CTF said:
I have heard of Bussard before but really know little about him. I hate to disparage anything that is so far above my head technically, but this has many of the earmarks of a fraud. I'm just sayin'. The time pressure, the hints of marketing the idea to rivals, the fact that this has been the holy energy grail for tons more of gifted scientists for decades, the preceding failed cold fusion table top experiments that caused such kerfuffle's.
IEC has nothing to do with cold fusion, it was being researched as far back as the 1950s (by Philo Farnsworth with his "fusor" device), decades before anyone imagined cold fusion. There have been a lot of steps that led to Bussard's device over a span of decades. Also, Dr. Bussard is one of the co-founders of the entire US nuclear fusion program, his work at Los Alamos and elsewhere is legendary, and it would be hard to name anybody who has a higher reputation in the field of fusion research.
One must also wonder what his motivations could possibly be for wanting to scam anybody. He's in his 80s now, and his reputation is already more than made in the scientific community. And, he's asking for a few million dollars to repeat the experiments he did for the US Navy, which is piddling pocket change compared to the billions we've thrown at tokamak research or attempting to secure Middle Eastern oil, both with little useful results to show. (Or, to put it in perspective, the hundreds of millions that Congress will hand out in vouchers for people to upgrade their TV sets in 2009!)
The most important thing I would underscore is that Bussard isn't promoting "orgone energy" or some other crackpot idea. His ideas are sufficiently grounded in known science that they can be reviewed, critiqued and (most importantly) tested by other scientists. I'm optimistic that it will happen, but it may take a while.
Now barring some sort of fusion, I see only two energy sources-The Sun with solar, ancient fossil solar, wind and fuel from growing things, And/Or The Earth with geothermal from the molten core or fissile minerals. So really it is a simple problem-identify the source to be used, collect it, distribute it and (hopefully all efficiently and cleanly) use it. Sun to electricity to (torque) seems to be the answer. Why sun to growing thing to alcohol to tank to ICE to torque? Less disruptive?
Barring fusion, the best "universal" and non-polluting power sources we have are solar power and nuclear fission. By universal I mean, they can work practically everywhere. Hydro power, wind power and geothermal are all great for those areas which have the appropriate local resources. There was a recent study suggesting that a little research and development could make it possible to tap into geothermal energy in "most areas", but that's still unproven.
The advantage biofuels have over battery storage is energy density. If you cultivate algae (or hemp, jatropha, switchgrass or any other plants) and refine them into biofuel, that is effectively a biological form of solar power. It's not as efficient as solar panels, but it does produce a fuel which is very energy-dense, and you will need that for some purposes. Aircraft fuel would be an obvious example. Others might include heavy trucks, construction equipment, farm equipment and military vehicles. I see a significant role for biofuels, unless somebody invents a miracle electricity storage device (like EEstor's thing, maybe?).
