Question is, how much coal and oil is burned in the creation process of these boxes? If we need to use additional fossil fuels to incorporate the Bloom box factories, isn't that a net loss for the environment?

[edit] removed my bitch ass comment about hydrogen coz ididn't know
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_oxide_fuel_cell
use methane and other stuff

Platinum? Palladium? Hell yeah, we can get those easy.

The host of this show has an uncanny ability to talk while saying absolutely nothing.

Have I got this right - it's a fuel cell. You just need to add the fuel. Which is to say it doesn't actually provide the fuel, but converts it to power more efficiently than alternative methods?

Anyone remember the Segway? Those things were supposed to be as significant an advancement as the personal computer. I think I've seen two in real life...

Hype is cheap, if they really had this going as well as they claim they'd be mass marketing them already. This stuff was developed in 2006, do you really think that if it lived up to it's hype they'd have let 1/3 of it's patent life slip by without making any profit?

Fuel cell is just an engine, but a highly effective one usually. There will most likely be a good market for things that use fuel for years to come, we are still a ways out for a better solution.

Interesting, but not a "Holy Grail" of any sort.

* eco?

I think this technology is too promising for engineers, and governments to pass up on. The technology is not quite there yet, but the push to improve it will definitly make this a viable and competitive energy alternative in the future. Is it a green alternative; no, but it will be a more efficient power source...i think.

You guys are total suckers and idiots.

This is like ancient technology. It is just a solid oxide fuel cell.

The only thing interesting is that they have existing fuel cell installs at eBay and google.

This won't be cheap or better. All it does is capture the big green energy investors and also it uses tax rebates in places like California to let rich people subsidize their electricity.

Wow do we have terrible press in this country. The company wants to drum up interest so they let people think it's a magic energy making box. Instead of making it clear it's not a new energy source the news outlet starts out with a clip of the Mr.Fusion.

A major cola causes cancer, we'll tell you which one at 11.

This comment interested me so I did a little morning time research. You are right in stating that this technology has been out there for a long time. One of the major down falls of conventional SOFC's are that they require a high operating temperature. The efficiency of SOFC's limitations lie in the material they use because of the high operating temperatures. The bloom box claims to have solved this problem with a fairly cost effective solution for what materials to use (melted sand = glass?). They were always made from ceramic before, I don't know what improvements glass have over ceramics. I don't know if their claims are all true. Too early to tell since it was just "released".

That all being said, I don't understand what the hoopla is about, either. You'd still need to bring some sort of natural gas to each "bloom box". Let's say tomorrow, we took out all the power plants and replaced every home and business with one of these devices. Let's say they operate at 70% efficiency (10% more than traditional SOFC's), would this be more energy efficient than a power plant. Would it cost us any less natural resources to run our planet? Those questions are a little more difficult to find out. Gotta do some more research on power plants. Somebody with a degree have any insight?>> ^joedirt:
You guys are total suckers and idiots.
This is like ancient technology. It is just a solid oxide fuel cell.
The only thing interesting is that they have existing fuel cell installs at eBay and google.
This won't be cheap or better. All it does is capture the big green energy investors and also it uses tax rebates in places like California to let rich people subsidize their electricity.

On the right track. But until I can pick one up that will power my place for under a few grand I'm not getting excited.

[redacted]

If they can adapt it to run on liquid fuel sources then it could be big, especially if the efficiency rate is above 90%, the reason being that while ethanol might be hard to make effectivly, methanol could be made in huge quantities.

I found the comments on the "clean" energy of the Bloom Box from The Register to be interesting. Some good points made -- could easily just be hype.

They said it cost "$3000 per person" for the consumer one. That is still more expensive than what i pay a year for electric.

Nevermind the fact that they are so vague in the press release. No hard numbers or anything. For all we know it could consume more gas than what current ones do, you could still be paying out the nose for electricity. If you can power if on a compost pile then lets get excited.

I do feel some awesome tech is coming out eventually that will change how we get power, its just right now everyone is trying for something, with each one have a major downside. Its just we have not seen this ones yet.

No, this is the holy grail of energy:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Liquid-Fluoride-Thorium-Reactor-Google-Tech-Talk-Remix

Absolutely retarded, the only reason this crap was even adopted by California companies is because of "green" tax credits of almost 50% and hippie-ass public relations.

An almost complete lack of good info, what a waste of time - the LFT reactor does have some promise though, shown in the vid laura posted.

I actually was a little disappointed when i read up on the Governments proposal to develop new nuclear power - they are going to be using Westinghouse reactors based around old tech, i wonder if they even considered developing LFT reactors at all.

The reporting....
"Some weird metal that you have to get"..."Extracting oxygen from electricity"... Wow.

Anyway. New way to burn fossil fuels. Great, if it's more efficient, but not revolutionary. Need to figure out how to produce enough biofuel for these, and I suspect that's going to be quite a hurdle. Fossil fuels built up over millions of years and we will have mostly used them all up in about 200 years from when we started. That's a LOT of biomass per year for energy production.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'BLOOM, BOX' to 'BLOOM, BOX, Brian Cooley' - edited by brycewi19

>> ^Mcboinkens:
P.S. I am going with hydrogen for the energy of the future.


Joking, right?

The "holy grail" for energy is when you can harness hype and turn it into electricity. Plug your house into Fox News and you're set!

Solar is the energy of the future. Storage is the main problem right now.

This reminds me of a Gordon Korman book called "I Want to Go Home". The main character is stuck at summer camp where he is sort of a passive resistor. He's assigned an art project, and produces a wooden box filled with sand. He calls "le sable", which causes everyone to see it as genuine art, because they don't speak french and assume they just don't get the art piece, which must be sophisticated to have a french name.

yeah, There hasn't been a big jump in battery technology for a long time. If that happened it would be a real game changer.>> ^budzos:
Solar is the energy of the future. Storage is the main problem right now.

Hear me and remember this: Although solar is the logical move, we're going to see many nations start up large-scale methane extraction plants along the contintental shelves. We'll need better catalytic converters, but I'm sure that will be worked out (I hope).

The method for extracting useable methane from clathrate deposits? You pump CO2 into the ice. So it's going to be easy to paint it as a green solution. Trust me on this one...

There is a major danger of massive methane eruptions, think city-sized volumes of methane suddenly erupting from the ocean floor and becoming part of the atmosphere. Aside from that I think it might be the thing that lets internal-combustion fueled capitalism thrive long enough to completely fuck our species.

... that is unless the battery thing can be worked out. Then, solar.

Are you talking about Fracking? Or AKA Hydrolic Fracturing?>> ^budzos:
Hear me and remember this: Although solar is the logical move, we're going to see many nations start up large-scale methane extraction plants along the contintental shelves. We'll need better catalytic converters, but I'm sure that will be worked out (I hope).
The method for extracting useable methane from clathrate deposits? You pump CO2 into the ice. So it's going to be easy to paint it as a green solution. Trust me on this one...
There is a major danger of massive methane eruptions, think city-sized volumes of methane suddenly erupting from the ocean floor and becoming part of the atmosphere. Aside from that I think it might be the thing that lets internal-combustion fueled capitalism thrive long enough to completely fuck our species.

No. I'm talking about methane clathrate deposits.

>> ^geo321:
Are you talking about Fracking? Or AKA Hydrolic Fracturing?