniquely different from anything I had ever seen. After winding probably a hundred armatures of all sizes (during my early motor repair years), I never saw mica between bars as thick as what Johnson used -1/8' thick. By turning the rotor and holding one brush in place, it was easy to se that the brush sent energy into one commutator bar just as the TWO wire SLOTS arrived in front of one magnet (let's say north). The mica thickness supplied OFF TIME before the next bar contacted the brush and the SAME WIRE SLOT now moved in front of a south magnet. The mica thickness was not just for insulation but to control the movement when the slot of wire arrived at another magnet.
The newly installed commutator had insulation between bars that was so thin i could hardly see it, I asked Marzicola who had supplied these new commutators. He said, " I ordered them and have a large supply in the store room." He said the thickness of the mica had to do with the voltage, and this unit operated on less than 50 volts. The makers of the commutators simply went by the VOLTAGE requirement given them. They were not permitted to see the actual motor. I tried to explain to Marzicola that with the thicker mica it afforded OFF-TIME, to gain an instantaneous polarity reversal from one rotor coil to its mating coil on the other rotor. He said if I wanted to help him, I should stop making trouble, the commutators were PERFECT. He insisted we work together to finish one of the rotors that already had a new commutator installed. It seemed to me that we were defeated before we started. Unfortunately my observation proved to be accurate.
Years later, I still pondered how this OFF-TIME could have accomplished more than just this instantaneous polarity reversal. Faraday had a great teaching on this subject, he stated, "When a current suddenly ceases, it can INDUCE a current IN THE SAME WIRE which is stronger than the original current. Thus, by conservation of force, there must be some force present, AN OPERATIVE, other than electric force. This force is probably the MAGNETIC FORCE." Science had this enlightening teaching over 150 years ago! Unbelievable!
Back to Johnson's motor. There were two separate windings, the driver rotor on the bottom, and the generator winding on top. A curved piece of metal that closely resembled aluminum (but did not drill like aluminum) was secured for 360 degrees around, centered between the two windings. This metal most definitely was a conductor of electricity. There were 52 small holes drilled, equally spaced, around the center of this curved metal (possibly magnesium). These holes were sized to be a snug fit to the #23 wires from The generator winding coils.
My electrical background deduced that these wires must certainly malfunction by being GROUNDED to the curved metal. To just solder extension wires to the cut-wires at the inside location would be a POOR repair job. I convinced Marzicola that we must do a good job. We would carefully pull the generator wires back to the outer surface, number them and replace them through the same holes. Only this time we would use insulation tubing.
Marzicola said they already thought of that, but insulation tubing wouldn't fit along with the wires. I told him that by holding a piece of copper tubing (as a safety guard) between the windings, I could position a drill directly in each hole and enlarge it. Then we could insert tubing with the #23 wire inside. We did just that.
After two days of hard work, we had all the generator wires connected to the commutator. None were grounded to this metal; it was a perfect ELECTRICAL circuit path. We had just negated the action of Johnson's Fuel cell. Why?
The 1/8" copper pipe that exited his fuel cell was positioned in such a way as to be secured to the inside surface of the housing with the "end flow point" directly across from the center of this metal. ALL of the fuel cell generated power became captured in this curved metal (located between rows of permanent magnets above and below).
The metal was designed to feed energy directly into each generator wire that was in direct contact with the metal. The modest pulse from the generator coil served the purpose of a catalyst to cause this energy to join in the flow to the Commutator and on to the lower winding. This metal was like a massive capacitor, and we did a great job of disconnecting it with insulation tubing.
Why go through all this? We will never understand how the Johnson motor functions without the firm understanding of the characteristics of this energy. We must think MAGNETIC not ELECTRIC.
Electrical knowledge won't help us construct the Ro-Mag unit. For example, can this same FORM of energy be released inside a motor without an energy piping system to put the energy someplace? Why not release the energy at the location where it is actually needed?
The Johnson motor has the fuel cell located directly in the heart of a massive magnetic field, where it PULSES as needed, to feed the Unit's RELEASED MAGNETIC POWER. So what is different between these two energy FORMS? As we know, electrical flow argues, that is, it sparks, short circuits, and must be CAREFULLY insulated, Magnetic structures, rather, want to SHARE their flow, and are compatible to the Universal Force. This new energy FORM responds when it is needed as well as HOW it is needed, manifesting as a MEASURABLE current.
Thus, in defining these different energies, it is important to understand that although electrical and magnetic (energy) work with similar ATTITUDES, the MANNER in which they work, sets up a differing energy effect. THINK MAGNETIC THINK MAGNETIC. Let us have a short magnetic school.
QUESTION: Does magnetism have a pulse rate? Do not say "no," because if it does, then much of what is called phenomena will be self-explained.
QUESTION: Does CHANGING a pulse change the polarity which also changes the intensity?
WHY ASK THESE QUESTIONS?
Because this is HOW present electrical theory took its present place, and when we were satisfied enough, we stopped asking questions.
QUESTION: In the field of magnetism would alternating the magnetic attract become a FUNCTION of this energy? WHY ASK? Why do we have alternating electrical currents? Well, ask the same about magnetic energy.
Judging from the present day electrical theory, magnetic energy is now relegated to being a by-product that is unnecessary or of NO USE. This is like saying a chicken is OK, but throw the eggs away. Why can what it is--it is only a by-product.
QUESTIONS: Is the energy now called electricity a VIOLENT MAGNETIC REACTION o the troubling or interferences in its field that is simply then manifested as SPARK?
This being so, is electricity then the by-product of a troubled ....[hiccup in manuscript].... accept the fact that a solid-state device has been constructed for magnetic field? It most certainly is. THINK: All things considered does this show a unity of forces? The unit of force we are NOW discussing is Compressed Magnetism (wrongfully called gravity). With gravity being compressed magnetism, there is only one force-magnetism. This force is CAPTURED by magnetic action inside the Johnson motor.
The coils in the Johnson Motor are charged and discharged. This action is called a COIL COLLAPSE TIMING because of the pulsing system that activates the energy flow inside Johnson's motor. As we understand that this ACTION is NECESSARY, we can construct other magnetic devices that function utilizing the same BASIC PRINCIPLE.
Let us now do a historical study about energy and how it relates to the construction of the Johnson Motor. The unit constantly recycles a stabilized Magnetic Electro energy. Is this statement in CONFLICT with past science teaching? Yes, it is; however, one scientist seemed to think otherwise. Dr. Lodge stated (about 1890) that. "Any form of ENERGY can be followed in TRANSFERENCE.' We say magnetic molecular structures are forming and reforming. If we drive a wire through a magnetic field, we TROUBLE the field, causing structures called electrons to form and flow. These electrons DO A JOB and discharge back into magnetic molecular structures having BASICALLY A NEUTRAL charge. Thus, hopefully at some point in time, we will be allowed to observe this transference action as Dr. Lodge stated.
We seem to be far off course. What happened?
We had a great scientific foundation, that is up until J.J. Thomson put forth his theory in 1890. Thomson identified the cathode rays as a building block of atoms and called them electrons. Until then, a good teaching was in place, the law of action and reaction.
What does one have to do with the other? Dr. Lorentz (about that time) stated that between radiating electrons,, the law of action and reaction could not hold. He stated, "When a moving electron radiates it slows down, thus losing momentum. It is some time later before the radiation hits other electrons. Thus, there can be no immediate reaction in other electrons to the creation of the radiating electron. And, all of the radiation will not be absorbed by electrons in hits, some will be scattered. Thus between ELECTRONS. The equality of action and reaction will not hold."
Scientists of OLD did not want to be burdened with the thought that an electron has a core structure. WHY? SAME REASON TODAY!! Because this thought then the mind to ask, "What holds he electron together?" Fifty years ago scientist, Dr. Ehrenhaft stated. "It is purely magnetic force which permeates throughout the known Universe." Did he conduct any tests to prove his statement? Printed in Nature, Jan 4, `41, Dr. Ehrenhaft stated, "There must also be a STATIONARY MAGNETIC FIELD in the beam of LIGHT with potential differences since SUPERPOSED MAGNETIC FIELDS accelerate or retard the MAGNETO-PHOTOPHERISIS. It can be observed that some particles stay at rest and that their motion stops suddenly, or that moving particles appear to change their velocity, even reverse it due to changes of CHARGE. The movement of magnetic ions in a homogeneous magnetic field is a MAGNETIC CURRENT."
All of this same action could be happening inside the fuel cell of the magnatron. We could say Magnetism is the property that unlocks the molecular lock. Therefore, surely magnetism is also the property that holds all structures together (electrons included).
Just what is necessary to CAPTURE this magnetic current to PUT IT TO WORK? first, we want this energy to move about as MAGNETIC BUBBLES, and this can be accomplished while the Johnson fuel cell has a vacuum interior. Why pull a vacuum to Fuel Cell? On reason is to allow the bubbles to move freely and not break. Keep in mind that the effects of compressed magnetism (gravity) are greatly reduced and this downward force being somewhat alleviated, allows a certain kind of FREEDOM to the bubble flow. A MORE IMPORTANT reason is the magnetic energy in the fuel cell came about because of an assembly of DIFFERENT CHARGED PARTICLES. These particles need to maintain their IDENTITY as highly complex interactions take place within the fuel cell. If air were inside, it would tend to NEUTRALIZE these charges, a condition that would then interfere with the correct particle joining process.
SHOULD THE FUEL CELL LIGHT UP? In 1905 Einstein made the suggestion that, "light travels from EMITTER to ABSORBER in discrete particle-like BUNDLES." NO TOO BAD OF AN IDEA! If Einstein had finished the thought and said, "the bundles are composed of MAGNETISM AND LIGHT which travel SIDE BY SIDE, with there being NO light without the magnetism,"' he would have been accurate. Magnetism is a CONSTANT- it does not come from somewhere. BECAUSE it is already in place-everywhere. As a Vibratory change is caused to happen in magnetism, it then creates an ENERGY CHANGE that the human eye can see, visible matter called LIGHT.
SO WHAT HAPPENS AS THE LIGHT STOPS? When light is not needed any longer, it returns to its original form. It stops its manifestation of light while the magnetism continues manifesting as it always did.
Inside Johnson's motor, I saw a great display of light as magnetic charges moved from one place to another. This action of having the fuel cell LIGHT UP might help to further explain the "Unity of Forces," (if we allow our minds o expand).
MAGNETIC BUBBLES transport a MASSIVE AMOUNT of energy, yet this energy does not NEED to be circuited by HEAVY wire. Why not? Are we saying that magnetic energy is transferred primarily in the FIELD AROUND the WIRE? This must be true, Johnson used #23 wire, a wire size ordinarily used to operate an electric motor having less than a fraction of one horsepower. If this wire is equated to horsepower in present day motors, Then his motor COULD NOT WORK. I saw all the worn commutators, brushes and bearing. His motors undoubtedly ran for YEARS. Anyone could observe minimal wear on commutators, brushes, and other parts.
JUST WHAT KIND OF WORK CAN A MAGNETIC FLOW ACCOMPLISH? Back to the Magnatron Motor. Here is a sample of the magnet size and wire size. The same size as used inside Johnson's motor. His magnets, when magnetically charged could be designated as `weak' in flux power. These magnets, to respond with greater POWER required energy from his fuel cell. They then acted as CHARGING CAPACITORS with their ENERGY DISCHARGE setting up a given PULSE RATE, which created the action of RELEASE TIMING. And what did this do? This release timing element goes on to affect the revolutions. The revolutions affect the pulsing. The pulsing determines the input. The input determines the outlay of the magnetic current flow.
Yes, the magnets Johnson used had weak flux power, however, without the flux power, everything would be stationary. Yes, the flux power not only helps the released magnetic energy, it ENCOURAGES IT. Yet, it is not a MATTER OF FLUX POWER. It is a matter of TRANSMUTABILITY and this has to do with molecular structures.
Mr. Johnson stated that the FUEL is caused to work by blending Deuterium and Gallium. Scientists already had the NAME of the energy that it manifests as these two elements are blended. Johnson used a spark energy that became focused after going through a dark, smoky defraction prism. The scientists were convinced that Johnson could not produce THEIR already named, newly discovered energy FORM with a MINIATURE cold fusion fuel cell small enough to fit inside his motor. This was their position, and they never wanted a challenge to the teaching they spent YEARS memorizing.
CONFUSION-CONFUSION! IS WHY WE HAVEN'T ADVANCED IN THIS TECHNOLOGY! Newton's law states, "A change in substance is a change in molecular structure.""
As we focus on the thought that there is nothing BUT energy which manifests as magnetic molecular structures constantly forming and reforming, just using the words, "a change in substance" has no application. All processes go through a process of forming and reforming. THEN, any given visible substance could be perfectly reproduced, isotropic in every respect, yet be the product of DIFFERENT MOLECULAR STRUCTURE.
SO WHERE IS THIS THOUGHT LEADING US? Each electron has an identifiable core structure of its own which can be identified as its place of origin. Today, electrons are FORMED at the Earth's energy zone, the ionosphere.
HERE IS A FULL SIZE ISOMETRIC VIEW OF THE FUEL CELL INSIDE THE UNIT. Why is this center acrylic tube called a Fuel Cell? The action accomplished inside this unit could be used to expand the name to a Molecular Vibratory Exchanger Unit.
Why call it by this name? What is it exchanging? It is exchanging the matter (liquid) into a pure energy form.
Q. Why go into the details of this magnatron motor? A. To make sure this very significant technology doesn't get buried in a dead-end file. If the the human species is to survive, the fossil fuel extravaganza must be curtailed and magnatron motors can take its place.
What is vibrating? Vibrations come off both magnets from below the FUEL CELL and cause a SOUND OF VIBRATION as magnetic waves BOUNCE off the energy field that is already inside the vacuum chamber. This action sets up a given RESONANCE.
SOUND TURNS INTO WAVES but the magnetic energy comes out as PULSES. THIS ACTION gives a vibratory change to the structure of the liquid. This is all a random action; however, the RANDOMNESS IS THE DESIRED ORDER.
Next, we note that the energy wants to escape without doing work. WHAT IS Magnetic work? We want the molecular structures to be used to their maximum potential. This only gets accomplished as we CAUSE a "molecular break-down" by circuiting The energy in such a manner as to drive it to this point of MAXIMUM POTENTIAL, that is, its breakdown. THIS NEW MAGNETIC ACTION inside the fuel cell accomplishes this response, which then causes a point of transference that forms a NEW molecular structure. This new structure is associated with the conductive action of the red brass cover. THUS, the action taking place inside the fuel cell is a continuous process of COMBUSTION.
Faraday had a thought that is worth remembering. He stated, "The very progress which science makes as a body, is a continued correction of ignorance, i.e., a state which is ignorance in relation to The Future, though wisdom and knowledge in relation to the past."
We can only CLAIM the use of wisdom and knowledge about the past, as we ADMIT the errors of the past. Planet Earth is in dire need of repair because the POWERS TO BE will not use wisdom and knowledge to address the PAST.
Why is it necessary for someone OUTSIDE TRADITIONAL DISCIPLINE to step inside in order to gin a new freedom of thought? A former astronaut, Captain Edgar D. Mitchell stated it quite well when he said, "History has shown time and again that important scientific discoveries generally happen only when someone steps outside the limits of his traditional discipline and looks at something from a fresh point of view. Then what should have been obvious all along comes into focus."
Thus such great Technology has been suppressed for almost 20 years. First the U.S. Department of Energy issued a "gag" order and then a "grab" order (See Appendix 2), which is why Rory Johnson moved all his motors and technology out of his lab in the middle of the night and moved to California, and shortly thereafter he mysteriously died. Some inside information revealed that OPEC had been keeping track of all competitive technology and he was #1 on their Hit List! He was about to manufacture the motors through a nationwide dealership. Some motors still exist but the owner wants several million dollars for them.
“Suppression From Higher Up” [Excerpt]
by
Eric Masen
In the late 1970s, Rory Johnson, a brilliant inventor in Elgin, Illinois, created a cold-fusion, laser-activated, magnetic motor that produced 525 horsepower, weighed 475 pounds and would propel a large truck of bus 100,000 miles on about 2 pounds of deuterium and gallium. This was years before either Pons & Fleischman or Dr. James Patterson entered the scene with their cold-fusion technology. Johnson entered negotiations with the Greyhound Bus Company to install this revolutionary motor in several buses in order to demonstrate fuel savings, maintenance reduction and, hence, the possibility of greater profits for Greyhound.
Little did he know, however, that OPEC keeps close track of any potential competition to its oil business and that he was number one on its hit list. His first mistake was publicizing, in many magazines, his plans to manufacture and distribute his revolutionary motor. (The writer has spoken with a few people who even signed up for distributorships.)
After a year of hearing nothing but silence from Johnson, Greyhound agents tried to contact him-only to be notified that he had passed away unexpectedly. This is a particularly troubling part of the story, since he had been in his early fifties and in robust health. Later, Greyhound learned that shortly before he died, Johnson had inexplicably moved our of his laboratory in the middle of the night and taken all of his motors and technology to California.
Another bizarre fact then surfaced: The U.S. Department of Energy had placed a restraining order on Johnson's company, Magnatron, Inc., prohibiting it from producing the Magnatron engine.
Popular Performance Boat Magazine -- Unidentified Date/Title
Author: Rick Mazicola ?
“525 HP From Laser Activated Motor”
The February issue of the Roseau, Minnesota Farmers Union Oil Company News Letter carried a front page account of a new self-contained electric motor that will power a car for 100,000 miles on less than 2 pounds of fuel, will produce 525 horsepower and is self-contained with a weight of 475 pounds. We were at once skeptical and yet so extremely interested that our publisher, Nick Marzicola hopped a jet to Chicago to gather information, photos and have a look in person.
Rory Johnson, President of Magntron, Inc., and inventor of the proposed laser-activated power source said that the early report was factual and described his invention as being a combination electric drive and generator with a fuel cell to supply constant power.
The fuel concept is new, using Deuterium and Gallium fused by a miniature laser prism. The fuel cell is guaranteed by Magnatron to last 100,000 miles in normal use and the motor parts will be warranteed for 15,000 or 15 months, whichever comes first.
Johnson said that the motor rpm is 8,000 with a gear ration of 2:1. Lubrication for the sealed, no exhaust, no emissions, motor is Mobil 1 synthetic which will not need changing and will not use a filter due to the non-introduction of foreign materials such as carbon and varnish which are found in the internal combustion piston engine.
Fuel for the new power source is plentiful, since Deuterium is derived from water and Gallium is derived from Aluminum Bauxite, three parts per million all over the face of the earth.
Potential uses and markets seen by Magnatron are in transportation and energy production such as a replacement for steam boilers, turbines and auxiliary power for industry with home generator usage possible. Johnson, being located in Elgin Illinois, privately feels the first units should be power farm tractors and trucks with personal transportation vehicles being fitted second. Magnatron says the new power source would be highly adaptable to boats, ships, and air use.
A public demonstration of the new power source-is scheduled for the very near future, says Johnson, with four Magnatron-equipped vehicles traveling across the USA in such a manner that practically every citizen will have a chance to see the new motor on a first-hand basis. Also, one special vehicle will take a surprise route coast-to-coast on an unannounced schedule, while itineraries for the other vehicles will be publicized prior ro arrival.
Production is proposed to begin after the public demonstration and with current facilities Magnatron estimates a maximum of 100 units per day could be constructed. Plans are in the worls to construct a larger manufacturing plant on a 65-acre plot in Illinois with national distribution to follow.
In addition to the driving tests, Magnatron plans to send three motors to independent labs for testing and install several others on various farm equipment including grain storage and drying equipment, Popular Performance Boat Magazine will have an updated story next issue including the drive plan itinerary. Magnatron stated that due to the volume of mail being received, only those inquiries with self-addressed stamped envelopes will be answered.
_________________
New technology is the easiest to ridicule but the most difficult to ignore - lest our skeptic minds be wrong.
Posted by: Dr. Lee Davis | July 10, 2011 at 10:29 AM
Dr. Davis,
I may need to invoke a comment length limit after this.
Posted by: George Mobus | July 17, 2011 at 09:49 AM
It is unfortunate that there will not be enough Net Energy available, during the coming decades..And we have to change our life style or we need to rebuild it..
Posted by: Core Drill Rig | November 29, 2011 at 11:39 PM