Re: Methane and other winds (was Re: alternatives to big oil andifthey can ...

From: Doug Jones (
Date: Sun Feb 06 2000 - 13:50:36 MST

Eugene Leitl wrote:
> It doesn't really matter, storing energy in inertia wheels isn't
> chemical energy either. As of Rhombic (caution: it might be vaporware
> or a straight hoax, the company site strikes me slightly kooky), I
> like the 1 kW/1.5 kg density specs, and the non-Carnot nature of the
> thing (really elegant, this). Interesting, what the lifetime is (how
> much rad does the diamond still get?), and how much energy integrated
> over total operational time the device releases.

I've come to the conclusion over the years that if the press release or
website concentrates on the applications rather than the technology itself,
and the tech has not yet been clearly demonstrated, it's vapor. Sure, high
energy density flywheels would be very useful, this has been known for a
long long time- but nothing on their site shows that they know how to
*build* such things.

I believe in hardware- I've been testing a complete rocket engine and its
ignition system all week, and the functional hardware is essential to
making real progress. Talk is cheap, action is difficult.

Doug Jones
Rocket Plumber, XCOR Aerospace

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:30 MDT