Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 25 Feb 2012 08:35:11 -0800: Hi, [snip] -Original Message- From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com Robin: This has nothing to do with me (Robin). Think, say 20 atoms of Ni in a cluster surrounded by H gas. The thermal energy in the cluster increases and transforms the increase of kenetic energy to the surrounding H. H is the heat transfer agent. Not good. Why is this not good? H is an excellent heat transfer agent. The thermal energy occurs on the surface of the cluster, not on its interior, probably in Casimir pits so overheating is actually tempered and controlled by this kind of heat transfer and outward vector. I would call that desirable. BTW - Why do you assume there is a Chan method? Everything I have seen from Chan, including his writing and online demeanor and so-called experiment is most consistent with an undergraduate student playing a silly prank to see how much gullibility is out there in LENR_LAND, instead of the effort of a serious scientist. (there is a megaton of gullibility and he seems to have tapped into it). Has he now put up videos or supplied pictures and data? Apologies if I have missed something that makes him looks serious, as otherwise this character should have been written-off as silly bogosity weeks ago - without a minimal degree of validation. Jones Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Robin, The cost of developing the prototype is estimated at between $100,000 and several million Check out Brad Lowe's images of his garage set up. You can do it for much less. http://ecatbuilder.com/builders/bhlowe H is the heat transfer agent. Not good. Why is this not good? Read how Dale G.Basgall blew up his leg and was carted off to the hospital crying. My own personal work with high pressure hydrogen under elevated temperatures was ultra dangerous and unpredictable. According to Chan: 4. Mix molar % of MgH2 30 (100% excess) Ni 30, Cu 20, Fe 20 in glove box. You might try igniter such as ANTIMONY TRISULFIDE or LITHIUM BOROHYDRIDE in tiny catalytic amounts. Rossi probably noted this and invented a new ECat devise cartridge probably containing a hydride to avoid the use of hydrogen gas. Is this what you are after: (This document describes a project for the development of a small prototype fusion reactor, incorporating a completely new paradigm. http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html) ? Start immediately after studying Wladimir Guglinski and Frank Znidarsic. Jones enjoys ridiculing , perhaps. Ignore adverse comments by others and push on. I wish to encourage you and anyone else to get your feet wet, so to speak in this incredible new era about to explode and change life as we know it. Reality mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 25 Feb 2012 08:35:11 -0800: Hi, [snip] -Original Message- From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com Robin: (Snip)
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
In reply to integral.property.serv...@gmail.com's message of Sun, 26 Feb 2012 17:56:24 -0500: Hi, [snip] Robin, The cost of developing the prototype is estimated at between $100,000 and several million Check out Brad Lowe's images of his garage set up. You can do it for much less. I certainly hope so, however I wanted to err on the high rather than the low side, so that any potential investor would get a pleasant rather than an unpleasant surprise. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
I agree, hydrogen will diffuse through metal walls until the hydrogen pressure (partial pressure) is the same on both sides. On 24 February 2012 20:54, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:20:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] • The high pressure CO2 coolant will eliminate hydrogen exfiltration from the hot kernel stainless steel reactor kernel walls; I don't think so. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Robin: Think, say 20 atoms of Ni in a cluster surrounded by H gas. The thermal energy in the cluster increases and transforms the increase of kenetic energy to the surrounding H. H is the heat transfer agent. Not good. Better: Surround cluster with other inert medium. Example: mix Cu, Fe, MgH2 and Ni nano size powder (Each previously treated by soaking at 180 C for 2 days under 100 psi H) and ball mill under an inert atmosphere. Add mineral oil or othe nonreactive heat transfer agent, either liquid or solid to mill. If product is liquid, 10 plate Duda heat exchange and Delco fuel pump to circulate and trigger reaction as per Chan II Method. If solid, encapsolate in as small a Cu envelope as possible to allow Frequincy Generator EMF triggering as per Phen, Chan etc. Total cost under $1,000.00 Less verbal hot air is possibly the most important catalyst to discovery. Motivation is simply curiosity Reality
RE: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
-Original Message- From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com Robin: Think, say 20 atoms of Ni in a cluster surrounded by H gas. The thermal energy in the cluster increases and transforms the increase of kenetic energy to the surrounding H. H is the heat transfer agent. Not good. Why is this not good? H is an excellent heat transfer agent. The thermal energy occurs on the surface of the cluster, not on its interior, probably in Casimir pits so overheating is actually tempered and controlled by this kind of heat transfer and outward vector. I would call that desirable. BTW - Why do you assume there is a Chan method? Everything I have seen from Chan, including his writing and online demeanor and so-called experiment is most consistent with an undergraduate student playing a silly prank to see how much gullibility is out there in LENR_LAND, instead of the effort of a serious scientist. (there is a megaton of gullibility and he seems to have tapped into it). Has he now put up videos or supplied pictures and data? Apologies if I have missed something that makes him looks serious, as otherwise this character should have been written-off as silly bogosity weeks ago - without a minimal degree of validation. Jones
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:20:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] The high pressure CO2 coolant will eliminate hydrogen exfiltration from the hot kernel stainless steel reactor kernel walls; I don't think so. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
The next generation of gas cooled small modular reactors will offer high level process heat, useful for mobilizing oil sands and oil shale, fertilizer production and many other industrial processes. Thus more of the waste heat may be utilized, rather than lost to the environment. - Original Message - From: Chemical Engineer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 7:26 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor The travesty of the existing grid is that only 25-45% of the fossil energy produced in heat and elec. at the utility company ever makes it to the end user. The rest goes out the stack/cooling tower/river or ocean water as Polution to the environment On Monday, February 20, 2012, Alain Sepeda wrote: I agree. the grid will not die, but will change from a delivery grid to an exchange grid. for me it is like internet. internet did nt kill the mainframe, but replaced it by servers that behave like big or small mainframes, providing different services, organized according to the needs, but also to the orgianization of the producer of content... of course ther is still home production, but less than at the begining, and alos there is an organized exchange platform, like CHP can be. mainframe are no more the only allowed technology, but big internet servers exists 2012/2/20 Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com The key issue is that household electricity demand averages about 0.3-1.5kW, but can spike up to 10kW with aircon, ovens, hairdryers, clothes dryers, toasters, kettles, lawnmowers, powertools etc. It is very hard to make a system that can cover such a range efficiently or cheaply. Currently even the best batteries are very expensive ($0.03/kWh), but grid supplies are typically $0.07-0.01/kWh (on top of the cost of electricity at a large powerplant). A neighbourhood micro-grid is a good compromise - it evens out the loads and can handle the spikes in demand from individual houses with no trouble so you don't need to have a home generator capable of high peak power, or any energy storage, but you don't have to pay for the maintenance of large transformers, substations and transmission lines. And if your generator needs maintenance you will still have power. A neighbourhood microgrid will be low voltage, transformerless and will probably add $0.02/kWh to the cost of electricity. It might involve small generators in each house (heat and power) with electricity shared between all houses to cover power spikes, or it might be a centralized generator of 50-1000kW. That said all sizes of generators will be used from 100's of MW for industrial uses to 10's of kW for factories to 1-5kW with energy storage for stand alone and rural and 100's of W for communication towers or lighting. On 20 February 2012 22:13, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent power producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for local communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I hope LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs, expand and boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets it first...) On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the people who repair the wires after storms and so on. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system . . . You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your supercritical turbine cannot do all that. I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U. But it is not worth the trouble. Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have individual ones because it is so convenient. It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home (one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it will be cheaper and simpler in the long run
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot
backup for some time)
Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical
distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a
distributed system is much safer during war , solar flares, etc.
Distributed LENR systems will provide local CHP which is a big
plus.Equipment will be taxed, capitalized depriciated.
On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Jay Caplan wrote:
**
I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these
types of generating facilities for the best economy.
The risk is that govs will intervene with tax credits and regulations to
influence how and where energy is produced - this invariably leads to
distortions and inefficiencies. Tax credits and deductions for solar panels
and electric cars being notable examples.
- Original Message -
*From:* Axil Axil javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'janap...@gmail.com');
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'vortex-l@eskimo.com');
*Sent:* Sunday, February 19, 2012 7:30 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here.
Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality.
If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the
individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s
basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation
products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated
by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost
provider.
The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the
upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power
doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless
green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production.
NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power
production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies
of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power
production by statewide or even regional electric utilities.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell
jedrothw...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'jedrothw...@gmail.com');
wrote:
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'alain.sep...@gmail.com'); wrote:
good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need.
your design save energy, but at the cost of investment.
the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel.
so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will,
because it will ensure the least total cost
LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management.
we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . .
Yup. Well said.
see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety
and simplicity...
LENR is even less expensive about consumption.
I agree. I was going to make these points.
- Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot backup for some time) That's what I said in my book, chapter 14. I discussed this with a lot of power company and EPRI people. Abandoning the distribution network will save a tremendous amount of money over the long term. Of course it will take a long time. Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a distributed system is much safer during war . . . I hope that war will not be an issue in the future. A few days after 9/11, Bush flew to N.Y.C. He looked out of the window of the airplane and said, this is the first war of the 21st century. When I read that I thought, I was hoping there wouldn't be any more damned wars in this century, or any any century to come. People may feel that is a unrealistic hope but I do not see why. At least in the First World we have eliminated slavery, child labor, filthy drinking water and many other social evils that used to kill a lot more people than war did. I don't see why we can't eliminate war. It is no more ingrained in human nature than these other evils we eliminated. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system, then DGT may be the product for you. But in a high density urban environment, few will be able to fit their stuff into their apartment or their condo let alone afford their own electric utility package. The ideal of self-sufficiency will not prevail against the reality of crowded urban living. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot backup for some time) Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a distributed system is much safer during war , solar flares, etc. Distributed LENR systems will provide local CHP which is a big plus.Equipment will be taxed, capitalized depriciated. On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Jay Caplan wrote: ** I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these types of generating facilities for the best economy. The risk is that govs will intervene with tax credits and regulations to influence how and where energy is produced - this invariably leads to distortions and inefficiencies. Tax credits and deductions for solar panels and electric cars being notable examples. - Original Message - *From:* Axil Axil *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Sunday, February 19, 2012 7:30 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the people who repair the wires after storms and so on. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system . . . You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your supercritical turbine cannot do all that. I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U. But it is not worth the trouble. Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have individual ones because it is so convenient. It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home (one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency. Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into everything. Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will be self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer. Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
I believe that it was Jed that first made the comparison: In the past ice (simple, frozen H2O) was delivered to businesses and homes. Centralized production, then distribution made sense due to the technological limitations of the time. Now that nearly every home in the developed world has its own freezer, these distribution channels are pared down to gas-station and supermarket deliveries, for barbecue and picnic support. If Ni-H becomes sufficiently compact and reliable, we would simply replace a furnace or air conditioner with an all-in-one Combined Heat and Power device. This won't occur overnight, but seems to be a logical result of power system evolution. Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:36:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system, then DGT may be the product for you. But in a high density urban environment, few will be able to fit their stuff into their apartment or their condo let alone afford their own electric utility package. The ideal of self-sufficiency will not prevail against the reality of crowded urban living. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot backup for some time) Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a distributed system is much safer during war , solar flares, etc. Distributed LENR systems will provide local CHP which is a big plus.Equipment will be taxed, capitalized depriciated. On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Jay Caplan wrote: I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these types of generating facilities for the best economy. The risk is that govs will intervene with tax credits and regulations to influence how and where energy is produced - this invariably leads to distortions and inefficiencies. Tax credits and deductions for solar panels and electric cars being notable examples. - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2012 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/supercritical-carbon-dioxide-brayton.html Take a look at the size comparison of CO2 unit verses steam. The steam turbine is a quarter page and the CO2 turbine is the size of an exclamation point at twice the capacity. First the wires are all paid for and they all are in use. The key to LENR success is to capture as much of the existing electric infrastructure as possible. Most people in the US cannot now afford to buy housing. Landlords will opt for pay as you go rent/utility payments. The upfront cost of a new DGT power system is not cost effective for the landlord. So like green power, DGT power will not be successful. Don’t drink the Green power cool aid. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I believe that it was Jed that first made the comparison: In the past ice (simple, frozen H2O) was delivered to businesses and homes. Centralized production, then distribution made sense due to the technological limitations of the time. Now that nearly every home in the developed world has its own freezer, these distribution channels are pared down to gas-station and supermarket deliveries, for barbecue and picnic support. *If Ni-H becomes sufficiently compact and reliable*, we would simply replace a furnace or air conditioner with an all-in-one Combined Heat and Power device. This won't occur overnight, but seems to be a logical result of power system evolution. -- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:36:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system, then DGT may be the product for you. But in a high density urban environment, few will be able to fit their stuff into their apartment or their condo let alone afford their own electric utility package. The ideal of self-sufficiency will not prevail against the reality of crowded urban living. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot backup for some time) Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a distributed system is much safer during war , solar flares, etc. Distributed LENR systems will provide local CHP which is a big plus.Equipment will be taxed, capitalized depriciated. On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Jay Caplan wrote: ** I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these types of generating facilities for the best economy. The risk is that govs will intervene with tax credits and regulations to influence how and where energy is produced - this invariably leads to distortions and inefficiencies. Tax credits and deductions for solar panels and electric cars being notable examples. - Original Message - *From:* Axil Axil *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Sunday, February 19, 2012 7:30 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent power
producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for local
communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I hope
LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs, expand and
boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets it first...)
On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'janap...@gmail.com'); wrote:
The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric
turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power
generators.
I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the
people who repair the wires after storms and so on.
If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square
footage to install your own power system . . .
You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating
and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and
replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your
supercritical turbine cannot do all that.
I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and
refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump
steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U.
But it is not worth the trouble.
Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has his
own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis make
much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In
cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have
individual ones because it is so convenient.
It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home
(one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it
will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency.
Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into everything.
Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will be
self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer.
Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity.
- Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
The US industrial sector is outsourcing absolutely everything they possibly can, including entire industrial plants and oil refineries. Electric utility companies might be obsolete in the UK because they are outsourcing their electric power from French nuclear. Germany will do the same when their coal runs out. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent power producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for local communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I hope LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs, expand and boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets it first...) On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the people who repair the wires after storms and so on. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system . . . You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your supercritical turbine cannot do all that. I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U. But it is not worth the trouble. Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have individual ones because it is so convenient. It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home (one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency. Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into everything. Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will be self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer. Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
A landlord/commercial building owner will be able to lease a new LENR system for less monthly cost than he is currently paying for heating fuel and electric. No brainer. On Monday, February 20, 2012, Axil Axil wrote: http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/supercritical-carbon-dioxide-brayton.html Take a look at the size comparison of CO2 unit verses steam. The steam turbine is a quarter page and the CO2 turbine is the size of an exclamation point at twice the capacity. First the wires are all paid for and they all are in use. The key to LENR success is to capture as much of the existing electric infrastructure as possible. Most people in the US cannot now afford to buy housing. Landlords will opt for pay as you go rent/utility payments. The upfront cost of a new DGT power system is not cost effective for the landlord. So like green power, DGT power will not be successful. Don’t drink the Green power cool aid. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I believe that it was Jed that first made the comparison: In the past ice (simple, frozen H2O) was delivered to businesses and homes. Centralized production, then distribution made sense due to the technological limitations of the time. Now that nearly every home in the developed world has its own freezer, these distribution channels are pared down to gas-station and supermarket deliveries, for barbecue and picnic support. *If Ni-H becomes sufficiently compact and reliable*, we would simply replace a furnace or air conditioner with an all-in-one Combined Heat and Power device. This won't occur overnight, but seems to be a logical result of power system evolution. -- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:36:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system, then DGT may be the product for you. But in a high density urban environment, few will be able to fit their stuff into their apartment or their condo let alone afford their own electric utility package. The ideal of self-sufficiency will not prevail against the reality of crowded urban living. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot backup for some time) Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a distributed system is much safer during war , solar flares, etc. Distributed LENR systems will provide local CHP which is a big plus.Equipment will be taxed, capitalized depriciated. On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Jay Caplan wrote: ** I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these types of generating facilities for the best economy.
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Progress, I have moved you off the kilowatt sized unit to the megawatt sized unit. But with LENR, power will be so cheap; most people will buy a 1500 watt electric heater at the local hardware store for $30 plug it into the wall socket and skip the headache of being the own utility provider. No brainer On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: A landlord/commercial building owner will be able to lease a new LENR system for less monthly cost than he is currently paying for heating fuel and electric. No brainer. On Monday, February 20, 2012, Axil Axil wrote: http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/supercritical-carbon-dioxide-brayton.html Take a look at the size comparison of CO2 unit verses steam. The steam turbine is a quarter page and the CO2 turbine is the size of an exclamation point at twice the capacity. First the wires are all paid for and they all are in use. The key to LENR success is to capture as much of the existing electric infrastructure as possible. Most people in the US cannot now afford to buy housing. Landlords will opt for pay as you go rent/utility payments. The upfront cost of a new DGT power system is not cost effective for the landlord. So like green power, DGT power will not be successful. Don’t drink the Green power cool aid. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I believe that it was Jed that first made the comparison: In the past ice (simple, frozen H2O) was delivered to businesses and homes. Centralized production, then distribution made sense due to the technological limitations of the time. Now that nearly every home in the developed world has its own freezer, these distribution channels are pared down to gas-station and supermarket deliveries, for barbecue and picnic support. *If Ni-H becomes sufficiently compact and reliable*, we would simply replace a furnace or air conditioner with an all-in-one Combined Heat and Power device. This won't occur overnight, but seems to be a logical result of power system evolution. -- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:36:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system, then DGT may be the product for you. But in a high density urban environment, few will be able to fit their stuff into their apartment or their condo let alone afford their own electric utility package. The ideal of self-sufficiency will not prevail against the reality of crowded urban living. On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: The grid of the future is no grid (existing grid will transistion to a hot backup for some time) Distributed power systems will prevail long term since fuel and electrical distribution/transmission costs upkeep go towards zero $ and a distributed system is much safer during war , solar flares, etc. Distributed LENR systems will provide local CHP which is a big plus.Equipment will be taxed, capitalized depriciated. On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Jay Caplan wrote: ** I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these types of generating facilities for the best economy.
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
The key issue is that household electricity demand averages about 0.3-1.5kW, but can spike up to 10kW with aircon, ovens, hairdryers, clothes dryers, toasters, kettles, lawnmowers, powertools etc. It is very hard to make a system that can cover such a range efficiently or cheaply. Currently even the best batteries are very expensive ($0.03/kWh), but grid supplies are typically $0.07-0.01/kWh (on top of the cost of electricity at a large powerplant). A neighbourhood micro-grid is a good compromise - it evens out the loads and can handle the spikes in demand from individual houses with no trouble so you don't need to have a home generator capable of high peak power, or any energy storage, but you don't have to pay for the maintenance of large transformers, substations and transmission lines. And if your generator needs maintenance you will still have power. A neighbourhood microgrid will be low voltage, transformerless and will probably add $0.02/kWh to the cost of electricity. It might involve small generators in each house (heat and power) with electricity shared between all houses to cover power spikes, or it might be a centralized generator of 50-1000kW. That said all sizes of generators will be used from 100's of MW for industrial uses to 10's of kW for factories to 1-5kW with energy storage for stand alone and rural and 100's of W for communication towers or lighting. On 20 February 2012 22:13, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent power producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for local communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I hope LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs, expand and boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets it first...) On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the people who repair the wires after storms and so on. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system . . . You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your supercritical turbine cannot do all that. I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U. But it is not worth the trouble. Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have individual ones because it is so convenient. It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home (one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency. Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into everything. Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will be self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer. Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
After LENR, eLectricity, now virtually free will be exchanged like college
kids share torrents, afterall they are just electrons.
On Monday, February 20, 2012, Robert Lynn wrote:
The key issue is that household electricity demand averages about
0.3-1.5kW, but can spike up to 10kW with aircon, ovens, hairdryers, clothes
dryers, toasters, kettles, lawnmowers, powertools etc. It is very hard to
make a system that can cover such a range efficiently or cheaply.
Currently even the best batteries are very expensive ($0.03/kWh), but grid
supplies are typically $0.07-0.01/kWh (on top of the cost of electricity at
a large powerplant).
A neighbourhood micro-grid is a good compromise - it evens out the loads
and can handle the spikes in demand from individual houses with no trouble
so you don't need to have a home generator capable of high peak power, or
any energy storage, but you don't have to pay for the maintenance of large
transformers, substations and transmission lines. And if your generator
needs maintenance you will still have power. A neighbourhood microgrid
will be low voltage, transformerless and will probably add $0.02/kWh to
the cost of electricity. It might involve small generators in each house
(heat and power) with electricity shared between all houses to cover power
spikes, or it might be a centralized generator of 50-1000kW.
That said all sizes of generators will be used from 100's of MW for
industrial uses to 10's of kW for factories to 1-5kW with energy storage
for stand alone and rural and 100's of W for communication towers or
lighting.
On 20 February 2012 22:13, Chemical Engineer
cheme...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'cheme...@gmail.com');
wrote:
In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent
power producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for
local communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I
hope LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs,
expand and boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets
it first...)
On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric
turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power
generators.
I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the
people who repair the wires after storms and so on.
If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square
footage to install your own power system . . .
You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating
and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and
replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your
supercritical turbine cannot do all that.
I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and
refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump
steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U.
But it is not worth the trouble.
Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has
his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis
make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In
cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have
individual ones because it is so convenient.
It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home
(one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it
will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency.
Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into everything.
Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will be
self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer.
Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity.
- Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
I agree. the grid will not die, but will change from a delivery grid to an exchange grid. for me it is like internet. internet did nt kill the mainframe, but replaced it by servers that behave like big or small mainframes, providing different services, organized according to the needs, but also to the orgianization of the producer of content... of course ther is still home production, but less than at the begining, and alos there is an organized exchange platform, like CHP can be. mainframe are no more the only allowed technology, but big internet servers exists 2012/2/20 Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com The key issue is that household electricity demand averages about 0.3-1.5kW, but can spike up to 10kW with aircon, ovens, hairdryers, clothes dryers, toasters, kettles, lawnmowers, powertools etc. It is very hard to make a system that can cover such a range efficiently or cheaply. Currently even the best batteries are very expensive ($0.03/kWh), but grid supplies are typically $0.07-0.01/kWh (on top of the cost of electricity at a large powerplant). A neighbourhood micro-grid is a good compromise - it evens out the loads and can handle the spikes in demand from individual houses with no trouble so you don't need to have a home generator capable of high peak power, or any energy storage, but you don't have to pay for the maintenance of large transformers, substations and transmission lines. And if your generator needs maintenance you will still have power. A neighbourhood microgrid will be low voltage, transformerless and will probably add $0.02/kWh to the cost of electricity. It might involve small generators in each house (heat and power) with electricity shared between all houses to cover power spikes, or it might be a centralized generator of 50-1000kW. That said all sizes of generators will be used from 100's of MW for industrial uses to 10's of kW for factories to 1-5kW with energy storage for stand alone and rural and 100's of W for communication towers or lighting. On 20 February 2012 22:13, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent power producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for local communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I hope LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs, expand and boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets it first...) On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric power generators. I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations, the people who repair the wires after storms and so on. If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square footage to install your own power system . . . You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your supercritical turbine cannot do all that. I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U. But it is not worth the trouble. Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have individual ones because it is so convenient. It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home (one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency. Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into everything. Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will be self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer. Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
The travesty of the existing grid is that only 25-45% of the fossil energy
produced in heat and elec. at the utility company ever makes it to the end
user. The rest goes out the stack/cooling tower/river or ocean water as
Polution to the environment
On Monday, February 20, 2012, Alain Sepeda wrote:
I agree.
the grid will not die, but will change from a delivery grid to an exchange
grid.
for me it is like internet.
internet did nt kill the mainframe, but replaced it by servers that behave
like
big or small mainframes, providing different services, organized according
to the needs, but
also to the orgianization of the producer of content...
of course ther is still home production, but less than at the begining,
and alos there is an organized exchange platform, like CHP can be.
mainframe are no more the only allowed technology, but big internet
servers exists
2012/2/20 Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e({},
'cvml', 'robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com');
The key issue is that household electricity demand averages about
0.3-1.5kW, but can spike up to 10kW with aircon, ovens, hairdryers, clothes
dryers, toasters, kettles, lawnmowers, powertools etc. It is very hard to
make a system that can cover such a range efficiently or cheaply.
Currently even the best batteries are very expensive ($0.03/kWh), but
grid supplies are typically $0.07-0.01/kWh (on top of the cost of
electricity at a large powerplant).
A neighbourhood micro-grid is a good compromise - it evens out the loads
and can handle the spikes in demand from individual houses with no trouble
so you don't need to have a home generator capable of high peak power, or
any energy storage, but you don't have to pay for the maintenance of large
transformers, substations and transmission lines. And if your generator
needs maintenance you will still have power. A neighbourhood microgrid
will be low voltage, transformerless and will probably add $0.02/kWh to
the cost of electricity. It might involve small generators in each house
(heat and power) with electricity shared between all houses to cover power
spikes, or it might be a centralized generator of 50-1000kW.
That said all sizes of generators will be used from 100's of MW for
industrial uses to 10's of kW for factories to 1-5kW with energy storage
for stand alone and rural and 100's of W for communication towers or
lighting.
On 20 February 2012 22:13, Chemical Engineer
cheme...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'cheme...@gmail.com');
wrote:
In the future, I think the industrial sector will become independent
power producers supplying all of their own needs and act as a backup for
local communities. Utility companies will become obsolete long term. I
hope LENR will be the boost that US manufacturing needs to cut costs,
expand and boost production and get jobs back in the US (unless China gets
it first...)
On Monday, February 20, 2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
The economy of scale says that one room sized CO2 supercritical
electric turbine is far more economical then 10 million sterling electric
power generators.
I doubt it. Not when you include the cost of the wires, substations,
the people who repair the wires after storms and so on.
If you are a standalone survivalist, have the capital and the square
footage to install your own power system . . .
You are forgetting that a standalone system also functions as a heating
and thermal airconditioning system. It eliminate electricity and gas and
replaces the furnace, the airconditioner and the water heater. Your
supercritical turbine cannot do all that.
I have my open HVAC system at my house, and my own washer, dried and
refrigerator. It might be more efficient to use district heating and pump
steam through pipes for heat, the way they do at the campus at Cornell U.
But it is not worth the trouble.
Look at it this way. Automobiles are very inefficient. Everyone has
his own, and they sit in the parking lot all day. Trains, buses or taxis
make much better use of equipment, take up less space and cost far less. In
cities such as Paris, the cars are crammed together. But we like to have
individual ones because it is so convenient.
It will not be more convenient to have one or two generators at home
(one for backup) because no one cares where electricity comes from, but it
will be cheaper and simpler in the long run, and that trumps efficiency.
Eventually, thermoelectric power supplies will be built into
everything. Everything from watches to refrigerators the automobiles will
be self-powered. There will be no electric wires. It will be a lot safer.
Note that refrigerators will use mainly heat, rather than electricity.
- Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
you mix two lossed. the thermodynamic cycles are the same for LENR, even worse for small units, and lower temperature of reactors. this is why bigger units might be more efficent that smaller. the other lossed are transport losses. but don't forget that in LENR the biggest cost is not fuel but investment. investing in a generator 5 times bigger than your average consumtion, just to be off the grid is not efficient. also if the grid became a peer to peer network, and no more a donwnload network, the transport losses will be strong ly reduced. the good point is that grid could be more easily managed because more naturally balanced. anyway ther could be some regional/temporal disbalance where the big powerlines will be usefull to avoid building big huge powerplants... once again we have changed paradigm, investment and maintenance is the cost, this means maximum power. no more the energy itself. 2012/2/21 Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com The travesty of the existing grid is that only 25-45% of the fossil energy produced in heat and elec. at the utility company ever makes it to the end user. The rest goes out the stack/cooling tower/river or ocean water as Polution to the environment
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
the thermodynamic cycles are the same for LENR
Yes they are the same Rankine cycle but the 65% excess heat energy
generated locally with LENR can be used to heat water, homes and factories
and in the summer maybe to run absorption chillers for extra cooling.
Also, DGT's reactor can cycle up 5 kW thermal increments by closing a 24 V
contact and energizing one more core much like 12 cyclinder IC engines can
go from 6-8-10-12 cylinders and only generate the power when needed. It
will be no contest, utililities are toast.
Also, 30% of the fossil fuel energy today is used to drill, mine and
transport the fossil fuels themselves!
On Monday, February 20, 2012, Alain Sepeda wrote:
you mix two lossed.
the thermodynamic cycles are the same for LENR, even worse for small
units, and lower temperature of reactors.
this is why bigger units might be more efficent that smaller.
the other lossed are transport losses.
but don't forget that in LENR the biggest cost is not fuel but investment.
investing in a generator 5 times bigger than your average consumtion, just
to be off the grid is not efficient.
also if the grid became a peer to peer network, and no more a donwnload
network, the transport losses will be strong ly reduced.
the good point is that grid could be more easily managed because more
naturally balanced.
anyway ther could be some regional/temporal disbalance where the big
powerlines will be usefull to avoid building big huge powerplants...
once again we have changed paradigm, investment and maintenance is the
cost, this means maximum power. no more the energy itself.
2012/2/21 Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e({},
'cvml', 'cheme...@gmail.com');
The travesty of the existing grid is that only 25-45% of the fossil
energy produced in heat and elec. at the utility company ever makes it to
the end user. The rest goes out the stack/cooling tower/river or ocean
water as Polution to the environment
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I believe that it was Jed that first made the comparison: In the past ice (simple, frozen H2O) was delivered to businesses and homes. Centralized production, then distribution made sense due to the technological limitations of the time. The limitation was they used ammonia refrigerant, which was toxic. Before that they cut ice from ponds in winter. People stored that on farms, in ice houses, covered in sawdust. They would sell ice to people in town, and send it by ship to Florida. Technology often goes in circles, from centralized systems, to decentralized, back to centralized systems. A vivid modern example: isolated mainframe computer = timeshare (shared) = isolated mini-computers = isolated PCs = LAN-PCs = Internet = cloud computing (more shared than any previous model) The distinction is somewhat artificial. People think of automobiles as decentralized but look at fuel delivery, road building and traffic control it seems almost as centralized as a railroad. In some ways. No doubt many competing cold fusion systems will be developed. The market will decide. It may be that centralized systems work bbest for large cities with high population density, but in suburbs and rural areas, decentralized systems will prevail. The market distribution may fall in about the same areas as central sewer systems versus septic tanks. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. now it is work, and not energy that is expensive. for defkalion machine, my vision was that 70% of the cost would be investment, 30% maintenance and fuel preparation, and 0,1% raw nickel simplifying the machine will be more efficient that optimizing it. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. 2012/2/19 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com A relatively new transformational reactor concept that uses supercritical carbon dioxide (S-CO2) as the coolant in a direct cycle NiH reactor (SC-NHR).
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
I agree with your vision. just one detail, nuclear energy huge size is alos linked to the need to concentrate criticall mass, AND safety protection in one place... the possibility of medium sized nuclear power plant, like hyperion look like another compromize. however saftery is also critical in that sizing, since the size is reduced to reduce local maintenance and accident impact. again things are different for LENR, since capital efficiency is the only problem. 2012/2/20 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
A flexible interface matching LENR modular steam boiler that can be fitted into the current electric power plant infrastructure footprint would have a large and eager customer base from in-place current electric utilities. Such an approach would save untold $billions in existing electric power plant real-estate, plant infrastructure, generation and grid connectivity. Rossi and DGT should be devoting design effort in first meeting this important market need. Replacing this large investment in existing electric utility capabilities with small kilowatt sized units is surely not the right way to go with LENR. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: I agree with your vision. just one detail, nuclear energy huge size is alos linked to the need to concentrate criticall mass, AND safety protection in one place... the possibility of medium sized nuclear power plant, like hyperion look like another compromize. however saftery is also critical in that sizing, since the size is reduced to reduce local maintenance and accident impact. again things are different for LENR, since capital efficiency is the only problem. 2012/2/20 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
I agree, the market will decide the optimum scale and location for these types of generating facilities for the best economy. The risk is that govs will intervene with tax credits and regulations to influence how and where energy is produced - this invariably leads to distortions and inefficiencies. Tax credits and deductions for solar panels and electric cars being notable examples. - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2012 7:30 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor We are talking the cost effective generation of electricity here. Let us draw proper lessens from recent history and current reality. If the production of electric power was more cost efficient in the individual home, then natural gas turbines would be now found in everyone’s basement; but there are no home centric gas/electric home generation products on the market. The big centralized natural gas turbines operated by large electric utilities are now and will always be the low cost provider. The idea that the independence of the individual is critical in the upcoming peak energy apocalypse according to the green renewable power doctrinaire is false. So it is extremely important that this groundless green concept must not be transferred to LENR electric power production. NiH power production is a highly concentrated nuclear based form of power production. In the same way as fission power, high COP and huge economies of scale can be translated into ultra-low cost centralized electric power production by statewide or even regional electric utilities. On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: good design, but I think it is not adapted to the need. your design save energy, but at the cost of investment. the structure of LENR is that it is investment that cost, not fuel. so my vision is that classic water, moderate temperature, will will, because it will ensure the least total cost LENR is really a violent paradigm change in energy management. we were preparing for starvation, and it is bonanza. . . . Yup. Well said. see the nuclear reactors, working at low temperature for incresed safety and simplicity... LENR is even less expensive about consumption. I agree. I was going to make these points. - Jed
