Energy Secretary Calls For Propsals

Discuss funding sources for polywell research, including the non-profit EMC2 Fusion Development Corporation, as well as any other relevant research efforts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Energy Secretary Calls For Propsals

Postby MSimon » Wed May 13, 2009 6:53 pm

*

http://arpa-e.energy.gov/keydocs/ARPA-E-FOA.PDF

*

From:

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapit ... tionaries/

Starting today, the Department of Energy is accepting proposals for energy R&D projects that “disrupt the status quo. The Nation needs transformational energy-related technologies to overcome the threats posed by climate change and energy security, arising from its reliance on traditional uses of fossil fuels and the dominant use of oil in transportation.”

The DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, modelled on a successful Defense Department research scheme, is offering up to $20 million assistance to make moonshots reality. Small thinkers need not apply: “We are not looking for incremental progress on current technologies.”

The $400 million program is part of the Energy Department’s new emphasis on breakthrough technologies. Energy Secretary Steven Chu has repeatedly said that the U.S. needs “Nobel-level” breakthroughs in energy technology in order to tackle the twin challenges of energy security and climate change. Some naysayers figure all the emphasis on technological breakthroughs distracts from the task at hand—using existing technology to tackle the same challenges.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

KitemanSA
Posts: 6101
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Wed May 13, 2009 7:08 pm

This has been discussed pretty thouroughly in other topics. the problem with this call is that it requires a 20% investment by the company itself.

In the FOA, the DOE-ARPA wrote:B. Cost Sharing (or Matching)
The recipient must provide cost share of at least 20% of the total allowable costs for R&D projects of an applied nature (i.e., the sum of the Government share, including FFRDC contractor costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project). For awards where ARPA-E determines that use of a TIA is appropriate, recipients are required to provide at least 50% of the total project costs, where practicable.


Don't know what a TIA is, but I hope it don't apply!

KitemanSA
Posts: 6101
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Wed May 13, 2009 7:09 pm

Oh, and as also pointed out, this is a max of ~$20M plus the $5M the company provides and is spread over 5 years.

This MAY be enough for an intermediate scale, continuous operation demo, but not the net production unit.

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Wed May 13, 2009 7:11 pm

KitemanSA wrote:This has been discussed pretty thouroughly in other topics. the problem with this call is that it requires a 20% investment by the company itself.

In the FOA, the DOE-ARPA wrote:B. Cost Sharing (or Matching)
The recipient must provide cost share of at least 20% of the total allowable costs for R&D projects of an applied nature (i.e., the sum of the Government share, including FFRDC contractor costs if applicable, and the recipient share of allowable costs equals the total allowable cost of the project). For awards where ARPA-E determines that use of a TIA is appropriate, recipients are required to provide at least 50% of the total project costs, where practicable.


Don't know what a TIA is, but I hope it don't apply!


Thanks!

I gave EMC2 a heads up. We shall see if anything comes of it.

BTW if the Gov. wants to do this badly enough there are always way of fudging the rules.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

KitemanSA
Posts: 6101
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Wed May 13, 2009 7:23 pm

As I asked before, or perhaps only implied, would a loan by Seimans or GE of a set of magnets constitute the 20% input by the company or co-investor? Perhaps the magnets can be used for a short enough period to NOT get unacceptably deranged by neutron bombardment. Can we get proof with limited expense? GE/Seimans could then have their magnets and heat them too! :wink:

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Wed May 13, 2009 10:18 pm

KitemanSA wrote:As I asked before, or perhaps only implied, would a loan by Seimans or GE of a set of magnets constitute the 20% input by the company or co-investor? Perhaps the magnets can be used for a short enough period to NOT get unacceptably deranged by neutron bombardment. Can we get proof with limited expense? GE/Seimans could then have their magnets and heat them too! :wink:


Many SC materials get improved with neutron bombardment. Tc gets lower but Jc goes higher.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM


Return to “Fund-Raising”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests