Ceramatec's Joshi heads Matheson donation list, Oct. 8, 2010

---

Matheson has loyal following of individual donors

By Matt Canham

The Salt Lake Tribune

Published: September 5, 2010 12:00AM
Updated: October 8, 2010 01:37PM

philantrophy day 2 magid 11/1/07 Norma Matheson, left, and Barbara Pioli at Utah Philantrophy Day awards ceremony. magid photo

Washington • Rep. Jim Matheson is by far the biggest fundraiser among Utah’s three House members, representing a district that is often competitive. While he raises most of his money from political action committees run by business groups, unions and politicians, he still has a small core of committed individual donors.

The Salt Lake Tribune analyzed contributions from each of Matheson’s six House elections to determine which families rank among his top 10 contributors of all time. These loyal supporters, some of whom are quite wealthy, are limited by federal rules on how much they can give. PACs can donate $5,000 per election (convention, primary and general), while individuals can contribute $2,400 per election.

1. Ashok and Surekha Joshi

Ceramatec

Total contributions • $33,644

Matheson’s top contributors run a company that has benefited from federal earmarks secured with the congressman’s help. It’s hard to tell if their ties go beyond this. The Joshis did not return calls seeking comment.

They run Ceramatec, a Utah company that develops new uses for ceramics, including biofuels and the delivery of pain medication. Matheson has helped the company secure at least three earmarks in recent years, including a $1.6 million defense grant in 2008. Matheson hasn’t sponsored an earmark for the company in the past two years.

Back in 2008, Ashok Joshi told The Tribune he contributes for two reasons: his wife is a supporter and he hoped the contributions would help get federal funds.

“I also feel that appropriations have politics behind [them], so naturally I want my representatives to fight to get the money to Utah,” he said.

Matheson said he met the Joshis at a House party during his first campaign. “They appreciated my approach and supported me ever since.”

The Joshis have contributed $10,600 to Matheson so far this election cycle. The couple have also donated to other federal officials, such as Sen. Orrin Hatch, but in much smaller amounts. When contributions from all Ceramatec executives are combined, the company has contributed nearly $45,000 to Matheson since he first ran for office.

The Joshis have contributed $10,600 to Matheson so far this election cycle. The couple have also donated to other federal officials, such as Sen. Orrin Hatch, but in much smaller amounts. When contributions from all Ceramatec executives are combined, the company has contributed nearly $45,000 to Matheson since he first ran for office.

The Joshis have contributed $10,600 to Matheson so far this election cycle. The couple have also donated to other federal officials, such as Sen. Orrin Hatch, but in much smaller amounts. When contributions from all Ceramatec executives are combined, the company has contributed nearly $45,000 to Matheson since he first ran for office.

Internet Fraud-definition

Internet Fraud

Also found in: Wikipedia

0.01 sec.

A crime in which the perpetrator develops a scheme using one or more elements of the Internet to deprive a person of property or any interest, estate, or right by a false representation of a matter of fact, whether by providing misleading information or by concealment of information.

Unjust enrichment--definition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unjust enrichment is a legal term denoting a particular type of causative event in which one party is unjustly enriched at the expense of another, and an obligation to make restitution arises, regardless of liability for wrongdoing.^[1]

Definition:
1.n. a benefit by mistake or chance. Morally and ethically the one who gains a benefit that he or she has not paid or worked for should not keep it to the rightful owner's detriment. The party that received money, services or property that should have been delivered to or belonged to another must make restitution to the rightful owner. A court may order such restitution in a lawsuit brought by the party who should rightly have the money or property. ^[2].

2. n. A general equitable principle that a person should not profit at another's expense and therefore should make restitution for the reasonable value of any property, services, or other benefits that have been unfairly received and retained. ^[3]
-

fraud, hartvigsen hydro, brian kunzler, watermotor, peter ruyter, cargo and kraft, sweden, ceramatec, coorstek, turgo turbine, alternarive energy, h-hydro, extortion

Extortion--Elements of Offense

Elements of Offense

Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim. Threats to harm the victim's friends or relatives may also be included. It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury. It may be sufficient to threaten to accuse another person of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule. The threat does not have to relate to an unlawful act.

Other types of threats sufficient to constitute extortion include those to harm the victim's business and those to either testify against the victim or withhold testimony necessary to his or her defense or claim in an administrative proceeding or a lawsuit. Many statutes also provide that any threat to harm another person in his or her career or reputation is extortion.

Under the common law and many statutes, an intent to take money or property to which one is not lawfully entitled must exist at the time of the threat in order to establish extortion. Statutes may contain words such as "willful" or "purposeful" in order to indicate the intent element. When this is so, someone who mistakenly believes he or she is entitled to the money or property cannot be guilty of extortion. Some statutes, however, provide that any unauthorized taking of money by an officer constitutes extortion. Under these statutes, a person may be held strictly liable for the act, and an intent need not be proven to establish the crime.

Statutes governing extortion by private persons vary in content. Many hold that a threat accompanied by the intent to acquire the victim's property is sufficient to establish the crime; others require that the property must actually be acquired as a result of the threat. Extortion by officials is treated similarly. Some statutes hold that the crime occurs when there is a meeting of the minds between the officer and the party from whom the money is exacted.

Criminal Fraud.... What is "fraud"? Legislated definitions are too complicated so here are three simple explanations expressed in different ways.

Criminal Fraud....

What is "fraud"? Legislated definitions are too complicated so here are three simple explanations expressed in different ways.

1. "All multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth. It includes all surprises, tricks, cunning or dissembling (disguising, concealing), and any unfair way which another is cheated." [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th edition]

2. "Deceitful conduct designed to manipulate another person to give something of value by (1) lying, (2) by repeating something that is or ought to have been known by the fraudulent party as false or suspect or (3) by concealing a fact from the other party which may have saved that party from being cheated. The existence of fraud will cause a court to void a contract and can give rise to criminal liability. [Duhaime's Online Legal Dictionary]

3. "Lying and stealing and cheating for gain"

Nando responds to Hartvigsen's retraction of fraudulent copyright claims, June 4, 2010

e: Hartvigsen: "I am willing to post that I was wrong on the copyright issue if you want bring this up again....

From:	Nando ... View Contact
To:	mjgnecco@aprotec.com.co; c.glasspool@verizon.net; georgegetz@bellsouth.net; maggie@fogartyfamily.org; nwgpa@yahoo.com; idaminer40@yahoo.com; idaminer@live.com; davis ron

---

I was cleaning my PC and had suspended some mail rules at the moment that RON DAVIS sent this message -- unhappily it came in !!!.

Ron Davis has been blocked for many moons due to instable mind and behavior

It is time that RON stop this nonsense -- that periodically occurs like a woman menstrual period or every time he tries to sell a turbine and fails.

I am in this ENDLESS loop because I have not accepted his behavior when I was in the middle, assisting Joe Hartvigsen that was sending some items to him and even planning to go to Bolivia and visit him to show him how to build and design a good Turbine and than the one he has.-- trip I canceled when learned of his behavior and dishonesty-- which placed me as a target for his attacks .

Dishonesty has been clearly demonstrated when he failed to deliver either the money paid for two turbines or the money returned to the senders GINNEE & FELIPE HANCOCK , in Costa Rica that up to today they have not being able to install a (new never arrived) Turbine to have some electricity -- I checked with Ginnee to make sure if the money was returned -- Ginnee will report via the MicroHydro group if such occurs.

The list of emails from Ron's message is one that Ron thinks that the owners of them are backing him -- I hope that all of you do question him and ask explicity these points -- because others have tried to get a response from him and No answers have been forthcoming .

Also, he has said the Wim the micro hydro gorup owner has NOT allowed him to defend himself, the TRUE FACT is that he has NOT done so, he ask questions unrelated to the necessary statement he needs to say - and directly demonstrate that he has returned the money or sent the two turbine to Ginnee and Felipe Hancock in Costa Rica .

Pestering Ginnee so often that she stops using an email address -- attacking her and demanding to declare world wide that RON DAVIS is an honest and reliable person -- and so ON and ON.

Sending a long mail filled with garbage specially his writing that do not show any basis or footings to have a truth in them.

I call on those that are, as well, plastered periodically with his messages to either tell him to stop sending to you those senseless messages or to show that he is right or to recognize his error and correct his dishonesty.

Nando

The National Crime Prevention Council--Cyber-bullying defined

Cyber-bullying defined

The National Crime Prevention Council's definition of cyber-bullying is "when the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person."

Cyber-bullying can be as simple as continuing to send e-mail to someone who has said they want no further contact with the sender, but it may also include threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech), ganging up on victims by making them the subject of ridicule in forums, and posting false statements as fact aimed at humiliation.

Cyber-bullies may disclose victims' personal data (e.g. real name, address, or workplace/schools) at websites or forums or may pose as the identity of a victim for the purpose of publishing material in their name that defames or ridicules them. Some cyberbullies may also send threatening and harassing emails and instant messages to the victims, while other post rumors or gossip and instigate others to dislike and gang up on the target.

Nando--Joe is good fellow assisting the hydro projects.....Oct. 5, 2010

Hartvigsen letter to editor of Mormon Magazine, Sunstone Sept.25, 06

Hartvigsen to Dan Wotherspoon, editor of Sunstone, Mormon Magazine


Flag this messageRe: Fwd: Re: Re: Impersonating an LDS BishopMonday, September 25, 2006 2:50 PM
From: This sender is DomainKeys verified "Joseph Hartvigsen" Add sender to Contacts To: "Dan Wotherspoon" Cc: "davis ron" , rrees@utah.govDan,
Ron has forwarded your comments to me. I don't know how you know Ron,
perhaps he has just emailed with some sensational claims as he has last
week to a deseret news reporter. Anyway contrary to his claims I did
not ask that this be brought to my bishop, rather Ron insisted, and as
I had nothing to hide I agreed. The Robert Rees in question is Bishop
of the Highlands Ward, Kaysville UT Haight Creek stake, and is an
employee (attorney with the legislature) of the State of Utah (hence a
utah.gov email adress). Anyone familiar with the church can easily
verify this. Think about it, why would I use an official government
address to fake a response from a church leader? Ron accuses me of
faking the email and impersonating someone else, which I have not done,
while he has on at least two occasions posted "questions" about me
using bogus contrived identities.

The supposed misdeeds in question center on his lack of understanding
of intelectual property laws.

1. He asked me to have my employer evaluate an invention of his which
we did at considerable expense to the company. In the process we made
some improvements. The company's owner offered to bear the cost to
patent and market the invention in exchange for a generous royalty (~4x
what we get when we license our technology to someone else). What threw
Ron was that the owner detailed that the patent would include our
improvements, and hence would list Ron as primary inventors and those
who added as co-inventors. Patent law requires all inventors be (an
inventor being based on the originator of material covered in any
patent claim, hence if other people made improvements or additions
which require additional caims they are co-inventors) listed or the
patent can be invalidated.

He sees this as an attempt to steal his invention, when it only
strengthens it. Due to his irrational response, the company dropped it
and told him to do what he wanted to do with it alone. We lost money,
he still has what he had to start with. The company has not and will
not ever do anything more with the idea.

2. I sold Ron a water turbine blade that I received from a fellow in
Sweden. Ron copied it. He didn't just copying the idea, he used the
part to form a mold to make identical replicas. The fellow (now a
business partner) in Sweden requested that I collect from Ron a $2/part
royalty. Ron doesn't think we have the right to do so. We dropped the
issue 5-6 years ago but he brought it up in public a few months back so
we addressed it. It is true that there is no patent, so the general
idea is not protected. The actual part (as "an original expression
fixed in a tangible medium") is protected without filing under US
copyright laws for the life of the creator + 75 years. The creator died
some 10 years ago, and his widow sold the rights to my partner in
Sweden. Tracing the rights is as simple as following the parts. The
person who is now the only source in the world of these parts is also
the one controlling the copyright. Ron claims it is fraudulent to
request a royalty.

So Ron will vigorously defend his IP (against a proposed cooperative
venture for an improved product) while trampling that of others. His
harrassment, were he here in the US, could land him in court. As he has
no assets of note and lives in Bolivia he feels he can do what he wants
without recourse. I really don't want anything from him except to leave
me alone.

I have not done anything illegal, immoral or even unkind in my dealings
with Ron. In both cases I've just tried to help him and have received
nothing but trouble in return. I have not used my religion to gain his
trust. My religion is a big part of who I am and so it was part of our
discussions before Ron's paranoia got the worst of him.

I really don't know how to end this so Ron will quit harrassing me,
you, Bishop Rees, and others.

Joe



--- davis ron wrote:
>
>
> --- Dan Wotherspoon wrote:
>
> > From: "Dan Wotherspoon"
> > To: "davis ron"
> > Subject: Re: Re: Impersonating an LDS Bishop
> > Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:09:22 -0600
> >
> > The name Robert Rees is certainly not uncommon.
> > From the response of the
> > Bob Rees I know, he certainly isn't surprised that
> > someone living in Utah
> > might have his name. This won't be a matter he'd
> > want to get involved with,
> > so I won't be forwarding you his email address.
> >
> > From the context of It seems to me that you are of
> > the impression that the
> > title of "bishop" is similar in scope in Mormonism
> > as it is in Catholicism.
> > This isn't the case. Mormonism has a lay
> > priesthood, and every LDS "ward"
> > (congregation) has a bishop. And there are tens of
> > thousands of wards in
> > the world, and the role of bishop rotates to another
> > person every five years
> > or so. So, for instance, my friend Bob Rees was
> > once in the role of bishop
> > but hasn't served in that capacity for twenty years
> > or so. Hence your
> > assumptions about this being alarming and surpise
> > over what you see as a
> > lack of response, if it is indeed a case of
> > impersonation, are a bit
> > overinflated. This isn't like a Catholic bishop who
> > is even higher in the
> > hierarchy than a priest. LDS bishops receive no
> > theological training and do
> > not draw a salary, they are simply volunteers who
> > have agreed to lead a
> > congregation for a few years. Certainly they
> > counsel and on occasion
> > administer things like Church discipline, but
> > typically they are just good
> > guys trying their best to help members of their ward
> > feel connected and
> > engaged and grow spiritually.
> >
> > I really don't know the issues in your complaint
> > against this person or your
> > associate who wanted this person to arbitrate your
> > disagreement, but it
> > seems to me that you should just go to a civil
> > authority instead. If your
> > associate is using his supposed "faithful Mormon
> > insider" status to defraud
> > people, prosecute the hell out of him for the fraud.
> > Trading on Mormon
> > belief and touting one's piety is indeed immoral,
> > and I'm hoping there's a
> > special kind of torment for such folks who do so
> > with the intention of
> > gaining undeserved trust, but it seems to me best to
> > bring it to the courts
> > and realm of public discourse so this person will be
> > exposed and won't be
> > able to use that kind of leverage again.
> >
> > Good luck,
> > Dan
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "davis ron"
> > To: ;
> > Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 8:26 AM
> > Subject: Re: Re: Impersonating an LDS Bishop
> >
> >
> > > Sept. 25, 06
> > >
> > > Hello Dan,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your response. I'm sure that you
> > > are very busy.
> > > I would like to communicate directly with bishop
> > > Rees in order to provide him with information
> > > regarding this matter so he can bring charges
> > against
> > > the individual impersonating him. May I please
> > have
> > > his e-mail address?
> > > I'm sure the LDS Church would be very interested
> > as
> > > well. Or at least, I hope so. Who should I write
> > to?
> > >
> > > I am certainly owed an explanation. Do you not
> > agree?
> > > Mainly, I want to make sure that the authentic
> > > Bishop Rees had no part whatsoever in this matter.
> > > I have been very surprised at the lack of
> > response.
> > > Perhaps this kind of thing happens more often than
> > I
> > > could have possibly imagined.
> > >
> > > All the best, and thank you again,
> > >
> > > Ron Davis
> > > Campo Nuevo,
> > > La Paz, Bolivia
> > > 591 2 2493646, 591 71527700
> > > watermotor.net
> > >
> > > --- Dan Wotherspoon
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Ron,
> > >>
> > >> I'm running a magazine and a small, overreaching
> > >> non-profit organization
> > >> Sorry, I just don't have time to get involved. I
> > >> hesitated to even reply in
> > >> the first place but the mention of the name of a
> > >> friend sent me into it only
> > >> as far as whether it was him or not.
> > >>
> > >> Surely you have a friend in the US who has a
> > stake
> > >> in the issues related to
> > >> your dispute and would make the inquiries for you
> > at
> > >> LDS headquarters about
> > >> who the bishop is for a person living at that
> > >> address.
> > >>
> > >> Best of luck,
> > >> Dan Wotherspoon
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "davis ron"
> > >> To: "Dan Wotherspoon"
> > >> Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 2:29 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: Re: Impersonating an LDS Bishop
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Dan,
> > >> > I don't know if I mentioned that I am in South
> > >> > America.
> > >> >
> > >> > Hartvigsen's address is:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1529 South 400 East
> > >> > Kaysville, UT 84037 USA
> > >> >
> > >> > Does that help?
> > >> > Ron
> > >> >
> > >> > --- Dan Wotherspoon
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> My guess is there are about two dozen or more
> > LDS
> > >> >> bishops in Kaysville,
> > >> >> Utah. You'll need to find out the exact name
> > of
> > >> the
> > >> >> ward this guy is
> > >> >> pretending to be the bishop of. With that
> > name
> > >> in
> > >> >> hand, you can either call
> > >> >> the LDS Church headquarters to get the name
> > and
> > >> >> phone number of the real
> > >> >> bishop of that ward (240-1000 is their general
> > >> >> information line, which can
> > >> >> direct you to the right department for that
> > info)
> > >> or
> > >> >> simply look it up in
> > >> >> the white pages under Church of Jesus Christ
> > of
> > >> >> Latter-day Saints, then find
> > >> >> the Kaysville stake this ward is in, then
> > you'll
> > >> see
> > >> >> listings of each ward
> > >> >> below that.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I wrote to Bob Rees in California when you
> > first
> > >> >> mentioned his name. He
> > >> >> wrote the following back:
> > >> >>
>
=== message truncated ===

Blind Carbon Copy: The Watermotor: renewable energy for poor rural areas

Blind Carbon Copy: The Watermotor: renewable energy for poor rural areas: "Ben Courtice"

Hartvigsen puts photos of damaged turgo spoons on site, Feb.28, 09

Max,
Sorry to be so slow but it has been a busy week at work so I haven't
had much time to spend on hydro.

I've put some photos in this folder in the group's file area
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/microhydro/files/Copied_Runner/
There are two new photos with views of a runner made with low quality
aluminum castings. Text to the runner are the original plastic spoons
which were used to make these un-authorized aluminum copies and for
comparison the precision investment cast stainless steel which is heat
treated for high hardness and tensile strength. One of the stainless
spoons is shown with the optional polished surface.

I have a good camera but for file size I've reduced the resolution. It
is still hard to really show the difference in a photo compared to
directly viewing the parts. However, these copies are bad enough that
you can see many of the defects.

I've also put photos of the original 16 orange turgo runner I made 10
years ago for my system. These photos are probably elsewhere in the
group area and on Wim's site but I put them here for comparison.


Joe

Nando to Yahoo microhydro group: "..copyrighted Turgo spoons is killing the WATERMOTOR project and YOU KNOW IT", March 4, 2009

Nando: "..the copyrighted Turgo spoons is killing the WATERMOTOR project and YOU KNOW IT" "...and Joe
asked me to assist her". March 4, 2009

Reply Message #11665 of 12578 <>
Re: [microhydro] Open Letter to Wim Klunne---Re "Nando" alert March 4, 09

RON:

Wrong and You Know that is not like that -- you have worded the message
carefully to your liking.

I never contacted a client of yours in Costa Rica, Ginnee due to the flak and
garbage you sent to her, because she have to have bronze Turgo spoons , in where
you included flak with Joe Hartvigsen name and she searched for him and Joe
asked me to assist her .

I was not aware of the existence of Ginnee, until I got the message which was
already a long time after the problem was in existence -- Ron , yourself, gave
Ginnee the parameters for her to ask for help, your obsession to use the
copyrighted Turgo spoons is killing the WATERMOTOR project and YOU KNOW IT --
but continues with the same downfall path -- instead of correcting yourself and
give yourself a better chance to continue with your life peacefully.

I do not care about you, and I am not try to be your enemy or detractor -- just
change your behavior and give peace to yourself and who contact you !!.

Ginnee order of turbines and what ever happened after that is her own decision
and Joe or I were not involved at all -- we appeared long after the problem was
in existence -- for sure

The aluminum issue was Ginnee alone and it was good for her -- and after my
linking with her and knowing what she site has, I concur with her -- and you
should have respected her true order and not tried to change for your own
benefit !!.

Nando


----- Original Message -----
From: Otto Rike
To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: [microhydro] Open Letter to Wim Klunne---Re "Nando" alert March
4, 09


Message to Klunne-re Nando, March 4, 09

From: Otto Rike
Subject: "Nando" just for the record
To: "Wim Klunne"
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 10:18 PM

Wim,

It seems that "Nando" has contacted a client of ours in Costa Rica through
your group who had ordered two Watermotors with aluminum runners in order to
convince her that aluminum is worthless for turbine blades, and that I was just
trying to cheat her. This caused her to threaten to cancel her order, as
intended.
Then she began to demand bronze runners from me at no charge. This has, as
intended, caused a lot of trouble.
As you know, this is not the first time "Nando" has done this sort of
thing.
I reported another incident of this sort in which he sent hate mail about
me to a member who had expressed interest in helping a small water powered
lighting project here in Bolivia.
When I asked you to take some kind of action to prevent this type of
behavior on your site, you expelled me from the group.

I want to know what you intend to do about it this time.

Ron Davis
watermotor@...

--- On Tue, 10/27/09, alberto rivera wrote:

From: alberto rivera
Subject: Re: [microhydro] Open Letter to Wim Klunne---what proof did you ask
from Hancock, "Nando"?
To: microhydro@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 4:22 PM



Now that Wim has given clearance for Ron Davis to respond, and Ginnee's
questions are quite explicit and unambiguous, Ron's straightforward reply
would be a great opportunity to clear his name. Ron? We should put a closure to
this soonest.

Thanks & regards.

Rocky

--- On Tue, 10/27/09, Wim Jonker Klunne
wrote:

From: Wim Jonker Klunne

Subject: Re: [microhydro] Open Letter to Wim Klunne---what proof did you ask
from Hancock, "Nando"?

To: microhydro@yahoogro ups.com

Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 3:15 PM



Dear Group,

As a follow-up on the email sent by Ginnee several messages have been

sent by Ron Davis all with a similar content that he was (uncorrectly)

assuming that he would not be allowed to respond to the message by

Ginnee. Although I immediately responded to him that he would certainly

be allowed to respond, the message below was his reaction.

I just want to ensure both the group and Ron that I will allow Ron to

respond to the message by Ginnee.

Kind regards,

Wim

davis ron wrote:

>Wim,

>

>Wim,

> For several years you have been publishing highly damaging accusations about
me, to which I am not allowed to reply, and have just done so again. Have you
ever asked Hartvigsen or Ruyter for proof of their defamatory statements about
me posted on your site? Did you ask Ginnee Hancock for any proof at all for her
statements?

>

> Well, as we see she has already told everyone she will NOT provide the email
record to support her accusations.

> What she is telling everybody is that YOU did not ask her for any proof nor
did you verify her statements. She knew she didnt have to because you will not
ask for it.

> Where does that leave you?

>

> The group members should know about this.

>

>Ron Davis

>

Hartvigsen Announces Takeover of Turgo Design : "Basically, the spoons are orphans that Peter found and we adopted". Nov. 7, 02

Hartvigsen Announces Takeover of Turgo Design : "Basically, the spoons are orphans that Peter found and
we adopted". Nov. 7, 02

November 7, 2002

At 13:33 02/10/30 -0700, you wrote:
Hi Ron,
I look forward to your dyno data. The only good
numbers I have
are for the combination of turbine and generator
being 50%
efficient using a 1/3 hp DC brush type motor and a
9/32" nozzle
with about 50' of head. These aren't really ideal
conditions.
The motor was much larger than needed for the output.
The
nozzle much smaller than ideal for the blue spoons.
I'd really
like to see numbers with something like a 1/2" nozzle
and
a direct measurement on the turbine rather than
electric output.

I'll look at the return address on the spoon mailers
for an
address for Ingela Carlsson. Peter said she is about
2 hrs north
of him "in the woods". I have a postcard note from
her that
came in one of the shipments here in my briefcase,
but it
doesn't have an address. I asked Peter if she had any
design
info, or the injection molding die, or test data,
etc. He has asked
and she doesn't. Her husband died something like 10
years before
Peter met her. She and her sons don't want to have
anything
to do with it as they blame his heart attack on his
hydro obsession.
Basically, the spoons are orphans that Peter found and
we adopted.
Joe