The Possible Political Impact Should LENR Emerge (Doug Marker)

The following essay was written at the Sifferkol blogsite and refined over a couple of days.

It considers the effect a disruptive energy technology could have on the stability of oil producing nations should the price of oil decline further than it has in the past year. The essay considers the possibility that LENR is already recognised as a disruptive technology and that should Andrea Rossi have the working solution he describes, that there could be an effort to block or at least delay his progress.

http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/excellent-geopolitical-lenr-analysis-by-doug-marker/#comment-25313

Doug Marker

  • jousterusa

    In terms of political impact, the greatest will be in oil-producing states in this country, where no one who does not accept the dominance of Big Oil on the state’s environmental and other policies is an also-ran. That will be very beneficial for all of us, ridding the House and Senate of long-term incumbent dinosaurs who should have been retired decades ago. Let’s just hope it happens peacefully.

  • doug marker

    Jacques,

    I do agree with you that it would be ‘wonderful’ had Rossi told us all how to build a copy. I would get a team together at a nearby University to have our go at it. Still hope to do it but not quite yet. Am even willing to fund it myself.

    Despite this, I don’t hold it against anyone who has done something remarkable, to handle it how they want to even if I don’t really like how they are going about it. I do defend their right to do it their way though even if there may be a price they pay for doing it that way. So in a broad sense I agree with you but defend Andrea Rossi’s right to be himself.

    Cheers

    Doug Marker

  • cashmemorz

    Those displaced workers bring to mind a reason for taxing LENR and other disruptive tech. Tax it to provide for those displaced workers. This could be various methods such as retraining or a form of employment insurance or other monthly cheque, call it what you want, to cover the transition until the worker in question finds their own way to make aa living.

  • Jacques

    Okay, I take back my greed remarks. But if the effects are real, their adoption is inevitable and will happen on their own time frame, and artificially holding onto the reins does nothing but induce skepticism. We’re still at the “Is this real?” stage and Rossi seems reluctant to move that dialogue forward, Cheers —

    • doug marker

      Jacques,
      Personally, I believe Rossi wants to move ahead faster than those who are watching and have energy agendas want him to.

      Rossi no matter what people may think, has triggered an enormous amount of interest worldwide, among people who would otherwise not know of LENR or its potential. There are now far too many smart and honest people who have done enough due diligence to conclude personally that LENR is and has been real for a long time – the more multidisciplinary types of researchers and inventors that take up the interest, the faster it will be exploited and understood.

      The trend in Science in the past few decades has been for graduates of physics and science to become specialized. This in part is driven by the explosion of new scientific work coming from the invention of the maser & laser. Particularly in the field called ‘Photonics’.

      The below information is a very good example of how science is directing new talent into teams with specialist skills. This is now what LENR needs and may soon get once the anti LENR propagandists can be put rightly in their place (spoilers).

      The advances in LENR require multidisciplinary expertise from Physics and Chemistry and Engineering plus smart people with great intuition and curiosity. They are emerging in growing numbers but we need a lot more.

      The Laser as an example:
      Just the laser alone has reshaped the scientific world tremendously as its use intrudes into so many areas of science. In particular the current discoveries in the areas of OAM (Angular & Orbital Momentum) of light are stunning. (see these links

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_angular_momentum_of_light )

      https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160315104208.htm

      The research in this ‘Photonics’ field of research and development is ‘racing’ ahead and promises yet more ‘quantum leap’s in technology from use in quantum computers, use in storing petabytes of data on a device not much larger than a DVD, massive increases in bandwidth and efficiency of fibre optics and even how light is harnessed and analyzed from space for achieving greater Astrophysical research of distant stars. In addition there are already demonstration videos of scientists using low watt laser ‘tweezers’ to manipulate small micron size particles (i.e. 4 microns big) on glass slides. There are other demos that use angular momentum of a laser beam to drive microscopic parts such as tiny wheels and pumps. These are working in labs today. The potential from these lines of research is wide open.

      Link to using OAM to create multiple (4) entangled photons – this capability has great significance to Quantum Computing.

      http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/2016/02/oam-entangles-four-photons-not-just-two.html

      This next link is about using OAM for vast improvements in fibre optic carrying capacity (it is already old news from 2013, old by current Photonics progress) …

      http://www.extremetech.com/computing/159986-twisted-laser-vortexes-carry-1-6-terabits-per-second-over-fiber-optic-network

  • Jacques

    The best way to combat Big Energy and Big Science (whatever that is) is, as it has been for some time, to publish a detailed enough description that people can replicate what Rossi has and begin an effort to understand what is happening and why. Then it becomes unstoppable. That he hasn’t, or won’t, indicates that either he is 1) greedy, 2) has let the need for full credit go to his head, or 3) (least desired outcome) is a charlatan. No. 2 is silly if he already had most of the goods. No. 1 is indefensible — there’s no moral lifestyle you can live on for $500 million that you can’t live on for $50 million or (at his age, face it) $5 million. About No. 3, the less thought the better, but it has be considered given the now years of dribbling out factoids,.

    • doug marker

      Jaques,

      It is very unfair to imply or accuse Andrea Rossi of being ‘greedy’ – that is a very one-sided and biased view. If he has produced what amounts to a miraculous advance in technology, why is he greedy if it turns out he wants to monetize his work. He would have more reasons to build up a development fund than you have to see him donate to anyone, his efforts. The problem with giving it away is that someone else quite ruthless would find a way to own it. Just look at Tesla, Marconi etc: etc: etc: etc: (there are a lot of creative people who gone done over by industrialists (usually they are real greedy ones).

      The opposite of accusing him of being greedy is to say he owes it to you and the world you see, to give it away. That is a very very narrow view and is a great notion when someone else has what you want. 😉

      Cheers

      Doug Marker

  • Montague Withnail

    There is no doubt, if LENR was announced as factory ready and immediately cost effective tomorrow, that it would be such a huge disruption that it would initially throw the world into dangerous turmoil.

    Just following through this scenario, it would represent an economic
    dislocation orders of magnitude worse than the sub-prime crisis, which was so
    dangerous because suddenly no one knew what financial assets were worth.

    The same would be true here. A sudden and coordinated loss of value (probably to zero and beyond) of oil majors, miners and utilities is probably not
    something that the Western banking or insurance industries could survive. This time it would be much harder for governments to bail it all out. Forget about the Middle East, we would just close the borders on them and let them get on with it while trying to deal with our own problems.

    So, does this mean that governments are actively and deliberately subverting LENR? I highly highly doubt it for several reasons:

    1. They would have done a better job. How hard really would it be to shut Rossi
    up? Get to him plus a couple of dozen others and it’s basically done with. If
    that’s what they wanted to do, they would have just done it.

    2. They would have done a worse job. Western governments are really bad
    at this sort of thing, they are way too leaky. We would know about it via
    Wikileaks or something by now.

    3. It’s a bad choice. Genuinely if they perceived a threat/opportunity of this
    magnitude they would come up with a better strategy for dealing with it, which
    would involve special regulation and epic amounts of “printed” money
    to keep the financial system afloat during the transition. Trying to keep information like this locked up is just a recipe for losing control

    4. It’s too big a sacrifice. There are two sub-categories here, industry and
    military. If governments really believed in LENR they wouldn’t be able to help
    themselves, they would be desperate to help their industry get a competitive
    advantage and they would be desperate to make sure they didn’t fall behind
    militarily. They wouldn’t sit on their hands and let competing nations get ahead.

    I’m afraid the explanation is much simpler. They just don’t believe it. Personally I am convinced that LENR is a real phenomenon, but I don’t really believe Rossi (I would love to, but for such eccentric claims I would need to see a credible independent validation). I suspect it will take years, maybe decades before we understand LENR sufficiently to make cost effective and useful energy out of it. That will give the world time enough to adjust relatively safely, but we do need to make a start – the long run problems of AGW and depletion are still out there and time-critical.

    • DrD

      I agree with your first paragraph except it also needs certification. No good having production and orders if they’re illegal to use.
      As for the rest, Governments aren’t so well organised and as you say nor can they keep secrets. That doesn’t mean there aren’t powerful interests who stand to lose fortunes who may well be active behind the scenes. So far they either haven’t needed to take drastic actions or they’ve been successful, so far.

    • doug marker

      Montague,
      A good set of points and well argued.

      Re your main premise ” if LENR was announced as factory ready and immediately cost effective tomorrow”, I don’t believe anyone believes this to be the case, nor is it really likely. Even if Rossi has what he says it is still years away from ‘prime time’.

      The issue with your follow on points is they almost all argue to your main premise which, is quite improbable. Although there are some valid general issues that are included in those points.

      But, none the less a good set of thoughts.

      Cheers

      Doug Marker

  • psi2u2

    True, but the history of oil, a relatively scarce but very valuable commodity, is full of violence and pollution. So putting that behind us with a source like LENR can only be a good thing.

  • Observer

    Each day we re-define ourselves as that which remains.

  • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

    #LENR: dilly-ding, dilly-dong!

  • Observer

    Then why is it that everyone seems to think they are immortal until proven otherwise?

    The ultimate test for a skeptic is to not believe the proof he is mortal.

  • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

    Hello Vicky. The meaning of ‘disruptive technology’ as it is used here is positive: it means a technology that breaks completely away from what was there before.

    http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/disruptive-technology.asp
    It does not refer to destruction or destructiveness, other than in the ‘Shiva deity’, or the ‘phoenix’ sense.
    Many of us here are not native English writers, and seek with much hope a peaceful, clean and fair ‘rebirth’ of energy sources.

  • Carl Wilson

    “The ‘warming’ come from data adjustments and excessive averaging and manipulation.” This is what UC-Berkeley professor Richard Muller (a physicist) thought. So the Koch foundation put $150,000 for him to demonstrate it. Oops. Google: Koch-Funded Berkeley Temperature Study.

  • DrD

    Hi Vicky, imagine if or when LENR fuels our cars. Don’t you think all those petrol station owners, tanker drivers, oil refinery employees will feel it’s disrupted their lives? Those examples are the tip of the ice burgh. That doesn’t mean I don’t long for LENR to eliminate oil based systems but lets not be mistaken, there’s a lot of people, (our pension funds included) that will suffer much disruption and will probably fight and delay it.

  • Carl Wilson

    Currently the last comment on the article at the sifferkoll site was:

    “Malkom700 said:
    If we can produce cheap and clean energy will not be hesitate to
    be introduced. The Third World War is a much smaller threat than
    global warming.”
    To believe that global warming is a threat one would have to look at the evidence for it or trust those that do. All the denialists have to do is declare that the evidence is a bunch of lies and that ends the argument.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      War is always a very, very bad option.
      The anthropogenic greenhouse effect increases the global temperature, almost no doubt about that. But negative implications of the warming are often exaggerated, sometimes grossly. If it leads into extremism of any sort, it is worrying and bad.
      The strongest warming takes place in highest latitudes such as Finland. We see it in nature: for example the lake ice melts 2-3 weeks earlier nowadays than it did 30-40 years ago. But it’s not a catastrophe, on the contrary it has also many positive implications. Vegetation zones are just moving poleward some hundreds of kilometres.

      The rainfall pattern in tropics is not much affected by greenhouse gases, but instead it is affected by the hemispheric asymmetry of anthropogenic soot emissions. If and when those emissions are reduced in China and India, the rainy zone shifts a bit northward in Africa, bringing more rains to countries like Nigeria. Also this is not a catastrophe, but rather it’s return towards more natural state which existed before the industrial age.

      • Carl Wilson

        “Vegetation zones are just moving poleward some hundreds of kilometres” out of the areas that our agriculture is adapted to, too quickly to build up the soils in many areas, releasing large amounts of carbon dioxide in others.

      • Carl Wilson

        “The rainfall pattern in tropics is not much affected by greenhouse
        gases, but instead it is affected by the hemispheric asymmetry of
        anthropogenic soot emissions.” You believe the studies that show this, I tend to believe the other studies.