Chinmaya Dunster, a very productive and proactive musician and filmmaker, who inspires environmental awareness with his lovely compositions and lively pictures, will perform with Sandeep Srivastav and the Celtic Ragas Band at British Council, New Delhi on 2nd Feb at 7pm.
The Celtic Ragas Band has gained some fame playing at Paul McCartney’s wedding in Ireland in 2002 (“I love the unique blend of Irish and Indian style music of Celtic Ragas. It has become one of my favourites.” Paul McCartney), but more recently has given a series of multimedia ‘Concerts for India’s Environment’ in India. These aim to raise awareness about the many difficulties facing the natural and human environment in India because of unrestrained ‘development’. These have also turned Chinmaya Dunster into a filmmaker with the film ‘Concert for India’s Environment’, which he completed in 2007. “I spent many satisfying days deep in the Indian wilderness collecting wildlife footage for this, and travelled to some remote places for interviews and shots of the people who live around and depend on the wilderness”, says Chinmaya Dunster about his work
Chinmaya Dunster has a collaboration with Dr Erach Bharucha (his guide and mentor to India’s environmental issues and presenter of the ‘Concert’ film), helping edit his books and spread the conservation message through film.
If you happen to be in Dehli at the time, you are invited to enjoy the event.
Chinmaya Dunster writes:
You are all invited to my performance with Sandeep Srivastav and the Celtic Ragas Band at British Council, New Delhi on 2nd Feb at 7pm. It promises to be a unique mutimedia event. I have compiled an hour of amazing video on the subject of climate change, and we have composed new songs to help inspire awareness of this …and other green issues. Plus we’ll be playing some of my old hits too of course……
To learn more about Chinmaya Dunster’s work and to enjoy some of his beautiful music Videos, please visit his website at: www.chinmaya-dunster.com
Can you imagine – a nuclear fusion reactor that would cost half as much to run annually as coal- burning fossil plants, because the fuel is accessible and inexpensive, and because safety measures are minimal due to the greatly reduced radioactivity the reactor would produce. It would require just about 200 grams of boron to run a 100-megawatt reactor per day at a cost of only a few dollars.
The reactor would not produce so-called greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming and Energy in the form of electricity and helium gas would be the reactor’s only products. If complications arose during operation, the reactor would quickly shut itself down.
According to researchers from UC Irvine and the University of Florida the developing safe and cost-efficient new sources of energy is imperative, because existing nuclear fission power plants built in the 1950s and ’60s must be closed down within this decade as their operation licenses expire. A license typically is valid from 40 to 50 years; the plants must be closed due to radiation damage, and many components must be buried due to high levels of radioactivity.
The english news service Independent.co.uk in its January 11th, 2010 edition has published an article by Pat Pilcher that states such a reactor has been devised by UCI physics professor Norman Rostoker, UCI research physicist Michl Binderbauer, and University of Florida physics professor Hendrik Monkhorst. The principle of this reactor is based on a collision of beams of boron and hydrogen particles that would be sent into a reactor where magnets would cause the beams to bend, causing the nuclei to collide and fuse. The fusion would create energetic-charged particles that could then be converted directly into electrical power at an efficiency of about 90 %, compared with, at most, 40 percent for a traditional coal-burning power plant or a deuterium-tritium Tokamak fusion reactor – which has been a long-planned project for a $10 billion research facility, but which would not lead to a viable reactor in the opinion of the researchers.
The newly proposed technology is the product of five years of investigation, that have been devoted mainly to reactor design questions, instead of focusing on fusion experiments and theory that eventually might lead to reactors, Rostoker explained, and it could be implemented into a commercial reactor – funded by private investors – within 10 years.
Well, obviously it is something that has not been shelved completely and work in this direction is going on, as we can learn from this youtube video (hope it’s not just tinkering with it to keep the students busy…). So we might hope to see it some day.
The comment on youtube for this video reads as follows:
We are a group of students at UMass Lowell that are building a type of fusion reactor called a Farnsworth Fusor.
Fusion has been conventionally done by heating a gas to such a high temperature that the average particle of gas has enough energy to overcome the coulombic repulsion of another particles nucleus so that it can fuse.
Instead we use 2 concentric spherical grids one of which is at a high negative potential to produce an electric field that accelerates the ionized gas to high enough velocities to fuse. The associated technology and cost of operations is many times less that the big budget fusion projects like ITER, while still producing a continuous nuclear fusion reaction.
The system consists of a vacuum system which evacuates our stainless steel vessel. We then use a variable autotransformer to control an input voltage for our high-voltage transformer. The transformer supplies anywhere from negative 10,000 to 50,000 volts to our central grid.
This video highlights our first plasma achieved. No fusion is actually ocurring in this video as the chamber is filled with air at medium vacuum pressure. To actually produce fusion reactions we will fill the chamber with it’s fuel, deuterium gas.
Deuterium gas? – thought it’s just hydrogen and boron… well anyway, please be careful not blow up the lab!
The start of 2010 also marks the beginning of a new decade. The last decade has turned increasingly frustrating for many: first terror then war – not only on terror, but on peoples -, the credit- and subsequent economic crisis, the pandemic threat, the climate change crisis…. No matter what your stance on these issues – it surely wasn’t easy. To me it seems that a majority of people are rather fed up with all the gloom and doom and long for some positivity, for some perspective, for the light to show on the horizon – short: for a fundamental change.
Change happens undoubtedly by itself. Exposure and revelations, the stroke of fate or new discoveries happen at any time and give our existence a new twist. We can either look into the future in despair or full of hope and anticipation. It really is a question of perspective. While challenges are a part of our earthly presence we can either perceive them as something “bad” and undesired – or we can accept them as a great opportunity for growth.
The question how we are going to experience the future is really whether we accept the opportunity to learn and evolve through such challenges, or whether we reject the offer and hang on to old ways that have provided us with a certain sense of security in the past, but that have now clearly shown to have outlived their validity. To cling or to release is the fundamental choice of our free will.
I personally trust that truth always has a trick up its sleeve to gain in live affirmative momentum that balances the equation, thus turning any given situation into a stepping stone that furthers our understanding, growth and development. However it might sometimes take routes that at first are hard to follow, and occurrences might be hard to comprehend as their outcome is not immediately foreseeable when they occur. When we look back later though we understand that all this had a certain purpose – even if it was just to break habits and situations that were not really good for us in the long run.
I think by the end of this beginning decade we will look back in amazement over the developments that catapulted the global community into a completely new reality in just ten short years. In bewilderment we will ask ourselves, how ever we could or wanted to live the way we were living only twenty years back, at the beginning of the 21st century.
The following video is a composition of predictions from the “Unknown” for the year 2010 from the Sedona Journal’s December 2009 edition, compiled by Peter Beamish. The soundtrack is called “Amazing” by the band “one Eskimo”.
My relation to batteries has turned a bit special when I met the decorated Swiss inventor Eduard Haas some years back. He had created and patented a battery (Swiss Patent No. CH 690 081 issued on 04/14/2000) consisting of sheets of carbon (graphite or compounded carbon dust) and magnesium that produced a pretty steady current when water was poured in. Ideally a little bit of table salt was added to enhance the electrolytic properties. A cell produced an electric potential difference (voltage) of about 1.5 volts regardless of it’s size, but the current (amperage) increased with size. Different values were read with different types of electrolyte used. The name “battery” is basically inaccurate for this device, as the term “battery” just describes an array of several cells and in general linguistic usage a battery describes a device that delivers power until it exhausts and needs to be disposed or recharged. Some battery types need to be primed by the manufacturer prior to use in order to be able to hold a charge – his invention produced electricity instantly when a liquid electrolyte was added. The proper designation for such a device is “galvanic element”, but this distinction is rather unimportant for the layman, as the device similar to any ordinary battery delivers direct current at a steady rate until either the electrolyte solution gets saturated with magnesium oxide and the current slowly decreases until the device goes off, or until one of the electrodes are used up. In the Haas cell not only water would work as an electrolyte, but also fruit juice, beer, sea water or other liquids (even urine would do the job).
Assembly of electrodes
The advantages of his cell over conventional lead acid batteries is obvious: the elements used show no harmful toxic properties to the environment and can easily be refitted (just a new set of magnesium plates would have to be inserted, as the carbon plates do not easily waste away) and the cell can be refreshed in an instant – once the output decreased, one simply has to exchange the electrolyte – water – to get the module back to it’s full capacity! Although the Haas cell is many times lighter than a heavy lead battery, the lower energy density would probably require more or bigger cells in order to generate the same output, so the lighter weight can but conditionally be stated as a further advantage.
Battery prototype consisting of several cells
Eduard (Edi) Haas bought an electric car of the make Skoda and replaced the lead-acid batteries with 13 of his magnesium-water batteries. He arranged them in such a way, that he would have to poor water into just one of the cells and from there it would spill over into all the others. Of course a pump would do the job on the inlet and his idea was to drain the water through a valve controlled outlet at a certain position, whenever electrolyte saturation was diminishing the output current. The motor of the car run on 84 Volts and produced an output of 15,4 kW. To achieve this, a current of 183 Ampére was needed. In order to get the right Voltage and Amperage, a set of small batteries was serially connected to produce sufficient voltage, while larger modules were connected in parallel to increase Amperage.
The electric Skoda at the workshop
He told me this anecdote: The police had stopped him on a test drive without number plates, before the car had passed the regulatory approval (remark: in Switzerland the number plates for a vehicle are issued in the name of the vehicles proprietor and are not transferred together with the vehicle in case of a trade). He explained to the police man, that he just wanted to try his vehicle, and that the procedure for approval was underway. Of course the police man would not accept this excuse and wanted to fine him. Mr. Haas told him that he would actually welcome a fine, as it would prove his driving on water. The policeman scratching his head abstained from issuing the ticket and instead escorted him back to his workshop.
Eduard (Edi) Haas in his workshop
When I met Eduard Haas, he was quite devastated. He had filed for a Swiss patent, but had – due to a lack of funds – neglected the international protection of his invention. Further he had no funds left to go in for proper technical evaluation of the cells parameters and he was negotiating with several people for a licensing, some of whom obviously tried to get all the details of his invention for free. I arranged a meeting between Haas and someone who could have put up the money for continuation, but this potential investor lost interest, after one of his acquaintanes working for the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich told him, that magnesium was problematic and would behave erratic as an electrode. However this was an inofficial statement and the cell has never undergone proper assessment. Although I helped Edi with some money to meet his most pressing personal obligations, I was not in the position to help financially for any further technical development and finally I ended up trying to keep his creditors at bay while I was calling or writing letters to just anybody I could think of with a potential to help furthering this development.
It was a lost battle from the beginning. Eduard Haas was getting increasingly desperate because his bank was unwilling to wait any longer for the downpayments of his mortgage and threatened with foreclosure. He called me once a week asking for any good news or for some more money and I grew increasingly disenchanted with the hopless search for funding with just vague information for an unproven product and with an incomplete patent protection. Whomever I contacted for funding declined in disbelief and the creditors started to grow very impatient with me, because of my asking them to be patient.
At some point all contact ceased. I don’t know what happened to Eduard Haas – but I assume he decided to leave his problems behind and escape into the next dimension, as he would announce at times in exasperation.
Now – some time later – the Japanese inventor Susumu Suzuki has come up with a similar principle: A battery that runs on water and can easily be recharged by simply injecting some water into the 1.5 Volt AA or AAA sized cell. The product is marketed under the brand NoPoPo (http://www.aquapowersystem.com) and has been received with astonishment by the audience. Although it does not have the same energy density as an alkaline battery, it is quite suitable for appliances that require low current and a cell can be recharged 4 to 5 times by repeatedly adding a few drops of water or other liquids.
Once more climate change, before I leave the issue and the debate to itself (for the time being). I am quite positively surprised to see mainstream media
suddenly opening up to discussions that have long been conducted in “underground” publications and forums on the net. Articles openly criticising and disclosing the various agendas of the dumbing down and enslaving globalist politics are suddenly appearing in newspapers and magazines that until recently toed the official (sanctioned) line.
(Telegraph.co.uk is the online version of the newspaper The Daily Telegraph. It includes the articles from the print additions of The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Telegraph as well as web-only content such as breaking news, features, picture galleries and blogs. It was named UK Consumer Website of the Year in 2007 and 2009 by the Association of Online Publishers.
The Daily Telegraph is owned by the Barclay Brothers after being bought from Hollston Inc. Amidst the unraveling of the takeover Sir David Barclay suggested that The Daily Telegraph might in the future no longer be the “house newspaper” of the Conservatives. In an interview with The Guardian he said, “Where the government are right we shall support them.” [Source Wikipedia]).
Why then this entire story? What is the idea behind it? Please watch the following sequence from the Movie “The Obama Deception” to get a basic understanding of the idea.
If you go around the globe, you find no rise (in sea levels) anywhere.
But they need the rise, because if there is no rise, there is no
death threat. They say there is nothing good to come from a
sea-level rise, only problems, coastal problems. If you have a
temperature rise, if it’s a problem in one area, it’s beneficial
in another area. But sea level is the real “bad guy,” and therefore
they have talked very much about it. But the real thing is,
that it doesn’t exist in observational data, only in computer
Where is ice melting? Some Alpine glaciers
are melting, others are advancing. Antarctic ice is certainly
not melting; all the Antarctic records show expansion
of ice. Greenland is the dark horse here for sure; the Arctic
may be melting, but it doesn’t matter, because they’re already
floating, and it has no effect. A glacier like Kilimanjaro,
which is important, on the Equator, is only melting because
of deforestation. At the foot of the Kilimanjaro, there was a
rain forest; from the rain forest came moisture, from that
came snow, and snow became ice. Now, they have cut down
the rain forest, and instead of moisture, there comes heat;
heat melts the ice, and there’s no more snow to generate the
ice. So it’s a simple thing, but has nothing to do with temperature.
It’s the misbehavior of the people around the mountain.
So again, it’s like Tuvalu: We should say this deforestation,
that’s the thing. But instead they say, “No, no, it’s the
(excerpt from an Interview with Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner by Gregory Murphy for EIR on June 6, published under the title “Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud” on June 22, 2007. Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden. He is past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. Dr. Mörner has been studying the sea level and its effects on coastal areas for some 35 years. You can download the entire Interview here).
The only thing that remains to worry about is the fact, that many now may think that “if there is no manmade global warming, then there is no problem”. But climate change is real and much of it is manmade! It’s not caused by CO2, but by deforestation through overexploitation and a lack of re-afforestation. Please read my recent posts for further illustration. The probably biggest threat humanity faces is water scarcity! No water – no Food! It’s that simple. Fortunately many of the emerging countries (like India) are becoming increasingly aware of this fact (through experience) and have started massive reforestation programmes. But much more needs to be done and on an international level. Existing forests need to be protected and new forests need to be grown. There is ample space in the deserts and on deserted wastelands of this earth to plant trees.