Axil,
I find that to vague to able to draw any conclusions. I'm sure you
recall many people complaining if all sorts of things because they lived
within a ten mile radius of a nuclear power plant.
It not at all clear precisely what the experimental set up was.
Presumably quite different from what Rossi is doing.
AA
On 9/21/2016 6:30 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
see
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3728-Can-we-talk-about-Homlid/?postID=35868#post35868
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 6:11 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net
<mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:
Axil
I don't consider a link to the thread" Can we talk about Homlid?"
any sort of reference what so ever.
Rossi has stated on his blog that not only is he well but,
repeatedly, that the E-Cat does not produce significant
radiation. If it had presumably he would be a sick man by now.
AA
On 9/21/2016 5:29 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
See eros posts in
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3728-Can-we-talk-about-Homlid/
<https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3728-Can-we-talk-about-Homlid/>
For Rossi, see his blog.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM, a.ashfield
<a.ashfi...@verizon.net <mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:
Axil wrote: "Both both Rossi and eros has suffered serious
health issues when in close contact with their reactors."
References please
AA
On 9/20/2016 5:55 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Rossi now joins the chorus of LENR developers who recognise
the dangers inherent in high power output LENR reactors.
Rossi joins ME356 and eros in advising caution based on
their observation of LENR performance characteristics. Both
both Rossi and eros has suffered serious health issues when
in close contact with their reactors.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 5:08 PM, a.ashfield
<a.ashfi...@verizon.net <mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:
Axil, I doubt the QuarkX is that dangerous. It is not
like it could cause a nuclear explosion.
Rossi seems to think The QuarkX is the future and the
real problem is him being tied up in a legal battle.
In answer to a comment on anther thread, suggesting that
because IH claimed they had tried and failed, consider
that MIT and Caltech concluded that Fleischmann & Pons
could not be replicated 0 and we now know it can be.
I don't see IH giving up without getting their hands on
the Quark technology.
AA
On 9/20/2016 4:40 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Norman
September 20, 2016 at 7:28 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi:
Update of the work on the QuarkX?
Cheers,
Norman
Andrea Rossi
September 20, 2016 at 8:29 AM
Norman:
Still in very good standing, but also still
dangerous. Working mainly on safety issues now.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
If seems that LENR reactors are not as inherently
safe as we all once thought. But the safe deployment
of LENR technology could still be accommodated into
the current power infrastructure.
The development of ocean deployment of huge wind
turbines will serve LENR reactor deployment well. A
safe method of LENR deployment will entail the use
of those floating platforms located just off shore.
The technical feasibility of deepwater floating LENR
platforms will not be questioned, as the long-term
survivability of floating structures has been
successfully demonstrated by the marine and offshore
oil industries over many decades. However, the
economics that allowed the deployment of thousands
of offshore oil rigs have yet to be demonstrated for
floating LENR reactor platforms. For deepwater wind
turbines, a floating structure will replace
pile-driven monopoles or conventional concrete bases
that are commonly used as foundations for shallow
water and land-based reactors. The floating
structure must provide enough buoyancy to support
the weight of the reactor as a function of its size
and power production rating and to restrain pitch,
roll and heave motions within acceptable limits.
Since muon shielding is so problematic, distance
from any population is the one dependable risk
mitigation method.
The distance of LENR deployment offshore would be a
function of the range of muon travel before decay
and the inverse square law dilution of muon density
together with safe muon exposure limits.
The floating LENR reactor will be bigger than a sea
buoy, but smaller than a floating wind turbine.
Robotize remote controlled maintence could allow for
human free maintenance of the LENR reactor such as
refueling. The activated waste fuel could be dumped
into the deep water or dissolved in acid.
