Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
(V): Thank you for the link. Had a skim read, but will look at more carefully later, with an open mind :)
I did pick up two statements in the article "...you can’t get more energy out of a system than you put into it," and "more energy can’t be taken out of a system than is put into it or is already in it.”
The former statement is of course wrong as the author argues. Whether it be solar, wind, geothermal, hydrocarbon etc. these are all forms of potential energy, which we then convert (mostly) into kinetic energy to generate power.
The latter statement is true, imho, and refers to perpetual energy / motion machines which are not possible. I believe this is what you referred to as 'free' energy. But I'll read the article carefully first!
(hide) If you are waiting for your turn, click on "change" next to the "refresh" on the main page, then set refresh the page to 30 seconds to get your turn to move displayed faster. (Servant) (show all tips)