Shaun "where's my ride" Cassidy

[Hyrion]

... so others may mine and sell, or they may invest their own capital, and extract the resources

That's really where the core difference between harvesting and converting the "fuel" for use comes in.

It's far easier (and significantly cheaper) to harvest and convert sunlight for use then it is a pocket of gas half a mile down.

[YiamCross]

..

It's far easier (and significantly cheaper) to harvest and convert sunlight for use then it is a pocket of gas half a mile down.

If that were true they'd be building solar frams all over the world. As more than a tax dodge, that is.

[vampireLOREN]

I think when he 'fires' it up for first time, Shaun will experience a 'blaze' of glory.....

Boom boom

Next video he will not be wearing gloves....just bandages, I hope he goes bang!.

[Hyrion]

..

It's far easier (and significantly cheaper) to harvest and convert sunlight for use then it is a pocket of gas half a mile down.

If that were true they'd be building solar frams all over the world. As more than a tax dodge, that is.

Cost of an Oil Rig vs the cost of a Solar Panel.

I present the fact I can purchase a solar panel today and start harvesting sunlight for my use and can't afford the costs to even begin to afford an oil rig as proof of my statement that it's far easier and signficantly cheaper to harvest and convert sunlight then it is to collect and process biofuels in the form of gas and oil.

Whether it's more profitable: solar is not, for companies that do the collecting, processing and distribution biofuels are more profitable.

The bulk of society can not easily or cheaply extract and process the fuel for use themselves and must rely on a provider. It's ongoing virtually guaranteed business into the unforeseeable future (or at least till the source empties).

With Solar panels, the profit is in the upfront sales of the solar panels and units to integrate with what you're using them for (whether house, motorhome, your cooking plate you use for camping, etc.). After that - ongoing repeat business tends to mean finding new customers.

Your example that solar farms aren't built all over the world is a testament to the difference in profit to businesses. It's not a testament to the costs of the product to the consumer which is what I was speaking towards.

[PeanutGallery]

In regard to the profitability of energy sources it also has to be taken into consideration that for a long period our society has used fossil fuels and coal as a primary source of energy. This has increased the price of these commodities, although some nations fortunate enough to find them in their borders have profited massively.

Solar is only a recent development and at the moment it can really only be used to power a house (and perhaps charge up an electric car and mobile devices. It also does not mean that existing power stations are suddenly made redundant, most nations have a lot of money already invested in their power infrastructure and to raze it and rebuild it every time a new technology came along would be a fools gambit.

While I do see that Solar is likely to be a future method of generating energy, it's going to take at least 10-20 years before it will start to replace existing power plants. Even then the energy produced by solar panels won't be 'free' the cost of manufacturing and maintaining the panels over time will add up, equally those who invest in commercial solar installations will look to get a return on their investment.

However the types of machine Shaun is proposing have little to no chance of working, Tesla was a man well ahead of his time in many regards, but even though he could envisage several technologies that we have only recently begun to take for granted (Tesla did foresee WiFi communication networks), all of his work was governed by the laws of thermodynamics, as Shaun will find out his device also is, when it becomes very thermal and violently dynamic.

[NigelJK]

Solar Farms.

Can't wait, there will be an even bigger glut of petrol to power my car.

[YiamCross]

Cost of an Oil Rig vs the cost of a Solar Panel.

I present the fact I can purchase a solar panel today and start harvesting sunlight for my use and can't afford the costs to even begin to afford an oil rig as proof of my statement that it's far easier and signficantly cheaper to harvest and convert sunlight then it is to collect and process biofuels in the form of gas and oil.

You're talking about a number of different things and not comparing like with like. Sure, you can go buy a solar panel and start "harvesting" the sun's enertgy which is great if you want to charge your phone on a sunny day. Trouble is, if you want to heat and light your house, cook your food, play your computer games and do all the things we somehow manage to do at the moment you're talking about a whole different level of investment. Lots of panels, batteries for storage, control circuitry to make it all work (which is a big old chunk of cash, I can tell you) and most likely some time from techincally able people to make it all work. That stuff doesn't last forever so you have to factor in the cost of maintaining and replacing stuff.

Coal is free, it's just laying around in the ground. Trouble is, mining isn't. Generating power from it is not. Distributing the power is not. Same with solar. Do you think the land needed for a solar farm is going to be free?

As you say, you may not be able to sink an oil well or a mine shaft & convert all the free fossil fuel into energy but you can buy it from those who do cheaply and easily without having to lay out a considerable chunk of cash to harvest your "free" sunshine.

Your example that solar farms aren't built all over the world is a testament to the difference in profit to businesses. It's not a testament to the costs of the product to the consumer which is what I was speaking towards.

But the viability of a business is determined by the cost of the product. If solar panels could compete with oil and gas then you can bet your ass those with the capital to invest would be building solar farms as fast as they possibly could. Why risk billions building rigs to try & find a new oil field when you could just go down the supermarket, buy a shedload of solar panels and start flogging cheap electricity as fast as you can lay them out in the sun?

When you work out the cost of a unit of energy gas and oil beat solar hands down right now. Maybe that will change, certainly for parts of the world where there's plenty of sun, but it will never be the best option in every situation.

One thing is even more certain and that's the fact that "over unity" systems simply cannot work no matter how many coloured crayons their proponents use in their pictures. I don't know why they think Tesla managed to find a way to cheat the laws of physics. He certainly did some incredible work before he tried to marry a pigeon but I think that was a strong indication that he'd passed the point of producing his best work.

[Hyrion]

Trouble is, if you want to heat and light your house, cook your food, play your computer games and do all the things we somehow manage to do at the moment you're talking about a whole different level of investment.

Last time I priced it out (admittedly a bunch of years ago) it rang in around the $36,000 mark to fit my housing electrical needs.

... batteries for storage ...

If you want to be pure off-grid. And depending where you draw the line with regards how much battery storage you can be looking at anywhere from $5k to an equivalent cost to what you paid for the array. However, if you connect directly to the grid pushing any excess power to the grid and using the grids energy during off-peak (to the consumer that would mean no sunlight) hours, then you can do away with the costs and storage space for the battery array.

I can't say for other locations, but here the energy companies are required to pay "micro distributors" the same per kWhr they charge. So the primary cost to you for the energy provider is the administration fees (which means you're not independent and those fees alone can be ouch). Point being: there are choices and pros and cons to weigh - so many and all together we who are contributing to this discussion haven't covered them all yet.

... control circuitry to make it all work ...

Conversely, what's the cost on the control circuitry for harvesting and processing fossil fuels? Speaking of solar: This I did not price out - however, I have seen setups from very simple designs which wouldn't require much to full blown computer controlled environments which I would expect to be in the $10,000 to $20,000 range.

... most likely some time from techincally able people to make it all work ...

Conversely: equivalent cost for those needed to harvest and process fossil fuel? For solar I'd expect another potential $10,000 here for someone else to do it for you.

That stuff doesn't last forever so you have to factor in the cost of maintaining and replacing stuff.

Conversely: costs for replacing and maintaining everything from the tools and vehicles required to sink the oil rig through processing?

The nature of the structure of good solar panels is such that they commonly have a 20-25 year warranty period. That range was a few years ago, for a recent example I looked up http://www.canadiansolar.com/ and they have a 30 year warranty to ensure the actual power output will be no less than 83% of the labeled power output of the solar panel. Gives one an idea just how soundly built a good solar panel is given this warranty period factors in damage from nature such as hail.

If you design your setup with a little thought, you may be able to produce a reasonably priced design that can protect your array from the elements while having minimal impact on the sun getting to the array. That extends the life to the array. As it produces electricity in the form of direct current - you have no moving parts. To consider how often you would have to maintain such a setup, you need only ask:

• How often do you maintain the electrical wiring in your house?

Distributing the power is not. Same with solar.

True... but if you, the consumer, go totally off-grid you are not concerned with distributing the power to others. If you stay grid-connected so you do without the battary array, you can let the energy company deal with distributing the power.

Do you think the land needed for a solar farm is going to be free?

Land for any purpose is not free. That has nothing to do specifically with solar. And the price of the land won't change whether you're buying it to put a ranch on it to breed horses or putting a solar array up.

The individual who is not looking to go into the energy distribution business does not require the kind of solar farm you refer to. Again, just to be clear: this point you are refering to would be of interest to someone wanting to put up a business for energy harvesting/distribution. Depending on the size of your roof and your average electrical needs - specifically in my case: I have all the space I need on my roof for the solar array.

As you say, you may not be able to sink an oil well or a mine shaft & convert all the free fossil fuel into energy but you can buy it from those who do cheaply and easily

You're crossing that of a business with that of a consumer again. Your negative points on solar are those from the perspetive of a business - review your own points. You just produced a positive point for fossil fuel from the perspective of a consumer: "buy it from [others] cheaply and easily". Your negative points against solar are all about up-front costs. Your positive points for fossil fuels completely ignore those costs in favor of someone else already having foot the bill.

I really wish I had some cold hard data from someone who has designed a simpler system to meet their needs, what their up front costs were, what they would paying the electrical company over the years, what they have been paying in the event they stayed grid connected, and so on: to be able to clearly identify the point at which the energy you collected from the sun - relative to the energy you would have paid for from the utility company - meets. In other words: at what point the solar array pays for itself.

Obviously if you compare only the up front, short term costs of putting up a solar array to "fill up the tank" on your electric car with the short term costs of going to the gas station for a fill up: the fossil fuel is infinitely cheaper. It's equally correct to say:

It's infinitely cheaper to go to the gas station to fill up the tank on your car then it is to put up an oil rig on your own farm to harvest the fossil fuels to fill up your tank.

You want compare the costs of the solar to the costs of the provider then you must do so over a long period of time. As a very rough calculation with inflated costs giving the utility company the benefit:

• $40k (rounded up) + $40k (assuming I could fit this sized battery array in my basement) + $20k + $10k = $110,000

Assume I already have a good chunk of land, could I sink a basic oil drill with $110,000? Granted, if I could and did and did have a pocket of fuel under my property, then I could become a very wealthy person indeed - or in the alternative, hoard the fuel for myself and likely have many generations worth.

On with the solar comparison calcluations to give an idea what needs to be considered:

• Current bill (both electric and gas): $210.89

Assuming that, as the avg cost each month, it would take 43.5 years to pay for the array based on the previous costs listed. I can't say what the costs are in your area, but If you price things out relative to Edmonton, Canada - you'll find the previous prices listed is very expensive relative to what would actually be paid. And - of course - depending on the setup you aim for, the prices are going to drastically change - I'd estimate your low figure is likely between 35k to 40k.

But the viability of a business is determined by the cost of the product.

I disagree. From the business people I know including a couple start ups along with the discussions I've been involved in with the bank, the viability of a business is determined by the anticipated 5-10 year profits the business is expecting. Perhaps the business people in your area look at things differently then here.

If solar panels could compete with oil and gas then you can bet your ass those with the capital to invest would be building solar farms as fast as they possibly could.

I'll agree with the wording:

• If the profits from a solar panel farm could compete with oil and gas then you can bet your ass those with the capital to invest would be building solar farms as fast as they possibly could.

When you work out the cost of a unit of energy gas and oil beat solar hands down right now.

I did work out some of those costs from the perspective of a consumer - again, a good number of years ago. The straight costs for the solar panels alone - assuming the cost per kWhr from the electrical company did not change - would have the solar panels paid for in 23 years. Do you really believe your utility company is going to freeze their prices and not increase them over the next 2 decades?

... it will never be the best option in every situation...

Didn't say it was. We're lucky here in Edmonont. Throughout the year we get an average of 6 hours of sunlight per day - this takes into consideration factors such as cloud coverage which would drastically drop the performance of your solar array.

One thing is even more certain and that's the fact that "over unity" systems simply cannot work no matter how many coloured crayons their proponents use in their pictures.

I'll take your word for it, I have no idea what an "over unity" system is.

[FatGambit]

An over unity system is a generator of such that produces more energy than it consumes, a kiss principle example is an alternator on a car, also putting two model motors together of different rates and use one to drive the other can result (if setup correctly) in a 3v motor producing 60+ volts on the other motor, strictly speaking over unity, but it doesn't take into account amps produced which are barely nothing, you might be able to drive a few LEDs more doing this than attaching the LEDs directly to the battery, but it would be noisy as hell.

We are supposed to be getting a solar array installed next week, our landlord has rented the roof space of all their south facing properties to a company to use as solar farms, they're speculators investing in the panels to get the return from the feed in tarriff, our sweetner is we get to use the panels for free, but each array is costing about £9k to install. The feed in tarrif here is a bit stupid as you get 50% of the rated output of the panels paid regardless of how much you actually send to the grid, hence why there are so many people panicking because the scheme is being closed.

[Hyrion]

An over unity system is a generator of such that produces more energy than it consumes ... a 3v motor producing 60+ volts ... but it doesn't take into account amps produced ...

Sounds like you're describing a voltage multiplier - using capacitors and diodes you can increase the voltage while decreasing amperage.

I haven't watched the video posted - I've gotta be in the right mood of humor to sit and listen to what comes out of OPCA-type mouths - but I suspect what they're describing isn't the same thing. It's part of the modus operandi for OPCA to use terms in a not-normal defined sense.

The feed in tarrif here is a bit stupid as you get 50% of the rated output of the panels paid regardless of how much you actually send to the grid

Wow! That's some incentive to get solar installed. You harvest and use all the electrical and they still pay you for 50% - assuming I understood that correctly.

[FatGambit]

That's basically it yes, if I understood the bumf from the governemt right, it's the reason why 'call me Dave' has scrapped the scheme because you could fly a jumbo through it. There was also something about monitoring your output for the first month but the vast majority of the scheme is based around guestimates.

I haven't watched the videos either but my dad is a sparky and my son a mad scientist so we often just build these things for shits and giggles to see what haopens if we can get the plans for nothing.

[The Observer]

I am going to step in here and please ask that we return the conversation to Shaun Cassisdy and not debate solar power vs. conventional energy methods here. You are more than welcome to start such a discussion in a new thread in our "Gambling and Quatloosia Good LIfe" forum.

[YiamCross]

Well I was on the point of saying we should maybe take this elsewhere as it's straying off topic but actually this free energy rubbish comes up a lot on freemanesque circles. They're always banging on about energy being free but somehow forget to add in all the costs of getting it out of the ground or the sky and getting it to where it's needed when it's needed.

It's an easy mistake to make, I know, the sun shines most days, well anywhere but the UK, and never sends a bill. All you need to take advantage of this free energy is $36,000 worth of panels and batteries plus of course the cost of putting it all in. Your panels might last 30 years but your batteries will be doing well to last 5 and I'll bet you'll have to spend a lot more than you think if you really expect to be able to do all you want to do when the sun doesn't shine so much. Then there's the question of whether you have $36K in your back pocket to do the do & if not how are you going to finance it? Another cost. But hey, the the energy is free.

So the fact is that you can go on about what's business and what's not and ignore the fact the actual cost per unit energy delivered to your light bulb or cooker hob is what counts. Whether you pay it in arrears monthly to your electric company or find a huge chunk of cash to re roof the house with solar and then amortise it over 10,or 20 or 30 years, it all costs.

The fact is, none of it is free. Maybe solar will work out cheaper over the long run than buying gas or oil generated electicity over the same period and that's great if you're sure of being in the same house long enough to recover the capital costs. Or when every house has solar and you move to a system that's as good as the one left behind. Still not gonna be free, though, all gotta be paid for some way some how.

Zero point systems are the ones where they tune a magic coil so it produces more energy than the motor driving it needs so there's some left over and bing, over unity! Better than solar, it works in the dark.

Or like or our lad Master Cassidy you bung in a few magic magnets and tune them so they will drive the heat particle accelerator (toaster) with no need to plug it into the mains. Also better than solar.

The one thing which seems to obsess these nutjobs is the free in freeload, I mean freeman. Free energy, free water, free money (benefits), tax free, free parking... I think we know where we're going here but the harsh reality of life is that nothing is for nothing. Not even the of in a bogof though it can appear to be to those who think there's free energy for the taking when the sun shines. Strange how even otherwise sensible people can get the idea that there's something to be had for nothing.

[#six]

I know we have gone really off topic on this subject but some of you may be interested that there is a documentary on Netflix (UK) about Tesla - "Tesla. Master of Lightning"

He was a genius and latterly a bit of a mad man. But he certainly did not believe in free energy.

[morrand]

An over unity system is a generator of such that produces more energy than it consumes, a kiss principle example is an alternator on a car, also putting two model motors together of different rates and use one to drive the other can result (if setup correctly) in a 3v motor producing 60+ volts on the other motor, strictly speaking over unity, but it doesn't take into account amps produced which are barely nothing, you might be able to drive a few LEDs more doing this than attaching the LEDs directly to the battery, but it would be noisy as hell.

Not exactly. An over-unity system would be (for example) an alternator wired to an electric motor, which is then belted back to the alternator. Give the motor a spin, and it drives the alternator, which powers the motor, which spins the alternator, etc. As an over-unity device, you can then wire your reading lamp in on top of this, and voila, free lighting!

At least, that's how it seems like it should work, especially to Cub Scouts and others who don't really understand the laws of thermodynamics. If you actually try to build this kind of device, you quickly realize that it won't work that way: the energy that's taken out of the system has to be replaced, or the whole thing will eventually slow down and stop. That's how car alternators work: they're supplied from the engine, which burns fuel to produce torque, a small part of which is siphoned off to drive the alternator. (You know this, I'm sure, but I want to clarify, lest someone think over-unity is a valid mechanical principle. It's not; it's just a snazzier name for a perpetual motion machine.)

Your example of linking two motors together is also not over-unity. It's a mechanical form of power transformer, an especially useful one when in the direct current realm (or it was, anyway, until switched-mode power supplies grew up, but that's another topic), and fair-sized motor-generator assemblies were once fairly common for things like lifts and electric railways. In each case, though, you still need to put in at least as much energy as you take out, plus any loss in the machine. Yes, you may be able to drive a device like that at 3 volts, and get 60 volts out, but as you say the output current will also be 20 times lower than the input current (less, actually, due to losses). Or, in other words, volts times amps on the input will be more than volts times amps on the output, so the efficiency is less than 100%, so it's not over-unity.

And, yes, noisy as hell. I've started a rotary converter substation (rotary converters are a related machine, but a more ingenious mechanism; check Wikipedia), and that is fun. It's a couple of tons of iron to set spinning at 1800 rpm, and it hums and buzzes and chatters and sings as it goes. Beautiful machine. That one burnt out a winding some years ago and now sits silent, which is a pity.

Back to topic, Shaun says something about putting a Tesla coil into the box with the...oh, whatever else it is he plans to put in there besides a cardboard tube. But I don't know if he understands that all the Tesla coils out there, that I know of, anyway, plug into mains for operation. Hardly free energy, though I suppose that, in the strictest sense, if he manages to set his flat on fire by abusing his Tesla coil, he'll have all kinds of free heat available for at least a little while.

[SteveUK]

Look, let's just all agree that alternative energy is boring and move on- to alternative energy freeman style....latest from our inventor:

"Two more parts ordered.. wait for them then... boom make a Tesla Coil hehehehe! ooh energy how i am soo looking forward to holding lightning in the palm of my hands."

I'm not sure if he's being ironic with 'boom' and 'lightning in hands' but let's assume not. Anyone want to donate a few sheckles to Shaun so we get the 'boom' sooner rather than later?

[YiamCross]

Look, let's just all agree that alternative energy is boring and move on- to alternative energy freeman style....latest from our inventor:

"Two more parts ordered.. wait for them then... boom make a Tesla Coil hehehehe! ooh energy how i am soo looking forward to holding lightning in the palm of my hands."

I'm not sure if he's being ironic with 'boom' and 'lightning in hands' but let's assume not. Anyone want to donate a few sheckles to Shaun so we get the 'boom' sooner rather than later?

What are the chances of Master Cassidy and high voltage electricity getting on well together, co existing amicably without one of them ending up as a smoldering black husk on the floor? Consequently I would question whether donating to the cause might not make one culpable in some way for his inevitable demise from several kilo Volts arcing through his pudgy pink body. Sure hope he manages to make a video, maybe we should encourage him to live stream in case of the worst. Like he zaps himself and the video doesn't get posted.

[hucknallred]

What are the chances of Master Cassidy and high voltage electricity getting on well together, co existing amicably without one of them ending up as a smoldering black husk on the floor? Consequently I would question whether donating to the cause might not make one culpable in some way for his inevitable demise from several kilo Volts arcing through his pudgy pink body. Sure hope he manages to make a video, maybe we should encourage him to live stream in case of the worst. Like he zaps himself and the video doesn't get posted.

We must assume that his council accommodation has modern electrics. Meaning that an RCD will intervene before he collects a Darwin award.

[Joinder]

I've often wondered how patients are put into an "induced coma".
I wonder no more.

[FatGambit]

RCD's can fail