Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 15, 2016 at 1:11 am.
The following correspondence to Todd Ridolph, the new Executive Director for the Directory:New Energy Movement, is posted with permission.
December 14, 2012
I am following up with our discussions at the Event:2012:Global Breakthrough Energy Movement Conference regarding having some testing protocols, procedures and ways of professionally vetting break through energy technologies. This seems to be one of the objectives that came out of several meetings.
I feel this is important for the following reasons:
1. To act as a guide to developers and inventors who on many occasions make claims based on either poor methodologies or just using the wrong equipment. It also enables them to know what may be in front of them should media, scientists, governments or investors get involved.
2. To bring credibility and build bridges to mainstream science, media, governments and the investment sector.
3. To enable the projects that really need to be resourced vs those based on a false premise.
It is also important that:
1. These procedures not just be based on what mainstream scientists and engineers want to see, but also draw on the experience of people who have been doing this for years and understand where mistakes have been made or what tricks are used to deliberately deceive. I have on many occasions seen engineers, scientists and some pretty smart business people fooled by not understand what they are really seeing, misinterpreting results or just missing some important input or output.
2. It is also essential that these procedures be designed specifically for the technologies being tested, and that some degree of flexibility be allowed.
3. That the team charged with undertaking this can not be influenced in anyway by journalists, investors or politics, and may remain independent.
4. That this is signed off by the various participants and organizations involved in new and breakthrough energy movements.
5. Endorsed by at least some mainstream scientists, engineers and testing professionals.
There are 4 steps in bringing this about:
1. Reach an agreement between various groups and movements that this is important and that they put their resources behind the establishment of a steering committee. This committee can be representative of these organizations.
2. Bring together a team of scientist, engineers and people with on-ground experience in the various fields to develop the testing protocols and methodologies. This will be an ongoing process as new technologies emerge. However several categories can be already established without too much effort.
3. Establish a database of scientists, engineers and people with the skills to actually advise, or be available to undertake the work of testing claims.
There already exists worldwide through various networks many people skilled in these areas, who have been doing this for years as:
c. Paid Consultants.
It is important that they have the skills, professional standing and reputation. Part of the role of the organization formed to undertake this is to make sure that the people involved are credible, ethical and have the ability to undertake the tasks. These tasks could be advisory or actually in the field testing. The good news there are many, worldwide who already exist. Most geographic areas are covered, as well as the many areas of expertise that need to be covered. I can think of at least 30 of the top of my head. There are many other organizations also we can draw upon who already have people capable of delivering these services.
4. Although a lot of this work is voluntary, or can in some cases be charged out as a fee for service, some way of being able to reimburse those undertaking the task of acting as advisors or in the field need to be taken care of.
1. People are often just looking for advice, not just testing. Part of this group should have the necessary database of people that can be referred to with specialist skills that may be needed for advice. The people seeking advice are inventors, developers and, more often than not, investors.
2. A pool of portable equipment would be helpful that may not always be available to individuals required to undertake specific and specialized tests.
3. A pool of labs who are willing to allow their facilities to be used freely or at reasonable rates. I actually often tag on tests of devices on existing tests at little or no charge.
I am happy to go into much greater detail. I just wanted a starting point for your consideration. Many others need to have their opinions heard. I am writing this without prejudice, to keep the dialogue going, so affirmative steps can be taken to undertake a process that can bring this objective into fruition. I hope many come back with further suggestions and comments.
I see my role as minor in this, other than assisting in bringing this into a reality. There are many people far more qualified than myself to bring about the establishment of procedures and protocols.