Free energy? The Steorn challenge smells…
By now many of you have heard about an Irish company called Steorn Ltd. that placed an advertisement in The Economist on Aug. 18 challenging the top scientists of the world to test Stoern’s claim that it has developed “a technology that produces free, clean and constant energy.”
The company says it has overcome the laws of physics — i.e. thermodynamics and the “principle of the conservation of energy,” which basically says energy can be neither created nor destroyed but can only change form. Apparently Steorn’s technology is based on magnets and the interaction of magnetic fields, and the company says it discovered this “breakthrough” while trying to use magnetics to improve the efficiency of wind turbines. Also, knowing full well there will be skeptics, the company placed the ad in a bid to recruit 12 independent scientists who could come together and publicly verify/dispute the claim.
A few observations:
* Placing an advertisement in The Economist is a good idea, because even though it was likely very costly it lends some (false) credibility to the company.
* But why resort to placing an ad? The company says it has approached many institutions that have refused to look at the technology, and those scientists who have verified that it works have refused to go on record. Why would they refuse to go on record? Why, like most companies, would they not slowly build consensus in the scientific/research community? Why not write a paper for a respected scientific journal that goes through peer review? Without answering those questions, of course this is going to be viewed as a publicity stunt.
* Now, if you consider this a publicly stunt, you have to wonder what can be gained from it? I mean, sure, you create an elaborate hoax on the world, but doesn’t that just piss people off and make your company persona non grata with the business and scientific community? Apparently, according to a Web site called Steorn Watch, this company is legitimate and has existed since 2000 — whatever “legitimate” means. There’s got to be some other motive if this is a scam, because pure publicity doesn’t make sense.
* Finally, like any agnostic who admits there could be a possibility that God exists (just in case), I think the same applies here. Sure, it would be great of this unknown company proves that the laws of physics are garbage and comes up with a technology to save the world’s energy and environmental woes, but for now we’ve got to consider this an elaborate experiment to be watched out of pure curiosity. This screams reality TV, and it would be fascinating to have BBC cameras following around these 12 selected scientists as they work toward disputing or verifying this potentially world-changing claim.
And if it does turn out to be a hoax? It would be a bit of a pisser, as I’d rather see all this attention focused on real technologies that have a chance of making real change.
UPDATE: Wired.com has an article here about Steorn and its scientific challenge. Make sure to check out the comments at the bottom of the article. Guardian Unlimited has an even better story, in which the reporter actually went to Steorn’s office and saw the device in action.
Tyler Hamilton is senior energy reporter and columnist for the Toronto Star, Canada's largest daily newspaper. In addition to this Clean Break blog, Tyler writes a weekly column of the same name that discusses trends, happenings and innovators in the cleantech market. This blog is a personal project started in April 2005. It is not an official blog of the newspaper. Tyler can be reached at tyler@cleanbreak.ca
August 23rd, 2006 at 10:48 am
This is being discussed over at the SciAm blog. So far the most illuminating comment IMO is that this company used to work with the Irish police to break up credit card fraud/scammers. They may be operating under the principle that to catch a scammer you must become a scammer.
August 23rd, 2006 at 3:43 pm
Maybe this is a subtle approach asking us to think what such a limitless source would mean to the world. For example, what do we do with the energy we have now? We trawl the oceans, re-position and engage the Sixth Fleet, consider advertizing on the moon, remove the ecological functions and diversity from vast swaths of landscape, divert rivers and even entire floodplains. etc, etc. We are already using an estimated 40% of natures resources, -to this equation we then add the expected global population rise. Maybe they are asking us to consider which is the more sane path forward: backing-off on our attack on nature by reducing our energy use, or supplying ourselves yet more potential, however clean in emissions.
We surely need this discussion as we move into the promises a world of solar concentrators, Eestor, and Flowbatteries offers.
August 25th, 2006 at 5:13 am
If someone has indeed discovered a way to create 285 units of energy using only 100 units why would they care what the world thinks about their invention. They would simply start making excess energy and sell it and make money.
Imagine you have invented a money-making machine. Would you like the rest of the world know that you have it and how it works?
OK bad example – making money at home is illegal.
Imagine you have invented a gold making machine. Would you like the rest of the world know how this machine work or you would be simply keep making gold. Actually, a few years ago there was a company that advertised just that – a gold making machine. If they really had it why would they be selling a machine – why not selling gold.
I hope you got my point
August 25th, 2006 at 2:01 pm
The Guardian Unlimited article you linked is interesting.
September 1st, 2006 at 4:22 am
Free energy, you say ? Nowadays, energy equals money, i’e why dont they just plug their excess energy into power grid and get filthy rich with electricity bills ? Why dont they drive around in non-polluting electric cars powered by their miracle devices already ? Because its a scam, regardless of their motivations
September 6th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
I figured it all out. Yep. I did it. Ready?
Stoern was the original funding entities for Troy Hurtibuse. Once he got the Angel Light working, they infused him with another round of fundage to further his invention to evolve the Angel Light which we now know as the God light. What the found was when they aimed the God light at a typical turbocharger, it started to spin. They then hooked a generator up to it, and power was created. We should all be scared, they are going to use the technologies to dominate the world. With limitless energy, the power to see through walls, and the Ursus bear suit, we simply cannot stop them.
But look on the bright side, no more need for oil, *AND* we can finally find Osama yo Mama.
Ethenkyou
September 11th, 2006 at 8:15 pm
They probably said the same things about Tesla with his black box. Pity he couldn’t lease it to the commies, otherwise we would have free energy today.
Remember that radical invention and innovation usually comes at the 1 in 100 year solar radiation cycles. Our Sun giving us the intellectual means to save the planet this time around.
February 8th, 2007 at 6:49 am
There is no real doubt into the existence of this technology (based on the information that is available).
Unfortunately some members of the scientific community and their zealous, blind, easily manipulated and fear prone followers seem to have a fundamentalist component and a default setting of sorts.
Not too long ago there was a belief that the earth was flat and all who thought differently were considered blasphemous and further proclaimed heretics to be subsequently burnt at a stake.
Another question is why have Steorn chosen this approach…one obvious reason is that if the standard protocols were pursued no one would have even heard about this as there are many powerful individuals, governments and corporations that are bound to be upset with a discovery that’s been around for quite sometime. All of the mentioned follow the motto “if it is not broken don’t fix it” and they are furthermore comfortable and content with how the ailing current economic system works. To quote Upton Sinclair: ” It is hard for a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”.
Fortunately changes are certainly taking place and the real question is….when will the paradigm shift occur?
February 8th, 2007 at 10:58 am
If their technology is for real, all they have to do is build a small power plant, sell the “free” electricity and live happily ever after.
By the way, the Brooklin bridge is still available.
June 10th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Your comment on the Laws of ‘Thermo Dynamics,’ is not correct. I invented an engine running on compressed Air in the 80’s and this argument was used against me, but what I didn’t realise then but do now is the Laws of Thermo dynamics are bull-shit in the first place.
The rule it says applies is: you cannot transfer energy from a closed loop system.
What it fails to recognise is we are in 1 Universe, we are not in another system. Therefore as another ‘LAW’ of physics says you cannot destroy energy only convert it.
There is an Austrailian guy who has now developed an engine doing just what I did, and it runs on compressed air.