Jed Rothwell
Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:30:42 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One watt of released energy is small comparted to the chemically released energy.
So what? The power level of the heat from impure radium is far lower than most chemical reactions with same mass of fuel. That proves nothing.
There is a show on NOVA onel ine about the development of a new hydrogen storage metal. The amount of heat liberated during loading is great.
Yes, that is clearly visible on the other graphs, and you can see the tail end of that heat in the hydrogen loaded sample. As you see, it is stone cold after 300 minutes, whereas the deuterium sample remains hot 10 times longer. That proves the point.
A heat exchanger has to be attached to the stroage medium to take the heat away. The released energy has got to be in the tens of kilowatts range.This released heat is chemical.I don't know how one can claim that a continued slower release of heat must be nuclear.
Oh come now, Frank. NOBODY has claimed that a "slower" release of heat must be nuclear. The total energy release proves that. The power level has nothing to do with it.
Debending on the bulk of the material the continued release of 1 watt would have to extend for months to convince me.
The material weighs 7 g, it is about 20% to 30% Pd, and it absorbs about 2.2 mass% for the Pd (ignoring Zr) at 1 MPa (Yamaura et al.)
Why months? And for that matter, why not decades or centuries? This is arbitrary. You need only wait until the heat release is far beyond the limits of chemistry, which this is. Setting an arbitrary limit of months is moving the goal posts for no reason, which is the sort of thing skeptics do.
- Jed