Re: Attn: Mr. Mook

This ongoing rant is all perfectly well and good. However, what
exactly is it about spare/surplus energy that you still do not
understand?

Once Earth is flooded or saturated with your Mook H2 and LH2, then
what?

It’s like the Rn222 of radium, or the He3 of natural gas, whereas
neither of these nifty elements has to be utilized, but I’d think Chu
and others might agree that it’s certainly a darn good shame that
we’re not. Are you planning to just dump whatever spare/surplus Mook
energy into the atmosphere, so as to maintain an artificially inflated
cartel price?

If the h2o2 product were to be created via Mook and other green/
renewable energy that's in spare/surplus, what the hell does it matter
how much energy it takes to safely create, easily store and deliver
those 10 million tonnes/year of 70+% h2o2 to the global end-users?
(same argument goes for whatever Mook synfuel via fossil, bio or even
CO2 alternatives)

You were planning on giving us terawatts of green/renewable energy,
were you not?

~ BG


On Dec 22 2008, 8:34 am, william.m...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Mök Energy Innovations Increasing Solar Energy Efficiency

1.      Panel Design to Maximize Energy Capture
a.      Concentrators
i.      All concentrating photovoltaic  (CPV) systems seek to reduce costs
by focusing sunlight to a small point and devising a PV device to work
with that small intense point of sunlight efficiently.  In this way
costly PV material is used more efficiently and PV costs are reduced
as a consequence.   The Mök system operates at 1,100x solar intensity
dramatically reducing the cost of PV materials. This method of
operation introduces a number of challenges adding to balance of
system costs.  All these challenges have been efficiently addressed
including the following factors;
1.      Concentrator benefits – low PV cost - the high efficiency multi-
junction PV materials we use are 38% efficient and cost $11,000 per
square meter. By concentrating sunlight 1,100x we only use $10 of
material per square meter.  By generating 380 watts per square meter
our PV costs are less than $0.03 per peak watt.
2.      Concentrator Costs – mirrors, glass lenses, fresnel lenses and
holograms all cost in excess of $100 per square meter.  While
contributing only $0.26 per watt, this cost is still higher than we’d
like to pay.  For this reason we use precision hot press molded PET
films that have an array of molded lens shapes.  Two or more PET
sheets, each 200 microns thick, are joined together in a fluid bath to
create an extremely low cost liquid filled optical cavity that
efficiently focuses light to high intensity at a cost of  less than $1
per square meter, adding a fraction of a cent to the cost of
generating each watt of electrical output.
3.      Thermal management – at 1,100x solar intensity energy arrives at
the PV cell at a rate of 110 watts per square centimeter.  This rate
of energy influx if far too high to be cooled conventionally.  There
are a number of innovations, that are used to manage heat in the Mök
system and do so at very low added cost per watt.;
a.      Spectral Cooling – as taught in one of my patents on this subject,
using dichroic mirrors on the face of the PV cells to create an
optical band-pass filter, allows only effective light to strike the PV
material, limiting heating of the material.  Added cost is nil for the
giant-bi-refingent optical (GBO) films we use.
b.      Limiting Current – by operating six or more junctions efficiently
in series current is reduced, and parasitic i-squared-R heating is
reduced by a factor of 30 or more at no added cost to the system.
c.      Total Immersion in Optical Medium – the fluid filled lens cavities
focus light inside the lens medium.  Locating the PV cells inside
these cavities allow the lens fluid to circulate and efficiently carry
away heat by fluid convection at a rate of 50 watts per square cm per
side at no added cost to the system.
d.      Efficient Loading – continuous operation at the peak power point
for each cell means that over 1/3 the energy arriving at the cell in
the form of optical energy, is efficiently carried away from the cell
by as electrical output, reducing the heat load of the cell at no
added cost to the system..

2.      Eliminate Mechanical Tracking
a.      Entendue’ in optical systems has been compared to entropy in heat
engines.  Just as entropic considerations explain the ultimate
limitations of all heat engines, such as Carnot efficiency, entendue’
provides a powerful argument for similar limitations in all optical
concentrators – namely the clear relation between field of regard and
concentration ratio.  Legendary workers such as Wilson in the 20th
century used in his optical calculations much of the same mathematical
machinery, the continuity of complex spaces, that legends such as
Botzmann used in their work on heat engines in the 19th century.   As
mentioned a critically important finding is the relation between field
of regard and concentration ratio.  This finding seems to require that
highly concentrating systems such as the Mök system possess a
mechanical tracker that accurately maintains orientation toward the
solar disk with an accuracy of a few degrees.  Through a clever
approach to optics, this requirement is met without the use of moving
systems or mechanical trackers and is a central feature of the Mök
system.
b.      The easiest way to see how the Mök system works is to consider
various types of tracking systems – all of which have been built and
studied by Mök;
i.      Bulk mechanical motion – a lens projects the image of the sky onto
an image plane.  A PV cell is located at the center of that image and
the lens is moved mechanically to maintain the image of the solar disk
on that PV cell.
ii.     Internal mechanical motion – the same lens as above projects the
image of the sky as before, but as the sun moves through the sky, the
PV cell is moved inside the lens system within the image plane to
maintain the image of the solar disk on the PV cell
iii.    Compound internal mechanical motion – in this system a secondary
lens is located on the image plane to redirect the solar disk to a
stationary PV cell located beyond the image plane.
iv.     Stationary Compound lens array – in this system an array of
stationary secondary lenses is located on the image plane to redirect
the solar disk to a stationary PV cell located beyond the image plane.
c.      The compound lens array described in item IV above has no moving
parts and is the method Mök uses in its most advanced systems.  This
system is implemented using very low cost synthetic hologons similar
to those used to secure credit cards and consumer goods like CD
cases.  A *** of holographically imprinted plastic material is
placed between the precision molded PET films at an added cost of
fractions of a cent per peak watt.
d.      The wide field of view of the fisheye primary lens combined with
relative insensitivity to orientation allow Mök CPV panels to operate
as a flat panel PV collector regardless of panel orientation or
concentration ratio.  This feature dramatically reduced installation
and maintenance costs.
e.      It is easy to see that a casual analysis might conclude the system
described appears to exceed entendue limits.  A careful analysis
reveals it does not!  By merely observing that the primary lens is
reused thousands of times by each of the secondary lenses in the array
– and that each pair constitutes a separate system each with its own
field of regard, overlapping other pair’s field of regard.  Another
important point is that each system is discontinuous with all others
while following continuity limits itself.
f.      No other CPV system uses this approach, and this is subject of
current patent activity.
3.      Minimize Solar Cell Size
a.      Our solar panels consist therefore of
i.      A top *** of precision molded PET film 200 microns thick
ii.     A ‘redirector cover *** of PET film 25 microns thick.
iii.    A  holographically molded *** of PET 25 microns thick with 5
micron surface deformations produced by a heated nickel form to
implement a holographically formed redirector lens array.
iv.     The redirector cover *** and holographically molded *** are
bound together creating 5 micron thick voids where joined creating a
permanent holographic lens array.
v.      A bottom *** of precision molded PET film 200 microns thick to
complete the liquid filled optical cavity.
vi.     A base top *** of molded ABS plastic
vii.    A base bottom *** of molded ABS plastic
1.      The base bottom *** has copper foil impressed upon it to
implement a power capture circuit.
2.      An array of PV cells  each 750 microns square are cleaved from a
300 mm wafer and joined to the foil pattern already described.
viii.   The base bottom *** is joined to the base top *** to create
an optical die array that is electrically insulated, but has a window
to expose the PV cell.
ix.     The optical die array is molded to form ‘fingers’ that hold each
PV cell at the focal point within each lens in the lens array forming
the base assembly.
x.      The base assembly is joined to the bottom *** described above.
xi.     The bottom ***,, holographic lens array, and top *** are all
joined in a fluid bath to create a finished lens array joined by
ultrasonic welding.
b.      Each PV cell consists of a germanium over silicon base layer that
operates at 1,600 nm.  To that is added through chemical vapor
deposition three or more layers of gallium-arsenide, each layer is
doped to operate as slightly different bandgap energy.  Finally a
layer of indium-phosphide is added to capture shortwave energy.  In
this way 38% of the energy contained in the solar spectrum is
converted to electrical energy.  PV cells are coated with glass by a
CVD process to isolate the cells from the fluids used..
c.      Each lens array consists of 4,608 lenses in a 4 foot by 8 foot
array ¾ inch thick.  Each lens focuses light onto one of 4,608 multi-
junction PV cells .  Each cell is joined in parallel to 96 others in
columns.  48 columns are joined in series to create a panel producing
approximately 300 volts at 3 amperes in full sunlight at a total cost
of less than $40 per panel – a cost of less than $0.05 per peak watt.
4.      Minimize Manufacture/Assembly/Shipping/Installation Cost/Unit
a.      The Portland Oregon based company, CH2MHill, was retained to design
a 1.2 million square foot factory capable of producing 188 acres of
panels per hour and a field based system to install panels at this
rate while maintaining very low production and installation costs.
Selling rights to various markets allow construction of this plant.
b.      Panels are produced as part of continuous strings 1,100 panels
long.  They are wired together the same way Christmas tree lights are
wired, at the factory, to present two 9,000 Volt circuits at either
end of a 4,400 foot long 8 foot wide string.  There are only two
electrical connections in the field, for each string minimizing cost
per watt.
c.      Panels have a water drainage system molded into their back side so
they may be installed directly on graded earth held in place by
netting molded along with the panels that is continuously buried in
trenches continuously dug by special tractors designed to install the
panels.
d.      Panels are z-folded together into easily shipped blocks that are 8
ft x 12 ft x 53 ft in size.  These blocks are handled by special
tractors that unfold and install them in 4,400 ft strips 8 ft wide.
In this way a crew of five installs a square mile per eight hour
shift.  Six crews totaling 30 workers working around the clock with
two tractors install 7 square miles every 24 hours – the output of
each plant.  Mök has plans to create backorders of panels sufficient
to keep 14 plants busy when at full capacity.  .
e.      Total cost of the completed systems, without electrolyzers, is
$0.05 per peak watt installed.  This translates to an energy cost of
less than 1/5th cent per kilowatt-hour.
f.      Very low cost alkaline electrolyzer systems costing an added $0.02
per peak watt is installed at either end of each strip.  These are
made of PET film vapor coated with metal to form very efficient and
low cost electrodes operating within PET containers  Fed with water
laced with potassium hydroxide at 200 psi these systems produce
hydrogen and oxygen at a rate proportional to lighting conditions.
Oxygen is blown down through a turbo pump to reduce water compression
costs.  Hydrogen is withdrawn at 200 psi into a low pressure gathering
system and transmitted to point of use by pipeline.
5.      Efficiencies in Energy Storage by Use of Hydrogen
a.      The Mök system uses solar derived DC power to make hydrogen in the
field as a way to maintain efficient operation.
b.      A major difficulty of any solar powered system is low capital
utilization.  There are 8,766 hours in a year.  Even in sunny areas
sun is available 20% of the time.
c.      This means that solar powered systems stand idle 80% or more of the
time.  So, low capital cost is of paramount importance to maintain low
operating costs.
d.      It is unreasonable to demand that the entire chain of industrial
equipment operate at such low capital efficiency.  So, in order to use
solar energy on a large scale some system of storing solar energy must
be developed so that industrial equipment attached to the solar
primary source may be operated continuously.
e.      DC electricity produced by solar panels must be fed into a balanced
load that requires no more or no less than the solar panel produces
under the lighting conditions it finds itself.  Since lighting
conditions change throughout the day this means that any load attached
to a solar panel must be equipped with some sort of intertie to
maintain this balance.  These intertie systems alone cost in excess of
$0.30 per watt – which is far larger than our low cost system
described here.
f.      Batteries cost nearly $1 per watt, and far more per watt hour.
Batteries may only be charged and discharged a few thousand times and
then must be replaced.  As a consequence, available batteries are
impractical on an industrial scale at low cost. Batteries also self-
discharge in a matter of days, reducing efficiency.
g.      Low cost electrolytic hydrogen production is the best way to
connect low cost solar panels to industrial loads.
i.      Electrolytic production of hydrogen naturally uses the DC output of
solar panels
ii.     Hydrogen may be stored indefinitely in tanks or pipes
iii.    Hydrogen burns under the same conditions as all other fuels, and
may also be used in fuel cells and other advanced systems, without
creating a carbon footprint, or creating an issue with solid waste as
battery disposal does.
6.      Hydrogen Production, Variable Load Electrolyzer
a.      The Nernst Equation describes in detail the physical operation of
electrochemical systems such as alkaline electrolyzers.  Mök has
devised a means to efficiently and reliably tie together arrays of PV
cells at high voltage in a way that maintains efficient PV operation
under variable lighting conditions when driving variable geometry
electrolytic cells designed as part of a single circuit.  This
approach makes natural use of the physical processes involved to vary
hydrogen production rates as lighting conditions vary.  By varying
electrode geometry the peak power point of the PV cells are maintained
even while their operation changes throughout the day.  The result is
a system that varies hydrogen production and water flow to keep
balance with available lighting.  This innovation, when combined with
other production innovations allow Mök to create a system that
produces hydrogen from water at less than $110 per metric ton from 9
metric tons of distilled water using 56 mega-watt-hours of DC
electricity.  Heat released burning that ton of hydrogen is equivalent
to burning 6.2 tons of coal, or 24.3 barrels of crude oil.  Unlike
these other fuels, hydrogen combustion produces no CO2.  The heat from
this hydrogen is used to boil (through multi-stage distillation) 2,000
tons of sea water producing 2,000 kiloliters of distilled water,and 35
tons of salt solids, both of which are saleable.  Hydrogen made
through sunlit hours is used continuously to drive evaporators
efficiently, even when there is no sunlight.

* * * * * *

Dec 13th Economist pg 56 & pg 57:

Energy security is a major concern of governments, businesses and
increasingly, consumers. While oil-producing countries are becoming
more politically assertive, those who depend on them are becoming
increasingly unsettled by the rise of resource nationalism. Risk of
terrorist threat to key infrastructure, increased demand from
developing nations and the voltility of oil prices have also pushed
the issue to the top of the agenda in every region of the world. With
this in mind, Economists Conferences gathered influential thinkers and
prominent business figures to debate the issues.

* * * * * *

This is a powerful argument for the US to engage in its own resource
imperialism to restore its economic strength.

The first step is to carry out my program to cover 25,000 sq km with
solar panels make 277 million tons of hydrogen per year displace 1.14
billion tons of coal in US' 1,032 coal fired power plants using a
national hydrogen pipeline and create 7 billion barrels of liquid
fuels each year from the stranded coal exporting 2 billion barrels
when this production is combined with conventional US production. This
program is completed in 7 years at a cost of $200 billion per year.
The bulk of this is borrowed aganst government purchases of syncrude
at $35 per barrel which is paid at time of delivery and sold by gov't
at market rates.  The production infrastructure once underway reverts
back to market once established. In addition to providing energy
security this program also cuts our carbon footprint in half.

The next step is to fill greater and greater parts of our energy need
directly with hydrogen.  Since the US economy doubles every 20 years
this provides a natural transition to an all hydrogen economy.  The
beginnings of a hydrogen infrastructure are in place at this time.
Tthat hydrogen component is expanded while the hydro-carbon is fixed
or declines through natural depletion. Since depletion raises prices
this provides a natural transition to a lower cost hydrogen
alternative created in the first step. As technology develops public
private partnerships develop core hydrogen tech - just as NACA
developed air travel tech in the first half of the 20th century these
partnerships with adequate solar hydrogen at low cost begin to make
sense. In this second phase as the US develops its own hydrogen
infrastructure it exports ever larger shares of its synfuel production
overseas. This has two beneficial effects; it lowers oil prices
undermining foreign oil profits; and undermines the development of
foreign hydrogen tech allowing US to excel in this tech.

Phase three involves US export of hydrogen overseas and older hydogen
tech

Phase four export of advanced hydrogen tech along with increasing
amounts of hydrogen.

This program especially when combined with more speculative advanced
tech developments will maintain US economic a geopolitical leadership
for two generations or more while capturing foreign revenues that
equals then exceeds the entire economic output of the USA today.

Cheers
Bill
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

.

Loading