Not sure about health, don't live in the UK but education? Kids are taught to pass the tests these days in many schools. College fees went from 1k to 3k to 9k and it will go up again forcing people into debt as I think the current stats are 50% or something can never pay it back so one has to question the new system put in place by the government as it is costing them more than they will get back if that many can never repay. Tories Labour or coalition, makes no difference, the banks are robbing you all blind. It's like the death of a thousand cuts, no one on it's own is a problem but altogether they bring you down. I mean, HSBC and Barclays were caught red handed, HSBC caught laundering money for Colombian and Mexican drug cartels, something you or I would do life for and not one person faced criminal charges, just a fine, costing HSBC about 2 weeks profits. Royal bank of Scotland going after the very people that are bailing them out, repossessing viable assets to get the cash. Labour, didn't Gordon Brown sell off most of the UK gold for a ****ty price too?
On the fracking. Currently energy companies in the US are using environmentalist organisations to get public land zoned off by the federal government, citing some endangered species of flora or fauna, then the feds lease the land to frackers. Now sure if anyone is aware of the Bundy ranch thing going on there in Nevada, apparently land his family have used for grazing for generations is now protected because of a species of tortoise. A big stand off going on atm. Turns out the feds are gonna lease the land to frackering companies.. clever bastards using the environmentalists to free up the land for pillage. http://www.naturalnews.com/044670_BLM_lies_fracking_leases_Bundy_ranch.html For all the UN reports we see, no one ever even remotely looks in the direction of energy companies, the real blame is always the fact you threw a tea bag in with the plastic refuse.
It may be hard to believe but oil companies would rather leave that business behind as fusion would be the real money spinner as the running cost would be a fraction and the energy output to sell an order of magnitude higher. But they are not sure if it is possible hence why there is little funding. Exxon leader himself stated if scientists get fusion working as we desire then he'd personally shutdown the oil rigs on day one and bury the barrels of oil not yet sold.
The problem with hydrogen power for oil companies is you don't need the oil company, it's just water. Every home can have it's own. It's the plastics and rubber and all the billion other things made of oil we are screwed for. Power and fuel tech is there. We're oil junkies.
Hydrogen is not a free lunch. You still need energy to create the Hydrogen in the first place, in fact more energy than you get back from it.
But I am talking fusion, not hydrogen. For commercial scale power generation giving every home a converter wouldn't suffice, fusion is the answer energy companies are hoping comes to fruition. I believe we are already producing oil free plastics but they are energy intensive during production. Absolutely. We need major advances in bio-chemistry to make it economical and even then is it wise to create bio-engineered microbes on such a scale to do the work, imagine the potential to evolve past genetic restrictions we design.
Fusion power is a quantum leap forward, when it is finally achieved. Possibly later this year, 'General Fusion' will begin work on a full-size prototype reactor. At the center will be a sphere, three meters in diameter, inside which molten lead swirls at high speed creating a vacuum, or vortex, in the middle. Arrayed around it will be 200 to 300 pistons, each the size of a cannon. Firing in perfect harmony, they will create an acoustic wave that collapses the vortex at the very moment a plasma injector shoots hydrogen isotopes, the nuclear fuel, into it. If General Fusion has its physics right, the heat and pressure will ignite a fusion reaction that spins off countless neutrons which will heat the lead even more. Pumped through a heat exchanger, that hot lead will help generate steam just like a conventional thermal power plant. Getting the reactor to work once is the easy part. Getting it to work repeatedly and cost effectively for power production, thatâs harder? The magnetized target fusion that 'General Fusion' is attempting is whatâs known as an âalternate concept". What continues to bedevil General Fusionâs efforts is the damned plasma. The team has to get the combination of energy and confinement to a level that sustains, even for a fraction of a second, the conditions in which fusion energy is released. In 2011 a new round of financing brought the total raised up to $50 million. In addition to earlier investors, who anted up again, some notable new money joined the group. One was Bezos Expeditions, the venture capital arm of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The other was Cenovus Energy, a major player in Canadaâs oilsands. âCenovus is impressed by General Fusionâs innovative, pragmatic approach,â executive vice-president Judy Fairburn explained in a release announcing the $3.8-million investment from the oil companyâs Environmental Opportunity Fund. It was Cenovusâs investment, more than that of Bezos, that turned heads among investors. SOURCES - Canadian Business and General Fusion................
The problem with power and energy is, that all research is geared towards big business and nothing else. When you think of the enormous energy the Sun gives off every second, and the way that nature is geared to harvest that sunlight for crop production and growth, you just have to wonder about the inept scientific thinking that is looking at less efficient concepts and models. Why haven't we developed more efficient ways of harvesting sunlight? Solar energy is still in it's primitive infancy, why? Because no big money wants a truly efficient household energy production unit, that would be environmentally beneficial to the planet!...........
It's in the conversion, how you transform the liquid to a gas. 1 gallon of water is about 1000 gallons of hydrogen in gaseous form. So your power consumption is in converting the liquid to a gas rather than a mechanical process. You will not use more than a thousand gallons worth of hydrogen power to convert 1 gallon of water to hydrogen gas. Especially with the advancement of ultrasound techniques. The magic is in the transformation of liquid to gas, that's how you get more out than you put in because what you have put in is water and a small amount of electricity, you lose something from the water during the conversion, the oxygen so that's the classical "getting less out that you put in" but we can lose the oxygen without it costing us anything really but technically there is loss. Oxygen is also burned in this conversion process so that means even less loss from the water in the engine. Water mileage is claimed to be about 25 miles per ounce without any fuel gas supplement, many others run cars 5% fuel 95% water too. Remember, a car generates energy when it runs and we know you charge your car battery by driving your car so it would be logical to assume power from driving goes into converting water to hydrogen gas too. This tech deployed on great scale in homes cars ect ect would annihilate the oil corp profits.
Fusion power is supposedly the answer, but it is supposedly the answer for decades. Yet here we are waging wars over oil and smashing up the place fracking, fracking that costs more to get the stuff up than they make from it in profits?! so really how far along this road are we in the end? Fusion power will give us electricity but it won't give us power to drive our cars and so on. Hydrogen conversion replaces gas, fusion replaces nuclear, fossil fuel, wind and solar generated power. Neither will replace everything else we use oil for. There is nothing that is capable of filling that gap.
Fusion would give us almost limitless amounts of cheap electricity. We could use some of this power to create liquid Hydrogen to power future cars at a fraction the cost of petrol. Fusion really would/will be the answer to all our energy problems. The oil & gas companies may as well just give up as soon as it arrives. Problem is the technology required to produce a sustainable fusion reactor is mind boggling.
I agree the benefits are immeasurable. Ask yourself this, when have advancements led to anything being cheaper for you and I? Advances in technology always leads to increased profits, nothing get cheaper, everything rises in cost year in year out. For cars liquid hydrogen? That's just dangerous to the extreme, wouldn't fancy crashing a car loaded with liquid hydrogen, oxygen is a oxidizer so the hydrogen could burn, given it is stored in high pressure as a liquid, I'd rather petrol from a safety aspect at the moment. Storing water and converting to gas via converter is much much safer. Hydrogen gas is low pressure and is also safe. Advances in communications computers and transport means we get more work done, we don't get more money for it. Advances in production methods create more profits due to lower costs, when has a corporation ever come out and said, we can now make this a lot cheaper so we'll drop the price of our products? No, shareholders rub their hands instead. That's the reality, any technological benefits to business and commerce push more money to the top of the pyramid. Why would you think this would change with Fusion power becoming readily available? Why would corps follow a path that leads to decreased profits. A corporate sociopath entity would never act in the best interest of anyone but it's self So I won't be holding my breath for cheap energy. In Spain people are going to be facing inspections from the "solar police" if suspected of illegally collection solar energy?!?!?!?!?! "Illegally collecting solar energy" illegally?!?!?!? This is the energy world we live in So forgive me for not buying into the cheap energy for all when EU dictated governments are trapping people into energy and preventing self sufficiency. The system does not want people becoming independent of it, if you have your own water and your own power, why do you need the state or energy companies, why would you need to be on the grid. IF those resources were so readily available the referendums for independence around the world would rise exponentially. Governments are actively trying to prevent people living off the grid constantly with laws.
Computers, phones, TV's, cars, food, everything that comes out of China - much cheaper thanks to advancements in technology. Is there anything that hasn't become cheaper? Hydrogen is the future for cars, there really is little question about it. As for being dangerous, I believe hydrogen as a fuel is safer than both petrol and diesel. The 'solar' tax in Spain is a tricky one. At first glance it's easy to think it's just a way for the greedy bureaucrats to cash in from people trying to save the planet, but truth is there's a bit more to it. If the wealthy, who can afford solar panels, refuse to contribute anything towards maintenance of the national grid then it's the poor, who cannot afford solar power, that are going to foot the bill.
You have a grave misconception there, China produces cheaper products for companies through a slave labour force exploitation, these people even work with chemicals banned in our countries, stuff like benzene that's given thousands of young people leukemia. These people make your iPhone for probably less than a quid a day. Many kill themselves. What is disgusting is all the muppets that rush out and get the latest iPhones without even considering the implications of this slave labour supported consumerist model. There's advancement in technology for you. Apple and the like do not want to pay a decent wage and make fair profits, they want to use slaves in dictatorships and totalitarian states, poor countries, and exploit a labour force by paying literally nothing in terms of corporate costs for their manufacturing, not only that Apple an American corp took all of those jobs out of the US where 46 million are on food stamps. oh how we love technology. here's a riddle. If advances in technology automate more and more jobs that humans have been doing, that means progressively less jobs for a progressively rising population/ All for increased profits. What jobs are we going to do? in 100 years from now 30% rise in global poverty in the past couple of years, 30%!! They can't even make cars now without them going on fire for one reason or another having to recall so many, imagine all those cars with high pressure liquid hydrogen tanks in them If you get a crack in one in an accident and the liquid hydrogen meets air, you wouldn't want to be a decent distance of that car. At least with petrol, it has to be ignited in some way first. On Spain, it's completely dictated by the energy company lobbyists behind government, can't you see that.? With one hand we are "ruining the planet" yet when we go OK fair enough you blamed us on that so we'll use solar and reduce our CO2 footprint, it is now illegal to do so. We use less electricity so they raise the prices to keep profits from falling. Who the **** has the right to tell you you can't power your home with solar power? When **** gets like that you can see why the Basques and Catalans want independence from Spain. The media are keeping quiet about the hundreds of thousands protesting for years over there against the EU dictated poverty making austerity policies in place. I tell you now that the cost of maintain a solar power would be significantly less than the costs of maintaining the current power grid. It's mainly a one time cost of installation. It's simplistic and can be maintained by almost anyone. Storage of energy is the issue from solar power so imo the best combination would be a hydrogen converter generator in the basement that runs on water for the main power source and solar for all the lights and all the other light power usage devices and any heavy duty power usage from the hydrogen generator for cooking ect and of course a sunless winter power supply. You also have some redundancy on this too, when the grid cuts you off you are in the left in the lurch because you just take it for granted it will always be on. Other than maintenance costs, which would be dwarfed by energy bills, the cost of one bill may cover your maintenance costs for 2 years, there no other expenses. Why Spain crack down on this is simply to prevent a movement where the majority of the population go solar because it is more financially feasible for poor people to be energy dependent. The lobbyists behind government for the energy industry are powerful and mega wealthy and help decide elections through financing. For them to see a growing movement in energy self sufficiency is a attack on their profits and therefor power.
On climate change and the mention by someone of emailed released Here is the relevant tidbits of emails concering the following Data manipulation Hiding data Attempting to get professors sacked because they don't agree and whole other lot of devious shenanigans that the media ignored pretty much and Shell were involved. [video=youtube;Cu_ok37HDuE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Cu_ok37HDuE[/video]
It's pretty shocking ain't it? The lengths they went through to essentially propagate a myth, they knew their data did not add up. Shell are not interested in free energy, they are interested in the money climate science generates as the whole world is a client of climate change, except the US India and China funnily enough, the three biggest polluters on the planet if they took a reference form 1000 years and it showed they were wrong, they shortened the reference period until it gave the impression they wished to give. It's like the sun affecting the weather argument. The climatologists say "oh luminescent energy from the sun only variates 0.1%" Sounds ok until you see what changes can occur in out weather paterns with a difference of 0.1% in sun energy emissions, and the climate science people leave that important bit out. Climate science excludes any data that does not fit the models
The answer is for the billionaires who pledged 99% of their wealth to good causes should pool their money and buy a big energy company and a big pharmaceutical, then change the policies those two companies operate under. Governments wouldn't do a thing to stop them, and other companies would be forced to change their policies in order to be competitive. It takes just one energy company to direct 50% of profits to fusion to see it become commercially viable in a matter of a few years, and one big pharamacuetical to debunk the placebos sold by rivals and conduct real research in to parasitic infections like Malaria. At the moment they are tackling parasites in poor regions using a charity fund and this is expensive, not to mention inefficient, and they are not really tackling energy which would help the poor as much as a malaria cure.
