The Free Energy Imperative for Maddy and Her Contemporaries
Brian O'Leary, Ph.D., April 23, 2011
Meredith and I just returned from a wonderful family reunion in New Jersey and our first meeting with our perky and healthy new granddaughter, Maddy, at four months of age. What a precious jewel she is, and what a thought that she will be my age in the year 2082! What will the world be like then? The thought of it is daunting and pulls my spirit ever more toward envisioning a world of clean, cheap energy and water everywhere—because I know this will be possible if we will only try. I hold that vision along with the vision of a truly peaceful, sustainable and just world for Maddy and her generation.
We also stopped over in Costa Rica for a number of meetings and talks on the energy solution revolution and the possibility of creating an alliance of individuals, groups and nations in Latin America to become more sustainable and sovereign through innovation, especially in energy. In the process, I gave a seminar to the Sat Yoga Institute in the presence of many kindred spirits. We look forward to returning to Costa Rica and holding related events here at Montesueños.
While it’s always nice to be back home at Montesueños, I’ve also confronted a few obstacles—including hundreds of personal emails (that I simply cannot answer) requesting me to vet this or that free energy concept or to generally discuss personal or planetary concerns. Regarding the free energy technologies, there are literally hundreds of research devices out there, some of which appear to be primed and ready to go to market this year although this may or may not manifest in today’s complex and volatile world. Whether or not anything becomes viable in the marketplace is still beyond the pale of any conventional discussions about sensible energy policies, because everything in this field is ignored, denied or viscerally opposed by the mainstream culture.
I’ve also received hundreds more emails alerting me to the fact that the world situation is truly grave and that we may not make it. The news is relentlessly negative and much of it is accurate. The Fukushima nuclear disaster is but the latest shock foisted upon all life on Earth. How is it that we can continue to draw 93% of our energy from hydrocarbons and uranium, creating such a toxic stew at every stage of the fuel cycles? It should be crystal clear that we cannot go on much longer like this. But what astounds me is that the promise of free energy falls on deaf ears even within the most educated researchers among us. Only doom and gloom from the alternative press or elite denial from the mainstream press fill the airwaves. Even the scrappy and stalwart “keep-the-oil-in-the-ground” environmental writer George Monbiot has recently caved in to the advocacy of nuclear power. How about also keeping the uranium in the ground?
Last year’s BP oil/chemical disaster in the Gulf of Mexico symbolized the use of hydrocarbons run amok, and the current Fukushima disaster symbolizes an out-of-control use of nuclear energy. All this is so unnecessary.
So at the risk of endlessly repeating myself amongst the cacophony of short-sighted commentary almost everywhere I look, I again declare that it is possible to create a world of clean, cheap and decentralized energy. Many concepts wait in the wings, any one or some of which could do the job.
We have to admit that the primary systems and technologies now in use worldwide are tyrannically controlled and outmoded—energy, money, weapons, medicine, water and food. The side effects of each of these sectors are unsustainable and unnecessary. To what end? Simply to optimize profits from large systemic vested interests? Of these principal sectors, energy probably stands out as the foremost that needs a change as soon as possible.
It's clearer to me than ever that we must phase out both nuclear power and hydrocarbons as soon as possible and get on with the task of developing truly sustainable energy. To do that job we need to leave no stone unturned in our search, and be brutally honest as to which options are most sustainable in their full life-cycle environmental cost, going way beyond the traditional renewables such as biofuels, hydro, solar and wind. We must insist that the suppression of the most promising clean breakthrough options end, and that R&D of new energy technologies be supported. Public awareness of the possibility of clean breakthrough energy, even among environmentalists, continues to be close to zero. We need to break the silence and begin the discussions transparently and without fear.
By its very nature energy is and should be free, or “open-source.” It shouldn’t be metered or sold as a commodity at exorbitant prices and monopolized. Energy delivery systems can be sold, but the energy itself should be free. The biggest paradigm shift of the decade will be a growing recognition that energy in itself can be truly free. It has become obvious that fossil fuels and nuclear energy are hazardous to our health and environment, but it is also true that the so-called “renewables” such as biofuel plantations, large dams, solar farms and windmill farms are unsustainable and expensive when we consider the materials and land use. These familiar options will almost certainly give way to cheap compact electromagnetic vacuum energy, hydrogen and cold fusion devices.
Now more than ever, we must get on with the job of converting our energy systems to ones that will be truly sustainable for generations to come. The age of suppression and vested interests in energy must come to an end if we are to survive on this planet. And yet it may not end if even the environmentalists among us continue to live in denial. Misters Gore, Monbiot, Nader, Lovelock, Lovins, Hansen, McKibben, Klare, Heinberg, Ruppert, Brown, Flavin, Hawkin, Gelbspan, Rifkin and countless others, are you ready to sit down and talk about a truly integrated and intelligent energy policy that transcends all that has been discussed so far? I think we all can agree that time is running out and we have little more time for ignorance and denial. For those of us willing to do the job, teams of environmentally conscious scientists will need to assess the full range of clean decentralized energy possibilities.
Perhaps you gentlemen believe that the “laws” of thermodynamics truly hold sway under all conditions, and therefore all free energy is impossible. This could be an honest mistake for those of you who aren’t more observant. But it is important to remember that there are no unalterable laws in science, only theories that apply under limited conditions. We’ve seen our understanding of thermodynamics, for example, break down with the anomalies of chaos and quantum theory.
Or perhaps at some level you know free energy is possible because you may have heard about one or more alleged proofs-of-concept or theories but have conveniently chosen to deny the possibility because it may threaten your own vested interest in advocating some currently available options. Or perhaps your avoidance of the issue could be a career-preserving group-think move mandating that “I don’t want to go there.” But this avoidance of investigating and discussing such an important potential solution to the energy crisis can only give greater credence to the George Orwell adage that “the biggest lies are lies of omission.”
Or you might deny the possibility of free energy because you are scared by the prospect that the technology could be abused or overused, creating the analogue of another nuclear nightmare. You might feel that all radical new technologies are potentially dangerous and shouldn’t be pursued.
But why do you stay silent about discussing these things? It appears that the sooner we have these discussions, the sooner we can prevent the holocausts of another Deepwater Horizon or another Fukushima or another manmade climate extreme. These proposed talks among environmentally open-minded colleagues can provide the seeds of a positive energy future. There should be a group effort to design those systems and benevolent transition scenarios that can guarantee a sustainable world for generations to come.
But the existence and potential of free energy continue to be among our most emotionally charged and repressed issues. It seems that the messenger and message will continue to get ignored, ridiculed or literally shot until such time when one or more brave souls are able to surmount the awesome obstacles caused by human greed and actually come forward with a practical device. Meanwhile, raising any possibility that we might have free energy is as politically incorrect as saying black is white.
President Obama won the election on a platform of “change,” but instead we have only gotten more war, more pollution and more financial deprivation. We are subject to the same old twisted priorities that are preventing real change. Many of us fear the kind of change that will inevitably come with free energy, and these fears are dictating the very long wait we’ve endured since the time of Nikola Tesla almost a century ago. It’s still amazing that nobody with mainstream access to the public has yet broken through this conundrum. Instead we continue to follow the age-old conservative belief that it’s “better the devil we know than the devil we don’t know.”
Max Planck, the father of quantum physics, famously said, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
We don’t have time for that. In spite of history repeating itself, the commons must begin a discussion about the possibility of free energy, which will initiate a profound change in human history and will affect all areas of life—to our benefit if we can make the transition intelligently and ethically. This will end the geopolitical game in which control of virtually all energy, resources and money is in the hands of the few, and is not sustainable. This one development will do more for the people and for nature than anything else in history. Only the small number of elitist controllers will “lose” in this new game, and in the long run even they and their offspring will win too.
For the sake of Maddy and her contemporaries, isn’t it time those of us outside the small community of free energy innovators begin to discuss how we can utilize free energy to realistically design a peaceful, sustainable and just world? I see two very different worlds that we must choose between: one in which the land, waters and air of the Earth, as well as the potential of humanity, are almost completely destroyed by human folly in a business-as-usual scenario; and one in which our planet is restored to its rightful beauty and re-invigorated with altruistic foresight that some of us in the generation of Maddy’s grandparents can now envision. Which will it be? I appeal to those of you with enough energy and clout to make a difference, please rise to the challenge of these dire times and take a risk by initiating the discussion about free energy as soon as possible.