Frågor till Fredrik och Stefan

Alla initiativ som syftar till att politiker ska agera med längre tidshorisont än nästa val är bra. Global utmaning med partners uppmanar i DI våra politiker att svara på ett antal frågeställningar med långsiktigt perspektiv.

Angående energi och klimat ställs frågan:

“‘Vad tänker ni göra de närmaste fem, tio åren för att Sverige ska bli koldioxidneutralt 2050?”

De skriver också följande angående omställningen:

“Sverige har unikt goda förutsättningar för att gå före i omställningen till ett fossilfritt samhälle: Statsskulden är bland de lägsta i Europa, överskotten i handeln med utlandet har länge varit rekordhöga och inflationen låg eller obefintlig. Sverige kan utan vidare mobilisera de betydande offentliga och privata resurser som krävs för att bland annat energieffektivisera miljonprogrammet, se till att allt som byggs nytt är energisnålt, satsa på förnybar energi, smarta elnät, utbyggnad av kollektivtrafiken, trafiksystem för eldriven trafik och en långt mer resurseffektiv ekonomi – där produkterna har längre livslängd och material av olika slag återvinns maximalt. Vi har dessutom råd att ställa upp för de många fattiga länder som drabbas hårdast av klimatförändringen, i en situation där deras bidrag till utsläppen varit minimalt.”

VD för E.ON i Sverige är en av avsändarna och i sammanhanget något av en udda fågel (Anders Wijkman, Anders Wejryd, Stefan Einhorn är några av de andra). Jag har nämnt det tidigare – det börjar byggas upp betydligt mer tryck från näringslivet i den här typen av frågor. Positivt!


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

9 Responses to “Frågor till Fredrik och Stefan”

  • Elforsk Perperktiv 2013 nr2

    Elforsk Report for Vattenfall

    Executive summary

    Best book about the controversy

    with Elforsk, Sweden like all planet can be converted to carbon free energy in 10-20 years, without pain.

    good reading . hope this helps.

    • Thanks for the info. I am well aware of the Elforsk material, which I also have reported on this blog, however I am not yet convinced about the LENR future. In my view there is still too much of strange activities around it. I have absolutely not ruled it out, and I think that we will know for sure within 2014 whether it is an energy solution we can set our hope to or not.

      I will have a look at your other links – thanks!

      • sorry to be redundant.
        I’m optimistic, but clearly Elforsk validated the reality of the heat, not it’s stability, usability, reliability… Engineering question stays open, but any engineer know that when you have anomalous heat, it is a question of time to make it useful…
        Not a surprise that LENR+ reactors were designed by engineers-style innovators, and not academic.

        • Well, the heat surplus was indicated in the Elforsk validation, not fully reliably measured (e.g. calorimetric), however there is no doubt that some initially hesitant scientists were surprised by the results. What bothers me is the fact that even a couple of years after the initial ‘breakthrough’ it is still small scale tinkering that is being done. It should not take several years to objectively verify the process, bring in some serious funding and unleash an army of engineers and take a number of applications quickly to the market.

  • the way it was measured through thermometric calorimetry (it is calorimetry, rough but real) is in fact much better that flow calorimetry to ruleout frauds and question.
    one advantage is that there is less moving and hidden parts, and that the measurement is absolute and not comparative.

    previous experiments using flow of phase change, raised endless pathological questions…

    the way pomp&eriksson pretended paper was bashed quickly by Bo hoistad who reminded the facts (calibration, error margin compared to measures, conservatives hypothesis, blanks, contradictor evident incompetence), in fact reinforced the result.

    No other pretended paper came to support that claims, since as usual the experimenter anticipated many questions, because they are competent, unlike criotics.

    I see the same story many times in the book of Charles Beaudette , excess heat, with incompetent physicists pretendig to raise artifact, and only showing their lack of knowledge of the field.

    Lewis was so, Shanahan later (after Beaudette book) was rebutted fully, showing that LENr scientist were not chicken of the day.

    Beaudette is quite thanks to full with Mirrisson who was one of the only serious critic, but in fact who bounded the errors and show clearly that some experiments were without any possible doubt, even in pessimistic hypothesis.

    the problem for innocent people is that when we see physicists pretending a rebuttal we cannot imagine that they are so incompetent, that they refuse to reed the details in the report, to question the authors,… we imagine that they do their homework and stay modest when facing ignorance… sure that is our error. to trust physicist on calorimetry.

    calorimetry is today a job of engineers, chemist, industrial physicist, not of nuclear physicist, whatever they claim.
    as show most of LENR critics today, nuclear physicist are mostly mathematicians who apply laws, invent laws, and check that reality follow their laws.

    the book of Beaudette raise really a concern on modern science, at least on nuclear physicist, high impact journals, media courage, delusion trickle down in funded science, in international science…

    • AlainCo, regarding the energy catalyzer produced by the previously convicted criminal Andrea Rossi, a self taught scientist, much like the not so criminal Edison, who invented a lot of stuff. As you have read on the completely reliably information source, the internet, I agree with you in principle. But would you not think that it be prudent for the claimer to prove his claims before investers going in head first. The actual proof so far has been limited. For instance, swedish authorities has rejected the claims of more energy being produced than have been injected into the system, whereupon several investors withdrawed. But perhaps you have inside information which trumphs common sense. Please let me know.

      • All I have is Elforsk position. Elforsk confirm the reality of the heat.
        I know that some government staff is aware but prudent to avoid being ridiculed (by US watchdogs?).

        where did you get the information that swedish authorities refuse the claim ?

        the only swedish “authority” who gave an opinion, is Elforsk and they confirm and defend the claim agains pathetic critics.

        Of course they don’t say it is nuclear, just that it is above what you can expect from any chemical reaction.

        Maybe you have better evidences than Elforsk Perspektiv official position?

        I am interested.

        about Rossi as a bandit, even recent (post 2000) articles in corriere della sera no more accuse him of fraud (after all he was cleared of those charges), but of incompetence. Justice judged him of being a victim of retroactive law, but also of having tried to hide his wealth during the induced bankruptcy.
        You should note that after he was cleared of environmental and fraud charges, he was hired by a company working in energy domain, and worked for DoD.

        nasty interpretation of his work exist, but others exist who just say that he tried to do what people try to do today, harness nanotechnology for seebeck converters, and face the problem of industrialization and cost. after an awfully expensive lab prototype, he tried many industrialization methods and none gave good results…
        I currently follow TEG technology and what he did was classic. not sure it works better today.

        Maybe he is too optimistic about industrialization, but his career and the way he is hired does not match with scam artist.

        Today evidence of illegal behaviors or fraud are only
        – MIT historical experiment tweaked to disprove F&P
        – industrial spying by a scientist against a company (not rossi). I know who it is, and it is not rossi but a second rank alliance which attack him as a scam artist.
        – 2 case of commercial spying by experts, on startups (not reactors inventors, stealing data).

        we are far from the cliché of conspiracies…
        Bad guys are academics or… spying agencies.
        Good guys are energy agencies, engineers, experimenters, oils companies, nuke/space/army engineering labs, corps labs, asian research…

        as if the corruption came only from US academic establishment, and trickled down western research…
        If you read Beaudette book, it is clearly the dominant feeling. A tragedy of Manhattan project establishment.

  • Instämmer med AlainCo. Vi måste omedelbart inleda ett krasch-program för att ersätta befintlig kol och oljekraft med kärnkraft.

  • Hello admin, i must say you have high quality content here.
    Your website can go viral. You need initial traffic boost only.
    How to get it? Search for; Mertiso’s tips go viral

Leave a Reply