Re: [Vo]:World population graphs
2011/10/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: The bad news is that the population is now approaching 7 billion. The good news is that the growth rate and fertility rate are falling, and contraceptive prevalence is above 60%, although not increasing. so future trend look good. I do not see why this is good or bad news. With eCat we can have vertical agriculture, because we can remove the only obstacle why we do not have yet vertical farming, that is the obstacle of producing cheap light. With rapidly evolving LED-technology and eCat this obstacle is completely removed and we can increase the productivity of land by factor of 200 or more and water and nutrients can be fully recycled. And production automatized. This means that there are over two gigahectares of fertile land mass freed from horizontal agriculture. That is plenty of land mass for both humans and nature. Vertical agriculture means, no (GM-) pesticides and no erosion. Therefore, if we have unlimited source for energy and electricity price is 5 dollars or less per MWh, vertical agriculture is cheaper than horizontal farming. And if we can do this, then there is absolutely no reason, why we should worry about the welfare of nature. (Of course we do need to worry, but we can rise the environmental conservation standards by several orders of magnitude from today's standards.) –Jouni
RE: [Vo]:OT: Nothing about us, without us!
From: Harry Veeder Nothing about us, without us! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UjZyjFMUC8 water...education..air...free energy... ...And they just tear gassed Occupy Wall Street demonstrations held in California. http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/26/us/occupy-wall-steet/index.html?hpt=hp_c1 I saw inklings of this kind of discontent during the anti Wisconsin governor Scott Walker demonstrations held in Wisconsin earlier this year. I personally felt transported back to the 1960s, as did many other old farts, like me. Earlier this year many assumed the anti Scott Walker protests must only be local phenomenon... just a bunch of disgruntled state employees plus a few outside rabble rousers and union thugs trying to stir up the crowds, or so the pro Scott Walker crowd claimed, including Sarah Palin (Union Thugs). Not anymore. The genesis of that so-called local discontent are now spreading across the entire nation. We are living through interesting times. Interesting sociological events like: possibly cheap new energy sources, and how that will change the political power base of nations... Radical changes in government policy will have to be addressed. People are frightened, particularly the conservative base which is always terrified of change - give me that good ol time religion while not realizing how foolish such fantasies are. Fortunately, I suspect the rest of the population gets it, more or less. The protests the goals are still a little unfocused, but they are getting there. As previously stated, the Occupy Wall Street movement reminds me of the 1960s, the counter-culture, and the all the protests and riots that revolved around the Vietnam War disaster. The senselessness of it all. As always, it took rabble rousers... particularly protestors marching in the streets and weathering the indignity of tear gas and other humiliations to get the nation to eventually recognize the insanity of the government policy of that time. Is history about to repeat itself? Looks very likely to me. This will take years to unfold. Sanity will eventually prevail, but it will take time, hardship, and a lot of discussion, debate, and national soul searching. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:OT: Something wrong with the moon
This is hilarious, including the fact that the presenters of this you tube video would appear dead serious. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYglbymnihQNR=1 Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Observers at the October 6th demo.
From Sean: It's not scientific, but I've been digging into the people listed as attending the Ross ECat demo on October 6th ...and an interesting list of characters it is. Thanks Sean. Of particular interest to us Americanskian's Paul D Swanson, SPAWAR/DARPA I wonder what Mr. Swanson's report to his superiors will say. Damn! Rossi is beginning to catch up to us ? ;-) Actually, I'm not inclined to believe speculation claiming that DoD has secretly been using CF for years, if not for decades. But stranger things have turned out to be true. So who really knows. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:World population graphs
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: I do not see why this is good or bad news. With eCat we can have vertical agriculture, because we can remove the only obstacle why we do not have yet vertical farming, that is the obstacle of producing cheap light. Actually there are some schemes to do vertical farming without much artificial light. See: http://www.verticalfarm.com/ I am in favor of this, and I discussed in my book. This sort of thing would allow a higher population density was less damage to the ecosystem. However population pressure will cause problems no matter what. I think a stable or declining population would be a good idea even with cold fusion. Some parts of the world are more overpopulated than others. The truth is, I think people should have lots of space. Especially children. They should have lots of woods and fields with no fences or boundaries to run around in, unsupervised, away from adults. Japan has high population density but actually there is a great deal of space and many beautiful places in the countryside where no one lives anymore. It is a shame they cannot spread out their population with telecommuting. It is also a shame that kids spend all afternoon in cram schools instead of outdoors causing mischief. - Jed
[Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
I have been conducting a review of a graph of the ECAT internal temperature (T2) versus time. This graph reveals some important facts concerning the operation of the ECAT which can be uncovered with a bit of effort. I am including several of the discoveries that I have uncovered for the benefit of this technically qualified group. I know that I will have interesting feedback regarding my points if history of the vortex is a guide. It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The only other possible explanation for the anomalous reading at this time mark would be if the water flow were high enough to fill the ECAT and start to overflow into the heat exchanger. Of course, the rate of water flow into the ECAT is one of the most contentious parameters that we have been discussing within vortex. Some measurements suggest that overflow is occurring at this time and others do not agree. Mats Lewan measured a flow rate of .91 grams/second at 18:57 by collecting water for a 6 minute period during which he collected 328 grams of output. He collected enough water for a long enough time to obtain a reasonable average. Meanwhile, the leakage water exiting the ECAT case was measured and estimated to be 2 kilograms/hour. This calculates to be .555 grams per second. The addition of the two yields 1.46 grams/second as the assumed flow rate. I calculated the total water delivered to the ECAT using this figure and obtained 1.46 grams/second x 9480 seconds = 13.8 kilograms. This is about one half of the estimated water capacity of the ECAT, which is 30 kilograms. There is support for a larger water input flow rate however. During the September test documented by Mats the ECAT started to overfill after 8400 seconds. The ECAT used for that test (SN?) was reported to have a volume of approximately 30 liters. Mats kept very accurate records of the water inflow and I am very grateful to him. The water input flow rate can be calculated as 3 grams divided by 8400 seconds, or 3.57 grams/second. This can be converted into 12.857 liters/hour which is very close to the specification of the pump (2 liters/hour). Also, during the September test the temperature reading at what we now call T2 was 90.3 C which is below boiling. The saturated pressure associated with this temperature is lower than atmospheric and thus the pump should be capable of delivering its specified flow rate. The argument presented above is so persuasive that I plan to analyze the behavior of the ECAT further using the assumption that overflow is in fact occurring much earlier than I anticipated. There must be a reason for the low flow rate that Mats measured for the October test and I suspect that the data has an effect hidden within. I think that it is safe to assume that one of the two options I have listed is functioning. Either the ECAT is overflowing quite early within the test, or its water level is significantly lower and the temperature probe is not touching the heat sink fins. I have made several additional interesting observations during my review of this particular graph which I will document for the group when convenient. I do not wish to overload the vortex with too large of a post at one time. Dave
Re: [Vo]:Observers at the October 6th demo.
Am 26.10.2011 15:48, schrieb OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson: From Sean: It's not scientific, but I've been digging into the people listed as attending the Ross ECat demo on October 6th ...and an interesting list of characters it is. Thanks Sean. Of particular interest to us Americanskian's Paul D Swanson, SPAWAR/DARPA I wonder what Mr. Swanson's report to his superiors will say. At least the Bologna University Professors where privately there and not officially sent by the university or institutes. As only invited observers where there, I would believe that all scientists where there privately and not officially. An observer of European Patent Office was invited, but was not there. Damn! Rossi is beginning to catch up to us ? ;-) Actually, I'm not inclined to believe speculation claiming that DoD has secretly been using CF for years, if not for decades. But stranger things have turned out to be true. So who really knows. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:movin and gorven now
I found a HDMI cable for $20 on the internet, 10 ft long, and it works fine. Plugged my computer into my flat panel TV with it. Hooked up the computers TV input to the cable. Got a wireless keyboard form Amazon, KeySonic, with built in touch pad. It works nice. Fixed my easy char, I am spinnen in my chair and movin and groven with two displays today. I need a Rossi unit so that I could do this for free. I would also like a nice woman instead of this cat who keep jumping on my laptop keyboard. Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:0.9 g/s primary flow was probably not the incoming flow rate
I am now in agreement with your assumption that the water input flow rate is quite a bit greater than I was assuming. I based my previous estimated rate on the October report of Lewan and now think it is incorrect. Several issues still do not make sense at the moment. How were they able to increase the rate since it is already at the maximum specification? Why the low readings at both of Mats test points? I am sure we will be able to understand the phenomenon once a great deal of effort is applied. Your comment that there must be a lot of extra heat generation is one I agree with completely. We are just forced to attempt to separate the variables to understand exactly how this is occurring. I am reviewing a graph of T2 versus time to see if the truth can be revealed to me. Good post Jed. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Oct 25, 2011 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:0.9 g/s primary flow was probably not the incoming flow rate Okay, Lewan told me that after the run there was at least 20 L of hot water left in the vessel. He did not measure it the way he did after the September test, but the vessel was pretty full. If there was any water let in the vessel that proves there must have been some cooling water flowing into it during the test. If the water was going out at the rate of 0.9 g/s (3.2 L/h), and there was no input, the vessel would have been nearly empty after nine hours. There would have been less than 1 L left. I think it is much more likely the average flow rate out was close to the incoming rate, and both were ~4 g/s. Lewan mentioned there was also a leak, which has been discussed here. Some amount of water left the cell via the leak. The important thing is, the replacement water coming in was at tap water temperature. It was coming in from the large plastic trashcan. The flow rate also had to be high enough so that people could see water moving to the pipe. I expect it was closer to 4 g/s than 0.9 g/s, most of the time. This proves the water was cooled down with incoming tap water. Obviously it also radiated a lot of heat. These two facts together prove that it could not have remained at the same temperature for four hours without a source of power inside the cell. It would be much better if we had a detailed record of the amount of water that was pumped into the cell, with a precision flowmeter between the pump and the cell. It would be difficult to determine how much of the water left via the of the leak and how much was vaporized or overflowed and ended up going through the heat exchanger. I suppose you could put another precision flowmeter below the heat exchanger, but even a high precision meter would have difficulty measuring this. To determine how much cooling water displaced the original water in the cell, you do not need to know whether the outflow left via the leak or via the heat exchanger. By the way, if there was no water flowing into the cell, that would mean there must have been intense anomalous heat. Otherwise, the cell would have radiated enough to cool down, and it would soon stop boiling. After that, the water would not have gone from the cell into the heat exchanger. Without a flow of incoming water to displace the existing water, boiling is the only thing that can force it into the heat exchanger. If there had been no flow, and no boiling to push the water into the exchanger, the exchanger would have dropped to room temperature very quickly. It would have done this in the time it takes that much metal to cool down, maybe 10 minutes, It would have registered no Delta T. Even if the reactor vessel had remained hot, cooling only by radiation and not by displaced hot water, none of that heat would have reached the exchanger. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The environment inside the reactor veseel would have a partial pressure of steam of about 0.85bar at 95°C, this steam will act to very rapidly heat anything within the reactor vessel to exactly the same temperatures (acting as a heat pipe) through the action of condensation, though it would be possible for dry surfaces to be hotter (superheating absorbs a releatively tiny amount of energy per degree of temperature change comapred to vaporisation). I therefore think your hypothesis of overflow is much more likely than that the thermocouple is under-reading. However another possiblity is that there is a significant opening from the reactor. While it is a reasonable surmise that there is a pressure relief valve given the way the reactor was emptied in the video from Sept demo, we still don't know don't know for sure, and it seems rather curious that the temp/pressure seems to get up to 2 bar gauge in the Sept test and 1.35bar in the Oct 6th test. It may instead simply be a small orifice. If steam does flow from the vessel to the heat exchanger (be it an orifice or a slightly leaky or non-ideal relief valve) then condensation would lead to a large flow of heat energy as the condensing steam casues a partial vacuum and is continually replaced.
Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now
I'm sure you intended this message for twitter.com T On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:04 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: I found a HDMI cable for $20 on the internet, 10 ft long, and it works fine. Plugged my computer into my flat panel TV with it. Hooked up the computers TV input to the cable. Got a wireless keyboard form Amazon, KeySonic, with built in touch pad. It works nice. Fixed my easy char, I am spinnen in my chair and movin and groven with two displays today. I need a Rossi unit so that I could do this for free. I would also like a nice woman instead of this cat who keep jumping on my laptop keyboard. Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now
Frank sez: I would also like a nice woman instead of this cat who keep jumping on my laptop keyboard. While we are tweeting... Make sure she isn't allergic to cats. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now
You will need a larger keyboard or a very small woman! -Original Message- From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson [mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:48 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now Frank sez: I would also like a nice woman instead of this cat who keep jumping on my laptop keyboard. While we are tweeting... Make sure she isn't allergic to cats. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
At the time this measurement was performed, the water had not been boiling and air is occupying the space above it. This would cause a high humidity, but I am not sure that much condensation would occur. Do you still think that the condensation would be adequate to keep the probe reading accurately? -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The environment inside the reactor veseel would have a partial pressure of steam of about 0.85bar at 95°C, this steam will act to very rapidly heat anything within the reactor vessel to exactly the same temperatures (acting as a heat pipe) through the action of condensation, though it would be possible for dry surfaces to be hotter (superheating absorbs a releatively tiny amount of energy per degree of temperature change comapred to vaporisation). I therefore think your hypothesis of overflow is much more likely than that the thermocouple is under-reading. However another possiblity is that there is a significant opening from the reactor. While it is a reasonable surmise that there is a pressure relief valve given the way the reactor was emptied in the video from Sept demo, we still don't know don't know for sure, and it seems rather curious that the temp/pressure seems to get up to 2 bar gauge in the Sept test and 1.35bar in the Oct 6th test. It may instead simply be a small orifice. If steam does flow from the vessel to the heat exchanger (be it an orifice or a slightly leaky or non-ideal relief valve) then condensation would lead to a large flow of heat energy as the condensing steam casues a partial vacuum and is continually replaced.
Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
At 0.85bar partial pressure of steam there would definitely be enough. Heat pipes in general, and particulalrly those utilising steam have incredible rates of heat transfer. On 26 October 2011 18:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: At the time this measurement was performed, the water had not been boiling and air is occupying the space above it. This would cause a high humidity, but I am not sure that much condensation would occur. Do you still think that the condensation would be adequate to keep the probe reading accurately? -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The environment inside the reactor veseel would have a partial pressure of steam of about 0.85bar at 95°C, this steam will act to very rapidly heat anything within the reactor vessel to exactly the same temperatures (acting as a heat pipe) through the action of condensation, though it would be possible for dry surfaces to be hotter (superheating absorbs a releatively tiny amount of energy per degree of temperature change comapred to vaporisation). I therefore think your hypothesis of overflow is much more likely than that the thermocouple is under-reading. However another possiblity is that there is a significant opening from the reactor. While it is a reasonable surmise that there is a pressure relief valve given the way the reactor was emptied in the video from Sept demo, we still don't know don't know for sure, and it seems rather curious that the temp/pressure seems to get up to 2 bar gauge in the Sept test and 1.35bar in the Oct 6th test. It may instead simply be a small orifice. If steam does flow from the vessel to the heat exchanger (be it an orifice or a slightly leaky or non-ideal relief valve) then condensation would lead to a large flow of heat energy as the condensing steam casues a partial vacuum and is continually replaced.
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi says he has a European CE mark
The melting point of nickel , 1453°C, would only occur very locally as a result of IRH migrating between acute nano geometry and undergoing whatever reaction theory you happen to endorse. It won't happen without the geometry and if that much heat occurs the geometry will become plastic and grow closed to negate the stiction forces. I think this is why Naudin had so much difficulty with the MAHG and why other researchers have such difficulty replicating even their own experiments... because once these enabling geometries overheat they destroy themselves and the powders or skeletal catalysts have to be reactivated to become functional again. I think the explosion danger could be mitigated by using a minimal amount of hydrogen circulated rapidly through the reactor in a closed loop. The Haisch Moddel patent has certain advantages in this respect and the fact that the Rossi powder is on a larger micron scale than the nano scale promoted by other researchers makes it a good candidate to adopt this method. IMHO the circulation pump would act as an additional throttle / accelerator on the anomally. Regards Fran From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 10:41 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi says he has a European CE mark Andrea Rossi said to reporters: We do not use radioactive materials, do not leave radioactive material and the highes temperature we can reach is the melting point of nickel : once the nickel melts, the E-Cat stops and this fact makes it intrinsecally safe. In two follow-up questions, reporters asked: What he meant by leaving radioactive material. Earlier he claimed that radioactivity is detected during the event. It was pointed out that radioactive materials cannot simply vanish once they have been created. Also it was pointed out that the melting point of nickel is 1453°C, and that if the device reaches this temperature before the reaction stops this could easily cause a serious explosion. This temperature seems too high to be considered intrinsically safe. Rossi responded: meep meep! and ran away at high speed, vanishing in cloud of dust. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi says he has a European CE mark
On 11-10-25 10:40 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Andrea Rossi said to reporters: We do not use radioactive materials, do not leave radioactive material and the highes temperature we can reach is the melting point of nickel : once the nickel melts, the E-Cat stops and this fact makes it intrinsecally safe. In two follow-up questions, reporters asked: What he meant by leaving radioactive material. Earlier he claimed that radioactivity is detected during the event. It was pointed out that radioactive materials cannot simply vanish once they have been created. And the lead shielding, assuming it exists and assuming it really is necessary, indicates that there's some sort of hard radiation coming out (or trying to). When anything you're likely to need lead shielding for results from nuclear processes, there's generally at least *some* amount of radioactive byproduct left behind (some as in more than none). Of course, the measured isotope non-shift suggests that there may indeed be nothing nuclear taking place, which would make obtaining safety certificates of all sorts far easier. Also it was pointed out that the melting point of nickel is 1453°C, and that if the device reaches this temperature before the reaction stops this could easily cause a serious explosion. This temperature seems too high to be considered intrinsically safe. Rossi responded: meep meep! and ran away at high speed, vanishing in cloud of dust. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Observers at the October 6th demo.
Am 26.10.2011 17:36, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 26.10.2011 15:48, schrieb OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson: From Sean: It's not scientific, but I've been digging into the people listed as attending the Ross ECat demo on October 6th ...and an interesting list of characters it is. Thanks Sean. Of particular interest to us Americanskian's Paul D Swanson, SPAWAR/DARPA I wonder what Mr. Swanson's report to his superiors will say. At least the Bologna University Professors where privately there and not officially sent by the university or institutes. As only invited observers where there, I would believe that all scientists where there privately and not officially. An observer of European Patent Office was invited, but was not there. It should also be noted, that in his invitation to EPO Rossi wrote, the demonstration will be made in rooms made available by University Bologna and a report will be written and this did not happen. Probably the only persons who where there for official and professional reasons where the journalists. So, nobody will write a report to his superiors. And nobody clarifys this and all false rumours resulting from this are welcome and happily blown up and propagated for true as always in the free energy and LENR scene. If the research is like this, then there is nothing behind. You cannot take this serious. SCNR Peter
Re: [Vo]:Observers at the October 6th demo.
On 10/26/2011 2:14 PM, Peter Heckert wrote: And nobody clarifys this and all false rumours resulting from this are welcome and happily blown up and propagated for true as always in the free energy and LENR scene. I agree this is a circus, but such things are rare in LENR research. It is usually sedate. It takes place at boring universities or corporations. Look at the ICCF web sites and the Papers at LENR-CANR.org and you see no grandstanding or false rumors. In the free energy business you do see a lot of false rumors and flamboyant behavior. I think we all agree that Rossi is flamboyant. - Jed
[Vo]:Cold Fusion and Government Taxation
Greetings Vortex, IF Rossi is successful , as I expect, I wonder what will the world governments will do on taxation? Governments cannot resist. Will almost free energy be killed by taxation. Ron Kita, Chiralex
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion and Government Taxation
That might very well be the way big oil and other giant energy companies keep a major portion of the energy market once the energy catalyzer type products start damaging them. On the flip side, the push for climate change solutions may force the issue in the other direction. It depends upon who speaks the loudest. Dave -Original Message- From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 5:07 pm Subject: [Vo]:Cold Fusion and Government Taxation Greetings Vortex, IF Rossi is successful , as I expect, I wonder what will the world governments will do on taxation? Governments cannot resist. Will almost free energy be killed by taxation. Ron Kita, Chiralex
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now
That's not all. I found a way to get the pictures from my Accullade phone to download into my computer without going through Verizon. Its a program called BitPim. I am also watching the cartoon Peppa Pig in various languages. Sorry Jed no Japanese yet. Boines dies Peppa. Guten morgen Peppa Schwein. -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 9:09 am Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now You will need a larger keyboard or a very small woman! -Original Message- From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson [mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:48 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now Frank sez: I would also like a nice woman instead of this cat who keep jumping on my laptop keyboard. While we are tweeting... Make sure she isn't allergic to cats. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion and Government Taxation
DGT speaks on this in their forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=359 (Google translate) The fuel tax would be feasible if there was some form of combustion in the core Hyperions. No burning does not take place for the production of heat energy. The taxation of raw materials used in the generated thermal energy (Hydrogen and Nickel) is technically impossible or too difficult due to other uses have specific information in many industrial applications or everyday use (coins, chemical industry, food industry etc. ). The Ministries of Development and Environment have yet to clarify whether it intends to recommend the imposition or not of Hyperion devices with a fixed fee or duty shall be deemed public revenue from such taxes will more than cover them than it would save the national economy from reduced greenhouse gas emissions, currently covered by the Kyoto treaty, to reduce costs for the purchase of hydrocarbons for the needs of the public, increased revenue for the nickel mining industry, the revenues generated from the export of products and expertise by our company and the benefits in competitiveness is expected to result from the gradual reduction of high energy costs to the products of domestic industry and agriculture. We believe that the intentions and taxation policies will be specified by the competent authorities immediately after the licensing of our products. Then it is possible and the public debate should take place within the statutory and public consultation, and in which we prepare to take an active part. Thank you Η φορολόγηση καυσίμου θα ήταν εφικτή αν υπήρχε κάποιας μορφής καύση στον πυρήνα των Hyperions. Καμία καύση όμως δεν λαμβάνει χώρα για την παραγωγή της παραγόμενης θερμικής ενέργειας. Η φορολόγηση των πρώτων υλών που χρησιμοποιούνται για την παραγόμενη θερμική ενέργεια (Υδρογόνο και Νικέλιο) είναι τεχνικά αδύνατη ή υπερβολικά δύσκολη λόγω και των άλλων χρήσεων που έχουν τα συγκεκριμένα στοιχεία σε πάρα πολλές βιομηχανικές εφαρμογές ή καθημερινές χρήσεις (νομίσματα, χημική βιομηχανία, βιομηχανία τροφίμων κλπ). Τα αρμόδια Υπουργεία Ανάπτυξης και Περιβάλλοντος δεν έχουν ακόμα διευκρινίσει αν προτίθεται να εισηγηθούν την φορολογήση ή όχι των συσκευών Hyperion με κάποιο πάγιο τέλος κατανάλωσης ή αν θα θεωρήθεί ότι τα δημόσια έσοδα από μια τέτοια φορολόγηση θα υπερ-καλυφτούν από όσα θα εξοικονομηθούν από την εθνική οικονομία από τις μειωμένες εκπομπές αερίων ρύπων, που σήμερα καλύπτονται από την συνθήκη του Κιότο, την μείωση των εξόδων για την αγορά υδρογοναθράκων για τις ανάγκες του δημοσίου, τα αυξημένα έσοδα για την εξορυκτική βιομηχανία Νικελίου, τα έσοδα που θα δημιουργηθούν από τις εξαγωγές προϊόντων και τεχνογνωσίας από την εταιρία μας καθώς και από τα οφέλη στην ανταγωνιστικότητα που αναμένεται να προκύψουν από την σταδιακή μεγάλη μείωση του ενεργειακού κόστους στα προϊόντα της εγχώριας βιομηχανίας και της γεωργίας. Εκτιμούμε ότι οι προθέσεις και οι πολιτικές φορολόγησης θα διευκρινιστούν από τις αρμόδιες αρχές αμέσως μετά από την αδειοδότηση των προϊόντων μας. Τότε θα ειναι εφικτός και ο δημόσος διάλογος που πρέπει να γίνει μέσα και από την θεσμοθετημένη δημόσια διαβούλευση, και στον οποίο έχουμε προετοιμαστεί για να λάβουμε ενεργό μέρος. Ευχαριστούμε
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion and Government Taxation
Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com wrote: Governments cannot resist. Will almost free energy be killed by taxation. I do not think the voters would allow that. As I have often pointed out, cold fusion will save the average US citizen roughly $2000 per year, $8000 for a family of four. That's just the start; later it will save even more, as goods and services everywhere become cheaper because of zero cost energy. $2000 per person is far larger than the biggest tax break in history. If special interests attempt to strangle cold fusion, or impose unreasonable taxes on it, I do not think the voters will stand by doing nothing in response. A political leader who would deny ordinary people $2000 per year would face unprecedented voter anger. That much money will sweep aside the most powerful special interests like cobwebs. The fossil fuel companies or Wall Street Titans may think they can stop this, but their opposition will not last more than a few months in the face of public anger. As long as it becomes generally known that cold fusion is real, that it is safe, and that it will save everyone huge sums of money, cold fusion will be unstoppable. I think it would be prudent to impose some taxes on cold fusion in some applications. For example, we need something to replace the gasoline tax, to pay for road construction. I think it would be prudent to charge automobile owners a tax based the odometer for total mileage per year. Another plan would be to install automatic electronic tolls on many roads. These were recently installed in Atlanta on I-85. So far they are extremely unpopular, but I believe they are the wave of the future, as I explained in my book. - Jed
[Vo]:movin and gorven now/need advice
Cold fusion is not the only thing I have been working on. I have developed a device that detects when the ground wire breaks in a mine. Obama has inspired me with has call to innovate. I may have a customer for the mining device. I have also developed an automotive cell phone adapter, which is what I need advice on. A video of it in operation is linked below. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/movies/phoneadapter.wmv It is pretty much standard in that it activates the voice recognition in the phone and has one stick on button to call, answer, and hang up. This part of the technology is the same as in a standard wired head set. I found that when I amplified the audio from the phone through the AUX jack in the radio an echo resulted. The sound from the remote caller traveled out of the speaker and back into the mike. From there it is sent back to the remote caller. The echo is quite annoying, to say the least. I first developed a complex circuit with a battery, audio amplifier, and FET to cut off the mike when the remote caller was speaking. It worked but was a mess . You had to turn the box on before making or receiving a call then turn it off to save the battery. I then used my knowledge of the physics and wave cancellation and wave dispersion and developed a simple, passive, and effective echo eliminator. That's my trade secret. I have had several major manufactures look at it. they even signed non-disclosures, and letters of intent. They are excited at first, then after a while do not even return my calls. I have a provisional patent. What is wrong with this technology? It has only about 5 working parts and works fairly well. I know Blue Tooth is the wave of the future but this product will let millions of people who drive older cars to quickly and cheaply upgrade. Am I missing something? Frank Znidarsic
[Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
I have built a SPICE circuit simulation model of the manifold --- and the results are VERY BAD An initial small-scale model indicates that the ENTIRE top of the manifold is contaminated by the HOT side. Even with a stepped manifold (representing the various pipe fittings) , and with the thermocouple at the END of the tube, I get a 10 C ERROR ! My preliminary results are at : http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_oct11_spice.php I can make a more accurate model with Spice, but a Finite Element Model is clearly needed. (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now/need advice
Times I used 12. Times my used 3. T On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 6:39 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Cold fusion is not the only thing I have been working on. I have developed a device that detects when the ground wire breaks in a mine. Obama has inspired me with has call to innovate. I may have a customer for the mining device. I have also developed an automotive cell phone adapter, which is what I need advice on. A video of it in operation is linked below. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/movies/phoneadapter.wmv It is pretty much standard in that it activates the voice recognition in the phone and has one stick on button to call, answer, and hang up. This part of the technology is the same as in a standard wired head set. I found that when I amplified the audio from the phone through the AUX jack in the radio an echo resulted. The sound from the remote caller traveled out of the speaker and back into the mike. From there it is sent back to the remote caller. The echo is quite annoying, to say the least. I first developed a complex circuit with a battery, audio amplifier, and FET to cut off the mike when the remote caller was speaking. It worked but was a mess . You had to turn the box on before making or receiving a call then turn it off to save the battery. I then used my knowledge of the physics and wave cancellation and wave dispersion and developed a simple, passive, and effective echo eliminator. That's my trade secret. I have had several major manufactures look at it. they even signed non-disclosures, and letters of intent. They are excited at first, then after a while do not even return my calls. I have a provisional patent. What is wrong with this technology? It has only about 5 working parts and works fairly well. I know Blue Tooth is the wave of the future but this product will let millions of people who drive older cars to quickly and cheaply upgrade. Am I missing something? Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
Maybe you have an error with your simulation since the number does not seem to match the real world results. What kind of flow did you assume in the primary? I think that vapor condensation is where the most action is since that takes so much more energy than cooling the hot condensed liquid. I wish someone would have been wise enough to place the thermocouple well. Dave -Original Message- From: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 6:49 pm Subject: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless I have built a SPICE circuit simulation model of the manifold --- and he results are VERY BAD An initial small-scale model indicates that the ENTIRE top of the anifold is contaminated by the HOT side. Even with a stepped manifold (representing the various pipe ittings) , and with the thermocouple at the END of the tube, I get a 0 C ERROR ! My preliminary results are at : ttp://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_oct11_spice.php I can make a more accurate model with Spice, but a Finite Element odel is clearly needed. (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
At 03:55 PM 10/26/2011, David Roberson wrote: Maybe you have an error with your simulation since the number does not seem to match the real world results. What kind of flow did you assume in the primary? I think that vapor condensation is where the most action is since that takes so much more energy than cooling the hot condensed liquid. I wish someone would have been wise enough to place the thermocouple well. My initial simulation assumes primary 100C water IN at 15 L / hour, and the secondary 30C water leaving the heat exchanger at 600 L / hour. The height of my manifold model is approximately right, but it's probably 1/2 the correct length. I plan to calibrate the water/water simulation and then consider steam/water. The manifold is so short that I don't think there would be significant condensation in it -- so the heat transfer will be the same for superheated or saturated (100% dry) steam.
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
Your simulation looks interesting and might generate good correlation when it is honed in. I would expect the heat exchanger manifold body to settle at a temperature somewhere between the ECAT exit temperature and the output water temperature of the exchanger. The relative flow rates must weigh into the equation as you seem to be suggesting. Do you think that the vapor condensation active area might be a big piece of the puzzle? One more issue that I think will be important is that the pressure within the heat exchanger must be near atmospheric. This should cause a modest amount of the liquid leaving the ECAT under pressure to flash into a large volume of vapor. Have you been able to make an estimate of the relative volume of vapor versus liquid entering the manifold? Keep up the great work. -Original Message- From: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 7:06 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless At 03:55 PM 10/26/2011, David Roberson wrote: Maybe you have an error with your simulation since the number does not seem to match the real world results. What kind of flow did you assume in the primary? I think that vapor condensation is where the most action is since that takes so much more energy than cooling the hot condensed liquid. I wish someone would have been wise enough to place the thermocouple well. My initial simulation assumes primary 100C water IN at 15 L / hour, and the secondary 30C water leaving the heat exchanger at 600 L / hour. The height of my manifold model is approximately right, but it's probably 1/2 the correct length. I plan to calibrate the water/water simulation and then consider steam/water. The manifold is so short that I don't think there would be significant condensation in it -- so the heat transfer will be the same for superheated or saturated (100% dry) steam.
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/overall-heat-transfer-coefficients-d_284.html water-copper-air is 13.1 (W/m2 K) steam-copper-air is 17 And for flowing water/steam, I think that the MASS flow is what counts, not the volume flow, so there isn't a big transferdifference between the two.
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
There is a problem with you simulation, in my opinion. The number of cells in your model increases linearly with the distance from the flow. But it increases linearly because your model is 2D. If it were a 3D model, the number of cells would increase by the square of the distance, and the diffusion of heat would be much slow. 2011/10/26 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com I have built a SPICE circuit simulation model of the manifold --- and the results are VERY BAD An initial small-scale model indicates that the ENTIRE top of the manifold is contaminated by the HOT side. Even with a stepped manifold (representing the various pipe fittings) , and with the thermocouple at the END of the tube, I get a 10 C ERROR ! My preliminary results are at : http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_** ecat_oct11_spice.php http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_oct11_spice.php I can make a more accurate model with Spice, but a Finite Element Model is clearly needed. (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
I was referring to the fact that the steam is condensing and not just loosing heat slowly along the entire distance. We know that the stream consists of entirely water some where near the end of the primary exchanger output port. The pipes from that point forth are in the form of a plumbing trap and hold liquid water throughout. Since the water traps steam somewhere within the exchanger, it seems like the active condensation region will change as the net flow into the condenser changes. Do you think that this active condensation region must vary with net flow? What happens as the net flow approaches zero as a thought experiment. The last point that allows condensation must finally get to the manifold as the remainder of the exchanger fills with liquid water. Am I wrong in thinking that the major heat transfer is due to condensation? This is a complicated issue but I am sure you can get it resolved. -Original Message- From: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 7:26 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/overall-heat-transfer-coefficients-d_284.html water-copper-air is 13.1 (W/m2 K) steam-copper-air is 17 And for flowing water/steam, I think that the MASS flow is what counts, not the volume flow, so there isn't a big transferdifference between the two.
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
At 04:44 PM 10/26/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: There is a problem with you simulation, in my opinion. The number of cells in your model increases linearly with the distance from the flow. But it increases linearly because your model is 2D. If it were a 3D model, the number of cells would increase by the square of the distance, and the diffusion of heat would be much slow. I already noted that --- it is more easily done by changing the values by row (eg C is proportional to volume), and the horizontal R-values are proportional to the circumference.
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
At 04:48 PM 10/26/2011, David Roberson wrote: I was referring to the fact that the steam is condensing and not just loosing heat slowly along the entire distance. The manifold section of pipe is very short compared to the length of the hose from the eCat, and the (effective) length inside the heat exchanger. SOME steam will condense, but without a nucleating site it will tend to become supercooled, : see http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_steam_v410H.php#hosecondense Cantwell's simulation showed little condensation in the hose.
Re: [Vo]:Manifold mispositioning makes measurements meaningless
Well, are you sure? If you see the object in 3D, the object is not symmetrical, so, it is not a matter of just increasing the radial value. 2011/10/26 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com At 04:44 PM 10/26/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: There is a problem with you simulation, in my opinion. The number of cells in your model increases linearly with the distance from the flow. But it increases linearly because your model is 2D. If it were a 3D model, the number of cells would increase by the square of the distance, and the diffusion of heat would be much slow. I already noted that --- it is more easily done by changing the values by row (eg C is proportional to volume), and the horizontal R-values are proportional to the circumference.
Re: [Vo]:movin and grovin/need advice
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 8:33 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 2:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:movin and gorven now/need advice Times I used 12. Times my used 3. T YOU are welcome. T
Re: [Vo]:Making Sense of ECAT Water Pump Flow Rate
The manufacturers data sheet indicates it has variable rate and *variable stroke* pump and doesn't indicate that a tube can be replaced or even that it's a peristaltic pump. On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 2:28 AM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 10:34 PM 10/19/2011, David Roberson wrote: I have been trying to understand the unusual behavior of the ECAT water input pump. It may be possible to replace the peristaltic tube and thus get a result which exceeds the maximum for a standard tube. http://www.coleparmer.com/techinfo/techinfo.asp?htmlfile=PPTube_match.htmID=576
[Vo]:An interesting Steve jobs quote for Professor Rossi
Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently — they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.” – Think Different, narrated by Steve Jobshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rwsuXHA7RA Ron Kita, Chiralex
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Rossi’s customer
Daniele Passerini has reported that the customer interested in the MW reactor it is a well-known and largest industrial group http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/10/ecat-customer-is-large-well-known.html Perhaps GE or Siemens? Speculations? - Brad p.s. Rossi said on his blog that the 1MW reactor would burn 10kg Ni and 18kg of H2 if ran for 180 days. Interesting! http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Rossi’s customer
Like usually, Daniele is misinformed with his rumors. The real Customer is Maddelena! –Jouni PS. please clean up the subject line, before sending the message. For messages with reply only Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer, is enough. Having Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer is certainly overdoing it, because [Vo]-tag is only needed to express once for the mail-server. 2011/10/27 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com: Daniele Passerini has reported that the customer interested in the MW reactor it is a well-known and largest industrial group http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/10/ecat-customer-is-large-well-known.html Perhaps GE or Siemens? Speculations? - Brad p.s. Rossi said on his blog that the 1MW reactor would burn 10kg Ni and 18kg of H2 if ran for 180 days. Interesting! http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Rossi’s customer
hmm there is something wrong with the tagging... –Jouni 2011/10/27 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com: Like usually, Daniele is misinformed with his rumors. The real Customer is Maddelena! –Jouni PS. please clean up the subject line, before sending the message. For messages with reply only Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer, is enough. Having Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer is certainly overdoing it, because [Vo]-tag is only needed to express once for the mail-server. 2011/10/27 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com: Daniele Passerini has reported that the customer interested in the MW reactor it is a well-known and largest industrial group http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/10/ecat-customer-is-large-well-known.html Perhaps GE or Siemens? Speculations? - Brad p.s. Rossi said on his blog that the 1MW reactor would burn 10kg Ni and 18kg of H2 if ran for 180 days. Interesting! http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510
[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Rossi’s customer
Funny you should mention GE. When I heard that Passerini had said the customer is "a well-known large industrial group" I immediately thought of GE, (who wouldn't), although I suppose it could be any one of a few other big name players.Anyway, I sent an enquiry to three of GE's senior press people today asking if they have any affiliation with Rossi or a certain eCat LENR technology. We will see if I actually receive a reply, however I am encouraged by the fact that Kleiner Perkins managed a response to me a couple of weeks back.CraigFree Energy Truth 2011/10/27 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com: Daniele Passerini has reported that the customer interested in the MW reactor "it is a well-known and largest industrial group" http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/10/ecat-customer-is-large-well-known.html Perhaps GE or Siemens? Speculations? - Brad p.s. Rossi said on his blog that the 1MW reactor would burn 10kg Ni and 18kg of H2 if ran for 180 days. Interesting! http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510
