Latest Movie :
Recent Movies
Showing posts with label Energy Audit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Energy Audit. Show all posts

power engineer


Power engineering, also called power systems engineering, is a subfield of energy engineering that deals with the generation, transmission and distribution of electric power as well as the electrical devices connected to such systems including generators, motors and transformers. Although much of the field is concerned with the problems of three-phase AC power - the standard for large-scale power transmission and distribution across the modern world - a significant fraction of the field is concerned with the conversion between AC and DC power as well as the development of specialized power systems such as those used in aircraft or for electric railway networks. It was a subfield of electrical engineering before the emergence of energy engineering.

Electricity became a subject of scientific interest in the late 17th century with the work of William Gilbert.[1] Over the next two centuries a number of important discoveries were made including the incandescent lightbulb and the voltaic pile.[2][3] Probably the greatest discovery with respect to power engineering came from Michael Faraday who in 1831 discovered that a change in magnetic flux induces an electromotive force in a loop of wire—a principle known as electromagnetic induction that helps explain how generators and transformers work.[4]
In 1881 two electricians built the world's first power station at Godalming in England. The station employed two waterwheels to produce an alternating current that was used to supply seven Siemens arc lamps at 250 volts and thirty-four incandescent lamps at 40 volts.[5] However supply was intermittent and in 1882 Thomas Edison and his company, The Edison Electric Light Company, developed the first steam-powered electric power station on Pearl Street in New York City. The Pearl Street Station consisted of several generators and initially powered around 3,000 lamps for 59 customers.[6][7] The power station used direct current and operated at a single voltage. Since the direct current power could not be easily transformed to the higher voltages necessary to minimise power loss during transmission, the possible distance between the generators and load was limited to around half-a-mile (800 m).[8]
That same year in London Lucien Gaulard and John Dixon Gibbs demonstrated the first transformer suitable for use in a real power system. The practical value of Gaulard and Gibbs' transformer was demonstrated in 1884 at Turin where the transformer was used to light up forty kilometres (25 miles) of railway from a single alternating current generator.[9] Despite the success of the system, the pair made some fundamental mistakes. Perhaps the most serious was connecting the primaries of the transformers in series so that switching one lamp on or off would affect other lamps further down the line. Following the demonstration George Westinghouse, an American entrepreneur, imported a number of the transformers along with a Siemens generator and set his engineers to experimenting with them in the hopes of improving them for use in a commercial power system.
One of Westinghouse's engineers, William Stanley, recognised the problem with connecting transformers in series as opposed to parallel and also realised that making the iron core of a transformer a fully enclosed loop would improve the voltage regulation of the secondary winding. Using this knowledge he built a much improved alternating current power system at Great Barrington, Massachusetts in 1886.[10] Then in 1887 and 1888 another engineer called Nikola Tesla filed a range of patents related to power systems including one for a two-phase induction motor. Although Tesla cannot necessarily be attributed with building the first induction motor, his design, unlike others, was practical for industrial use.[11]
By 1890 the power industry had flourished and power companies had built literally thousands of power systems (both direct and alternating current) in the United States and Europe - these networks were effectively dedicated to providing electric lighting. During this time a fierce rivalry known as the "War of Currents" emerged between Edison, Westinghouse and Tesla over which form of transmission (direct or alternating current) was superior. In 1891, Westinghouse installed the first major power system that was designed to drive an electric motor and not just provide electric lighting. The installation powered a 100 horsepower (75 kW) synchronous motor at Telluride, Colorado with the motor being started by a Tesla induction motor.[12] On the other side of the Atlantic, Oskar von Miller built a 20 kV 176 km three-phase transmission line from Lauffen am Neckar to Frankfurt am Main for the Electrical Engineering Exhibition in Frankfurt.[13] In 1895, after a protracted decision-making process, the Adams No. 1 generating station at Niagara Falls began transmitting three-phase alternating current power to Buffalo at 11 kV. Following completion of the Niagara Falls project, new power systems increasingly chose alternating current as opposed to direct current for electrical transmission.[14]
Although the 1880s and 1890s were seminal decades in the field, developments in power engineering continued throughout the 20th and 21st century. In 1936 the first commercial HVDC (high voltage direct current) line using Mercury arc valves was built between Schenectady and Mechanicville, New York. HVDC had previously been achieved by installing direct current generators in series (a system known as the Thury system) although this suffered from serious reliability issues.[15] In 1957 Siemens demonstrated the first solid-state rectifier (solid-state rectifiers are now the standard for HVDC systems) however it was not until the early 1970s that this technology was used in commercial power systems.[16] In 1959 Westinghouse demonstrated the first circuit breaker that used SF6 as the interrupting medium.[17] SF6 is a far superior dielectric to air and, in recent times, its use has been extended to produce far more compact switching equipment (known as switchgear) and transformers.[18][19] Many important developments also came from extending innovations in the information technology and telecommunications field to the power engineering field. For example, the development of computers meant load flow studies could be run more efficiently allowing for much better planning of power systems. Advances in information technology and telecommunication also allowed for much better remote control of the power system's switchgear and generators.

{[['']]}

Dranetz DranTech PMI-Power Quality Analyzer


Dranetz DranTech PMI-Power Quality Analyzer


Condition :New

We are offering power quality analyzer
drantech pmit precision milliohm insulation resistance tester digital multimeter and data logger

* all-in-one: milliohm resistance meter, digital multimeter, insulation resistance tester and data logger compact and rugged for service applications under harsh conditions as well as laboratory use -- a single device for many applications
* kelvin connection (4-wire measurement) suppresses influence from test leads and contact resistances on measurements of device under test
* insulation resistance tester testing with 50 to 500 v on components, cables and conductors, for example on aircraft and in on-board electrical systems
* compact and multifunctional can be used advantageously in aircraft cockpits as well as in other tight spaces, which would otherwise require the use of several individual instruments.
* data hold for quick, reliable measurement and storage of individual measured values, e.g. Voltages at discrete cells of batteries and emergency power supplies
* lcd panel with backlit display high contrast, even under adverse ambient light conditions



{[['']]}

Hioki 3197-01-1000 P-Power Quality Analyzer


Hioki 3197-01-1000 P-Power Quality Analyzer


Condition :New

We are offering power quality analyzer
hioki 3197-01-1000 pro power quality analyzer (custom 1000a kit)

* vector multimeter
* quickset
* power & power quality
* bundled pc application software
* compact design makes for long battery life

includes:

* 3197 power quality analyzer
* 9669 1000 current clamp-on probes (3)
* 9438-03 voltage leads (3)
* 9418-15 ac adapter/battery charger
* 9459 rechargeable battery pack
* pc viewer software
* usb cable
* usb communicator software


power quality analyzer 3197 is a compact, easy-to-operate, and affordable power quality measurement instrument. It has streamlined the functions of power quality analyzer 3196, one of the power quality measurement instruments recognized as a standard worldwide. While the basic power anomaly measurement capabilities are retained, the smaller size and simpler measurement operations ensure that anyone can handle it easily. Also, in response to the recently growing interest in power management and energy saving measures, power measurement functions have been enhanced and display screen capabilities have been added for time series graphs of voltage, current and power, as well as energy consumption and demand graph displays. These features are ideally suited to the particular measurements required when a power anomaly occurs, and for applications involving power management and energy saving measures.



{[['']]}

Portable XRF-Portable Xrf Analyzer


Portable XRF-Portable Xrf Analyzer

Posted Date : 25,Aug 08


We Exhibit An Innovative Range of Portable Xrf Analyzer, Which are Completely Portable and Easy to Handle. Our Field Portable Xrf is High in Demand and is Appreciated By Our Clients for Its Highly Accurate Characteristic Quality. We have Manufactured Our Portable Xrf Keeping in Mind the Most Advanced Production Techniques So as to Assure Our Customers of Their Genuine Quality. the Basic Motive of Our Company is to Provide Excellent Quality Field Portable Xrf. We have Received Various Positive Feedbacks from Our Honored Clients for Our Highly Reliable Field Portable Xrf. We are One of the Famed Industrial Portable Xrf Manufacturers and Suppliers, Based in India.



{[['']]}

Push-me/Pull-you: Post-election Energy Policies


  Push-me/Pull-you: Post-election Energy Policies
I've seen numerous commentaries on the energy implications of President Obama's narrow, 51%/49%  victory. One of the most intriguing of these, from Reuters, concerned the prospects for exporting a portion of the growing output of natural gas produced from US shale deposits.  This issue doesn't only affect gas drillers and their residential and industrial customers, but also developers of renewable energy projects, because of the way that gas and renewables compete in electricity markets.  As much as the President's reelection, the failure of Republicans to capture control of the US Senate might turn out to be a key factor in determining the fate of potential gas exports, and by extension the environment within which renewables like wind and solar power must compete.

A variety of energy issues has been in limbo for months, pending the outcome of Tuesday's election.  That includes approval of the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline from Canada, which might have gotten a favorable nudge as a result of Senate wins by pro-pipeline Democrats in North Dakota and Montana.  Environmentalists are committed toblocking the pipeline, so the President must soon choose which part of his winning coalition he will disappoint.  By comparison, the question of natural gas exports has received much less attention in the media, although it's been discussed extensively within energy and manufacturing circles.  The likely incoming chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Ron Wyden (D-OR), appears to have strong views on the subject.    

If Senator Wyden does replace the outgoing chairman, Senator Bingaman (D-NM), as expected, this would represent a shift in constituencies from a state with significant oiland gas production to one with essentially none.  Senator Wyden thus brings mainly an end-user perspective to his Energy and Natural Resources role, and from that standpoint his concern about the potential price impact of gas exports, whether in the form of LNG or otherwise, is understandable, although I would argue it is also short-sighted and potentially detrimental to renewable energy, which he strongly supports.

On the surface, restrictions on the export of US gas should result in lower domestic natural gas prices than if large quantities of gas were shipped offshore.  After all, low US natural gas prices, compared to those in Europe and Asia, are the main driver behind the desire to build export facilities, such as the Sabine Pass project of Cheniere Energy.  Natural gas is cheaper in the US than elsewhere for several reasons, including the high and growing output from shale gas resources, as well as the epic disconnect between the natural gas price and crude oil prices, which are the basis for most international LNG contracts. US gas at the wellhead is currently trading for the oil equivalent of $21 per barrel, compared to UK Brent Crude at $107 per barrel.  The extent to which exports might increase domestic prices is a matter of much speculation and study, and I wouldn't venture a guess.  However, we can't just look at demand in gauging the impact of export restrictions.

The efficacy of holding down US prices by keeping more gas here also depends on the response of producers.  If legislators or regulators turn the US gas market into a capped bottle, why would producers be content to supply steadily increasing quantities of gas at prices that don't provide them an attractive return?  To some degree the low prices we've seen this year were the result of the combination of a weak economy and a supply glut created by contractual commitments on the part of drillers to develop gas leases at a specified pace.  My understanding is that most such commitments have lapsed, and that a significant proportion of current gas supply is coming from wells that depend on the economics of their liquids output (crude oil and gas liquids), with the associated natural gas effectively a byproduct.  It's not clear how rapidly gas production can continue to grow without natural gas prices that make gas-only wells economically attractive.  So a US gas market with no export outlets would likely produce less gas in the long run, and that would constrain opportunities to use our abundant gas resources to support new industries, displace oil from transportation, and further reduce the use of coal in power generation.

Moreover, keeping a lid on the US gas market would compound the obstacles for renewable sources of electricity.  Wind power developers and turbine manufacturers now face the expiration of the Wind Production Tax Credit (PTC).  Even if it is extended, the output of wind farms competes with the output of gas turbines, while the grid relies on gas-fired power to provide a back-up for the intermittent output of wind and solar power.  The cheaper the gas, the tougher it will be for renewables to make a profit. Market competition with gas will become an even bigger issue for renewables as they expand beyond the capacity of a cash-strapped federal government to continue to subsidize them.  The one-year extension of the PTC under consideration could cost as much as $12 billion, an annual price tag that would only grow as renewables scale up--as they must if they are going to matter.

Navigating the complexities of allowing or restricting natural gas exports, and balancing the various constituencies involved, could provide an early test of the administration's commitment to an all-of-the-above energy strategy.  That's because "all of the above"--if not merely a slogan--implies more than just producing energy from a variety of sources.  It also entails competition among all these sources within a market in which some sectors of demand are declining, others growing, and new ones--including exports--are appearing all the time.  Pushing back on one part of this market will have large consequences in other parts, and regulators could soon be overwhelmed by unintended consequences. 
{[['']]}

Is Gas Rationing Superior to Raising Prices for Consumers?


ENERGY OUTLOOK
  Is Gas Rationing Superior to Raising Prices for Consumers?
With New Jersey about to end the odd-even gasoline rationing  imposed in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, we have an opportunity to consider whether this kind of response actually produces better outcomes than the price increases by which the market would normally balance supply and demand.  Most of the defenses of "price gouging" that I've seen, including Matthew Yglesias's recent posting in Slate, tend to focus mainly on its supply-side aspects. Yet such arguments, however well-reasoned, are unlikely to sway Americans from their innate sense of fairness, on which most anti-gouging regulations are premised.  That's inherent in the judgmental term itself.  However, having spent my share of time in gas lines during the energy crises of the 1970s, I believe that supporters of these rules are ignoring some even more pragmatic, consumer-based arguments for allowing prices to rise after a disaster.

In addition to the tragic loss of life and property inflicted by Sandy, the storm left the petroleum products infrastructure on which New Jersey depends paralyzed for days.  Refineries were shut down, distribution terminals full of gasoline were unable to deliver product, and gas stations without power had no way to sell the fuel stored in the tanks under their forecourts.  This combination represented a huge supply shock to the region, and it wasn't long before gas lines formed at those stations that had both product and electricity.  New Jersey has strict and specific anti-gouging rules and isalready charging merchants with violations following Sandy.  Within a few days, in an effort to alleviate the queuing that resulted from the supply shortfall and the inability of retailers to raise prices, Governor Christie resorted to rationing by license plate number.

Although restricting prices might superficially appear more equitable--particularly for lower-income consumers--than allowing them to climb to the levels necessary to clear the market without long lines, it also imposes significant costs on all consumers.  For starters, anti-gouging rules effectively confine motorists to their vehicles precisely when they have many other urgent priorities, including attending to their families and homes. They also implicitly put a very low monetary value on consumers' time.  Waiting on line for four hours to obtain 10 gallons of gas at a pre-disaster price of $3.50/gal., instead of experiencing a much shorter wait to purchase fuel for $5.00/gal., is equivalent to being paid $3.75 per hour--around half the state's official minimum wage.  This situation also increases the chances that an individual will wait for hours only to see the station run out of fuel before his or her turn comes, because demand is unchanged or temporarily higher than before the crisis.  Adding odd/even rationing might reduce gas lines by limiting demand and breaking the psychology contributing to the lines, but it also compounds the harm to consumers, some of whom are left with no legal means of acquiring fuel when they need it most.

I don't expect politicians and regulators suddenly to embrace a purely market-based approach towards post-disaster pricing of necessities like fuel.  However, we ought to expect them to look at the real-world results of their policies and apply some common sense and creativity to improve how they function.  Anti-gouging rules clearly benefit some at the expense of others. How could we simultaneously preserve the benefits for the first group, while allowing those willing to pay a premium for emergency supplies to do so, in the process sending the appropriate price signal to reduce overall demand? One solution might be to allow gas stations with multiple pump islands to raise prices as long as they have at least one set of pumps offering the pre-disaster price.   Technology should provide even more innovative and effective options.

Given the magnitude of the supply disruption post-Sandy, there was no way to avoid a serious shortage of motor fuel in the affected region.  However, the appearance of long gas lines and the resort to a 1970's expedient of odd-even rationing shouldn't satisfy anyone concerning the effectiveness of the pre-existing emergency energy policies that were called into play following the storm.  I can't imagine New Jerseyans being content with the outcome they experienced.   
{[['']]}

Aldo Proia is CEO and commercial director of Italian eCat license holders Prometeon


Aldo Proia is CEO and commercial director of Italian eCat license holders Prometeon srl – he gave this interview to International Business Times a few days ago.
Prometeon CEO – Aldo Proia pictured inside one of Rossi’s 1MW industrial eCats
  • Current validation phase will take another three months
  • “E-Cat is a Ferrari that is made to walk like a turtle”
  • eCat: Commercial product and a “great opportunity to change the world”
  • Pseudosceptics trying to spread lies and disinformation


Several eCat Models

Proia talked about some of the different models of ecat…

“The E-Cat exists in several versions, which are essentially the heat and, in the future, than electricity. In practice, the E-Cat can be at low temperature (120 ° C), already ordered, and between not very high temperature (600 ° C). In addition, the power can be electric, as the E-Cat “classic”, or gas version in advanced stage of development. In all cases, the minimum size is 1 MW thermal, and clients we work with are essentially small or large industries. The civil sector will only at a later time, since the price of the E-Cat current is amortized if the consumption of energy produced by it is the case for most of the year, so the ideal application is to provide process heat in industrial field. In the future will also be required for winter heating only and cooling. There is no fixed price list because it is a highly customizable according to customer needs, a bit ‘as it happens eg. for large biomass plants when you go on the sizes of megawatts or more. The price, in the cases mentioned above is however – especially in the gas version and, in the future, for that power – much improvement of the business plan than any alternative on the market.”

Marketing

“In this first phase, will be marketed large E-Cat industrial heating, followed by large electric E-Cat, at some point also be used for civilian use. In the second phase, will be sold in the domestic E-Cat, which can not be marketed until there is broad acceptance of the technology by the general public, which will predictably with the first operating systems installed at customer not military in Italy or abroad. For home, then, you must wait at least two years. In the third phase, the E-Cat could be implemented in the transport, which requires considerable investment in terms of money and R & D, for example. for miniaturizzarli.”

Commercial Interference

Proi then went on to discuss how pseudosceptics and disinfo tactics are being used to negatively impact the success of the ecat.

“Yes, there are people who, personally and / or on behalf of third parties dealing with publicly sow disinformation, doubts or anything negative on the subject of cold fusion and the invention of Rossi, sometimes inventing out of whole cloth parts of articles and systematically changing Wikipedia entries with blatant falsehoods. However both the Leonardo Corporation, which is fully equipped on the computer it is able to easily trace those responsible, that Prometeon srl constantly monitor the web saving each article artfully manipulated against our interests to store it and attribute it to an author or a tested, in order to present the bill – and not just metaphorically speaking – at the appropriate time. In fact, the Italian market the E-Cat industry is in theory about 25 billion euro and therefore who gets a financial loss to a company can not expect to act with impunity for a long time.”

{[['']]}

100% Carbon Free Electricity by 2018


100% Carbon Free Electricity by 2018

We need a massive increase in electricity generated from alternative energy.


Here's Al Gore's vision:




Here's one way to achieve 100% Carbon Free Electricity



Thoughts?

{[['']]}

Interesting article on how a grass-roots funded effort

Interesting article on how a grass-roots funded effort has enabled the purchase of Tesla’s long neglected Wardenclyffe lab, with plans to turn the site into a permanent museum for the Croatian genius. 

Tesla’s Wardenclyffe lab as it looks today.
I say CROATIAN because Fox News seem to be trying to change the fact of his country of birth with the article entitled “Honoring the legacy of Americanphysicist and engineer Nikola Tesla”.  Why not just say Croatian? – surely American readers will still be interested in reading the article regardless of whether he was born in America or not?

Anyway…here’s the article..
“Earlier this month the purchase of a long-neglected laboratory of the Croatian-born (son of a Serbian Orthodox minister) American physicist/engineer, Nikola Tesla, received funding through a remarkable web-based grassroots campaign that raised $1.37 million within a week.

The average contribution was a mere $47 and gifts came from every part of the US and a total of 100 countries worldwide.

The web-site was run by a comic book writer, Gary Inman, who created The Oatmeal and lives in Seattle, Washington — a long way from the Wardenclyffe lab in Shoreham, Long Island, NY.

In some ways this campaign is reminiscent of the grassroots funding campaign for the election of Barack Obama, which contributed to his election in 2008. On the other hand, unlike President Obama, who could speak eloquently for what he represents, Tesla is no longer with us and there are, no doubt, many different opinions among the donors to the Wardenclyffe purchase about what Tesla represents.

On this 70th anniversary of Tesla’s death at the New Yorker Hotel at age 86, capturing what Tesla represents and the best use of his former laboratory seems like a critical next step, now that a 16 year effort to purchase the property has likely concluded.”
{[['']]}

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

Renewable Energy Regulatory Framework

Renewable Energy Regulatory Framework

The development of grid interactive renewable power took off with the coming into force of the Electricity Act 2003 (EA 2003), which, among other things, provides for regulatory interventions for promotion of renewable energy (RE) sources through a) determination of tariff; b) specifying renewable purchase obligation (RPO); c) facilitating grid connectivity; and d) promotion of development of market.
The National Tariff Policy (NTP) 2006 requires the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs) to fix a minimum percentage of Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) from such sources taking into account availability of such resources in the region and its impact on retail tariffs and procurement by distribution companies at preferential tariffs determined by the SERCs. NTP has further elaborated on the role of regulatory commission; mechanism for promoting renewable energy and timeframe for implementation, etc. The policy was amended in January 2011 to prescribe solar-specific RPO be increased from a minimum of 0.25 per cent in 2012 to 3 per cent by 2022. Further, the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) suggests increasing the share of renewable energy in the total energy mix at-least up to 15 percent by 2020.
In view of the aforesaid provisions, regulatory framework for renewable power is evolving and all major States, Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC), Central Electricity Authority (CEA) etc are declaring, revising, and modifying renewable power regulatory framework such as RE policy, RPOs, Feed in Tariffs (FiTs), Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) mechanism, grid connectivity and forecasting provisions etc. on a regular basis.
Ministry of New & Renewable Energy has initiated an exercise to track the evolving renewable power regulatory framework and develop a repository of information in a consolidated manner. This exercise is expected to help understand the dynamic nature of the renewable energy regulations and related issues and also create a platform to share information on pertinent issues.
The information is planned in the following two broad categories;
  • Monthly Update/Summary
  • Consolidated Renewable Energy Regularity Framework Data
 The consolidated data comprises of State-wise and CERC level regulations. Utmost care has been taken to compile the information, however, in case of any discrepancy or further clarification the primary source only may be treated as authentic.
Feedback/suggestions if any may be sent at: http://www.mnre.gov.in/feedback
{[['']]}

Energy development


Sustaining Energy Development in Eastern Utah

Energy development is the effort to provide sufficient primary energy sources and secondary energy forms for supply, cost, impact on air pollution and water pollution, mitigation of climate change with renewable 
energy

. 
 
Technologically advanced societies have become increasingly dependent on external energy sources for transportation, the production of many manufactured goods, and the delivery of energy services. This energy allows people who can afford the cost to live under otherwise unfavorable climatic conditions through the use of heating, ventilation, and/or air conditioning. Level of use of external energy sources differs across societies, as do the climate, convenience, levels of traffic congestion, pollution and availability of domestic energy sources. Renewable energy is energy which comes from natural resources such as sunlight, wind, rain, tides, and geothermal heat, which are renewable (naturally replenished). Renewable energy is an alternative to fossil fuels and was commonly called alternative energy in the 1970s and 1980s. In 2009, about 16% of global final energy consumption came from renewables, with 10% coming from traditional biomass, which is mainly used for heating, and 3.4% from hydroelectricity. New renewables (small hydro, modern biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, and biofuels) accounted for another 2.8% and is growing very rapidly. The share of renewables in electricity generation was around 19.4%, with 16.1% of global electricity coming from hydroelectricity and 3.3% from new renewables.[1] Wind power is growing at the rate of 21% annually, with a worldwide installed capacity of 238 gigawatts (GW) in 2011,[2] and is widely used in Europe, Asia, and the United States.[3] At the end of 2011, cumulative global photovoltaic (PV) installations surpassed 69 GW, an increase of almost 70%,[4] and PV power stations are commonplace in Germany, Italy, and Spain.[5] Solar thermal power stations operate in the USA and Spain, and the largest of these is the 354 megawatt (MW) SEGS power plant in the Mojave Desert.[6] The world's largest geothermal power installation is The Geysers in California, with a rated capacity of 750 MW. Brazil has one of the largest renewable energy programs in the world, involving production of ethanol fuel from sugar cane, and ethanol now provides 18% of the country's automotive fuel.[7] Ethanol fuel is also widely available in the USA. Climate change concerns, coupled with high oil prices, peak oil, and increasing government support, are driving increasing renewable energy legislation, incentives and commercialization.[8] New government spending, regulation and policies helped the industry weather the global financial crisis better than many other sectors.[9] Scientists have advanced a plan to power 100% of the world's energy with wind, hydroelectric, and solar power by the year 2030,[10][11] recommending renewable energy subsidies and a price on carbon reflecting its cost for flood and related expenses. While many renewable energy projects are large-scale, renewable technologies are also suited to rural and remote areas, where energy is often crucial in human development.[12] Globally, an estimated 3 million households get power from small solar PV systems. Micro-hydro systems configured into village-scale or county-scale mini-grids serve many areas.[13] More than 30 million rural households get lighting and cooking from biogas made in household-scale digesters. Biomass cookstoves are used by 160 million households.[13] Wind, water, and solar power using current technology can supply all of the world's energy by 2030, and has the advantage that consumption is reduced by 30%. Excess production would be used to produce hydrogen for use in ships and airplanes.[14] It also has the advantage that it lasts for as long as we are on the planet, vs. less than a century for most of the non-renewable resources. Conventional production of oil peaked in 2006, and the more we use the faster it will be depleted. An investment in non-renewable resources of $8 trillion is required to maintain current levels of production for 25 years,[15] a cost that is avoided by transitioning instead to renewables. A 2010 study estimated that Australia could transition to 100% renewables for $370 billion over a ten year period - about $8/household/week.[16] Driving an electric car is like buying gasoline for $0.60/gallon,[17] although in 2012 an electric car is over $8,000 more than one powered by gasoline. If they were mass produced, this differential would be reversed. The most expensive part, the battery, is projected to be reduced from $12,000 to $1,500 by 2020.[18] Charging an electric car from roof mounted solar panels is almost free, other than the cost of installation, which could be included in the purchase price of the home.[19] Electric cars have almost no maintenance costs. The EV1, an advanced prototypical electric car, was brought in once every 5,000 miles just to rotate the tires and re-fill the windshield washer fluid.[20]
{[['']]}

New Energy Sources


  New Energy Sources and Inventions In the late 1880's, trade journals in the electrical sciences were predicting "free electricity" in the near future. Incredible discoveries about the nature of electricity were becoming commonplace. Within 20 years, there would be automobiles, airplanes, movies, recorded music, telephones, radio, and practical cameras. For the first time in history, common people were encouraged to envision a utopian future filled with abundant modern transportation and communication, as well as jobs, housing and food for everyone. So what happened? Where did the new energy breakthroughs go? Was this excitement about free electricity all just wishful thinking that science eventually disproved? Current State of Technology. The answer is no. Spectacular new energy technologies were developed right along with other breakthroughs. Since then, multiple methods for producing vast amounts of energy at extremely low cost have been developed. None of these technologies have made it to the open consumer market, however. Why this is true will be discussed shortly. First, here is a short list of new energy technologies. The common feature connecting all of these discoveries is that they use a small amount of one form of energy to control or release a large amount of a different kind of energy. Radiant Energy . Nikola Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter, T. Henry Moray's Radiant Energy Device , Edwin Gray's EMA Motor , and Paul Baumann's Testatika Machine all run on Radiant Energy. This natural energy can perform the same wonders as ordinary electricity at less than 1% of the cost. It does not behave exactly like electricity, however, which has contributed to the scientific community's misunderstanding of it. The Methernitha Community in Switzerland currently has 5 or 6 working models of fuelless, self-running devices that tap this energy. [More] Permanent Magnets . Dr. Tom Bearden has two working models of a permanent magnet powered electrical transformer. It uses a 6-watt electrical input to control the path of a magnetic field coming out of a magnet. By channeling the magnetic field, first to one output coil then a second repeatedly and rapidly, the device can produce a 96-watt electrical output with no moving parts. Multiple inventors have working mechanisms that produce torque from permanent magnets alone. [More] Super-Efficient Electrolysis . Water can be broken into hydrogen and oxygen using electricity. When water is hit with its own molecular resonant frequency, it collapses into hydrogen and oxygen gas with little electrical input. Hydrogen fuel can drive engines (like in your car ) for the cost of water. [More] Cold Fusion. Though initial claims were debunked, cold fusion is very real. Not only has excess heat production been repeatedly documented, but also low energy atomic element transmutation has been catalogued, involving dozens of different reactions. [More] There are dozens of other systems. Many are viable and well tested. But this short list is sufficient to make the point: new energy technology is here. It offers the world pollution-free energy abundance for everyone, everywhere. It is now possible to stop the production of "greenhouse gases" and shut down the nuclear power plants. Transportation and production costs for just about everything can drop dramatically. Yet all these wonderful benefits that can make life on this planet so much easier and better for everyone have been postponed for decades. Why? Whose purposes are served by this postponement? Four Invisible Forces. There are four forces that have worked together to create this situation. The wealthiest families and their central banking institutions are the first force. Their motivations are greed and the need to control almost everything except themselves. Their plan is to eventually control all of the resources of the world, and thereby control everyone's life through the availability of all goods and services. An independent source of wealth (new energy device) in the hands of every person in the world ruins their plans for world domination. They don't want any competition. The weapons they have used to enforce 
 this include intimidation, "expert" debunkers, buying and shelving of technology, and murder of inventors. They have also promoted the scientific theory that states free energy is impossible (laws of thermodynamics). The second force is national governments. The problem here is related to the maintenance of national security. There is a constant jockeying for position and influence in world affairs, and the strongest party wins. In economics, it's the golden rule: "The one with the gold makes the rules." Unlimited energy on this planet will lead to an inevitable reshuffling of the balance of power. Everybody will want it, and at the same time, want to prevent everyone else from getting it. So, national governments' motivations are self-preservation. Their weapons include preventing the issuance of patents based on national security grounds, harassment of inventors with criminal charges, tax audits, threats, phone taps, arson, theft, and a host of other intimidations which make the business of building and marketing a new energy machine

A New Energy Source - Blacklight Power


practically impossible. The third force consists of deluded inventors and con men. On the periphery of the extraordinary scientific breakthroughs that constitute real new energy technologies, lies a shadow world of unexplained anomalies, marginal inventions and unscrupulous promoters. The first two forces have constantly used the media to promote the worst examples of this group, to distract the public's attention, and to discredit real breakthroughs by associating them with the frauds. So, the third force is delusion and dishonesty. The motivations are self-aggrandizement, greed, want of power over others, and a false sense of self-importance. The weapons used are lying, cheating, self-delusion and arrogance combined with bad science. The fourth force operating to postpone the public availability of new energy technology is all of the rest of us. It may be easy to see how narrow and selfish the motivations of the other forces are, but actually, these motivations are still very much alive in each of us as well. Like the wealthiest families, don't we each secretly harbor illusions of false superiority and want to control others instead of ourselves? Also, wouldn't you sell out if the price were high enough? Or like the governments, don't we each want to ensure our own survival? Or like the deluded inventor, don't we trade a comfortable illusion once in a while for an uncomfortable fact? Or don't we still fear the unknown, even if it promises a great reward? All four forces are just different aspects of the same process. There is really only one force preventing the availability of new energy technology, and that is unspiritually motivated behavior. New energy technology is an outward manifestation of divine abundance. It is the engine of the economy of an enlightened society, where people voluntarily behave in a respectful and civil manner toward each other. Unspiritualized humans cannot be trusted with new energy. They will only do what they have always done, which is to take merciless advantage of each other, or kill each other and themselves in the process. The Opportunity. What is new is that you and I can communicate with each other now better than at anytime in the past. The Internet offers us, the fourth force, an opportunity to overcome the combined efforts of the other forces preventing new energy technology from spreading. What is starting to happen is that inventors are publishing their work , instead of patenting it and keeping it secret. More and more, people are "giving away" information on these technologies in books, videos and websites. While there is still a great deal of useless information about new energy on the Internet, the availability of good information is rising rapidly. All of us constitute the fourth force. If we stand up and refuse to remain ignorant and action-less, we can change the course of history. Only mass action can create the world we want. The other three forces will not help us put a fuelless power plant in our homes. New energy technology will change everything about the way we live, work and relate to each other. It obsoletes greed and fear for survival. But like all exercises of spiritual faith, we must first manifest generosity and trust in our own lives. New energy technology is here. It has been here for decades. Communications technology and the Internet have torn the veil of secrecy off of this remarkable fact. People all over the world are starting to build new energy devices. The bankers and governments don't want this to happen, but can't stop it. Tremendous economic instabilities and wars will be used to distract people's attention from the new energy movement. There will be essentially no major media coverage of this aspect of what is going on. Western society is in many ways spiraling toward self-destruction due to the accumulated effects of greed and corruption. New energy technologies cannot stop this trend. If, however, you have a new energy device, you may be better positioned to support the transition that is underway. The question is, who will ultimately control the emerging world government, the first force, or the fourth force? Those who choose the fourth force may live to see the dawn of the world of new energy. I challenge you to be among the ones who do so. New Energy Sources was written by Peter Lindemann, D. Sc. and summarized and edited by Fred Burks
{[['']]}

My Experience as a Summer Intern at ENERGY STAR



By: Yohana Merho
For many college students summer is a time to take a well-deserved break from all-nighters, term papers and exam week stress, to go out and find something they are interested in. And if they are lucky, they may find something they could be passionate about as a career. I am a college student in my sophomore year at the University of Maryland, College Park studying Environmental Policy and Spanish. I am fortunate enough to really love my major, but I also know that I am not alone in that I am still unclear of how I want my education to translate in to my life post-grad. So, like most others in my position, I decided to take on an internship for the summer in hopes of learning about the many different roles and professions in the environmental sector that I might find appealing.
Yohana MerhoAfter several applications and emails I landed a sweet internship at ENERGY STAR. On my first day I was shown to my personal cubicle with my very own computer, phone and email. This whole ‘taking a sneak peak of the work force’ thing was beginning to feel a little like a reality now! Before I knew it I was going to meetings, working on assignments, doing research and feeling completely immersed in the ENERGY STAR work-culture.
One of my first and most interesting assignments was to prepare for a Congressional Expo that ENERGY STAR was to participate in. We were celebrating our 20th anniversary and my job was to make sure that our signs and posters reflected that through our statistics and general language. Soon after, I was told I was to work at the booth the day of the Expo, talking to other environmentalists about energy efficiency and other environmental issues. I was nervous, but very excited. I got to meet a lot of people, all working to better the environment through their individual professions, and I learned a lot from them.
My entire experience at ENERGY STAR has been a great learning experience. It was interesting to see and be a part of an entire office working independently as well as collectively to make a real difference in the fight against climate change. I had a chance to talk with several employees about their background and how they got to where they are now. I can say that I got exactly what I was hoping to get out of interning at EPA and much more. Who knows, maybe after I graduate I can help ENERGY STAR celebrate its 25th anniversary.
Yohana Merho is a college student in her sophomore year at the University of Maryland College Park. She is double majoring in Environmental Policy and Spanish and spent her 2012 summer interning at EPA’s ENERGY STAR.
{[['']]}
poower
 
Support : Creating Website | mayank | Mas Template
Copyright © 2009. Auditor Link - All Rights Reserved
Template Created by Creating Website Published by salman
Proudly powered by videos