[Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
Hello group, For everybody's interest, it looks like Daniele Passerini (22passi) is going to post regular updates to his Twitter account regarding the 1MW E-Cat test supposed to be held today in Bologna: http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Alternate URL: http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile Whether he will be able to post detailed information or not, however, it's not known yet. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:The Associated Press reporter would be present at today test.
The Associated Press reporter would be present at today test. Sterling D. Allan AP Writer Approved I just spoke to Andrea Rossi by phone. He invited me to come earlier than 11, at 9:30 am [GMT+1], as they “are ready”. He said the AP writer from NYC has the address, and is approved to attend; and I will meet him this morning. He asked me to postpone posting the PowerPoint presentation Hank and I prepared for the event until tomorrow. I’m going to go catch breakfast. http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:October_28%2C_2011_Test_of_the_One_Megawatt_E-Cat
Re: [Vo]:Your Oct 28 Predictions
I make an alternative prediction: Rating 25 - 50. Lets assume the input power is measured and confirmed by the electrical company and it cannot been doubted. 1 MW of energy is enough to vaporize 1.345 m^3 of water (0°C) per hour. So the vaporized water is easy to measure and it is easy to calculate the COP. So far I have seen the output pipes, it is not possible to generate 1 MW of steam, because this would be 2287 m^3 of steam per hour or 0.63 m^3 per second. So less steam will be generated and less ecats will be used and less power consumed than initially planned. At the end it will be unclear if all water was vaporized or if some of the water was stored in the unused ecats because the amount of generated steam was not measured. But the visible amounts of steam will be megamoster big and very impressive. ;-) - Original Nachricht Von: ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com An: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 27.10.2011 17:44 Betreff: [Vo]:Your Oct 28 Predictions Please feel free to write your prediction about the Oct 28 1MW Rossi test. ** Please include a 0 to 100 prediction ** 0 is a scam is exposed, 25 is an unexposed scam, below 50 is failure, and 100 is commercially viable no doubt LENR power.
[Vo]:before the DEMO starts
My friends, please see: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/10/1mw-test-e-day-or-t-day-for-rossi.html I have written this before the demo starts- prediction cannot use facts from the future; the are for postdiction. . I have considered my duty of blogger and of new energy loyalist to tell clearly what I think about this experiment. Let's see together what happens- it will be not easy and let's discuss again. Should I accept a job of techno-prophet? Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:FYI- greater press about the DEMO
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markpmills/2011/10/28/the-relentless-pursuit-of-magical-energy/?partner=technology_newsletter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Before the Test- Forbes comes down hard against Cold Fusion
Greetings Vortex, So much ...from Forbes- they have replaced Mark Gibbs coverage of Cold Fusion with an Anti_Cold Fusion writer. His view: He doubts IF it will work..and even IF it works it is insignificant. His coverage late Oct 27th is go long on Exxon Mobil...Chevron. Oil technology has too much inertia to become overtaken by another technology. My spin: the advertisers on Forbes..complained. For it the sponsors who wag the dog. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markpmills/2011/10/28/the-relentless-pursuit-of-magical-energy/ Ron Kita Funny ..from memory...there was a army general that was going to park his Jeep at ground zero the day of the first A-Bomb test. He was running around saying: this is going to be the biggest boondoggle the world has ever seen. It is not gonna work. He should have been allowed to sit in his parked Jeep at ground zero.
Re: [Vo]:Before the Test- Forbes comes down hard against Cold Fusion
- Original Nachricht Von: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 28.10.2011 13:22 Betreff: [Vo]:Before the Test- Forbes comes down hard against Cold Fusion Greetings Vortex, So much ...from Forbes- they have replaced Mark Gibbs coverage of Cold Fusion with an Anti_Cold Fusion writer. His view: He doubts IF it will work..and even IF it works it is insignificant. No, I think he is friendly. He lets it open if it works and he says it will not change the world soon. Same what Rossi always said. The author remembers to Fermi and Marconi and says he has italian roots to. He says it would be fun if it works. I dont see anything negative he is very friendly. He lets the decision to Rossi and his team. His coverage late Oct 27th is go long on Exxon Mobil...Chevron. Oil technology has too much inertia to become overtaken by another technology. My spin: the advertisers on Forbes..complained. For it the sponsors who wag the dog. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markpmills/2011/10/28/the-relentless-pursuit-of- magical-energy/ Ron Kita Funny ..from memory...there was a army general that was going to park his Jeep at ground zero the day of the first A-Bomb test. He was running around saying: this is going to be the biggest boondoggle the world has ever seen. It is not gonna work. He should have been allowed to sit in his parked Jeep at ground zero.
Re: [Vo]:RUNNING COST FOR THE 1 MW E-Cat
Dr. Peter Gluck, Further to Your comment. The need for semi-continuous electrical heating of the many E-Cats in the I MW “Container-Cat” is, at the moment, the largest running cost in addition to the low-cost fuel (6 month running period) represented by the 10 kg modified nickel micro powder and the 18 kg of hydrogen gas and some small power for the frequency modulator. In the lowest heath generating modus (the 1 to 6 energy gain) the maximum el-power heating requirement is around 167 kWh which over 6 month running time represent 180 x 24 = 4320 hours. At 167 kWh this adds up to 721440 kWh. In Italy this amount of el-power for an industrial consumer will cost: 721440 kWh x Euro 0,1331 = 96023 Euro. Even though Mr. Andrea Rossi informed me that the 167 kWh for resistor heating was necessary to run the I MW E-Cat Container, today's major test in Bologna will show how this in real life is functioning. He might start groups of 6 E-Cats units at the time for each of the two 500 kW E-cat groups that makes up the I MW E-Cat Container. It is now, based on the 10 former E-Cat tests performed earlier, certain that Rossi's E-Cat technology generates excess heat from the “low nuclear energy reactions (LNER)” (a process that very well, in the near future, will show it self to be more of a Quantum / ZPE / Rydberg type process then a general “cold fusion” reaction). The sceptics that still state the the E-Cat do not generate excess heat are just not well enough informed or do not simply accept facts that does not fit with their “believe system”. To get the 1 MW “Container Cat” prototype to run commercially it is necessary to run it on a much higher energy ratio than a present 1 to 6 (due to that it is el-power in and just heat out). Earlier tests have indicated that much higher energy ratios are highly possible and have been shown, as has running in self contained mode without el-power heating of resistors for long periods of time been demonstrated. We should also not forget that there are a number of other developers / companies (in addition to Andrea Rossi / Leonardo Corp.) that are stating real results great energy generation possibilities with much similar energy generating processes. We will see from today's major 1 MW E-Cat test in Bologna what the present ratio between el-power in and heat out will be. For the calculation the following present el-power prices in Italy have bee used: End-user energy prices for industrial consumers. Italy € 0.1331 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Industrial-Elec Retail (end-user) energy prices for households. Italy € 0.2568 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Domestic-Elec Sincerely, Jorn-Erik Ommang, engineer New Energy Specialist to major oil, gas energy companies Enerley.com On 27/10/2011 20:56, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Can you please give some price limits for 167 kWh electric energy and 1000 kWh thermal energy, say carried by steam 115 deg Celsius? Thanks, Peter On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Jorn Erik Ommang j...@enerley.com wrote: RUNNING COST FOR THE 1MW E-Cat: A lot have been written the last 2 days (on E-Cat blogs web sites) about the running cost of the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant that has only focused on the cost of the nickel hydrogen fuel used. One should not forget that the I MW E-Cat Power Plant will not run in self-sustained mode due to safety issues. There will be a general minimum 1 to 6 gain in energy from the plant. I.e. the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant will require a maximum of 167 kWh to run during the 6 months. So in addition to the fuel cost of 10 kg modified Nickel micro powder and 18 kg hydrogen gas one need to add the cost of purchasing 167 kWh for each hour the plant is running during the 6 months. This el-power running cost is much larger than the cost of the Nickel / Hydrogen fuel used. Se today's recent Andrea Rossi answer to my questions re. running cost of the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant: Jorn Erik Ommang October 26th, 2011 at 3:50 PM Dear Andrea Rossi, Congratulation from Norway, Spain UK! 1.0 Is it correct that Your 1 MW E-Cat Container will require a maximum of 167 kW in el-power to run and generate the 1 MW of heath (a minimum 1 to 6 energy gain) (1 to 6 energy gain = 167 kW el-power in and 1 MW heat out)? 2.0 Will the cost of this el-power (maximum 167 kWh for 6 months) come in addition to the cost for fuel (10 kg nickel 18 kg hydrogen pr. 6 months)? I have been working as consultant in New Energy (since 1994) for management of Oil and Energy Companies in Norway (including Europe’s largest renewable energy company) as well as work the Government. The Consultant work has included training top management in what will come in the clean new energy field and have followed Your great work for a long time. Have also long time experience as Project Manager in the Norwegian Oil Gas Industry and as technical auditor for Shell Statoil. 3.0 I am interested in
Re: [Vo]:Before the Test- Forbes comes down hard against Cold Fusion
Yes..are some good points to the Mills Forbes article, but not as rosy as Mark Gibbs. Gibbs was inspiring. Ron On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:13 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: - Original Nachricht Von: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 28.10.2011 13:22 Betreff: [Vo]:Before the Test- Forbes comes down hard against Cold Fusion Greetings Vortex, So much ...from Forbes- they have replaced Mark Gibbs coverage of Cold Fusion with an Anti_Cold Fusion writer. His view: He doubts IF it will work..and even IF it works it is insignificant. No, I think he is friendly. He lets it open if it works and he says it will not change the world soon. Same what Rossi always said. The author remembers to Fermi and Marconi and says he has italian roots to. He says it would be fun if it works. I dont see anything negative he is very friendly. He lets the decision to Rossi and his team. His coverage late Oct 27th is go long on Exxon Mobil...Chevron. Oil technology has too much inertia to become overtaken by another technology. My spin: the advertisers on Forbes..complained. For it the sponsors who wag the dog. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markpmills/2011/10/28/the-relentless-pursuit-of- magical-energy/ Ron Kita Funny ..from memory...there was a army general that was going to park his Jeep at ground zero the day of the first A-Bomb test. He was running around saying: this is going to be the biggest boondoggle the world has ever seen. It is not gonna work. He should have been allowed to sit in his parked Jeep at ground zero.
[Vo]:Steve Jobs Apple and Cold Fusion
Greetings Vortex, It has been a number of years since I read I-Woz by Steve Wozniak, and according to memory: Steve Jobs approached HP and tried to get them interested in making personal computers...HP responsethere is no consumer market for such devices. Thank God that HP said that. The computer revolution was in far better hands with Jobs and Wozniak...than with HP. The same is true with Cold Fusion...I think...it will be shown that Rossi has good hands. Ron Kita
Re: [Vo]:RUNNING COST FOR THE 1 MW E-Cat
Thank you very much for your detailed and welll docunented answer. Let's waith the global results of the Demo for the most relevant calculation. In your experience and not on;y for Italy what are the price ratios electric energy/thermal energy? Peter On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jorn Erik Ommang j...@enerley.com wrote: Dr. Peter Gluck, Further to Your comment. The need for semi-continuous electrical heating of the many E-Cats in the I MW “Container-Cat” is, at the moment, the largest running cost in addition to the low-cost fuel (6 month running period) represented by the 10 kg modified nickel micro powder and the 18 kg of hydrogen gas and some small power for the frequency modulator. In the lowest heath generating modus (the 1 to 6 energy gain) the maximum el-power heating requirement is around 167 kWh which over 6 month running time represent 180 x 24 = 4320 hours. At 167 kWh this adds up to 721440 kWh. In Italy this amount of el-power for an industrial consumer will cost: 721440 kWh x Euro 0,1331 = 96023 Euro. Even though Mr. Andrea Rossi informed me that the 167 kWh for resistor heating was necessary to run the I MW E-Cat Container, today's major test in Bologna will show how this in real life is functioning. He might start groups of 6 E-Cats units at the time for each of the two 500 kW E-cat groups that makes up the I MW E-Cat Container. It is now, based on the 10 former E-Cat tests performed earlier, certain that Rossi's E-Cat technology generates excess heat from the “low nuclear energy reactions (LNER)” (a process that very well, in the near future, will show it self to be more of a Quantum / ZPE / Rydberg type process then a general “cold fusion” reaction). The sceptics that still state the the E-Cat do not generate excess heat are just not well enough informed or do not simply accept facts that does not fit with their “believe system”. To get the 1 MW “Container Cat” prototype to run commercially it is necessary to run it on a much higher energy ratio than a present 1 to 6 (due to that it is el-power in and just heat out). Earlier tests have indicated that much higher energy ratios are highly possible and have been shown, as has running in self contained mode without el-power heating of resistors for long periods of time been demonstrated. We should also not forget that there are a number of other developers / companies (in addition to Andrea Rossi / Leonardo Corp.) that are stating real results great energy generation possibilities with much similar energy generating processes. We will see from today's major 1 MW E-Cat test in Bologna what the present ratio between el-power in and heat out will be. For the calculation the following present el-power prices in Italy have bee used: *End-user energy prices for industrial consumers.* Italy € 0.1331 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Industrial-Elec *Retail (end-user) energy prices for households. *Italy € 0.2568 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Domestic-Elec Sincerely, Jorn-Erik Ommang, engineer New Energy Specialist to major oil, gas energy companies Enerley.com On 27/10/2011 20:56, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Can you please give some price limits for 167 kWh electric energy and 1000 kWh thermal energy, say carried by steam 115 deg Celsius? Thanks, Peter On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Jorn Erik Ommang j...@enerley.com wrote: RUNNING COST FOR THE 1MW E-Cat: A lot have been written the last 2 days (on E-Cat blogs web sites) about the running cost of the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant that has only focused on the cost of the nickel hydrogen fuel used. One should not forget that the I MW E-Cat Power Plant will not run in self-sustained mode due to safety issues. There will be a general minimum 1 to 6 gain in energy from the plant. I.e. the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant will require a maximum of 167 kWh to run during the 6 months. So in addition to the fuel cost of 10 kg modified Nickel micro powder and 18 kg hydrogen gas one need to add the cost of purchasing 167 kWh for each hour the plant is running during the 6 months. This el-power running cost is much larger than the cost of the Nickel / Hydrogen fuel used. Se today's recent Andrea Rossi answer to my questions re. running cost of the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant: Jorn Erik Ommang October 26th, 2011 at 3:50 PM Dear Andrea Rossi, Congratulation from Norway, Spain UK! 1.0 Is it correct that Your 1 MW E-Cat Container will require a maximum of 167 kW in el-power to run and generate the 1 MW of heath (a minimum 1 to 6 energy gain) (1 to 6 energy gain = 167 kW el-power in and 1 MW heat out)? 2.0 Will the cost of this el-power (maximum 167 kWh for 6 months) come in addition to the cost for fuel (10 kg nickel 18 kg hydrogen pr. 6 months)? I have been working as consultant in New Energy (since 1994) for management of Oil and Energy Companies in Norway (including Europe’s largest renewable
RE: [Vo]:FYI- greater press about the DEMO
From Peter Gluck http://www.forbes.com/sites/markpmills/2011/10/28/the-relentless-pursuit-of- magical-energy/?partner=technology_newsletter The conclusion of the article: Is there a bet here? Root for the Italians if you're like me. Wouldn't it be fun if they were right? But if you're an investor, go long oil; buy Exxon [NYSE:XOM], Schlumberger [NYSE:SLB], Transocean [NYSE:RIG] ... you know the list. So, the Forbes writer, in the end, hedges his bets. (I guess If I were in his shoes I would do the same.) When one bets, one is essentially betting on the reputation of their Ego. They are betting on an illusion that they actually know what they are talking about. In the end the amount of betting, for or against, will not matter a hoot - certainly not to one's Ego. Lately, I've had long talks with my Ego. I think my Ego (and me) are finally beginning to understand each other - particularly the fact that most of the time we are clueless. But that's ok. Let Joe Six Pack continue to bet on Oil. Meanwhile I hope Joe Public will simply wait and see what develops. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Aw: RE: [Vo]:FYI- greater press about the DEMO
- Original Nachricht Von: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 28.10.2011 14:50 Betreff: RE: [Vo]:FYI- greater press about the DEMO Let Joe Six Pack continue to bet on Oil. Meanwhile I hope Joe Public will simply wait and see what develops. We have this already seen many times. There is definitely excess energy. Especially after the Kullander Essen Demo it was very clear that the input energy was too low to heat the water. But we also have seen errors in measurement that reduce the amout of energy and that make it possible to fake it. We have seen a lot of contradicting and definitely untrue promises. BTW, here in Germany we have a big pilot plant that converts wind energy into methan. Further plants are planned. If nothing else works, this is the way to go. Even if Rossis method works, this would be a serious competition. Best, Peter
Re: [Vo]:RUNNING COST FOR THE 1 MW E-Cat
Everything you want is here: http://www.energy.eu/ On 28 October 2011 13:41, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you very much for your detailed and welll docunented answer. Let's waith the global results of the Demo for the most relevant calculation. In your experience and not on;y for Italy what are the price ratios electric energy/thermal energy? Peter
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
If his tweets are translating properly, the Reactor is running is the self-sustaining mode presently. He also says there are representatives from the Associated Press and the Old Grey Lady. Could be interesting. Hope it doesn't explode. T
[Vo]:new wired.co.uk article about today test.
new wired article about today test. Cold Fusion: Future of physics or phoney? http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/28/cold-fusion
Re: [Vo]:RUNNING COST FOR THE 1 MW E-Cat
Thank you, Robert, very good site and I did't knew about it despite teaching Ecological Energetics to managers. It happens. Peter On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Everything you want is here: http://www.energy.eu/ On 28 October 2011 13:41, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you very much for your detailed and welll docunented answer. Let's waith the global results of the Demo for the most relevant calculation. In your experience and not on;y for Italy what are the price ratios electric energy/thermal energy? Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
On 2011-10-28 15:27, Terry Blanton wrote: and the Old Grey Lady. With NyT, he meant NyTeknik. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
if you refer to this Ci siamo appena autosostentati con un abbondante buffet! :)) it means: we are are eating, there are a lot of things on the table. bye C. Il giorno venerdì 28 ottobre 2011, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com ha scritto: If his tweets are translating properly, the Reactor is running is the self-sustaining mode presently. He also says there are representatives from the Associated Press and the Old Grey Lady. Could be interesting. Hope it doesn't explode. T -- Claudio Eterno via colle dell'Assietta 17 10036 Settimo Torinese (TO)
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
It can be alluding to autosustaining of the Setup but it seems it says Daniele is autosustaining himself at the buffet. I have asked him if he happens to see much steam- no answer yet. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: If his tweets are translating properly, the Reactor is running is the self-sustaining mode presently. He also says there are representatives from the Associated Press and the Old Grey Lady. Could be interesting. Hope it doesn't explode. T -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Forbes brings us back to stage 3
As noted, Forbes has published an attack on cold fusion: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markpmills/2011/10/28/the-relentless-pursuit-of-magical-energy/?partner=technology_newsletter This is by someone named Mark Mills. I believe he's a shill for the coal industry. It is a common name I suppose but someone by that name has published several articles in favor of fossil fuel. This article is filled with ignorant nonsense. The comparison of cold fusion two helicopters is particularly risible. A more apt comparison would be vacuum tubes to transistors. Anyway, this is a sign of progress. There is an aphorism often mis-attributed to Gandhi: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Forbes brings us back to stage 2 or 3, laughing at you or fighting you. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:RUNNING COST FOR THE 1 MW E-Cat
Dr. Peter Gluck, Further to Your question: The 1 MW “Container Energy Catalyser” (ContainerCat) Power Plant in its present form generate heath in the form of steam / hot water. As a thermal power plant it can be made to generate space water heating for factories and buildings. However, to put this revolutionary New Energy power plant into the present energy-marked perspective it is best to compare it with a CHP (combined heat power) plant when it (in the near future) is combined with a steam to el-power converting system in addition to delivering heat for usable heating purposes. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_heat_and_power On cost comparison it is best to compare the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant to CHP generated by natural gas. The most economic future E-Cat 1 MW Container Power Plant will be a Cogeneration (combined heat and power, CHP) that simultaneously generate both electricity and useful heat. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_power Some of Your question can be answer as: The energy efficiency of a conventional thermal power station, considered as saleable energy as a percent of the heating value of the fuel consumed, is typically 33% to 48%. And, yes the EU site is a good source for most anything on energy statistics in EU, including real facts on the ridiculous low efficiency factor for the expensive highly subsidised Offshore Wind Farms now being constructed in the UK (Wind Farms is like energy living on social security, “they can not stay on their own one feet”. Sincerely, Jorn-Erik Ommang, engineer New Energy Specialist to major oil, gas energy companies Enerley.com On 28/10/2011 14:41, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you very much for your detailed and welll docunented answer. Let's waith the global results of the Demo for the most relevant calculation. In your experience and not on;y for Italy what are the price ratios electric energy/thermal energy? Peter On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jorn Erik Ommang j...@enerley.com wrote: Dr. Peter Gluck, Further to Your comment. The need for semi-continuous electrical heating of the many E-Cats in the I MW “Container-Cat” is, at the moment, the largest running cost in addition to the low-cost fuel (6 month running period) represented by the 10 kg modified nickel micro powder and the 18 kg of hydrogen gas and some small power for the frequency modulator. In the lowest heath generating modus (the 1 to 6 energy gain) the maximum el-power heating requirement is around 167 kWh which over 6 month running time represent 180 x 24 = 4320 hours. At 167 kWh this adds up to 721440 kWh. In Italy this amount of el-power for an industrial consumer will cost: 721440 kWh x Euro 0,1331 = 96023 Euro. Even though Mr. Andrea Rossi informed me that the 167 kWh for resistor heating was necessary to run the I MW E-Cat Container, today's major test in Bologna will show how this in real life is functioning. He might start groups of 6 E-Cats units at the time for each of the two 500 kW E-cat groups that makes up the I MW E-Cat Container. It is now, based on the 10 former E-Cat tests performed earlier, certain that Rossi's E-Cat technology generates excess heat from the “low nuclear energy reactions (LNER)” (a process that very well, in the near future, will show it self to be more of a Quantum / ZPE / Rydberg type process then a general “cold fusion” reaction). The sceptics that still state the the E-Cat do not generate excess heat are just not well enough informed or do not simply accept facts that does not fit with their “believe system”. To get the 1 MW “Container Cat” prototype to run commercially it is necessary to run it on a much higher energy ratio than a present 1 to 6 (due to that it is el-power in and just heat out). Earlier tests have indicated that much higher energy ratios are highly possible and have been shown, as has running in self contained mode without el-power heating of resistors for long periods of time been demonstrated. We should also not forget that there are a number of other developers / companies (in addition to Andrea Rossi / Leonardo Corp.) that are stating real results great energy generation possibilities with much similar energy generating processes. We will see from today's major 1 MW E-Cat test in Bologna what the present ratio between el-power in and heat out will be. For the calculation the following present el-power prices in Italy have bee used: End-user energy prices for industrial consumers. Italy € 0.1331 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Industrial-Elec http://www.energy.eu/#Industrial-Elec Retail (end-user) energy prices for households. Italy € 0.2568 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Domestic-Elec http://www.energy.eu/#Domestic-Elec Sincerely, Jorn-Erik Ommang, engineer New Energy Specialist to major oil, gas energy companies Enerley.com On 27/10/2011 20:56, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:RUNNING COST FOR THE 1 MW E-Cat
Dear Jorn, Please accept my renewed thanks- I am waiting to see how mature is the 1MW demo. peter On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Jorn Erik Ommang j...@enerley.com wrote: Dr. Peter Gluck, Further to Your question: The 1 MW “Container Energy Catalyser” (ContainerCat) Power Plant in its present form generate heath in the form of steam / hot water. As a thermal power plant it can be made to generate space water heating for factories and buildings. However, to put this revolutionary New Energy power plant into the present energy-marked perspective it is best to compare it with a CHP (combined heat power) plant when it (in the near future) is combined with a steam to el-power converting system in addition to delivering heat for usable heating purposes. See: *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_heat_and_power * On cost comparison it is best to compare the 1 MW E-Cat Power Plant to CHP generated by natural gas. The most economic future E-Cat 1 MW Container Power Plant will be a *Cogeneration* (*combined heat and power*, *CHP*) that simultaneously generate both electricity and useful heat. See: *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_power * Some of Your question can be answer as: The energy efficiency of a conventional thermal power station, considered as saleable energy as a percent of the heating value of the fuel consumed, is typically 33% to 48%. And, yes the EU site is a good source for most anything on energy statistics in EU, including real facts on the ridiculous low efficiency factor for the expensive highly subsidised Offshore Wind Farms now being constructed in the UK (Wind Farms is like energy living on social security, “they can not stay on their own one feet”. Sincerely, Jorn-Erik Ommang, engineer New Energy Specialist to major oil, gas energy companies Enerley.com On 28/10/2011 14:41, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you very much for your detailed and welll docunented answer. Let's waith the global results of the Demo for the most relevant calculation. In your experience and not on;y for Italy what are the price ratios electric energy/thermal energy? Peter On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jorn Erik Ommang j...@enerley.com wrote: Dr. Peter Gluck, Further to Your comment. The need for semi-continuous electrical heating of the many E-Cats in the I MW “Container-Cat” is, at the moment, the largest running cost in addition to the low-cost fuel (6 month running period) represented by the 10 kg modified nickel micro powder and the 18 kg of hydrogen gas and some small power for the frequency modulator. In the lowest heath generating modus (the 1 to 6 energy gain) the maximum el-power heating requirement is around 167 kWh which over 6 month running time represent 180 x 24 = 4320 hours. At 167 kWh this adds up to 721440 kWh. In Italy this amount of el-power for an industrial consumer will cost: 721440 kWh x Euro 0,1331 = 96023 Euro. Even though Mr. Andrea Rossi informed me that the 167 kWh for resistor heating was necessary to run the I MW E-Cat Container, today's major test in Bologna will show how this in real life is functioning. He might start groups of 6 E-Cats units at the time for each of the two 500 kW E-cat groups that makes up the I MW E-Cat Container. It is now, based on the 10 former E-Cat tests performed earlier, certain that Rossi's E-Cat technology generates excess heat from the “low nuclear energy reactions (LNER)” (a process that very well, in the near future, will show it self to be more of a Quantum / ZPE / Rydberg type process then a general “cold fusion” reaction). The sceptics that still state the the E-Cat do not generate excess heat are just not well enough informed or do not simply accept facts that does not fit with their “believe system”. To get the 1 MW “Container Cat” prototype to run commercially it is necessary to run it on a much higher energy ratio than a present 1 to 6 (due to that it is el-power in and just heat out). Earlier tests have indicated that much higher energy ratios are highly possible and have been shown, as has running in self contained mode without el-power heating of resistors for long periods of time been demonstrated. We should also not forget that there are a number of other developers / companies (in addition to Andrea Rossi / Leonardo Corp.) that are stating real results great energy generation possibilities with much similar energy generating processes. We will see from today's major 1 MW E-Cat test in Bologna what the present ratio between el-power in and heat out will be. For the calculation the following present el-power prices in Italy have bee used: *End-user energy prices for industrial consumers.* Italy € 0.1331 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Industrial-Elec http://www.energy.eu/#Industrial-Elec *Retail (end-user) energy prices for households. *Italy € 0.2568 Ref: http://www.energy.eu/#Domestic-Elec
Re: RE: [Vo]:FYI- greater press about the DEMO
From Peter: ... We have this already seen many times. There is definitely excess energy. Especially after the Kullander Essen Demo it was very clear that the input energy was too low to heat the water. But we also have seen errors in measurement that reduce the amout of energy and that make it possible to fake it. We have seen a lot of contradicting and definitely untrue promises. Which brings me back to my original suggestion: Let Joe Public wait and see what happens. BTW, when I previously pontificated with: When one bets, one is essentially betting on the reputation of their Ego. They are betting on an illusion that they actually know what they are talking about. In the end the amount of betting, for or against, will not matter a hoot - certainly not to one's Ego. Lately, I've had long talks with my Ego. I think my Ego (and me) are finally beginning to understand each other - particularly the fact that most of the time we are clueless. But that's ok. I had not had my morning cup of Java. I meant to say: When one bets, one is essentially betting on the reputation of their Ego. They are betting on an illusion that they actually know what they are talking about. In the end the amount of betting, for or against, will not matter a hoot. IT ONLY MATTERS TO THE EGO. Lately, I've had long talks with my Ego. I think my Ego (and me) are finally beginning to understand each other - particularly the fact that most of the time we are clueless. I think I can live with that contradiction. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
sigh Thanks for the corrections. So, it's after 3 pm there. When does the show begin? After the barrel of wine is consumed? :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
Midnight... hope it doesn't turn out to be a sooner-tha-expected Halloween. 2011/10/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com sigh Thanks for the corrections. So, it's after 3 pm there. When does the show begin? After the barrel of wine is consumed? :-) T
[Vo]:Rossi: self-sustaining limit is around six hours
Earlier I said that I do not know the limits of self-sustaining operation and it might go on in that mode indefinitely. Recently, Rossi said that the limit for this particular machine is around six hours. I do not recall where he said that but I am sure he did. Some people have said he should have left the October 6 test run in self-sustaining mode for longer than four hours. That would have been nice, but apparently it was close to limit, and it would need to go back to a controlled mode. It is unclear how long the controlled phase is needed before input power can be turned off again. Rossi often makes dubious statements about business or nuclear theory, but as far as I know his assertions about the engineering aspects of his devices have all been accurate. I have no reason to doubt this. This is no indication that the technology is fundamentally limited to a six-hour duty cycle. Arata's cells have stayed warm much longer than this. Granted they are Pd-D which might be very different from Ni-H. There is absolutely no indication that the current ratio of 1 W input to 6 W output for most cells is caused by fundamental performance limitations or physics. As I said, this is a lot like saying that railroad locomotives will never go faster than 18 km/h because that's how fast the first one went in 1808. If the 1 MW reactor is run in self-sustaining mode for several hours that would certainly be a good test. From a technological point of view, there is no advantage to having cells go into fully self-sustaining mode. Having a small amount of power to control the cell is just as good as having no power at all. The overhead equipment cost of generating control current with thermoelectric devices will be trivial, and the dollar cost for the energy will be zero. I am sure the control current will ultimately be much smaller than the overall output. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
Good news is: nothing exploded! 2011/10/28 Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.com Midnight... hope it doesn't turn out to be a sooner-tha-expected Halloween. 2011/10/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com sigh Thanks for the corrections. So, it's after 3 pm there. When does the show begin? After the barrel of wine is consumed? :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
So far... :-) 2011/10/28 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com Good news is: nothing exploded! 2011/10/28 Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.com Midnight... hope it doesn't turn out to be a sooner-tha-expected Halloween. 2011/10/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com sigh Thanks for the corrections. So, it's after 3 pm there. When does the show begin? After the barrel of wine is consumed? :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
Terry, show begun some four hours ago. Daniele tweeted 60 minutes ago: »The coffee machine made famous by Krivit has never been put to the whip as it is today! :) Boys has the exclusive AP, Focus, NYT, expecting 22p» This means, that they are already making coffee there for the guests. Also Sterling Allan confirmed that it is a great day. –Jouni Sterling wrote in PES wiki: http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:October_28%2C_2011_Test_of_the_One_Megawatt_E-Cat I just got back from my turn. I was able to shoot a few pictures and take some video. The reason for the embargo on taking photos was personnel reasons. They don't want the engineers and testers to be shown, to keep them confidential. The company doing the testing does not wish to be known at this time. A quick comment from the AP writer who is here. The lack of coverage from the mainstream media is not due to lack of interest but from the lack of cooperation from Andrea Rossi. He has turned a lot of media away who have wanted to come in. The AP writer has gained Rossi's trust over time, and hence was invited to be here today. Rossi will be sending us all the data this evening. Wish I could say more, but it will have to wait. Great day so far. -- SilverThunder 05:42, 28 October 2011 (PDT)
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
Twitter screens do not auto-translate with Chrome. It seems you have to run the text through Google translate manually, here: http://translate.google.com/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
When a new batch of books soon to be published documenting the contentious history of Cold Fusion comes out, on the front cover of one of these books will be a photo of a coffee machine... perhaps with a modified eCat on top. A few insiders will get it. Most probably won't. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
Pretty clear from Passerini (@22passi) that the assembled witnesses are tailgating in the parking area (http://yfrog.com/z/hs6dppsj) while being allowed in one at a time to see the plant in operation. -- Sean
Re: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
I understand why it is not permitted to make photos of the Consultants of the Customer, but why not of the steam coming out from the Demo? On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Sean True sean.t...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty clear from Passerini (@22passi) that the assembled witnesses are tailgating in the parking area (http://yfrog.com/z/hs6dppsj) while being allowed in one at a time to see the plant in operation. -- Sean -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
Per Rossi's blog, the steam is going into a dissapater, and then back into the plant. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I understand why it is not permitted to make photos of the Consultants of the Customer, but why not of the steam coming out from the Demo?
RE: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
So, if the steam is recirculating, is there a secondary flow and heat exchanger? Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 08:43:59 -0700 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW. From: ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Per Rossi's blog, the steam is going into a dissapater, and then back into the plant. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I understand why it is not permitted to make photos of the Consultants of the Customer, but why not of the steam coming out from the Demo?
[Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog
Amazing! Rossi even finds time to write on his blog! http://goo.gl/ahMEA Andrea Rossi October 28th, 2011 at 10:37 AM FIRST INFORMATION REGARDING THE 1 MW PLANT TEST: WE SARTED REGULARLY THE TEST THIS MORNING . EVERYTHING IS GOING WELL SO FAR. THE 1 MW E-CAT IS WORKING IN SELF SUSTAINING. TONIGHT I WILL PUBLISH THE NON SECRET REPORT THAT THE CUSTOMER WILL RELEASE. WARM REGARDS, I HAVE TO RETURN TO THE PLANT. SORRY, I CANNOT ANSWER TO THE MANY COMMENTS I AM RECEIVING. I WILL PUBLISH THEM PROBABLY I WILL NEVER FIND THE TIME TO ANSWER. WARMEST REGARDS TO ALL, ANDREA ROSSI
Re: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
This dissipator or dissapator must be some type of condenser in which the steam is converted in water, supposedly hot. How is the heat produced by the setup- measured? On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:43 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: Per Rossi's blog, the steam is going into a dissapater, and then back into the plant. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I understand why it is not permitted to make photos of the Consultants of the Customer, but why not of the steam coming out from the Demo? -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Sean True sean.t...@gmail.com wrote: Pretty clear from Passerini (@22passi) that the assembled witnesses are tailgating in the parking area (http://yfrog.com/z/hs6dppsj) while being allowed in one at a time to see the plant in operation. That's not tailgating. This is tailgating: http://www.gatortailgating.com/tailgating-food At the world largest outdoor cocktail party this weekend. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi: self-sustaining limit is around six hours
There may be a good reason for a limitation of 6 hours for self-sustaining mode. It would be far better if the reaction slowly damped out with time than for someone to have to vent the hydrogen or add much additional input water to achieve that result. You would thus be able to turn off the power source to kill the output. I think that I would personally prefer a design that lost power output quickly after the drive is removed. I agree with your assessment that it was wise to stop the reaction after 4 hours. The data appears to support the contention that the output was tailing off slowly. Future devices will no doubt have a much higher ratio of output to input. This is going to be driven by the cost of input electrical power, which is significant. I have not seen any absolute reason that the 6 to 1 ratio is required. In my opinion, the self-sustaining mode is more of a show than practical. I can see little reason to use this technique in the final product. The average input power is what really counts. I am hoping that the test today will be well documented and we have access to the data. Am I dreaming? Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 10:21 am Subject: [Vo]:Rossi: self-sustaining limit is around six hours Earlier I said that I do not know the limits of self-sustaining operation and it might go on in that mode indefinitely. Recently, Rossi said that the limit for this particular machine is around six hours. I do not recall where he said that but I am sure he did. Some people have said he should have left the October 6 test run in self-sustaining mode for longer than four hours. That would have been nice, but apparently it was close to limit, and it would need to go back to a controlled mode. It is unclear how long the controlled phase is needed before input power can be turned off again. Rossi often makes dubious statements about business or nuclear theory, but as far as I know his assertions about the engineering aspects of his devices have all been accurate. I have no reason to doubt this. This is no indication that the technology is fundamentally limited to a six-hour duty cycle. Arata's cells have stayed warm much longer than this. Granted they are Pd-D which might be very different from Ni-H. There is absolutely no indication that the current ratio of 1 W input to 6 W output for most cells is caused by fundamental performance limitations or physics. As I said, this is a lot like saying that railroad locomotives will never go faster than 18 km/h because that's how fast the first one went in 1808. If the 1 MW reactor is run in self-sustaining mode for several hours that would certainly be a good test. From a technological point of view, there is no advantage to having cells go into fully self-sustaining mode. Having a small amount of power to control the cell is just as good as having no power at all. The overhead equipment cost of generating control current with thermoelectric devices will be trivial, and the dollar cost for the energy will be zero. I am sure the control current will ultimately be much smaller than the overall output. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog
Rossi wrote: FIRST INFORMATION REGARDING THE 1 MW PLANT TEST: WE SARTED REGULARLY THE TEST THIS MORNING . EVERYTHING IS GOING WELL SO FAR. THE 1 MW E-CAT IS WORKING IN SELF SUSTAINING. That is SPLENDID! Congratulations to Andrea Rossi. Say what you like about him, he has guts, and he has the courage of his convictions. I do not doubt this report, for two reasons: 1. As I said before, I have never seen Rossi lie about engineering technical claims. He says strange things about theory and business, but never about engineering. That's what you expect from engineers and programmers. They may cheat on their wives and their taxes but when it comes to machines, they tell the truth. 2. Several reliable people are there. They will tell us later if this is not true. He knows they will. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: That's what you expect from engineers and programmers. They may cheat on their wives and their taxes but when it comes to machines, they tell the truth. We never, ever cheat on our taxes!! T (you never know who's listening)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi: self-sustaining limit is around six hours
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am hoping that the test today will be well documented and we have access to the data. Am I dreaming? If, as Rossi claims, a third-party engineer is collecting the data we probably will have access to it. In lieu of that, Lewan is there and he will do his best to collect data. Without him there would have been no data at all from the past two tests. He said so himself, in an acid comment: The shortcomings of the test measurement methods were clear, though significant improvements had been made compared to previous ones. Data were retrieved only because Ny Teknik, without being prepared, took responsibility for gathering and recording the readings. http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3295411.ece He has worked under trying circumstances and done as well as can be expected. I think there is good hope that we will have better data this time. If the thing runs in self-sustaining mode for a long time, that will sure simplify the calorimetry, won't it? It makes for a very convincing demo. I do not think it has any technological significance but the main thing now is to convince people it is real. Of course the skeptics will say there was a hidden 1 MW wire or 343 kg of hidden gasoline (enough for 4 MWh), but many other people will be convinced by ~1 MW of steam continuing for many hours with no input. I will grant, it would not be hard to hide 343 kg of gasoline in that monster. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
I wrote: Twitter screens do not auto-translate with Chrome. Ah ha. Left click and select translate. Thanks Jouni Valkonen for telling me that. - Jed
[Vo]:October 28th Test Protocol
Has anyone seen any data come through on test protocols? If the water/steam is recirculating, does this mean that the 1MW is entirely closed-loop? Is there NO water being added to the system? How is water flow rate in the primary being measured, if at all? How is temperature in the primary being measured, if at all? Is the steam condenser a heat exchanger? Do we have a secondary water flow to examine Delta T? How is the temperature/pressure measured in the secondary? If there is no heat exchanger and secondary flow, but only a steam condenser, what are the pertinent variables for calorimetry? I think that it was Jouni / Jed that came up with the test methodology involving a secondary circuit, pumping water from and back into a swimming pool. If this is the case: Has the swimming pool begun boiling? Has anyone left a frog in the pool, to see if he'll jump out?
[Vo]:Update by Wired UK---no current test info
Greetings Vortex, Here is the spin on the Oct 28th Test by Wired. It is based on no current results. I was expecting a worse article from Wired: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/28/cold-fusion Ciao, Ron Kita
Re: [Vo]:Live Twitter feed by Passerini
At 10:29 AM 10/28/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Ah ha. Left click and select translate. Thanks Jouni Valkonen for telling me that. Right-click for me.
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog
Terry, That is true... hope your wife doesn't changes the locks :_) Fran -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 1:19 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: That's what you expect from engineers and programmers. They may cheat on their wives and their taxes but when it comes to machines, they tell the truth. We never, ever cheat on our taxes!! T (you never know who's listening)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi: self-sustaining limit is around six hours
The skeptics remind me of defense lawyers. They can always come up with reasonable doubt as to whether or not their clients committed the crime. The extent to which the skeptics of the ECAT go to convince themselves that it is a scam amazes me. Of course it is always possible to perform magic tricks and deceive everyone. But his luck would run out sooner or later and he would be discovered. Does anyone honestly think Mr. Rossi spends the time and energy that would be required to continuously devise tricky methods to deceive us? This concept is completely without reason. I have enormous confidence in Mats Lewan and appreciate the effort he has expended toward this project. Where would we be if it were not for him? I think you are wise in your belief that the self sustaining mode is convincing to observers. It is not really all that practical unless the energy used to keep it in that mode is derived from output of the device. I am sure that this is possible and will become common in the future. Wouldn't it be nice to have a small battery backup system just to start the reactor and then it recharges the batteries in preparation for the next start up. You suggest that the calorimetry is simplified by the self sustaining mode. To me, I would prefer to have constant input power that can be accurately measured and therefore steady state output. If this type of system is run for long enough, there can be not doubt as to the ratio of output power to input power. Actually it would not take much time to determine that steady state output has been achieved. My last document about proof of LENR revealed that truth. It was very evident that the ECAT was operating in a constant output mode (actually extremely slowly dropping) just before it was placed within the self sustaining mode. The measurements reported by Mats in his Excel file would allow me to calculate almost exactly how much the average input power would need to increase in order to make the output flat and not varying with time for as long as we desired. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 1:26 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi: self-sustaining limit is around six hours David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am hoping that the test today will be well documented and we have access to the data. Am I dreaming? If, as Rossi claims, a third-party engineer is collecting the data we probably will have access to it. In lieu of that, Lewan is there and he will do his best to collect data. Without him there would have been no data at all from the past two tests. He said so himself, in an acid comment: The shortcomings of the test measurement methods were clear, though significant improvements had been made compared to previous ones. Data were retrieved only because Ny Teknik, without being prepared, took responsibility for gathering and recording the readings. http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3295411.ece He has worked under trying circumstances and done as well as can be expected. I think there is good hope that we will have better data this time. If the thing runs in self-sustaining mode for a long time, that will sure simplify the calorimetry, won't it? It makes for a very convincing demo. I do not think it has any technological significance but the main thing now is to convince people it is real. Of course the skeptics will say there was a hidden 1 MW wire or 343 kg of hidden gasoline (enough for 4 MWh), but many other people will be convinced by ~1 MW of steam continuing for many hours with no input. I will grant, it would not be hard to hide 343 kg of gasoline in that monster. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog
Everyone has the right to be wrong. It will be interesting to hear from these guys when the dust settles from the test. The supporters of Rossi likewise need to admit their error if by chance his ECAT monster system is a scam. I am hopeful that a small passage of time will reveal the truth. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 1:34 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi writes on the blog Some people are septical: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/28/energy-catalzyer-extraordinary-scams-require-extraordinary-claims/
[Vo]:Anticipating skeptical response.
So today is supposed to be the big day, but I've said that enough times to my friends and family over the last few months that I am starting to get embarassed, if you simply posit that Rossi is perpetrating a scam (even though I don't think he is) then we are still sitting here without solid incontravertible evidence this is the Real Deal. And so for his latest demo Rossi has managed to muddy the waters even more due to its complexity and greater capacity for hidden sleight of hand - 50ish coolbox sized units in a shipping container and (I expect) another terrible calorimetry setup. Skeptics will claim he had a hidden steam pipe or combustor and fuel in one or more of the boxes or has another power source feeding in from under the container. Rossi will get angry at them and yet will have no way to prove to the world that he is legitimate other than his word (that the world can fairly say is questionable given his history). So I predict yet another Rossi generated stalemate. But if so then with luck he will run out of money and be forced to do a properly instrumented small demo running for a day or two. Also if I was an investor then at this point I would be very worried that we have only his word for it that it runs for extended periods - even if it is LENR then if it only runs for a day or two before requiring refurbishment or replacement of the reactor material then it is nothing more than a very interesting scientific curio with perhaps spectacular potential but little or no current practical use.
[Vo]:Report
from... PESNetwork PES Network, Inc. QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later.
[Vo]:ideal client
Stirling Allan reports: *QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during * *self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later.* I definitely like this client! Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Report
sounds about right compared to Oct 6 test 50 units * 3 cats per unit would imply about 3kW per e-cat On 28 October 2011 19:25, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: from... PESNetwork PES Network, Inc. QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later.
Re: [Vo]:Report
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: from... PESNetwork PES Network, Inc. QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later. At half nameplate! Hah! T
[Vo]:Dismaying rumors about October 28 test
I have heard that observers of today's tests are only being allowed to look at the equipment for a few minutes at a time, and they are not being introduced to the engineers who are taking the data. They are not being given a chance to establish the bona fides of these engineers, or to confirm that they are fully independent from Rossi. If this is true then it goes without saying these results will have zero credibility. If this is true then Rossi has once again taken a golden opportunity to convince the world his claims are true, and used it to make himself look like a crook. I hope this is not true. Whatever happens, I am sure we will get the full story. The reporters there can be relied upon to tell us the truth. If they are not allowed to interview the engineers and they cannot independently confirm the data, they will say so. I am sure Rossi knows they will tell the truth, so it seems unlikely he would impose such outrageous conditions. Unfortunately, he has often done outrageous things, such as telling people they are not allowed to measure the temperature with their own instruments. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
That's ~3KW for every core... So, that's much less than the other test on 6th october, or at lest at the low end. And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? 2011/10/28 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com Stirling Allan reports: *QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during * *self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later.* I definitely like this client! Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: That's ~3KW for every core... So, that's much less than the other test on 6th october, or at lest at the low end. And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? If there was no input power, the amplification was infinite. T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... 2011/10/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: That's ~3KW for every core... So, that's much less than the other test on 6th october, or at lest at the low end. And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? If there was no input power, the amplification was infinite. T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Stirling Allan reported: *QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during . . .* I believe Terry Blanton's prediction was the closest to this. He wins the prize here, if these results are confirmed. The difference between 470 kW and 1 MW is unimportant. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
I am so sorry that I don't know who is the Customer. I want to offer him a Trabant 1963 and ask the price of a Rolls Royce 2009. So I lose a great opportunity. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... 2011/10/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: That's ~3KW for every core... So, that's much less than the other test on 6th october, or at lest at the low end. And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? If there was no input power, the amplification was infinite. T -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? The amplification was reportedly infinite, but anyway, how do you know what the customer was promised? Were you there during the negotiations? There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. If that is true, then probably all of the input power all came out immediately, before the machine began to self sustain. That is what happened on October 6. As long as there is a balance of input and output before the machine begins to self-sustaining it does not matter how much you input. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... Promised to who? You? Rossi did not promise anything to anyone I know. He made vague claims that shifted often. He said he would produce a megawatt of hot water, then he said steam, he said he would use 20 individual units than 50 than 300 then back to 50. His plans have changed again and again. He never made clear to anyone what he would do. There's nothing wrong with this. People who are inventing with cutting-edge technology have to change plans constantly, or they will fail. Rossi had no obligation to tell you or us anything about his plans or his test. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
If Rossi's Reactor output 470,000 watts using a sustained Nickel/Hydrogen reaction and an industrial client from the US just bought it, the world has changed more dramatically than when the Trinity site as alit. Vishnu also creates worlds. T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
He always promised, during all these months, that the costumer would get a 1 to 6 ratio amplification. And we know that from what he says that self sustaining is not stable for long. Now, he does a test that is very within the energy density of 1L or 2L of propane in every core. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Date: 2011/10/28 Subject: Re: [Vo]:ideal client To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? The amplification was reportedly infinite, but anyway, how do you know what the customer was promised? Were you there during the negotiations? There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. If that is true, then probably all of the input power all came out immediately, before the machine began to self sustain. That is what happened on October 6. As long as there is a balance of input and output before the machine begins to self-sustaining it does not matter how much you input. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... Promised to who? You? Rossi did not promise anything to anyone I know. He made vague claims that shifted often. He said he would produce a megawatt of hot water, then he said steam, he said he would use 20 individual units than 50 than 300 then back to 50. His plans have changed again and again. He never made clear to anyone what he would do. There's nothing wrong with this. People who are inventing with cutting-edge technology have to change plans constantly, or they will fail. Rossi had no obligation to tell you or us anything about his plans or his test. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Wouldn't the client bother to open each unit and check what's inside? I wouldn't buy without taking a look inside each and every cat. 2011/10/28 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com He always promised, during all these months, that the costumer would get a 1 to 6 ratio amplification. And we know that from what he says that self sustaining is not stable for long. Now, he does a test that is very within the energy density of 1L or 2L of propane in every core. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Date: 2011/10/28 Subject: Re: [Vo]:ideal client To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? The amplification was reportedly infinite, but anyway, how do you know what the customer was promised? Were you there during the negotiations? There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. If that is true, then probably all of the input power all came out immediately, before the machine began to self sustain. That is what happened on October 6. As long as there is a balance of input and output before the machine begins to self-sustaining it does not matter how much you input. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... Promised to who? You? Rossi did not promise anything to anyone I know. He made vague claims that shifted often. He said he would produce a megawatt of hot water, then he said steam, he said he would use 20 individual units than 50 than 300 then back to 50. His plans have changed again and again. He never made clear to anyone what he would do. There's nothing wrong with this. People who are inventing with cutting-edge technology have to change plans constantly, or they will fail. Rossi had no obligation to tell you or us anything about his plans or his test. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
If you do so, you are NOT the Good Customer and NOT the Good Fairy. Not joking, it's a very special Customer, too good to be true/real. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.comwrote: Wouldn't the client bother to open each unit and check what's inside? I wouldn't buy without taking a look inside each and every cat. 2011/10/28 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com He always promised, during all these months, that the costumer would get a 1 to 6 ratio amplification. And we know that from what he says that self sustaining is not stable for long. Now, he does a test that is very within the energy density of 1L or 2L of propane in every core. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Date: 2011/10/28 Subject: Re: [Vo]:ideal client To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? The amplification was reportedly infinite, but anyway, how do you know what the customer was promised? Were you there during the negotiations? There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. If that is true, then probably all of the input power all came out immediately, before the machine began to self sustain. That is what happened on October 6. As long as there is a balance of input and output before the machine begins to self-sustaining it does not matter how much you input. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... Promised to who? You? Rossi did not promise anything to anyone I know. He made vague claims that shifted often. He said he would produce a megawatt of hot water, then he said steam, he said he would use 20 individual units than 50 than 300 then back to 50. His plans have changed again and again. He never made clear to anyone what he would do. There's nothing wrong with this. People who are inventing with cutting-edge technology have to change plans constantly, or they will fail. Rossi had no obligation to tell you or us anything about his plans or his test. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
The first priority is to win the sale. Getting outbid while kicking the tires would be devastating to the customer. The contract will specify that the sale is void if Rossi is using chemical shenanigans. The sooner the customer can start working on the technology, the faster they can establish themselves as the leader in e-cat technology. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't the client bother to open each unit and check what's inside? I wouldn't buy without taking a look inside each and every cat.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
In fact, I am questioning the existence of a client. If no weird rumor appears in a few months, well, I will be sure that there was never an e-cat. Of course, the client can give up the deal like Defkalion did, and we(except me) will never know if anything happened today... 2011/10/28 Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.com Wouldn't the client bother to open each unit and check what's inside? I wouldn't buy without taking a look inside each and every cat. 2011/10/28 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com He always promised, during all these months, that the costumer would get a 1 to 6 ratio amplification. And we know that from what he says that self sustaining is not stable for long. Now, he does a test that is very within the energy density of 1L or 2L of propane in every core. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Date: 2011/10/28 Subject: Re: [Vo]:ideal client To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? The amplification was reportedly infinite, but anyway, how do you know what the customer was promised? Were you there during the negotiations? There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. If that is true, then probably all of the input power all came out immediately, before the machine began to self sustain. That is what happened on October 6. As long as there is a balance of input and output before the machine begins to self-sustaining it does not matter how much you input. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... Promised to who? You? Rossi did not promise anything to anyone I know. He made vague claims that shifted often. He said he would produce a megawatt of hot water, then he said steam, he said he would use 20 individual units than 50 than 300 then back to 50. His plans have changed again and again. He never made clear to anyone what he would do. There's nothing wrong with this. People who are inventing with cutting-edge technology have to change plans constantly, or they will fail. Rossi had no obligation to tell you or us anything about his plans or his test. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
You have made an excellent point. I noticed that the self sustaining power was quite a bit below the driven power and this may demonstrate that phenomenon. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 2:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:ideal client On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: That's ~3KW for every core... So, that's much less than the other test on 6th october, or at lest at the low end. And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? If there was no input power, the amplification was infinite. T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Wait until the final results are posted and then we will know the score. I recall that there were to be two of the 500 kwatt units to make up a complete system. This test may just evolve one. Dave -Original Message- From: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 2:48 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:ideal client There certainly was input, as it always happen to achieve a threshold temperature to begin the reaction. But, anyway, this was not the promised test... 2011/10/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: That's ~3KW for every core... So, that's much less than the other test on 6th october, or at lest at the low end. And the client was promised 1 to 6 amplification! Wow, happened? If there was no input power, the amplification was infinite. T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
On 2011-10-28 20:26, Peter Gluck wrote: Stirling Allan reports: *QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during * *self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later.* I definitely like this client! Interesting comment on 22passi blog by an unidentified user (who appears to be truthful), translated in English by me. I think he mistook kW and MW with kWh and MWh: * * * I'm back from Via dell'Elettricista [Rossi's factory location in Bologna]. What Sterling Allan says is what Rossi said during the press conference, so it's the truth, for what it's worth. I can confirm that steam couldn't be seen as it was being condensed. Measurements should have been done by a certain engineer Fioravanti (I believe on behalf of the very important customer). Not everything went well (the usual [leaking] gaskets, the self-sustaining reaction that was in danger of runaway, etc), but 470kWh (even if not 1 MWh) without input power (excluding that of water pumps) couldn't leave room for doubts. Rossi will send a report (written by the customer's consultants) to the attendees, but he's already read it aloud entirely during the press conference in both Italian/English versions. There were many Swedes. Stremmenos, Levi, Ferrari were quite serene and attentive. Anyhow, either everybody made arrangements [to fake a succesful test] or it's all true. * * * Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Moon landing a FAILURE !!!
NASA reports that although they planned to send TWO men to the surface of the moon, they decided at the last minute (due to a leaky gasket, and some control issues) to send only one (the other -- selected by a coin-toss) staying on the orbiter. Neil Armstrong successfully landed Eagle on the moon, took photos, gathered samples and returned successfully to Columbia. However, because Buzz Aldrin had to remain in the command module, the landing must be classified as a failure.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
On 2011-10-28 21:52, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Interesting comment on 22passi blog by an unidentified user (who appears to be truthful), translated in English by me. I think he mistook kW and MW with kWh and MWh: More interestingly, the same user is also reporting that during the press conference Rossi claimed to have obtained all necessary permissions in order to perform the 1MW E-Cat test. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Moon landing a FAILURE !!!
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: NASA reports that although they planned to send TWO men to the surface of the moon, they decided at the last minute (due to a leaky gasket, and some control issues) to send only one (the other -- selected by a coin-toss) staying on the orbiter. Neil Armstrong successfully landed Eagle on the moon, took photos, gathered samples and returned successfully to Columbia. However, because Buzz Aldrin had to remain in the command module, the landing must be classified as a failure. I get it. Half a megawatt does not a megawatt make. :-) T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
If they only have heated water by about 50° then he would not need any permission. This would be 2 liters of hot water per second (estimated, not calculated). this are 7.2 m^3 per hour. This should be possible. However, how did they cool down the water (or condense the steam) to recycle it? For this a rather large heat exchanger would be needed. Is there a river nearby? This would do it too. Or wasnt it a closed circuit? Then it would be possible with two tank trucks. Peter Am 28.10.2011 22:20, schrieb Akira Shirakawa: On 2011-10-28 21:52, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Interesting comment on 22passi blog by an unidentified user (who appears to be truthful), translated in English by me. I think he mistook kW and MW with kWh and MWh: More interestingly, the same user is also reporting that during the press conference Rossi claimed to have obtained all necessary permissions in order to perform the 1MW E-Cat test. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Peter Heckert wrote: If they only have heated water by about 50° then he would not need any permission. In the U.S. you are not allowed to operate a boiler as large as this without a permit. It makes no difference whether it produces steam or hot water. You must have a permit; the machine has to be installed by a licensed HVAC person; and it has to be periodically inspected for safety. I have no idea what the rules are in Italy. I am talking about conventional electric and combustion boilers. I do not think the authorities would make an exception for a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles. I do not think they would say, we have no rule that applies to that so go ahead and do whatever you want. On the other hand, as someone suggested here, perhaps if you apply for a permit they may say: cold fusion does not exist. Your reactor must be fake, so we will not issue a permit. This is not our department. Perhaps the police should be brought in to investigate fraud, but we do not issue permits for imaginary reactors. Do as you please. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Report
Self-Sustaining mode for the 1MW ecat is ~470kw. (No input!) Regular operation with electrical input (~167kw) outputs the 1MW of thermal energy claimed by the nameplate. 6:1 Exciting day! 10 months of waiting! On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: from... PESNetwork PES Network, Inc. QA just finished; reading of results; 470 kW maintained continuously during self-sustain; customer satisfied; sale made; more later. At half nameplate! Hah! T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Am 28.10.2011 22:59, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert wrote: If they only have heated water by about 50° then he would not need any permission. In the U.S. you are not allowed to operate a boiler as large as this without a permit. It makes no difference whether it produces steam or hot water. You must have a permit; the machine has to be installed by a licensed HVAC person; and it has to be periodically inspected for safety. I have no idea what the rules are in Italy. I dont know, and I am not too interested. The problem is, the heat must be dissipated or stored somewhere. Even at 470kW this cannot been done easily. How was this done? Has nobody seen something. Where there big ventilators running? This must give more than 7 m^3 of hot water per hour or even more steam volume or even more hot air volume. This cannot been done unnoticed and unexplained.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Am 28.10.2011 23:15, schrieb Peter Heckert: The problem is, the heat must be dissipated or stored somewhere. Even at 470kW this cannot been done easily. How was this done? Has nobody seen something. Where there big ventilators running? This must give more than 7 m^3 of hot water per hour or even more steam volume or even more hot air volume. This cannot been done unnoticed and unexplained. 470 kW is the heat that comes down to earth surface on an hot summerday on an area of 470 m^2. This energy cannot vanish without being noticed. If, then there was no energy. Peter
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
On 2011-10-28 23:15, Peter Heckert wrote: The problem is, the heat must be dissipated or stored somewhere. Even at 470kW this cannot been done easily. How was this done? Has nobody seen something. Where there big ventilators running? Another 22passi user who was there mentions there were six large (1.5x1.5 meters) heat exchangers with approximately 1 meter wide cooling fans. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
Hello group, This is from PESN. Great video quality: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sZHOQ6P-Rw Possibly more coming soon. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: Another 22passi user who was there mentions there were six large (1.5x1.5 meters) heat exchangers with approximately 1 meter wide cooling fans. Ah! Finally some technical details. That sounds good. Six large heat exchangers sounds like what you would need. Where did you read that? URL please! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
More here: reactor running: http://www.youtube.com/user/PESNetwork Possibly more coming soon.
Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
Sheese... hold the camera still. Love that crazy sweater! --On Friday, October 28, 2011 2:57 PM -0700 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: More here: reactor running: http://www.youtube.com/user/PESNetwork Possibly more coming soon.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
On 2011-10-28 23:56, Jed Rothwell wrote: Ah! Finally some technical details. That sounds good. Six large heat exchangers sounds like what you would need. Where did you read that? URL please! I read it in one of the latest comments of 22passi Blog user nemo here: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/bologna-28-ottobre-2011-spazio-per-i.html User sono solo un test added interesting tidbits as well (in Italian). Anyway, we'll see much more information soon. Daniele Passerini said in his last comment in the URL above that (essentially) the news embargo has ended (literally, that the AP exclusive ended at midnight, Italian time). Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
More: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFiJb2UhzqYfeature=youtu.be
Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
That is wonderful! Splendid! You have to love a gigantic noisy machine. I can't wait to hear the details. Rossi is right about one thing: people will be impressed by the sheer scale of this thing. Some will believe it just because it is so big and so wonderfully loud. In the short video he said people are not as impressed by kilowatt scale reactors. He is right about that. If this is working the way Rossi claims, this is indeed one of the most important days in the history of technology. I still say he could have persuaded the important people with a much smaller reactor. But hey, it's Rossi's decision, his invention, and he gets to call the shots. I can't argue with that. - Jed
Fw: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:15 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event Obviously told to point the camera down most of the time Hard to fudge the input figures when the ecat is powered by a gen set - I like that and very easy to work out the output with those heat exchangers.
[Vo]:Photos of test report and a spreadsheet
have been posted on Rossi's blog (JONP). Let the digestion begin. -- Sean
Re: [Vo]:Photos of test report and a spreadsheet
On 2011-10-29 00:23, Sean True wrote: have been posted on Rossi's blog (JONP). Download link in ZIP format: http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Dismaying rumors about October 28 test
Yikes. This kind of confirms what I heard. I fear this may mean we will not find out who did this test or whether they are independent. I don't want to jump to conclusions but this sounds bad: http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:October_28%2C_2011_Test_of_the_One_Megawatt_E-Cat QUOTE I just got back from my turn. I was able to shoot a few pictures and take some video. The reason for the embargo on taking photos was personnel reasons. They don't want the engineers and testers to be shown, to keep them confidential. The company doing the testing does not wish to be known at this time. A quick comment from the AP writer who is here. The lack of coverage from the mainstream media is not due to lack of interest but from the lack of cooperation from Andrea Rossi. He has turned a lot of media away who have wanted to come in. The AP writer has gained Rossi's trust over time, and hence was invited to be here today. Rossi will be sending us all the data this evening. Wish I could say more, but it will have to wait. Great day so far. -- SilverThunder 05:42, 28 October 2011 (PDT) END QUOTE It says Rossi will be sending us the data. From where? Whose data? Whose instruments? Has anyone confirmed it independently? I hope this is not what it sounds like. I hope that the results are definitive in a way that be confirmed without instrumentation, just by observation. That was true of the October 6 test. Of course it would be *far better* to have proper independent instruments. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client
Am 28.10.2011 23:38, schrieb Akira Shirakawa: On 2011-10-28 23:15, Peter Heckert wrote: The problem is, the heat must be dissipated or stored somewhere. Even at 470kW this cannot been done easily. How was this done? Has nobody seen something. Where there big ventilators running? Another 22passi user who was there mentions there were six large (1.5x1.5 meters) heat exchangers with approximately 1 meter wide cooling fans. Thank you very much! Mass of air: 1.3 kg/m^3 Isobar heat capacity of air: 1kWs/(kg*K) (K = Kelvin) Calculation for delta T = 50K : Air mass flow = power/(heat capacity * delta T) = 470 kW/(1 kWs)*kg*K /(50*K) = 9.4 kg/s. Air volume flow = 9.4kg/s / (1.3 kg/m^3) = 7.2 m^3 /s Area of fans = 6*1.5*1.5 m^2 = 13.5 m^2. Air speed = 7.2/13.5 m/s = 0.53 m/s = 1.9 km/h. So at delta T = 5 K we would get about 20 km/h of air speed. This is about the speed of an bicycle. Yes, this is credible. I am not used to do such calculations, so please check for errors. If my calculation is correct, then my question is: Was anybody there and did feel a warm wind at bicycle speed or a hot wind at slow pedestrian speed?
Re: [Vo]:Photos of test report and a spreadsheet
At 03:24 PM 10/28/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: On 2011-10-29 00:23, Sean True wrote: have been posted on Rossi's blog (JONP). Download link in ZIP format: http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk Hmmm ... I don't see any measurement of steam quality in the contract jpg's
Re: [Vo]:Photos of test report and a spreadsheet
This report is meaningless. We need the raw data from a reliable source outside Rossi's circle of trust. At Daniele Passerini's blog comments someone said that the company is a food producer (!??!). Weird. 2011/10/28 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com At 03:24 PM 10/28/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: On 2011-10-29 00:23, Sean True wrote: have been posted on Rossi's blog (JONP). Download link in ZIP format: http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk Hmmm ... I don't see any measurement of steam quality in the contract jpg's
Re: Fw: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, John Harris jfhar...@dodo.com.au wrote: Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:15 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event Obviously told to point the camera down most of the time Hard to fudge the input figures when the ecat is powered by a gen set - I like that and very easy to work out the output with those heat exchangers. Yes, I saw the large orange generator. Note that it wasn't on wheels. It looked to be about 200 kW in capacity. But if you need almost 200 kW to fire up your 500 kW self-runner, you can't pull it out of a wall socket. Let's be patient and assume that the customer has some good engineers there for the test (assuming there really is a customer). The story is that the unit did output almost 1 MW when initiated; but, could only sustain half that in the self running mode. We will all await further data before issuing judgement, right? If this is a hoax, it will likely be AR's last. There was a lot of money spent here. If not, tell the Occupy Wall Street kids that we have a new way to keep them warm. T
[Vo]:Voice input draft of Rossi Oct. 28 test documents
Documents downloaded here: http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk This includes the spreadsheet and three photographs of a document. I just read the document aloud to voice input. This is practically uncorrected. I left out some parts. I apologize for uploading uncorrected text. I would appreciate if someone would make corrections. After some other things for the next few hours. - Jed TESTS TO PROOF THE LEONARDO 1 MW REACTOR WORKING BY MEANS OF LOW-ENERGY NUCLEAR REACTIONS – PROTOCOL PREPARED BY THE PARTIES the test has been performed by the parties: For the customer (omitted – confidential): engineer Expert scientists for the measurement of radiations outside the reactors: Dr. David Bianchini (University of Bologna) Date of the test: October 28, 2011 time of the test from 9.00 through 23. 00 Test protocol The test has the goal of comparing the energy output of the reactor made as in the description of the patent number against the energy consumption of the same. To reach this goal we have measured the energy inputs the reactor by means of the following instrumentation: [Blank] Such instrumentation has been certified as follows: [Blank] The energy output, or production has been measured by means of the integral of the delta T of the water coolant of the reactor in function of the water flow plus the vaporize nation heat of the water turned into steam. To be conservative, all the water which arrived liquid at the output of the reactor has been collected and its weight has been subtracted from the amount of water that has been considered vaporized. The water flow rate has been measured by a scaled reservoir and a chronograph all the times that the customers consultant has deemed opportune. This system has been chosen by the customer. The temperatures of the water before and after the reactor have been measured by means of the following instrumentation, previously tested by the customer: test of data logger #177 – T3 test of thermocouples # the positioning of the thermocouples has been chosen by the customer as for the radiations we have measured: the radiations emitted into the environment from the reactor the results are reported in attachment one: no radiation above the background have been registered the hydrogen tank is been waived by means of the scale before and after the loading of the hydrogen in the reactor. Before the loading the weight measured is: 13,604.5 kg after the loading the weight measured is: 13,602.8 kg the hydrogen tank pressure has been measured before and after the load: Average temperature of the water at the input 18.3°C Average temperature of the steam: 104.5°C (The diagrams of the temperatures is in the attachment to) Energy consumed from 12.30 (when the reactor has been turned on) and 18.00 (when the reactor has been turned off: one hour 66 kWh (sixty six) Total energy production from 12.30 through 18.00 2635.033 kWh. Water flow rate: liter per hour 675.6 Water not vaporize total: five water vaporize: total 3716 Total energy produced: (steam kilograms times 625.5) plus (100 minus input water T) times kilograms of water heated times 1.16 equals 2635 kilowatt-hours Ratio between energy producing energy consumed (COP): 2006 and 35:0 Description of test installation The 1 MW energy catalyzer (he) is an assembly of 170 modules of 10 kW each, connected in parallel. Each module is made by three submodules of 3.3 kW each, put in parallel. All modules are set in a container made by steel. The assemblies commanded by a control panel supplied with the necessary software and all the necessary electronic components, whose description has been detailed in the sale agreement. All the components result to be set as guaranteed from a pulmonary check. The dimensions of the container are: length 5 m with 2.6 m height 2.6 m weight declared from the manufacturer 10 times noise emissions below 50 dB at 5 m from the plant waste emissions: none Gasser smoke emissions: none liquid emissions: none the water is supplied by the reactors by means of to pumps with a flow rate capacity of 3000 m/h regulated by valve at the do flow rate of ~350 L per hour Type of pumps: The reactors have been served by a RSG, whose data are reported in the sale agreement description. The energy consumed by the RFP system has been Could in the calculation of the COP. The heat made by the reactor has been dissipated in a steam condenser and the water came from the condensation of the heat has been recycled to the reactor. Additional water has been added from the grid to compensate the water evaporated from the reservoir, by means of floating files, to maintain constant the water level of the reservoir. The modules have been divided into rows each with an independent pump, so that each pump has a flow rate of 750 kg per hour, for a total of 1500 kg per hour. The dissipated us have been designed by Leonardo Corporation, and
Re: Fw: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
/snip/ We will all await further data before issuing judgement, right? /snip/ Anxiously awaiting Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, John Harris jfhar...@dodo.com.au wrote: Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:15 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event Obviously told to point the camera down most of the time Hard to fudge the input figures when the ecat is powered by a gen set - I like that and very easy to work out the output with those heat exchangers. Yes, I saw the large orange generator. Note that it wasn't on wheels. It looked to be about 200 kW in capacity. But if you need almost 200 kW to fire up your 500 kW self-runner, you can't pull it out of a wall socket. Let's be patient and assume that the customer has some good engineers there for the test (assuming there really is a customer). The story is that the unit did output almost 1 MW when initiated; but, could only sustain half that in the self running mode. We will all await further data before issuing judgement, right? If this is a hoax, it will likely be AR's last. There was a lot of money spent here. If not, tell the Occupy Wall Street kids that we have a new way to keep them warm. T
Re: [Vo]:Voice input draft of Rossi Oct. 28 test documents
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: For the customer (omitted – confidential): engineer Appears to read Colonel - Domenico Fioravanti The Colonel is scratched out. Colonel Sanders?? KFC? A new way to cook chicken? Kewl! Hot! T
Re: [Vo]:Voice input draft of Rossi Oct. 28 test documents
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Appears to read Colonel - Domenico Fioravanti Digital Solutions Srl.? http://www.linkedin.com/in/domenicofioravanti T
Re: [Vo]:Photos of test report and a spreadsheet
At 03:48 PM 10/28/2011, Bruno Santos wrote: This report is meaningless. We need the raw data from a reliable source outside Rossi's circle of trust. At Daniele Passerini's blog comments someone said that the company is a food producer (!??!). Weird. Why weird? They use LOTS and LOTS of steam and/or water.
