I've heard that Nicola Tesla created something similar to a solar panel that could produce
free electricity from the cosmic rays that run rampant throughout our universe.

I've also heard that a man named Dennis Lee created a free energy device that runs on
power harnessed from permanent magnets.

I myself have come up with an idea that I believe will produce free electricity from a
Permanent Magnetic Alternator.

Scientists contest that these technologies are impossible!

What do you think?

I think the currently theorized about methods are, potentially, 'impossible' meaning those exact methodologies are not ones that would work. Personally I haven't tried to theorize why they would or would not work, but with an oil-centric society as we currently live in I imagine if an unending power source was possible someone would make it. Sure they would still sell it but they would be able to market it cheap and as a 'green' solution and would become a super-rich man/woman in no time.

That said, I don't really believe an infinite power source would be impossible I just cant fathom it. I doubt 'free' energy will ever be the case because, really, I assume whoever makes the devices that can generate the power will in fact charge regardless of how cheap it is for them.

I remember reading about how much energy is absorbed from the sun by the surface of the earth and how it could easily power the planet if it was harnessed properly. That concept has always been one to interest me, as well as perpetual motion machines that manage to work a turbine or whatever similar concept device to generate power.

You cannot get anything for free (unless its web hosting ). As Jeigh said, we are an oil-centric society and we need the power. We cannot run large cities of the small power we gain from solar and wind power!

Are you joking? The solar cells we have now operate at something like half a percent of efficiency. Which means for every watt of incoming solar energy, only 1/200 of that energy is actually able to be captured, where more is lost in the conversion and storage.

We're working on more efficient cell arrays, and when the efficiency goes up solar power will be a much more viable solution to meet our energy needs. People who say that we can't do it really have no idea how much energy the sun radiates, even through the atmosphere. The fact is, with hydrogen fuel cells powering cars, and the solar generation powering the electrolysis needed to create the gas, we can quickly reduce the amount of fossil fuels we're using.

I don't see how it can't, in theory. For instance, as in the first post, permanent magnets should somehow be able to have electricity generated from them. And then you could consider making a machine that generates electricity from walking. In fact, in typing this we are providing a source of energy that could probably be harnessed, too. Nearly everything we do can be used to generate electricity, and whilst technically not free since the energy comes from somewhere in the first place, it's just getting a little unused energy. Thinking right now, heat could be extracted from people exercising and collected to produce steam for a turbine. The list goes on and on. I'll stop here.

What we can also do is utilize the electricity generated by human brains.

Imagine the possibilities! Millions of these people, all in a stasis of sorts, living in a simulated reality---going on their day-to-day lives, walking, chatting, going to work---while unbenknownst to them, we utilize the power being produced by their brains for processing and actual electric operation!

However, there are always those who contradict innovation. I figure they might work together to produce a city underground where we are unable to reach them and harness their brain potential.

I'm sure we'll find a way around this though. We can build a drill. WE'LL BE RICH!

This one just keeps popping up. I file this under the perpetual motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion) category. Basically put you can never get an object that moves forever because there is friction and you violate the conservation of energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_Energy). When most people think they have the perfect free energy system they usually forget about friction and efficiency. Friction is everywhere. If you have two surfaces making contact then you have friction. If you have any surface making contact with air then you have friction. Friction leads to heat and heat is a loss of energy. You may think it is a large scientific conspiracy to hide a perpetual motion machine but I see hundreds of examples everyday of thermodynamics working and I have yet to see one example where it doesn’t.

I believe that solar power is the closest thing that we have to “free energy” but it does have a cost. As said before, solar panels are very inefficient and the process required to make them is rather nasty. Solar cells are based on silicon fabrication which is quickly becoming one of the largest “tech” polluters.

The simple fact is economy. Oil is cheaper and as long as oil is cheaper than alternative fuels it will be the dominant player. The oil companies are starting to see that threshold even now. As the price of gas rises people are starting to turn to previously too expensive fuels such ethanol and hydrogen. Even if you get past the oil problem you still have coal which some say is many more times abundant than oil.

As many people know, nothing really does come free! It takes time and money for people to invest in these types of technologies, tons of resources and manpower, and of course scientists don't work for free!

I think that efficiency should be the move for the future, as the natural resources for oil and gas energy should run out in a matter of decades. Solar power is a great idea, and nuclear power is most possibly going to be the driving force of the future.

I heard the president of the USA talk about nuclear power being the wave of the future, and I think that he's right.

But to come back to topic. If you put the time and effort into creating technology that would enable energy to be created freely, you would most likely want to be rewarded with money for your efforts. Plus, energy can't just be created (according to theory). It can be transformed from one form to another. So, the cost of creating energy would be the transformation of another type of energy.

Imo, all your poll answers are probably true.

Cosmic rays don't really get down to us. If we were able to use them, even if they made less power than tidal or waves, we'd probably be fried. Nuclear ftw, France makes something like 70% of its energy from them, and there was an amazing article in the Mensa magazine about the waste, something like over 30 years, one nuclear power plant can use the same 750kg of safer-than-uranuim over and over again, whereas a 100Mwh/y coal would produce millions of tons of carbon. There's details I've forgotten.. I'd hope someone else on these forums get this magazine.

Solar cells have something like a 2 year ROI energy-wise and 10 year ROI moneywise. Not bad given the solar cells can generate electricity for well over 50 years. And the technology is only getting better and more efficient.


Actually, if you heard Bush say it, NUCULAR power is the wave of the future. Seriously though, that too is a finite resource.


Putting the collectors in space or on the moon would be ideal for this...now to get the power from there to here...