I have said several times over the past few days that I have seen a least a hundred of these proposals, and only 2 or 3 of them looked like very good ideas. Of the 2 or 3, one of the other good ideas is your proposal. That's why I have helped you with it - I think it can succeed. I think the Choren process in Germany - and I have had a lot of interactions with them - has high potential but I think the capital costs right now are out of sight. And that process may fall victim to receding horizons. So while it is a good idea in principle, it may not be ultimately feasible.

There are other processes, like Robert Rohatensky's SHPEGS system:

http://energytower.org/

That appear to me to be good ideas. But I don't have the expertise in that particular area to judge it. So you won't hear me weighing in on that one. I mostly just watch from the sidelines as the merits are debated. But no doubt, at least 95% of the stuff I see is immediately discardable. No further evaluation required.

In my experience, talking to the lay public, 99.999999% of ideas they throw at you will not work for any given field of science.

With scientists/eng/doc its closer to 99% non working ideas.

Cursory glances at even ideas I come up with; typically tossing away 9/10 of what I come up with.

/edit, i am heavily biased towards ideas i come up with ;)

/edit, i am heavily biased towards ideas i come up with ;)

So am I :-)

Best Hopes for Rational, and not Ego driven, Analysis,

Alan