Hi , this is a link to a prototype on the making http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM it uses the kinetic energy of an object to transform it to electrical energy the fact that it gives more power than what it consumes dose not make it an overunitty device since it is not creating power but just transforming it if you would like to comment on it saying that it dosen't work give scientifical explanation and iff you would like to help you will find the link on the video if you would like to make one ask me how if you allready know how do it I appreciate all comments and replies but most the ones giving me support supporting me Thanks .
Very interesting !
Reminds me of the Milkovic pendulum device,
but here it is in a different layer plane...
Hopefully somebody can build this and try it.
Regards, Stefan.
This is a joke
I suggest you read this website before making any claims
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/modify.htm (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/modify.htm)
Kind Regards
@markdansie I am a funny guy , but it ain't no joke , I am not trying to rewrite physics , I do suggest you read the same article you send me to and ask yourself not why but "how" this could not work , where do the laws of physics are broken in this system? , the reason why I was asking for scientific explanations in comments like yours was so I could refute (not refuse ) scientifically any comments at the same level the comments were made , but then you didn't say it would not work just that it was a joke , so anyways thank you for your comment
@hartiberlin thanks for your comment I do hope so too that people start trying with this concept . thanks
Quote from: weston14 on July 23, 2013, 10:55:35 PM
@markdansie I am a funny guy , but it ain't no joke , I am not trying to rewrite physics , I do suggest you read the same article you send me to and ask yourself not why but "how" this could not work , where do the laws of physics are broken in this system? , the reason why I was asking for scientific explanations in comments like yours was so I could refute (not refuse ) scientifically any comments at the same level the comments were made , but then you didn't say it would not work just that it was a joke , so anyways thank you for your comment
@hartiberlin thanks for your comment I do hope so too that people start trying with this concept . thanks
Which laws are broken you ask? Laws like the most fundamental ones such as the conservation of energy (or alternatively the first law of thermodynamics) come to mind.
How could this not work? Just ask yourself the question. Where does the excess ENERGY you propose actually come from.?
As an aside , first read up on what energy is and how to quantify it , lest you start confusing it with Power or Force or Momentum or even pink unicorns for that matter.
@libreenergia first law of thermodynamics states that energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed. what I propose is transforming not creating . excess energy really ? so if you pedal a bike with an attached dynamo to the tire then you stop pedaling you ask your self why the light is still on ? or you just acknowledge that Kinetic energy is being transform to electric energy ? think about it if you need to see the video again is fine , by the way I do not like pink unicorns hahaha she-ra yes
I don't think I need more then ten equations to prove this on paper I'll take it as a challenge if somebody tries to prove me wrong like this.
The clockwork of the Universe is not running in your favour Weston14.
The old motor connected to a generator connected to the motor idea doesn't work.
Quote from: weston14 on July 24, 2013, 12:13:14 AM
@libreenergia first law of thermodynamics states that energy can be transformed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed. what I propose is transforming not creating . excess energy really ? so if you pedal a bike with an attached dynamo to the tire then you stop pedaling you ask your self why the light is still on ? or you just acknowledge that Kinetic energy is being transform to electric energy ? think about it if you need to see the video again is fine , by the way I do not like pink unicorns hahaha she-ra yes
I don't think I need more then ten equations to prove this on paper I'll take it as a challenge if somebody tries to prove me wrong like this.
Consider this.. if this were capable of 'self running' as you claim then we would put it inside a 'black box' and not allow any energy input into the box.. Would we then be able to extract usable power from it forever ?
Yes / No?
If you think yes then there is your the break of the law of conservation of energy right there. No energy in, but energy coming out implies energy is being created inside the box. Doesn't happen, even you admit that.
So, lets put some energy into the box to start with. Maybe spin up a flywheel and then use that stored kinetic energy to turn a generator..
Now, to be useful as an 'energy generation device' it would need to return more energy to us than we put into it.
So, we measure the ENERGY required to spin up the flywheel. Lets say it is 10 MJ. We then let it spin down and measure the ENERGY output as electrical energy. However, we know that due to friction and lower than unity generation efficiency we will get back less than our 10 MJ input.. lets say the whole system is 90% efficient and we get back 9 MJ We then use that 9 MJ to spin up our flywheel and get back a bit less than 8 MJ ..
and so on.
...Until the process eventually stops. All our ten MJ of energy has all been dissipated, mostly as heat, and we haven't managed to extract any useful work from the system.
Unless the thing 'inside the black box' actually creates energy (or perhaps absorbs it from some unknown source) then this is the inevitable result.
We could try fooling ourselves of course , as you appear to be doing by measuring the POWER during the spin up the flywheel and then measuring the POWER available from the generator and claiming success. However you must integrate any power measurements over the time it is applied to come up with an energy balance for the device. When you do this you'll find devices such as this are completely fruitless.
Of course lots of people fall into the same trap..
take Wayne Travis who once graced these boards regularly. He is still 'almost there' with the Hydro energy device (read the Current Objectives at his website http://www.hydroenergyrevolution.com/index.php/current-objectives)
I quote:
"Let me give you a little hint.... We use the "Travis effect" on the upstroke - and "Archimedes" on the down stroke - the excess energy comes from the efficiency difference between those two methods."
Personally I think they are measuring instantaneous power output on the up and down strokes and claiming an excess. (and there probably is for a short period of the stroke). However, they never attempt to do a full energy balance of the entire process over time.
Of course, they may not have attempted that from an intellectual point of view but physically the continuing failure to produce a self running device should serve as notice...
LibreEnergia
You waste your time ! It works exactly like evey animal body, energy is taken from outside, we just don't know yet the exact process of tapping that energy.
Quote from: forest on July 24, 2013, 01:19:28 AM
LibreEnergia
You waste your time ! It works exactly like evey animal body, energy is taken from outside, we just don't know yet the exact process of tapping that energy.
I have only one word for that.. Bullshit.
When considering a mechanical device such as the one described in the thread originators video we know exactly where the energy is coming from and going to.
Quote from: weston14 on July 21, 2013, 06:01:44 PM
Hi , this is a link to a prototype on the making http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM) it uses the kinetic energy of an object to transform it to electrical energy the fact that it gives more power than what it consumes dose not make it an overunitty device since it is not creating power but just transforming it if you would like to comment on it saying that it dosen't work give scientifical explanation and iff you would like to help you will find the link on the video if you would like to make one ask me how if you allready know how do it I appreciate all comments and replies but most the ones giving me support supporting me Thanks .
Congratulations!
You have invented the flywheel!
(Seriously... just because you have taken the standard "motor drives generator powers motor" idea and turned it vertical.... what makes you think that you have anything new or special? You are pumping energy into a flywheel by the action of your arms and hands. Then you can draw off some _power_ at high peak rates if you like-- higher than you can achieve with your arms alone, maybe-- but this is _not_ overunity nor does it imply or even suggest that you might be able to make something self-sustaining. You are not going to get any experienced builder to try to help you make a prototype until you can demonstrate something _new and unique_ about your idea... and so far, you haven't. I am taking you seriously here, as a sincere but perhaps a bit naive researcher. You should take Mark Dansie's advice and _study_ the Simanek pages, all of them. Then try to find something new about your design that might interest a skilled builder. And never forget: power is not energy, and power multiplication devices are all around us and they are none of them OU.)
Quote from: weston14 on July 21, 2013, 06:01:44 PM
Hi , this is a link to a prototype on the making http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM) it uses the kinetic energy of an object to transform it to electrical energy the fact that it gives more power than what it consumes dose not make it an overunitty device since it is not creating power but just transforming it if you would like to comment on it saying that it dosen't work give scientifical explanation and iff you would like to help you will find the link on the video if you would like to make one ask me how if you allready know how do it I appreciate all comments and replies but most the ones giving me support supporting me Thanks .
I have no problems accepting that you use a dynamo to power some LED's. The problem however, is that you claim you use less energy input than the dynamo can give. This is not possible. Everything in the universe is linked together - like a closed loop of chain. Pulling the chain means just that it will respond by moving and affect the complete loop accordingly.
Einsteins theory of relativity applies to all physics except singularity which is to be found in the center og black holes - where his equation at some point are devided by zero - which in turn means an impossible result with infinite gravity at an infinitly small point.
Vidar
SUPER Great invention.
Of course it works. Only a blind person (or a TROLL) would say it doesn't work.
Quote from: weston14 on July 21, 2013, 06:01:44 PM
Hi , this is a link to a prototype on the making http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM) it uses the kinetic energy of an object to transform it to electrical energy the fact that it gives more power than what it consumes dose not make it an overunitty device since it is not creating power but just transforming it if you would like to comment on it saying that it dosen't work give scientifical explanation and iff you would like to help you will find the link on the video if you would like to make one ask me how if you allready know how do it I appreciate all comments and replies but most the ones giving me support supporting me Thanks .
I give you credit for your effort and creative thinking. But what I have found is that as long as you use a standard generator for power generation, it will always be subject to less output than what you put into it. It has to do with the way a generator/alternator is designed that limits it's ability to never put out more than what you put into it. Because the magnetic coupling within a generator, from the rotational source input power and the generating coils for the output power, the lenz effect or counter magnetic field (magnetic drag) will always limit the output to less than what you put in. If you can find a way to get around that problem, as I have, then you will have something.
Liberty
@libre,,you found a way round that problem?am i reading correct?thers ways round the 2nd law thermo with electromagneto systems indeed yes with their limited entropy states.
Quote from: profitis on July 24, 2013, 11:03:07 AM
@libre,,you found a way round that problem?am i reading correct?thers ways round the 2nd law thermo with electromagneto systems indeed yes with their limited entropy states.
This process does not violate 2nd law of thermodynamics. It simply improves generator efficiency. It does not create energy.
@liberty nice but i just want to say that a 2nd law violation has nothing to do with creating energy,its about borrowing energy.
@Milehigh
Where do you see a coupling in between the shafts of motor and generator , this concept has an extra "Kinetic Energy" even the motor nor the gears are connected to the body in motion directly , the gears are inducing an elliptical movement on the body , when you watch the video look at the picture .
@forest in reply to @libreenergia What I can tell you is that in this system you really can tell that kinetic energy is being transform to electric energy and is not like other things that we really can not tell how they come to be . Thanks for commenting .
@TinselKoala I could be on my fifth cold one and still see no flywheel am I missing something ? where is the flywheel
I did not just turned the motor-generator concept vertical it has something extra "Kinetic Energy"
And unless you can named one person who has try what is depicted in here then yes I have something new and kind of special
You talk about over unity I never did claim it , thanks to Einstein I do not believe in over unity
Power multiplication device only if you want to see it that way I wouldn't even claim over 100% efficiency and still this system would give in electrical power more wattage than it is being use , that doesn't mean over unity . And I do believe that if every thing needed is put together in front of any level of skilled men it would be like legos they would figure it out and make it work no high skill level required . Thanks for your comment .
@Low-Q the dynamo was only for showing purposes you can not compare it to an alternator or wind power generator . I do not claim less energy input , what I claim is the use of less electrical energy on the motor , then you add up kinetic energy , then transform it to electric energy through the mechanism and you get more electric energy never ever I claim more energy itself coming out of this system than what is involve in the same . Like I said before thanks to Einstein I do not believe in over unity .
Thanks for your comment .
@FatBird Thanks for your support .
@Liberty Thank you . Again this is not an over unity device the mechanism uses kinetic energy to transform it to electricity that energy surpasses the loss of energy by friction heat gravity etc.
@LibreEnergia To your first question No not a perpetual motion device .
Then you need to leave the flywheel out of this , there is no flywheel involved in this system , where do you leave the kinetic energy involved in this system in your example ? Instead you should say 500watts in the motor causing movement on a body , inducing torque on a shaft , spinning a generator , powering an inverter , add all up in joules and you'll see there is not over unity involved and yet electric power output is more and is not a 100% efficient yet it should work .
In one of your comments you mention momentum and then you say on this one you must integrate any power measurements over the time it is applied to come up with an energy balance for the device. I'd be a fool to ask my self how much energy can fit into one second it is absurd I must say that in one cycle of this mechanism there is energy balance if you don't leave kinetic energy out . I rather would like you to consider this as schrodinger's cat example with all of us inside the box some of us being vials of either poison or antidote right now until one of them breaks meaning somebody proves it right or wrong this mechanism dose not and it dose work at the same time , fair enough?
here is the link again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM thanks to all for watching.
@Milehigh
Where do you see a coupling in between the shafts of motor and generator , this concept has an extra "Kinetic Energy" even the motor nor the gears are connected to the body in motion directly , the gears are inducing an elliptical movement on the body , when you watch the video look at the picture .
Quote from: weston14 on July 26, 2013, 12:56:49 AM
@Liberty Thank you . Again this is not an over unity device the mechanism uses kinetic energy to transform it to electricity that energy surpasses the loss of energy by friction heat gravity etc.
@LibreEnergia To your first question No not a perpetual motion device .
Then you need to leave the flywheel out of this , there is no flywheel involved in this system , where do you leave the kinetic energy involved in this system in your example ? Instead you should say 500watts in the motor causing movement on a body , inducing torque on a shaft , spinning a generator , powering an inverter , add all up in joules and you'll see there is not over unity involved and yet electric power output is more and is not a 100% efficient yet it should work .
In one of your comments you mention momentum and then you say on this one you must integrate any power measurements over the time it is applied to come up with an energy balance for the device. I'd be a fool to ask my self how much energy can fit into one second it is absurd I must say that in one cycle of this mechanism there is energy balance if you don't leave kinetic energy out . I rather would like you to consider this as schrodinger's cat example with all of us inside the box some of us being vials of either poison or antidote right now until one of them breaks meaning somebody proves it right or wrong this mechanism dose not and it dose work at the same time , fair enough?
Ok . I won't mince words. If you are too stupid to realise that what you propose is an over-unity device (if it works as you claim) or that one needs to analyse it as the equivalent of a flywheel and a generator then you deserve all the time wasting you are about to endure trying to bring this un-workable concept to fruition.
My sincere advice.. don't waste any more time on it and learn some classical mechanics instead. Forget trying to bring quantum mechanics and Schrodinger's cat into the analysis. These kind of effects are only encountered at quantum or relativistic scales and deserve absolutely no place in describing a working principle for this device.
LibreEnergia, I think you must don't waste your time on it, it is impossible to do something like that, it's a little like this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le1fa9-Y48Q
It is a good big fake, this is approximately the same thing as shown above.
Try something else.
@LibreEnergia
My apologies to you , I might have gone too far with momentum and Schrödinger's I'm just sorry I can't get everybody interested in this , sometimes when you see something is not worth it you just have to turn around and walk away without wasting time .
Best regards .
@Piced
First I do not know if that guy in the video you put a link to here is trying to prove something fake or truth I don't understand what he says , did he hide a battery in the motor or hack a lithium ion and put it inside the cover of the wires?
Before saying that what I propose which is NOT "over unity" or "perpetual motion" is impossible or big fake why don't you try to scientifically prove it wrong ? Up till today nobody has . And I don't think that what is shown in that video resembles in any way my mechanism .
@Liberty
I think I know what you mean by "does not violates the second law of thermodynamics" thank you , and you are right it does not create energy , if it improves efficiency , I think efficiency of any alternator or generator used in this mechanism would stay the same .
Proposed self-sustaining power generator http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM
HI, I'm new user and want to know about, "why the N machine is not working ?"
I read somewhere that N machine has opposite drag by the magnetic flux, that's why it's not working as a perpetual machine, but "IF ANY SYSTEM (like N machine) DOESN'T HAVE OPPOSITE DRAG THEN IT CAN BE PERPETUAL, RIGHT ?"
may be I invent a thing like this but it's not ready yet.......
Thank you.
That's the exact same video you started this thread with five days ago.
Making great progress I see!
Hi @MIKY if you think you invent something that's PM I advice you not to claim that on a patent application unless you can leave the room come back in a 1000yrs and find it still running which is very unlikely .
Best regards.
@TinselKoala in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM if you noticed I am asking for help without it I don't think I am going to see much progress in the near future , would you like to donate 5dlls or more ? You don't have to choose a reward if you don't want to . If you gentlemen wanted something close to free energy or at least affordable renewable energy , either , you would build one of this mechanism at least try or pitch in for my campaign .
Quote from: weston14 on July 28, 2013, 03:33:10 PM
@TinselKoala in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1WR7OJHryM) if you noticed I am asking for help without it I don't think I am going to see much progress in the near future , would you like to donate 5dlls or more ? You don't have to choose a reward if you don't want to .
Yes, I noticed that. No, I would not like to donate five dollars to you. Would you like to donate five dollars to me? I think I could make a pretty good case that I need the money more than you do.
Quote
If you gentlemen wanted something close to free energy or at least affordable renewable energy , either , you would build one of this mechanism at least try or pitch in for my campaign .
No, that's absolutely not true.
You have shown nothing unusual, nothing original, and you have not provided any evidence for your claim, which you can see in the title of this thread. If you had anything worthwhile, you would be providing some evidence for it instead of making empty claims and showing yourself playing with toys. Nobody is going to help you because your mistakes are evident and elementary, and you, like so many other hopeful dreamers, refuse to educate yourself properly in order to understand your own topic.
I am being this blunt because you had the utter unmitigated gall to ask me for money, and I am tired of being abused by those whom I try to help.
@TinselKoala Sorry if I did offend you , and sorry to hear you have been abused by people you have tried to help before . I have seen one of your videos I won't question the purpose of them , I know they will acquire you more knowledge and eventually achievements . Am I a dreamer ? Don't know but I do want one day be able to produce my own electricity , my way , without the use of any fuels and anywhere I want and at anytime . Thanks for your comments .
@ Weston14
Don't feel bad when the Trolls come along with negativity. There are a LOT of trolls out there.
For those that don't know what a Troll is, they:
1. Troll around Free Energy Forums to discourage good ideas.
2. Value their paycheck more than they value free energy for the world.
3. Try to get inventors to chase insignificant rabbit trail ideas to waste time.
4. Try to discredit and ridicule good honest inventors that are trying to help the world.
5. Are generally paid by Big Oil Corporations so nothing interferes with Big Oil's FAT PROFITS.
6. Try to cause anger and fights to get people discouraged and fight with each other so they give up and go away.
Here's a GOOD example. Look how they just DROVE David Bowling AND Rosemary Ainslee AWAY. SAME methods listed above! SAME Guys too.
Trolls build nothing, contribute nothing and add nothing to anyone.
Quote from: FatBird on July 28, 2013, 05:48:48 PM
@ Weston14
Don't feel bad when the Trolls come along with negativity. There are a LOT of trolls out there.
For those that don't know what a Troll is, they:
1. Troll around Free Energy Forums to discourage good ideas.
2. Value their paycheck more than they value free energy for the world.
3. Try to get inventors to chase insignificant rabbit trail ideas to waste time.
4. Try to discredit and ridicule good honest inventors that are trying to help the world.
5. Are generally paid by Big Oil Corporations so nothing interferes with Big Oil's FAT PROFITS.
6. Try to cause anger and fights to get people discouraged and fight with each other so they give up and go away.
Trolls build nothing, contribute nothing and add nothing to anyone.
Then again, some of us just can't bear to see others waste their time on unworkable concepts, and are prepared to help others understand why what they propose cannot ever work.
I'd like to find free energy as much as any in here. However, I know for certain that what is proposed here is based on a flawed understanding of mechanics and will not work.
FatBird:
I don't really see much of contribution from you besides cheerleading for any crazy free energy proposition that you see, or, you post about the "trolls" and how they are "bad."
Whenever someone asks you to back up your claims and state why you believe in a given free energy proposition you have nothing to say. In fact you usually run away and are never heard from again.
Roberto seems like a nice guy. But he also seems deluded because he is swinging a stick connected to a small generator and calling that free energy.
FatBird, because you have nothing of substance to contribute that I am aware of, in that sense you are the troll. This is a place to debate ideas and when you blindly claim that ideas without merit by inexperienced beginners are good, then you are being counter-productive.
You are saying "Don't think for yourself, just blindly believe that nearly every free energy proposition you see is real. Be just like me."
Sorry, myself and a lot of other people are not ever going to be like you.
Sorry again, but you are the troll in this thread. You contribute nothing and ask us to believe like sheep, just like you.
Everyone should think critically for themselves and try to learn. If Roberto tries to learn he will learn where he is making a mistake and withdraw his free energy claim. Everyone becomes a winner when that happens, and the biggest winner would be Roberto.
MileHigh
He's giving LOADS of proof that his idea WORKS. It is so Crystal Clear a CHILD can see it.
By moving his hand in a very SLIGHT CIRCLE he is producing OVERUNITY with a HUGE TORQUE!!!
How much more proof do you want?
Now all he is asking is some Help to Scale it Up.
I'll tell you what I see. An astute person that wants to learn should see the same thing.
He is putting mechanical power with his arm movements into a shaft with a weight on it. This shaft with a weight on it is a primitive flywheel that can store some of the mechanical power provided by his arm as mechanical rotational energy.
Finally there is a generator connected to an LED flashlight that draws some of the energy available in the spinning shaft/flywheel and at the same time it draws power directly from his arm when his arm is supplying mechanical power to the system.
Therefore, let's say we look at a time interval of sixty seconds:
Over sixty seconds, how much mechanical energy is he supplying with his arm movements?
Over sixty seconds, how much electrical energy is pumped into the LED?
Which one of the two above represents greater energy?
Even a young CHILD should be able to tell you that his arm is supplying much more mechanical energy as compared to the amount of electrical energy supplied to the LED.
Can't you see this? It is so simple and so obvious to me. There is nothing of merit here FatBird, absolutely nothing.
It's NOT a regular flywheel. Flywheels rotate on a Fixed shaft with bearings in a FIXED rotational plane.
This is a NEW Concept Modified Flywheel, which has CENTRIFUGAL FORCE ADDED to the rotation, which adds a lot of Torque..
You WON'T find this invention in any physics books!!!!
Let's wake up & help him out to scale it up.
Sorry FatBird, you have glazed eyes and are in free energy fantasy land. There is nothing going on here, absolutely nothing.
I am just wondering FatBird do you wear a aluminium foil hat?
I remember you form years ago telling the same story over and over as the technologies fell one by one.
In the mean time the rest of the world is adopting renewable technologies at an accelerating rate. In some countries it is breath taking like here in the Philippines they aim for power production to be 100% renewable in 10 years.
With breakthroughs in energy storage and transportation technologies we are seeing the birth of the electric or fuel cell vehicles.
Funny thing is big oil is one of the largest investors in this technology.
Kind Regards
Quote from: markdansie on July 29, 2013, 12:51:19 AM
In some countries it is breath taking like here in the Philippines they aim for power production to be 100% renewable in 10 years.
There is a region in Austria (Burgenland, one of the nine federal states) which is already producing 112 % of its electric energy with wind turbines. There are also some smaller solar panel parks and biomass gas producing stations. The surplus is distrubutede to other regions in Austria.
http://www.igwindkraft.at/?mdoc_id=1017600 (unfortunately only in German)
http://www.igwindkraft.at/?xmlval_ID_KEY[0]=1047 the whole of Austria is moving rapidly towards renewable energy sources, mostly hydro electric power stations, wind turbines, biomass gas and solar panel parks.
The example of the region Burgenland shows clearly that it is rather a political issue than a technical. The means are there (hydroelectric stations, wind turbines, solar panels, biomass gas) but there must be the political will to use it (to invest in this renewable sources rather than in oil or coal).
People have to realise that energy production is politics. But energy politics is in most parts of the world driven by big business (oil, coal). Only in small regions (like Burgendland) people took over energy production by having the state invest in renewable energy sources. And it works.
It might be difficult to move away from oil with cars, lorries and moving machines, but it is feasible to produce the electricity for households and businesses from renewable sources.
The solution for transport is public transport (trains, local electric buses, electric street cars and subways). In Austria people use trains more than ever (a strong revival).
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on July 29, 2013, 05:10:32 AM
There is a region in Austria (Burgenland, one of the nine federal states) which is already producing 112 % of its electric energy with wind turbines. There are also some smaller solar panel parks and biomass gas producing stations. The surplus is distrubutede to other regions in Austria.
http://www.igwindkraft.at/?mdoc_id=1017600 (http://www.igwindkraft.at/?mdoc_id=1017600) (unfortunately only in German)
http://www.igwindkraft.at/?xmlval_ID_KEY (http://www.igwindkraft.at/?xmlval_ID_KEY)- =1047 the whole of Austria is moving rapidly towards renewable energy sources, mostly hydro electric power stations, wind turbines, biomass gas and solar panel parks.
The example of the region Burgenland shows clearly that it is rather a political issue than a technical. The means are there (hydroelectric stations, wind turbines, solar panels, biomass gas) but there must be the political will to use it (to invest in this renewable sources rather than in oil or coal).
People have to realise that energy production is politics. But energy politics is in most parts of the world driven by big business (oil, coal). Only in small regions (like Burgendland) people took over energy production by having the state invest in renewable energy sources. And it works.
It might be difficult to move away from oil with cars, lorries and moving machines, but it is feasible to produce the electricity for households and businesses from renewable sources.
The solution for transport is public transport (trains, local electric buses, electric street cars and subways). In Austria people use trains more than ever (a strong revival).
Greetings, Conrad
In the USA, renewable is still much more expensive than coal plants. Electric prices are increasing in the US due to wind/solar power costs. Plus wind only works when the wind blows, then the energy that is not used on the fly, must be stored for later use at great expense. Solar only works when the sun shines; every night the panels sit idle. Therefore, the energy during the day must also be stored or only used during the day, also at higher expense. Solar and wind are to intermittent and are more expensive. I believe that the new technology of improved generator efficiency (at dynamaticmotors) is the only practical path that could be cost efficient when compared to all other sources. But it needs more development to be commercially useful and practical.
Liberty
Here is an update of my prototype https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUSMfJppnBY or go to my channel Roberto Montes kinetic energy . please take into consideration that I do not have financial help the Al gears I had to cast them myself it took aprox 6 to 8 months working only on weekends the difficult part was the molds but once I got it right I stopped only when I ran out of Al cans helpful youtube channel for metal casting "myfordboy" the gen shown in the video I didn't like it very little power so I decided to go with a bigger coreless gen, will show it on next video when someone can back me up on the specs after testing it