You two are really a pair -- two typical "know-it all types that that just take cheap shots at subjects "you think you know something about".
And that's is really too bad because of the damage that you cause.
Clark -- if you had any decency: - you would check on just how many AM and FM radios have been manufactured since Tesla invented and Patented the Radio - in 1900.
Maybe that's one of his "fringe ideas.
Or maybe it's the multiphase AC 'power system that the world uses today - discovered by Tesla in 1882 -- just another one of his "fringe ideas"
The POD MOD uses the same tuning circuitry as any of those radios -- just designed to develop more power
Did you graduate from the US Navy Class "A" (ET) Electronics School - / which is the equivalent of a Masters in Electronics - -and also the Class "A" Radar School -- I did.
And simply because a subject isn't taught any longer - does not mean that it doesn't work .
Guess what Mr. "PH. D", i.e.. "Piled High and Deep" in your case as to your knowledge base on the subject of producing electricity-- are you counting on the information you think you remember from some Physics class that you mght have taken - to back up your really "stupid statement"?
Classic Physicists commonly state that "...no power supply supply can produce more output power than input power..." -- and they actually are correct, but only on the substance of the statement.
However -- they didn't state the actual conditions correctly.
If the Physicists had stated that "...no power supply can develop more power than it is either physically or electrically designed to produce..." --- they would have been correct.
But you and SmithFS don't seem to give a damn about actual facts.
You two seem to be happy jerking each other with your "quotes and studies".
While public-private partnership such as ARDP and NRIC are necessary coordinators of fission technology research and commercialization, and utility payment systems need a structure that rewards energy capacity construction and generation, incorporating better ability to listen to market signals is equally helpful, and still less explored. Nuclear plants should be restarted where the dormant capital can yield significant net value - which is probably most of them. New or old reactors should be engineered for multi century lifecycles. By nature technology development costs more than marginal output and must be freed from current market cost, which is why finance exists and the public sector boosts technology finance in chosen sectors. That shouldnt mean a blank check or random pork, but rather a greater challenge for public sector ability to set and adjust criteria for competition for development funding to keep it vibrant and pushing advance. Related are strategic goals such as global markets, cheap electricity to advance the heartland, and keeping multiple fission variants in development, like vessel size, fuel form, coolant material, and breeding capacity. Throwing a wad at a massive build out based on assumed competitiveness is likely too big a risk given the advantages that Korea and China have shown in many sectors, and the ample supply of gas for internal US energy production. 3 Korean plants can be built for the price of vogtle. The allocation of limited surplus among restarting plants, developing new fission technology, and applying software to lower construction cost of large water cooled reactors needs to be considered carefully and frequently adjusted. Competitive ecosystems can detect and limit spending down commercial dead ends. A return to global exchange of nuclear science and free trade in components and plants would help US development. The engineering paradigm is another contributor to outcome that needs help, a shift to and maturation of systems and hazard engineering. Increasing state capacity, a fundamental challenge of information based economies that bears heavily on fission deployment, must grow a range of new cost measurement structures among a range of coordinating functions.
Mr. Clark: thank you for showing just how "out-of touch" you are with the reality of "electric resonance".
If you have the "cahones" to purchase / "ask for" / steal / or "what-ever" / to get your hands on a particular college level test-book named "...Basic Electronics.." / Fourth Edition / written by Mr. Bernard Grob -- which has been a staple of teaching at major Universities:
--- go to/ and read pages 544 -through 548 / and try to to get your opinionated pea sized brain around real / proven / hard facts - instead of the "opinionated crap" that you have written here.
You just might learn something.
Also -- a very early version of the power supply was tested at Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc -- On Sept. 10th. 1984 -- at 293% "over-unity" --because a resonant tank circuit - always develops more power than is required to power it.
That's been the case in every AM or FM radio tuning circuit - produced since Nikola Tesla invented and applied for his US Patent - on Mar. 20th. 1900
--- over 124 years ago.
Simply because you had you head somewhere else -- doesn't cancel history.
It took me this long - because academically trained people like you - who haven't got a clue as to what has been been "forgotten" as "already proven technology" - regularly "blow it out a certain orifice" - in order to keep your damned job.
Anytime that you want to go "head to head" with me as to what "electrical resonance" can, or cannot do -- then we should communicate as adults - which your a long way from reaching -- if this piece is any indication of your development.
You have given a poster child example of clear example of the truth - that "...you are entitled to your own opinions - but you are not entitled to your own facts...".
Good article. In Palisade’s case, because of the rapid decision to re-power just weeks after Holtec took possession of the plant, they have been able to re-employ almost half the previous workforce. The plant now has all hands on deck with the veterans training the new hires, both experienced operators from the nuclear industry and people starting their nuclear careers. The plant is an experience rich environment. Also, Entergy, the previous owner, made a number or improvements and upgrades at the plant, with the cooling towers being replaced just a few years ago. The plants first year of operation was 1971, but like a new knee or hip, parts and devices that wore out have been upgraded. The delayed maintenance due to the previously anticipated decommissioning has been adequately funded, and upgrades are now under way with the NRC fully engaged. Here’s a LinkedIn link with more information. https://tinyurl.com/2ykemdhh
Instead of restarting something that has the potential to melt down -- keep it "quiet" but:
--- install multiples of "rack-mounted POD MODs " against the interior walls of the Turbine Hall(s);
--- connect the new / clean / "electronically produced" / matching output power through the control room(s) to the connected power grid(s):
--- allowing for shutting down, or in this case - keeping shut down "only the Atomic pile ; associated gear; and steam turbines:
--- bringing back the site as a clean / new / "base-load" power plant that can operated at 100% of designed output / 24-7 / 365 days a year.
EC President Ursula von der Leyen saw this capability in the POD MLD when she requested the technology be brlought to Europe this last March.
And Mr. Chris Stark - the new Head of Mission Control / Energy in the new Labour Government in the UK - has asked for information on the POD MOD for their power systems.
It's only the US Government - with it's "commercialized first" / "accepted first -- that has turned it's back on the Nikola Tesla based POD MOD technology - which has been US invented / US developed and professional laboratory tested / and US Patented.
The POD MOD can be installed:
--- "at" any site:
--- produce all of the required electricity "for" that site;
--- for as long as is required "by" that site: -- "selectively" / up to and including:
--- 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps -which equals
--- 230,400 Watts; 230.4 kW; or .2304 MW -- how ever you care to describe it.
The Palidades Plant has an output capacity of 750,000 kW, or 750 MW.
It would take only 3255 / say 3260 / POM MOD units - to match that electric power output:
--- at a cost of $6.52 Million dollars for the POD MOD units themselves - at $2000 per unit.
Do the math - if nothing else---
It would not only be much less expensive, i.e., "cheaper" to retrofit-repower using POD MOD electric power units - plus a whole lot safer.
Also" -- there would not be any additional Nuclear Waste to try and figure out how to store safely --let alone all of the existing waste - since Yucca Mountain was shut down before going into use.
In case anyone else is wondering, this is an "over-unity" power generation scheme, aka an electronic perpetual motion machine. Like all such schemes, either the inventor has made the invention to scam investors, or the invention has scammed the inventor into thinking it works. It appears the later is the case.
If there were something to his device, it would have to pick up energy from some real source to produce the 4000x the input power claimed. Even if McKie doesn't understand why this must be the case in order to put out more power than it consumes, this is the only way his device could work. Otherwise any such claim is at best a measurement error. And since McKie has claimed to be able to make small working models since 1993, if it did work as he claims, he would be powering something that the input energy alone could not power in order to demonstrate proof of concept. He's had 31 years to build a couple and wire them together. But he hasn't because no matter how many times a measurement error is multiplied, it can't power anything.
To do the math, it would take an infinite number of POD MOD units costing an infinite amount to equal 750MW, because they produce less than nothing above what power gets put ito them.
That's almost as good a scam as running Palidades output with solar panels and wind turbines. Unicorn farts would be another excellent replacement. And Andrea Rossi can power the entire planet with his E-Cat cold fusion devices.
Now, now. They may not be practical for the task but at least solar panels and wind turbines actually work to produce energy. And if unicorns actually existed, as ruminants their farts would presumably at least contain burnable methane. E-cat's a deliberate scam to rip off investors and POD MOD's are a self-delusion born of measurement error and a preoccupation with Tesla fringe theories.
It's debatable that the system wide, full lifecycle, energy produced by wind & solar power actually has a net energy gain. So indeed might be just useless as the E-Cat & POD MOD.
The Bentek study showed increased wind in Texas & Colorado INCREASED fossil electricity consumption, i.e. no net energy gain.
A survey of 68 nations over the past 52 years done by Environmental Progress and duplicated by the New York Times showed conventional hydro was quite successful at decarbonization, nuclear energy was also very successful and both wind and solar show no correlation between grid penetration and decarbonization. An expensive total waste of capital and material resources. That indicates system wide efficiency of wind + solar is 1:1. One unit energy input replaces one unit energy on the output side.
To Michael Clark and SmithFS
You two are really a pair -- two typical "know-it all types that that just take cheap shots at subjects "you think you know something about".
And that's is really too bad because of the damage that you cause.
Clark -- if you had any decency: - you would check on just how many AM and FM radios have been manufactured since Tesla invented and Patented the Radio - in 1900.
Maybe that's one of his "fringe ideas.
Or maybe it's the multiphase AC 'power system that the world uses today - discovered by Tesla in 1882 -- just another one of his "fringe ideas"
The POD MOD uses the same tuning circuitry as any of those radios -- just designed to develop more power
Did you graduate from the US Navy Class "A" (ET) Electronics School - / which is the equivalent of a Masters in Electronics - -and also the Class "A" Radar School -- I did.
And simply because a subject isn't taught any longer - does not mean that it doesn't work .
Guess what Mr. "PH. D", i.e.. "Piled High and Deep" in your case as to your knowledge base on the subject of producing electricity-- are you counting on the information you think you remember from some Physics class that you mght have taken - to back up your really "stupid statement"?
Classic Physicists commonly state that "...no power supply supply can produce more output power than input power..." -- and they actually are correct, but only on the substance of the statement.
However -- they didn't state the actual conditions correctly.
If the Physicists had stated that "...no power supply can develop more power than it is either physically or electrically designed to produce..." --- they would have been correct.
But you and SmithFS don't seem to give a damn about actual facts.
You two seem to be happy jerking each other with your "quotes and studies".
While public-private partnership such as ARDP and NRIC are necessary coordinators of fission technology research and commercialization, and utility payment systems need a structure that rewards energy capacity construction and generation, incorporating better ability to listen to market signals is equally helpful, and still less explored. Nuclear plants should be restarted where the dormant capital can yield significant net value - which is probably most of them. New or old reactors should be engineered for multi century lifecycles. By nature technology development costs more than marginal output and must be freed from current market cost, which is why finance exists and the public sector boosts technology finance in chosen sectors. That shouldnt mean a blank check or random pork, but rather a greater challenge for public sector ability to set and adjust criteria for competition for development funding to keep it vibrant and pushing advance. Related are strategic goals such as global markets, cheap electricity to advance the heartland, and keeping multiple fission variants in development, like vessel size, fuel form, coolant material, and breeding capacity. Throwing a wad at a massive build out based on assumed competitiveness is likely too big a risk given the advantages that Korea and China have shown in many sectors, and the ample supply of gas for internal US energy production. 3 Korean plants can be built for the price of vogtle. The allocation of limited surplus among restarting plants, developing new fission technology, and applying software to lower construction cost of large water cooled reactors needs to be considered carefully and frequently adjusted. Competitive ecosystems can detect and limit spending down commercial dead ends. A return to global exchange of nuclear science and free trade in components and plants would help US development. The engineering paradigm is another contributor to outcome that needs help, a shift to and maturation of systems and hazard engineering. Increasing state capacity, a fundamental challenge of information based economies that bears heavily on fission deployment, must grow a range of new cost measurement structures among a range of coordinating functions.
Mr. Clark: thank you for showing just how "out-of touch" you are with the reality of "electric resonance".
If you have the "cahones" to purchase / "ask for" / steal / or "what-ever" / to get your hands on a particular college level test-book named "...Basic Electronics.." / Fourth Edition / written by Mr. Bernard Grob -- which has been a staple of teaching at major Universities:
--- go to/ and read pages 544 -through 548 / and try to to get your opinionated pea sized brain around real / proven / hard facts - instead of the "opinionated crap" that you have written here.
You just might learn something.
Also -- a very early version of the power supply was tested at Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc -- On Sept. 10th. 1984 -- at 293% "over-unity" --because a resonant tank circuit - always develops more power than is required to power it.
That's been the case in every AM or FM radio tuning circuit - produced since Nikola Tesla invented and applied for his US Patent - on Mar. 20th. 1900
--- over 124 years ago.
Simply because you had you head somewhere else -- doesn't cancel history.
It took me this long - because academically trained people like you - who haven't got a clue as to what has been been "forgotten" as "already proven technology" - regularly "blow it out a certain orifice" - in order to keep your damned job.
Anytime that you want to go "head to head" with me as to what "electrical resonance" can, or cannot do -- then we should communicate as adults - which your a long way from reaching -- if this piece is any indication of your development.
You have given a poster child example of clear example of the truth - that "...you are entitled to your own opinions - but you are not entitled to your own facts...".
Put up or shut up.
Good article. In Palisade’s case, because of the rapid decision to re-power just weeks after Holtec took possession of the plant, they have been able to re-employ almost half the previous workforce. The plant now has all hands on deck with the veterans training the new hires, both experienced operators from the nuclear industry and people starting their nuclear careers. The plant is an experience rich environment. Also, Entergy, the previous owner, made a number or improvements and upgrades at the plant, with the cooling towers being replaced just a few years ago. The plants first year of operation was 1971, but like a new knee or hip, parts and devices that wore out have been upgraded. The delayed maintenance due to the previously anticipated decommissioning has been adequately funded, and upgrades are now under way with the NRC fully engaged. Here’s a LinkedIn link with more information. https://tinyurl.com/2ykemdhh
Instead of restarting something that has the potential to melt down -- keep it "quiet" but:
--- install multiples of "rack-mounted POD MODs " against the interior walls of the Turbine Hall(s);
--- connect the new / clean / "electronically produced" / matching output power through the control room(s) to the connected power grid(s):
--- allowing for shutting down, or in this case - keeping shut down "only the Atomic pile ; associated gear; and steam turbines:
--- bringing back the site as a clean / new / "base-load" power plant that can operated at 100% of designed output / 24-7 / 365 days a year.
EC President Ursula von der Leyen saw this capability in the POD MLD when she requested the technology be brlought to Europe this last March.
And Mr. Chris Stark - the new Head of Mission Control / Energy in the new Labour Government in the UK - has asked for information on the POD MOD for their power systems.
It's only the US Government - with it's "commercialized first" / "accepted first -- that has turned it's back on the Nikola Tesla based POD MOD technology - which has been US invented / US developed and professional laboratory tested / and US Patented.
The POD MOD can be installed:
--- "at" any site:
--- produce all of the required electricity "for" that site;
--- for as long as is required "by" that site: -- "selectively" / up to and including:
--- 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps -which equals
--- 230,400 Watts; 230.4 kW; or .2304 MW -- how ever you care to describe it.
The Palidades Plant has an output capacity of 750,000 kW, or 750 MW.
It would take only 3255 / say 3260 / POM MOD units - to match that electric power output:
--- at a cost of $6.52 Million dollars for the POD MOD units themselves - at $2000 per unit.
Do the math - if nothing else---
It would not only be much less expensive, i.e., "cheaper" to retrofit-repower using POD MOD electric power units - plus a whole lot safer.
Also" -- there would not be any additional Nuclear Waste to try and figure out how to store safely --let alone all of the existing waste - since Yucca Mountain was shut down before going into use.
In case anyone else is wondering, this is an "over-unity" power generation scheme, aka an electronic perpetual motion machine. Like all such schemes, either the inventor has made the invention to scam investors, or the invention has scammed the inventor into thinking it works. It appears the later is the case.
If there were something to his device, it would have to pick up energy from some real source to produce the 4000x the input power claimed. Even if McKie doesn't understand why this must be the case in order to put out more power than it consumes, this is the only way his device could work. Otherwise any such claim is at best a measurement error. And since McKie has claimed to be able to make small working models since 1993, if it did work as he claims, he would be powering something that the input energy alone could not power in order to demonstrate proof of concept. He's had 31 years to build a couple and wire them together. But he hasn't because no matter how many times a measurement error is multiplied, it can't power anything.
To do the math, it would take an infinite number of POD MOD units costing an infinite amount to equal 750MW, because they produce less than nothing above what power gets put ito them.
That's almost as good a scam as running Palidades output with solar panels and wind turbines. Unicorn farts would be another excellent replacement. And Andrea Rossi can power the entire planet with his E-Cat cold fusion devices.
Now, now. They may not be practical for the task but at least solar panels and wind turbines actually work to produce energy. And if unicorns actually existed, as ruminants their farts would presumably at least contain burnable methane. E-cat's a deliberate scam to rip off investors and POD MOD's are a self-delusion born of measurement error and a preoccupation with Tesla fringe theories.
It's debatable that the system wide, full lifecycle, energy produced by wind & solar power actually has a net energy gain. So indeed might be just useless as the E-Cat & POD MOD.
The Bentek study showed increased wind in Texas & Colorado INCREASED fossil electricity consumption, i.e. no net energy gain.
A survey of 68 nations over the past 52 years done by Environmental Progress and duplicated by the New York Times showed conventional hydro was quite successful at decarbonization, nuclear energy was also very successful and both wind and solar show no correlation between grid penetration and decarbonization. An expensive total waste of capital and material resources. That indicates system wide efficiency of wind + solar is 1:1. One unit energy input replaces one unit energy on the output side.