PDA

View Full Version : Free Energy out of Tennessee!



NathanAllan
June 25th, 2005, 10:55 AM
I asked about theis subject a while back and figured it was a hoax but no! It's real. I couldn't find the first thread that I posted in. No biggie, here it is in full color. That guy, Carl Tilley, has done it and he hasn't been silenced. He seems to have been put on the back burner though, since it took a long time of searching to find his webpage. Here you go. I want a conversion kit for the Jeep!

http://www.tilleyfoundation.com/

Better yet, I want to hook a generator up to the house!

ahm
June 25th, 2005, 12:37 PM
There's no such thing as "free energy".
http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Tilley/fraud/

NathanAllan
June 25th, 2005, 03:08 PM
Well I sure feel silly. After reading a few of the articles posted I stand corrected. So yeah, there's no such thing as free energy.

I am still interested in the ultra-efficient prospect, though. I want to get in touch with Mr. Kibbey now.

Sorry for the hornblowing :? I just want to eradicate my electric bill.

Nathan

ahm
June 26th, 2005, 08:10 AM
Sure, I wouldn't mind some help with my electric bill too.

Have you considered solar?
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.05/solar.html
(I especially like the part about the "taco king")

NathanAllan
June 26th, 2005, 11:01 AM
I've considered it but the startup prices are daunting. It works and it's proven, I know, but solar cells are not very efficient. I am interested in a loop antenna, though(I mentioned it here before). I have the wire, I just need TIME to put it up and to measure the current that comes off it and to put together a transformer/power supply.

carlsson
June 27th, 2005, 02:58 AM
Too bad we're in Off Topic and not Rants. Otherwise I would have ranted about energy politics. Over here you get extra taxation and penalities if you become too successful in installing solar panels on your house (or other forms of alternative, private energy sources), like you are not allowed to become totally independent of the electricity company.

Terry Yager
June 27th, 2005, 06:35 AM
Hmmn...that's different. Here it is just the opposite. Our govt. will pay you (in income tax reduction) if you use alternative energy sources. We even have a law that forces the electric company to "buy back" any extra energy that you produce. If you produce more than you consume, the electric company sends you a check instead of a bill each month.

--T

CP/M User
June 27th, 2005, 03:07 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> Hmmn...that's different. Here it is just the opposite. Our govt. will pay
> you (in income tax reduction) if you use alternative energy sources. We
> even have a law that forces the electric company to "buy back" any
> extra energy that you produce. If you produce more than you
> consume, the electric company sends you a check instead of a bill each
> month.

I believe that happens here for people like Farmers who have wind powered turbines for themselves & the small local community to supply the power to. Though I think to actually have these things installed you have to pay for them - quite a bit of money, though in the long run these things are supposed to pay themselves off - with a bit of a income for the farmer - for supplying his land.

CP/M User.

Terry Yager
June 27th, 2005, 05:00 PM
Yeah, windmill farms, that's it here too. To run even a small farm requires the use of several windmills to produce the required amount of energy. That's why it's mostly farmers, who have the space to erect that many mills. Windmills are more expensive than solar power as implemented today, but they are also more efficient, returning better energy:$$$ ratios. Best bet is to spend a little more for the best equipment available, then hope it'll last the ten years it'll take to pay for itself.

--T

CP/M User
June 27th, 2005, 11:27 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> Yeah, windmill farms, that's it here too. To run even a small farm
> requires the use of several windmills to produce the required amount of
> energy. That's why it's mostly farmers, who have the space to erect
> that many mills. Windmills are more expensive than solar power as
> implemented today, but they are also more efficient, returning better
> energy:$$$ ratios. Best bet is to spend a little more for the best
> equipment available, then hope it'll last the ten years it'll take to pay for
> itself.

Yeah, I guess Solar power won't become efficent, until they can hook something to the sun & transport the energy back here faster than the speed of light - for generating! ;-)

One well known town which is down by the bay down where our other coal burning stations are (well on the other side of the hills in that region) - some farmer has these Powered Turbines - which powers the area. Think there's about 7 or 8 of the things. They get a lot of wind down where which is good, the Turbines are also designed to rotate so they catch the full wind - which is why they have them spaced out so much (so no collisions!).

CP/M User.

carlsson
June 28th, 2005, 05:21 AM
My source was someone telling me a few years ago how it works. It may not be fully accurate. I looked it up and in short, this is how it seems to work in Sweden:

If you are producing energy from solar cells, wind mills, bio fuel, small scale water energy etc, you can apply for an electricity certificate, dimensioned after your capacity. Every MWh gives one certificate. Then you can sell your surplus energy on the market. You will also sell your certificate (see below) and get more income.

Everyone are required to buy a certain amount of certificates based on your own usage. This is referred to as a duty quota (or if it is quota duty?), and is decided by the parliament. Normally your electricity company takes care of this and puts some fee on your electricity bill, but you can also register to do it yourself. If you don't have enough certificates, you will have to pay a fee. You also pay a yearly administrative fee for buying certificates.

So, the producer and the buyer comes to an agreement. The producer sells surplus energy and/or certificates. The price on each certificate needs to be reported to the authorities who publish statistics, e.g. on Internet. At the beginning of the next year, the buyer "cashes in" the bought certificates. If the demand is higher than the supply, the market may be out of certificates. The penalty fee then is 150% of the average certificate price the past year. For the first two years of this system, there was an upper limit, this year 240 SEK ($30) per certificate. This is to prevent inflation in certificates. If you buy more certificates than you need, you can save them for next year.

Based on this, things look good for a producer. This system was brought into use in 2004, so maybe the part about unfair conditions related to the earlier situation and this system tries to fix it. I still believe you need to make some serious investments in technology if you want to distribute your own electricity, and maybe someone who has a surplus is required to register as a producer, invest in the technology and apply for certificates?

Terry Yager
June 28th, 2005, 05:29 AM
Still sounds kinda regressive. Is the energy company owned by the govt in Sveden?

--T

CP/M User
June 28th, 2005, 04:00 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> Still sounds kinda regressive. Is the energy company owned by the
> govt in Sveden?

This sounds awlfully complicated - perhaps for the better, for anyone who tries to come along & scam the system out of a few bucks. You might get the occasional buckeroo who maybe smart enough to try something.

They try it here all the time - the latest scam here is people trying to get Govt. to grant payment for them buying their first home. Trouble is - it's not their first home. Then there's the Baby Bonus - you guessed it, same people trying to fraud that. Funny how when given the chance people decide it's a good time to start multiplying!

My subject at school talks about the Impact one person is having on the environment & the famous 'J' curve which we have idea where we are on the scale - is human life about to crash or are we towards the lower half of the Curve? ;-)

CP/M User.

carlsson
June 29th, 2005, 01:44 AM
There are several energy companies. Some are half state owned, some are city owned or fully private, as far as I know. All operate on the market on equal terms.

I guess a producer can "pay" his own consumption with the certificates he received. I don't know if the system has anything to say on surplus production that didn't get sold, if there is a penalty fee for that too, or if awarded but unsold certificates become invalid the next year. The certificates were introduced to create a demand. Maybe the idea is that the small producer will sell his certificates - and energy - for a better price than the big producer. As long as the consumer needs to buy certificates, he will buy from the producer with the best prices.

The next election is in September 2006. By then, the system has been used for two and a half years. Who knows what a different government may change and replace..