ADC energy. More efficient electricity transmission?

[BeyondKnowledge]

I agree with you on the above. NASA lost me on the O Ring thing. Back in the early 1990's I met a PhD who was an expert on O rings. We were OEM contractors for their SCBA'S. He got into a technical arguement with them as they wanted us to change our O ring groove to their's which paralleled the Challenger design. 

He showed me their and his letters. In the end NASA backed off and let us continue as-is as we had no failures, leaks or life cycle failures. It was all about the design of the machined O ring groove. Now back on topic. 

I dont know about you but I am all for the environment and I am no tree hugger. I have recycled all plant waste into the ground since being a kid. We still do it today and have a bumper crop of tomatoes from seed and yes, they do have flavor. 

You could be correct and that is way beyond where I want to go. That being said they will fix it as they have to as as a human race we have no choice. Thats why Congress is banging on the UFO door as someone here on this planet already has the technology that we need as a species to survive. IMO I dont belive that your position is totally without merit but to state that its a smoke and mirrors I disagree. The world is run by money and they all live on coastal shorelines throughout the world. The climate is getting hotter and the seas are rising. Those with the bucks would not stand for a charade. Just like Mr. Eat Bugs over at the WEF.  Hes an engineer by education. His old man was a Nazi in WWII. 

It will be fixed. Bet your 401K on it!

I do not think it is smoke and mirrors. I know it is. The smoke comes from the wires having too much current put through them if they are used as described by that NASA paper.

Let's take a wire for example that can handle 10 amps. From that 10 amps at 12 volts you can get 120 watts of power through it.watts is volts times amps. Now the same wire at 10 A and 120 V is 1200 W. Then at 10 A and 12000 V it is 120000 W.

The NASA paper says low voltage DC can be put on the wires with regular AC. Alternating current has the advantage of being easily changed from one voltage level to another with a transformer. DC, direct current, requires a lot of electronics to do this. Both lose some energy but the transformer loses less. This loss also occures when DC is made into AC power then the AC is made back into DC. The conversion loss is what the paper is trying to eliminate.

Using the above numbers, the proposel is to put an additional 120 W of DC electricity on the wire with 120000 W it is now carrying. If it worked it would add to 120120 watts of power. But that wire can only carry 10 amps at a time. Because if we put 20 amps through it, the wire will heat up and melt. So we can ether have 120000 W of power or 120W of power but not both.

To get 120,000 watts of power through a wire at 12 volts, the wire has to be 32 time the diameter of the 10 amp example.

This only covers the hardware problem with this paper and not the long distance loss characteristics of AC vs DC electricity which would take a lot longer to explain.

I hope this helps explain why it is a money pit to try to do this.

[Waterglass]

So, if what you are writing is accurate and you believe it I cant comment as I am not an expert nor even knowledgeble.  Too bad you cannot bring it forward publically or did NASA kind of do it by a veiled comment as this is how it is done in public by public agencies. Why I write this as I am a Registered Source for the DOD IG. 

My reference as to how this thing works is a book by a former priest who is a paid speaker to the DOD, FBI, CIA, SS, DHS, NSA and others. By page 50 in his book "Mind Games" you will get why certain whistleblowers discredit themselves or go public.  Two of those who have intentionally soiled themselves in my opinion are Robert Lazar and Dr. Steven Greer. They did it to foster confusion about themselves and encourage the means to discredit by others. Thats what keeps them alive and Richard Thieme writes about situations that in his book and that facts must be presented as fiction. I own his book. I read it and  get it. 

https://www.amazon.com/Mind-Games-Richar...0938326244

What you have here if accuracte is a bombshell. Those who would forward same in public would be walking down on the to be disappeared trail. 

I never did the above but I am under a USA Federal gag order for life after I had appeared internationally on CNN when CNN , "was good". I did so to save my life. I am obviously here. 

In my opinion global warming is a threat. I care less who caused it as its here and must be addressed. The human race is gaming on CO2 reduction as thats all they have and they began that back in the mid 1990's. Solar and Wind could be an effort in futility based on this thread but what else can they do other than taking out a billion people. Lets eliminate cars, farts, food, planes, trains and everything else. I am getting off point but all adds fuel to the "conspiricy"

[FlyingClayDisk]

 

In my opinion global warming is a threat. I care less who caused it as its here and must be addressed. The human race is gaming on CO2 reduction as thats all they have and they began that back in the mid 1990's. Solar and Wind could be an effort in futility based on this thread but what else can they do other than taking out a billion people. Lets eliminate cars, farts, food, planes, trains and everything else. I am getting off point but all adds fuel to the "conspiricy"

I have no doubt climate change is real, and a threat.  No doubt whatsoever.  Where my doubt lies is in the area of mankind having anything to do with it, and/or having even the slightest prayer of changing it.  There are so many other variables to consider and mankind is a tiny, almost microscopic, part of all of these.  The most obvious example is the planet Venus.  Venus has runaway greenhouse change, and no human or other animal has ever set foot there.

[BeyondKnowledge]

In my opinion global warming is a threat. I care less who caused it as its here and must be addressed. The human race is gaming on CO2 reduction as thats all they have and they began that back in the mid 1990's. Solar and Wind could be an effort in futility based on this thread but what else can they do other than taking out a billion people. Lets eliminate cars, farts, food, planes, trains and everything else. I am getting off point but all adds fuel to the "conspiricy"

How do you explain the global warming on Mars then? Not enough human made trash to make the environment change there yet.

Clomate change is a cyclical change in long-term weather. Not some doomsday that we caused or can stop.

I am all for cleaning up the environment but solar, wind, and electric vehicles are not the one size fits all answer.

Solar panels need more mining to get the materials to make them. They are black. This increases the heat locally around them. This heats the environment not reduse the heating. They drip toxic metals into the ground beneath them as they degrade in the rain.

Each wind turbine takes over 120 tones of coal to make. Again more mining. Wind farms are not easily recyclable. Funny how the best way is to burn them to make more materials for more turbines. Not to mention the damage to wildlife by the spinning blades and infrasound emitted by their operation.

Electrical vehicles for the masses are nowhere near ready to replace all vehicles. They also require lots of mining to get materials for the batteries and other components. There is no power source available to charge them yet. Probably won't be until there is a release in a breakthrough in fusion power. Then we can talk electric vehicles for everything.

Is all this mining is good for the environment in your opinion? I don't think it is.

Again, it only looks good on paper. So why are we destroying the planet trying it? Politics, the politicians want to get rich while they are looking like they are doing something good. There is no other reason for forcing solar, wind, and EVs on the populas. It is not helping.

[Waterglass]

How do you explain the global warming on Mars then? Not enough human made trash to make the environment change there yet.

Clomate change is a cyclical change in long-term weather. Not some doomsday that we caused or can stop.

I am all for cleaning up the environment but solar, wind, and electric vehicles are not the one size fits all answer.

Solar panels need more mining to get the materials to make them. They are black. This increases the heat locally around them. This heats the environment not reduse the heating. They drip toxic metals into the ground beneath them as they degrade in the rain.

Each wind turbine takes over 120 tones of coal to make. Again more mining. Wind farms are not easily recyclable. Funny how the best way is to burn them to make more materials for more turbines. Not to mention the damage to wildlife by the spinning blades and infrasound emitted by their operation.

Electrical vehicles for the masses are nowhere near ready to replace all vehicles. They also require lots of mining to get materials for the batteries and other components. There is no power source available to charge them yet. Probably won't be until there is a release in a breakthrough in fusion power. Then we can talk electric vehicles for everything.

Is all this mining is good for the environment in your opinion? I don't think it is.

Again, it only looks good on paper. So why are we destroying the planet trying it? Politics, the politicians want to get rich while they are looking like they are doing something good. There is no other reason for forcing solar, wind, and EVs on the populas. It is not helping.

Mars. I get what you wrote and agree. I thought I was clear enough in that I originally wrote that I could care less who caused it to take that arguement off the table. 

The bottom line is that earth is getting hotter. Man has to do something to give others some hope as if it cant me stopped then we should drop to our knees and say 40 "Our Fathers" as were done as in cooked. No hope then mass hysteria which already could be playing out especially by the media.

[BeyondKnowledge]

Mars. I get what you wrote and agree. I thought I was clear enough in that I originally wrote that I could care less who caused it to take that arguement off the table. 

The bottom line is that earth is getting hotter. Man has to do something to give others some hope as if it cant me stopped then we should drop to our knees and say 40 "Our Fathers" as were done as in cooked. No hope then mass hysteria which already could be playing out especially by the media.

We already have mass hysteria. It is called the climate change agenda. Just the politics of the sky is falling. We are all doomed. That is what they want you to believe. When you believe that, you will pay them to fix it.

Life will go on. Adapting to the ever-changing environment.

You say you don't care about what caused global warming. Ok, if humans did not do it, then how exactly are we powerful enough to stop it? I think we might have contributed slightly but insignificantly in the long run. The climate will change, it is just long term weather trends.

[Waterglass]

This is the warmest year in my life in South Carolina as we have had the most 100 degree days since we moved here in 2017. 

I have a friend who lives on an island off the coast of Tampa in Florida. He has been there for almost 20 years and has a boat dock. The dock has permanent steel steps up the bank and it had painted letters in inches as to the water level. Since he arrived the sea level is up one foot. 

Then take a look at what the US Navy has done along all coastal ports. 

My point was that man has to push something as a possible fix; real or imagined. I dont agree with it but so you tell us what to do? Lump it?