Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Lennart Thornros]

Jed, if I understand you right the world is full of idiots and scammers and
potential jailbirds.
All technical skepticism you have been provided are done by people without
common sense.
You obviously have more information than anyone else (only from IH?) and
that means your opinion is the one that makes sense.
Although you do not say which info you have. You just say others are a
little stupid or full-blown idiots for even questioning your statements.
It is a wonderful world. It is totally surrounded by mirrors. Only showing
the glory.
religion comes to mind.


Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Alan Fletcher  wrote:
>
> I accept your claim that 1MW in an un-ventilated, insulated room would be
>> fatal.
>>
>> But that is not the case : a 30,000 CPM is sufficient to ventilate it,
>> and there is a fan (of similar dimensions to one particular example) on the
>> roof. (Plus convective loss, which would reduce the need for ventilation).
>>
>
> Alan, you are missing the point!! Please read carefully:
>
> Yes, if there is a 30,000 CPM fan in the customer room, and yes if it is
> running the temperature will not go up. THEREFORE, in order to prove the
> heat is real, Rossi has to show the I.H. expert this fan. The expert has to
> measure the air temperature and flow with an HVAC tool such as this one:
>
> http://www.tequipment.net/ExtechAN200.asp
>
> This confirmation is essential because Rossi's own calorimetry shows no
> excess heat.
>
> This confirmation would be essential in any case, even if Rossi's
> calorimetry showed excess heat. No one is going to write a check for $89
> million without taking every reasonable step to make sure the heat is real,
> and this is an important test to confirm that. You want to measure heat at
> the boiler, heat coming from the industrial equipment, and heat removed
> from the room by the ventilation equipment. These should be in reasonable
> agreement.
>
> All large HVAC equipment has to be periodically tested for safety. When
> they do these tests, they measure the COP of the boilers, and they measure
> how well the chimney and fans are working. Anyone thinking of paying $89
> million will demand the same kinds of tests.
>
>
>
>> Rossi presented no calorimetric data to Lewan (see my separate thread), .
>> . .
>>
>
> I heard he did, but I could be wrong about that. Rossi quoted enough
> numbers to allow a calculation of the fluid temperature. The numbers he
> quoted were the same as the sample I analyzed.
>
>
>
>> Rossi filed his contract with IH with the court.  See sections 3(c) and 5
>> . . .
>>
>
> No, he did not. He is a fraud. His own data shows that his machine does
> not work. He tried to cover up additional proof of that by preventing
> access to the customer site.
>
>
>
>> Rossi says  (and will presumably produce in court) that IH and JM signed
>> off on a strict separation (double-black-box) policy.
>>
>
> JM is a shell company made by Rossi's lawyer. Their agreements mean
> nothing. Rossi had access to the facility.
>
>
>
>> There is NO evidence at all that ERV Penon is "Rossi's" man.
>>
>
> Yes, there is. He is also a certified idiot. If he sticks around in the
> U.S. he will be twice an idiot, because he will probably end up in jail.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan Fletcher  wrote:

I accept your claim that 1MW in an un-ventilated, insulated room would be
> fatal.
>
> But that is not the case : a 30,000 CPM is sufficient to ventilate it, and
> there is a fan (of similar dimensions to one particular example) on the
> roof. (Plus convective loss, which would reduce the need for ventilation).
>

Alan, you are missing the point!! Please read carefully:

Yes, if there is a 30,000 CPM fan in the customer room, and yes if it is
running the temperature will not go up. THEREFORE, in order to prove the
heat is real, Rossi has to show the I.H. expert this fan. The expert has to
measure the air temperature and flow with an HVAC tool such as this one:

http://www.tequipment.net/ExtechAN200.asp

This confirmation is essential because Rossi's own calorimetry shows no
excess heat.

This confirmation would be essential in any case, even if Rossi's
calorimetry showed excess heat. No one is going to write a check for $89
million without taking every reasonable step to make sure the heat is real,
and this is an important test to confirm that. You want to measure heat at
the boiler, heat coming from the industrial equipment, and heat removed
from the room by the ventilation equipment. These should be in reasonable
agreement.

All large HVAC equipment has to be periodically tested for safety. When
they do these tests, they measure the COP of the boilers, and they measure
how well the chimney and fans are working. Anyone thinking of paying $89
million will demand the same kinds of tests.



> Rossi presented no calorimetric data to Lewan (see my separate thread), .
> . .
>

I heard he did, but I could be wrong about that. Rossi quoted enough
numbers to allow a calculation of the fluid temperature. The numbers he
quoted were the same as the sample I analyzed.



> Rossi filed his contract with IH with the court.  See sections 3(c) and 5
> . . .
>

No, he did not. He is a fraud. His own data shows that his machine does not
work. He tried to cover up additional proof of that by preventing access to
the customer site.



> Rossi says  (and will presumably produce in court) that IH and JM signed
> off on a strict separation (double-black-box) policy.
>

JM is a shell company made by Rossi's lawyer. Their agreements mean
nothing. Rossi had access to the facility.



> There is NO evidence at all that ERV Penon is "Rossi's" man.
>

Yes, there is. He is also a certified idiot. If he sticks around in the
U.S. he will be twice an idiot, because he will probably end up in jail.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test

[Jed Rothwell]

Patrick Ellul  wrote:

> > The temperature was just over 100 deg C according to Rossi.
>
> Where did you get this quote from Rossi?
>
You can compute that from what he told Lewan. See:

[Vo]:Re: CMNS: CONTRIBUTION FROM V. VYSOTSKII, NEW DISPUTE GENERATOR
LAUNCHED

It is also shown directly in the sample calorimetry data I analyzed.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test

[Patrick Ellul]

On 22 May 2016 1:04 AM, "Jed Rothwell"  wrote:

> The temperature was just over 100 deg C according to Rossi.

Where did you get this quote from Rossi?

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

I accept your claim that 1MW in an un-ventilated, insulated room would be 
fatal. 

But that is not the case : a 30,000 CPM is sufficient to ventilate it, and 
there is a fan (of similar dimensions to one particular example) on the roof. 
(Plus convective loss, which would reduce the need for ventilation). 

Rossi presented no calorimetric data to Lewan (see my separate thread), except 
to note that he discounted the heat needed to bring the return water to boiling 
point. 

Rossi filed his contract with IH with the court. See sections 3(c) and 5 
Rossi says (and will presumably produce in court) that IH agreed to the ERV's 
technical specification and procedure (with modifications they requested). 

Rossi says (and will presumably produce in court) that IH and JM signed off on 
a strict separation (double-black-box) policy. 

There is NO evidence at all that ERV Penon is "Rossi's" man. 


From: "Jed Rothwell"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 3:11:49 PM 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal 

a.ashfield < a.ashfi...@verizon.net > wrote: 



Your claim that the heat released from the 1 MW plant would be fatal has been 
shot down. 



That was not my claim. You are making a straw-man argument. 

My claim was that without industrial grade ventilation, when you heat a space 
with 26 times more heat than is normally used in winter, and you leave the 
heaters on continuously without a thermostat, that space will soon be so hot it 
kills people. 

However, if there is proper ventilation, that will not happen. Therefore, in 
order to prove there was 1 MW of heat production, Rossi had to show the I.H. 
expert the ventilation equipment: the fans and ducts. The expert had to perform 
a conventional measurement of air temperature and flow to demonstrate that 1 MW 
of heat was continuously removed from the room. 

THAT is my claim. Do you agree or not? If not, why not? 

This is especially important because Rossi's own calorimetry shows no excess 
heat. The only way he could convince anyone is to show the customer equipment 
and ventilation. 



BQ_BEGIN
Likewise, your certainty of fraud because Rossi was the one who prevented IH 
from visiting the customer. 

BQ_END

Rossi was the one. He said so himself. I regard that as proof of fraud. If you 
do not, we have a large difference of opinion. 

I have several other reasons for thinking this is fraud, which I have not 
revealed. 


BQ_BEGIN
Your other evidence of fraud seem to come mainly from what IH has told you. 
BQ_END

No, it is from what Rossi himself has said, and from his calorimetric data, 
which shows no excess heat. I.H. played no role in my evaluation. 


BQ_BEGIN
Before accepting that IH is a knight in shining armor who speaks only truth you 
should read this. 
BQ_END

I.H. has nothing to do with it. Rossi himself provided all the proof I need 
that he is a fraud, mainly in his interview with Lewan. 

- Jed 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[Lennart Thornros]

No Jed,
My motto is ,there is always two possibilities. I an sure you have found
the only thing that contradict that statment.
You may have inside information but you have claim for having THE answer.
On May 21, 2016 13:32, "Jed Rothwell"  wrote:

H LV  wrote:

4. Apply some common sense. Ask yourself: what other reason would Rossi
>> have to refuse admittance, other than the fact that there is no 1 MW
>> machine, and no ventilation system or other means of getting rid of the
>> waste heat? Can you propose ANY reason why an honest person would hesitate
>> to open the door?
>>
>>
> ​
> You maybe invoking a concept which at present doesn't exist in US contract
> law.
> ​
>

I do not know a thing about contract law, and I am not discussing. I am
saying that a. ashfield should use some common sense instead of coming up
with improbably nonsensical hypotheses that might possibly explain why
Rossi's behavior is innocent in a parallel universe. Here in this universe,
the only plausible reason why he refused to let the I.H. people in is
because there was nothing in there. He was covering up fraud.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan Fletcher  wrote:

The point is that this thread's title : "1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft.
> facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal" is false.
>

Are you saying this would not be true? Are you saying that putting 25
heaters into an enclosed room with no fan, turning them on without a
thermostat, and leaving them on would not heat the space to an level that
fatal level? Do you really believe that? Please explain why it would not
get hot.


The ERV signs off on "Guaranteed Performance", they pay. No ifs, no buts.
>

The test is a fraud. No court on earth would enforce payment on such a
blatant, obvious fraud.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Your claim that the heat released from the 1 MW plant would be fatal has
> been shot down.
>

That was not my claim. You are making a straw-man argument.

My claim was that without industrial grade ventilation, when you heat a
space with 26 times more heat than is normally used in winter, and you
leave the heaters on continuously without a thermostat, that space will
soon be so hot it kills people.

However, if there is proper ventilation, that will not happen. Therefore,
in order to prove there was 1 MW of heat production, Rossi had to show the
I.H. expert the ventilation equipment: the fans and ducts. The expert had
to perform a conventional measurement of air temperature and flow to
demonstrate that 1 MW of heat was continuously removed from the room.

THAT is my claim. Do you agree or not? If not, why not?

This is especially important because Rossi's own calorimetry shows no
excess heat. The only way he could convince anyone is to show the customer
equipment and ventilation.



> Likewise, your certainty of fraud because Rossi was the one who prevented
> IH from visiting the customer.
>

Rossi was the one. He said so himself. I regard that as proof of fraud. If
you do not, we have a large difference of opinion.

I have several other reasons for thinking this is fraud, which I have not
revealed.



> Your other evidence of fraud seem to come mainly from what IH has told you.


No, it is from what Rossi himself has said, and from his calorimetric data,
which shows no excess heat. I.H. played no role in my evaluation.



>Before accepting that IH is a knight in shining armor who speaks only
> truth you should read this.


I.H. has nothing to do with it. Rossi himself provided all the proof I need
that he is a fraud, mainly in his interview with Lewan.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
Your claim that the heat released from the 1 MW plant would be fatal has 
been shot down.
Likewise, your certainty of fraud because Rossi was the one who 
prevented IH from visiting the customer.


Your other evidence of fraud seem to come mainly from what IH has told 
you.   Before accepting that IH is a knight in shining armor who speaks 
only truth you should read this.  Tom Darden was directly involved.


Meadowlands Remediation and Redevelopment Project
http://nj.gov/comptroller/news/oig/pdf/Meadowlands%20Remediation%20and%20Redevelopment%20Project.pdf

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

The point is that this thread's title : "1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. 
facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal" is false. 

On the contract point, re-read the IH/Rossi contract 
https://animpossibleinvention.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/rossi_et_al_v_darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001-2.pdf
 sections 3(c) and 5. 

The ERV signs off on "Guaranteed Performance", they pay. No ifs, no buts. (On 
the earlier acceptance test they had a "discuss with the ERV" clause, but not 
on the $89M.) 


From: "Jed Rothwell"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 1:50:40 PM 

The point is, it was incumbent upon Rossi to show that fan to the I.H. expert 
and to let him measure the air temperature and flow rate. This was a 
professional evaluation. You cannot take someone's word for something in this 
situation. Especially not before signing a check for $89 million. That would be 
unthinkable. 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan Fletcher  wrote:

The roof has one circular roof fan at the left, and a rectangular box at
> the other.
>

I believe the box on the right is a skylight window.

We are talking about this photo, which I think was taken in 2014. That's
when the street view photos were taken.

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.8155624,-80.3248408,26m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en



> Conclusion : allowing for heat loss through the ceiling, 1MW can be safely
> dissipated by a fan of this size.
>

The point is, it was incumbent upon Rossi to show that fan to the I.H.
expert and to let him measure the air temperature and flow rate. This was a
professional evaluation. You cannot take someone's word for something in
this situation. Especially not before signing a check for $89 million. That
would be unthinkable.

If the fan and duct air temperature and flow prove the excess heat is real,
Rossi would be crazy not to show them to I.H.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

The roof has one circular roof fan at the left, and a rectangular box at the 
other. 

Presuming that the manufacturing area was was adjacent to JM's offices (on the 
left) the left-most circular fan vents the manufacturing area. 

Heres the fan : http://lenr.qumbu.com/steampics/160521_fans_01.jpg ( 7 pixels) 
And a small car (6 feet wide). 
http://lenr.qumbu.com/steampics/160521_fans_02.jpg (10 pixels) 

That gives the diameter of the fan as about 50 inches. 

Here's a 32,000 CFM roof fan that fits (49 inch outside diameter) : 
http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/IND-FA-R-B/LFI-RD42T3750CM.html 

Conclusion : allowing for heat loss through the ceiling, 1MW can be safely 
dissipated by a fan of this size. 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[Jed Rothwell]

H LV  wrote:

4. Apply some common sense. Ask yourself: what other reason would Rossi
>> have to refuse admittance, other than the fact that there is no 1 MW
>> machine, and no ventilation system or other means of getting rid of the
>> waste heat? Can you propose ANY reason why an honest person would hesitate
>> to open the door?
>>
>>
> ​
> You maybe invoking a concept which at present doesn't exist in US contract
> law.
> ​
>

I do not know a thing about contract law, and I am not discussing. I am
saying that a. ashfield should use some common sense instead of coming up
with improbably nonsensical hypotheses that might possibly explain why
Rossi's behavior is innocent in a parallel universe. Here in this universe,
the only plausible reason why he refused to let the I.H. people in is
because there was nothing in there. He was covering up fraud.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

John  wrote:


> Your assumption that all the power used by the customer's plant must end
> up in heat in the room is not valid.  A quick search of J.M Products Corp
> indicates that they are in the chemicals business - wholesale and
> *manufacturing*.  I am not a chemist but I would guess that there are
> plenty of endothermic chemical reactions that would absorb heat energy to
> change one set of chemicals into another.
>

An endothermic industrial processes turns only a tiny fraction of the heat
into chemical bonds. The rest is waste heat. A typical process is cooking
or canning food. When you bake a cake, nearly all the heat ends up as waste
heat in the kitchen. Only a little goes into changing the chemical bonds in
the cake.




>   Much the same as a hectare of crop absorbs radiant heat from the sun to
> change water and CO2 into stored energy which is then trucked away to
> market.
>

Photosynthesis is 3 to 6% efficient. 94% is waste heat.



> My guess is that some process they are using to manufacture useful
> chemicals not only converts heat energy into chemical energy (which then
> exits the building by truck), but that this process also contains some
> confidential know-how that the company does not want their competitors to
> find out about.  So this would be a perfectly good reason why they would
> rather not have smart people getting a good look at exactly what goes on in
> their chemical manufacturing process and so wrote that condition into the
> contract.
>

1. There is nothing going on there. There are no people and no noise.

2. They let Rossi in whenever he wants to go. If anyone is likely to steal
IP, he would be.

3. This is registered as a chemical distribution warehouse. If they are
running large industrial equipment they are violating the law. Such
equipment has to be inspected on a regular basis.

4. An expert HVAC engineer would not have to look closely at the equipment
to measure the heat flow, and even if he did, he could not magically steal
the IP.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[H LV]

​I  wrote:

> ​It seems to me the doctrine of ​u
> nconscionability
> ​could be used by IH in their defense although it would be inconsistent
> with their claim of having performed due diligence.
>
>
​Actually, it says only a judge can rule on unconscionability and since the
trial (I think) is by jury this defense could be not be used.

Harry




> ​
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability​
>
>
> ​<<
> Unconscionability
> ​ ​
> (sometimes known as unconscionable dealing/conduct in Australia) is a
> doctrine in contract law that describes terms that are so extremely unjust,
> or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior
> bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. Typically, an
> unconscionable contract is held to be unenforceable because no reasonable
> or informed person would otherwise agree to it. The perpetrator of the
> conduct is not allowed to benefit, because the
> ​ ​
> consideration offered is lacking, or is so obviously inadequate, that to
> enforce the contract would be unfair to the party seeking to escape the
> contract.
>
>
> Unconscionability is determined by examining the circumstances of the
> parties when the contract was made, such as their bargaining power, age,
> and mental capacity. Other issues might include lack of choice, superior
> knowledge, and other obligations or circumstances surrounding the
> bargaining process. Unconscionable conduct is also found in acts of fraud
> and deceit, where the deliberate misrepresentation of fact deprives someone
> of a valuable possession. When a party takes unconscionable advantage of
> another, the action may be treated as criminal fraud or the civil action of
> deceit.
>
> For the defense of unconscionability to apply, the contract has to have
> been unconscionable at the time it was made; later circumstances that make
> the contract extremely one-sided are irrelevant. There are generally no
> standardized criteria for determining unconscionability; it is a subjective
> judgment by the judge, not a jury, and is applied only when it would be an
> affront to the integrity of the judicial system to enforce such a contract.
> Upon finding unconscionability a court has a great deal of flexibility on
> how it remedies the situation. It may refuse to enforce the contract
> against the party unfairly treated on the theory that they were misled,
> lacked information, or signed under duress or misunderstanding; it may
> refuse to enforce the offending clause, or take other measures it deems
> necessary to have a fair outcome. Damages are usually not
> ​ ​
> awarded.
> ​>>​
>
>
> ​
>

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Daniel Rocha]

There isn't evidence for almost everything besides words from IH and
Rossi/Lewan. But the area required for cooling is small, so I don't think
that this point is a big issue.

2016-05-21 16:56 GMT-03:00 David Roberson :

> Is there evidence for the existence of an input opening adequate to
> achieve this requirement?  Are all the doors and windows closed?
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> There is a difference between saying "in my opinion Rossi is a fraud" and
> a statement of fact, that you have made several times. "Rossi is a fraud."


Okay, let me put it this way: The evidence that he is a fraud is now
overwhelming in my opinion.



>   For the latter you could be sued for libel in court.
>

Not if he is a fraud. Anyway, I am not worried about that.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[H LV]

​It seems to me the doctrine of ​u
nconscionability
​could be used by IH in their defense although it would be inconsistent
with their claim of having performed due diligence.

​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability​


​<<
Unconscionability
​ ​
(sometimes known as unconscionable dealing/conduct in Australia) is a
doctrine in contract law that describes terms that are so extremely unjust,
or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior
bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. Typically, an
unconscionable contract is held to be unenforceable because no reasonable
or informed person would otherwise agree to it. The perpetrator of the
conduct is not allowed to benefit, because the
​ ​
consideration offered is lacking, or is so obviously inadequate, that to
enforce the contract would be unfair to the party seeking to escape the
contract.


Unconscionability is determined by examining the circumstances of the
parties when the contract was made, such as their bargaining power, age,
and mental capacity. Other issues might include lack of choice, superior
knowledge, and other obligations or circumstances surrounding the
bargaining process. Unconscionable conduct is also found in acts of fraud
and deceit, where the deliberate misrepresentation of fact deprives someone
of a valuable possession. When a party takes unconscionable advantage of
another, the action may be treated as criminal fraud or the civil action of
deceit.

For the defense of unconscionability to apply, the contract has to have
been unconscionable at the time it was made; later circumstances that make
the contract extremely one-sided are irrelevant. There are generally no
standardized criteria for determining unconscionability; it is a subjective
judgment by the judge, not a jury, and is applied only when it would be an
affront to the integrity of the judicial system to enforce such a contract.
Upon finding unconscionability a court has a great deal of flexibility on
how it remedies the situation. It may refuse to enforce the contract
against the party unfairly treated on the theory that they were misled,
lacked information, or signed under duress or misunderstanding; it may
refuse to enforce the offending clause, or take other measures it deems
necessary to have a fair outcome. Damages are usually not
​ ​
awarded.
​>>​


​


On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 3:25 PM, H LV  wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 4. Apply some common sense. Ask yourself: what other reason would Rossi
>> have to refuse admittance, other than the fact that there is no 1 MW
>> machine, and no ventilation system or other means of getting rid of the
>> waste heat? Can you propose ANY reason why an honest person would hesitate
>> to open the door?
>>
>> -
>>
>>
> ​
> You maybe invoking a concept which at present doesn't exist in US contract
> law.
> ​
>
>
> The concept of
> ​ ​"
> Duty of honest contractual performance
> ​" was
> only adopted in Canada
> ​ in 2014​.
>
> see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_honest_contractual_performance
> < common law organizing principle of good faith is a modest, incremental
> step. This new duty of honest performance is a general doctrine of contract
> law that imposes as a contractual duty a minimum standard of honesty in
> contractual performance. It operates irrespective of the intentions of the
> parties, and is to this extent analogous to equitable doctrines which
> impose limits on the freedom of contract, such as the doctrine of
> unconscionability. However, the precise content of honest performance will
> vary with context ...>>
>
>
> However, it seems the foundation of most contract law in the US is the 
> "implied
> covenant of good faith and fair dealing"
> ​see ​
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith_(law)
> ​< is a general presumption that the parties to a contract will deal with each
> other honestly, fairly, and in good faith, so as to not destroy the right
> of the other party or parties to receive the benefits of the contract. It
> is implied in every contract in order to reinforce the express covenants or
> promises of the contract. A lawsuit (or a cause of action) based upon the
> breach of the covenant may arise when one party to the contract attempts to
> claim the benefit of a technical excuse for breaching the contract, or when
> he or she uses specific contractual terms in isolation in order to refuse
> to perform his or her contractual obligations, despite the general
> circumstances and understandings between the parties.>>
>
>
> Please read and compare the two principles and you will see the question
> you pose appears to carry no legal significance in the context of "the
> covenant good faith and fair dealing".
>
> Harry
>
>

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[David Roberson]

Air must come into the building to replace the heated air that is exhausted.  
Is there evidence for the existence of an input opening adequate to achieve 
this requirement?  Are all the doors and windows closed?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha 
To: John Milstone 
Sent: Sat, May 21, 2016 3:29 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal



That's a surprisingly small volume. The machine has one of its smaller 
dimensions 3 meters. So, even 1.5m/s per second at one end would cool the 
device.


2016-05-21 15:51 GMT-03:00 Alan Fletcher :


Back-of-the-envelope calculation

I'm going to look at a column of air of volume V -- with area A ... and a 
height H sufficient to hold 
1-second's worth of 1MW of heat. This has to be vented in 1 second.

1MW is 1000 kJ /second. 
Q = 1000 kJ in one second

Specific heat of air at 100C is 1 kJ / (kg K)
Density of air at 100C is r = 1kg/m^3

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html

Ambient air is 20C, heated air is 100C dK = 80

Q = S * dK * M 


Mass = 1kg * r * V = r * V

Q = S * dK * r * V

Solve for V :

V = Q / ( S * dK * r ) = 1000 / ( 1. * 80 * 1.) 
 = 12.5 m^3 per SECOND
 = 750 m^3 per MINUTE

 = 26,486 CFM (Cubic Feet per Minute)

That's a teeny tiny little fan!
http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/wall-ventilation.html?=CIb8x7zb68wCFQEJaQodk4AMnQ



From: "Alan Fletcher" 
To: "vortex-l" 
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:37:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal





This chimney sizing link doesn't really apply --- it's for natural draft up a 
chimney of a given height and diameter --  WITHOUT a fan.


(The longer the chimney the higher velocity of the draft, so a given diameter 
can exhaust more heat.  They recommend "The velocity of air and flue gas in a 
smaller furnace should not exceed 2 m/s. " -- so I presume that the charts are 
based on this, and not the maximum 10m/s.).


I haven't put a ruler on the aerial photos of the vents on the roof ... but it 
looks like they could easily be 22 inches.


Since  a 22-inch vent WITHOUT a fan at a velocity of 2 m/s can handle 1MW, it 
seems likely that a vent WITH a fan could also do so.


There's probably a vent/fan sizing chart somewhere, but this isn't it.



From: "Jed Rothwell" 
To: "vortex-l" 
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 9:16:31 AM


As I said, 1 MW in this space would be like running 16 space heating furnaces 
continuously without thermostats. To remove that much heat, you need a 22" vent 
and a large fan. An expert from I.H. would have to confirm this ventilation 
equipment is installed and working to confirm the claim. 1 MW of heat release 
calls for at least at 22" vent:


http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/chimney-sizing-d_175.html












-- 

Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

> Rossi himself revealed some of the most important details in his interview 
> with Lewan. His numbers show that the temperature was close to 100 deg C. 

I can't find that statement in Lewan's interview : 
https://animpossibleinvention.com/2016/05/16/rossi-makes-offer-on-swedish-factory-building-plus-more-updates/
 

The only mention of boiling point is that he ignores the energy used to raise 
the return water from 60C (variable) to the boiling point (100C+-). This (with 
the arbitrary 10% reduction) is very conservative. 

If the planned operating temperature was around 100C then I'd sure put into the 
specification a measurement of the steam quality, or a measurement of the 
pressure to ensure that it's not in the wet/dry range. 

If I were IH I certainly wouldn't have given the final decision directly to the 
ERV, without an appeal/audit option. 

From: "Jed Rothwell"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:00:49 AM 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal 

Peter Gluck < peter.gl...@gmail.com > wrote: 




Jed you say you know the data but have to keep them secret. 
Correct? 



Rossi himself revealed some of the most important details in his interview with 
Lewan. His numbers show that the temperature was close to 100 deg C. 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Daniel Rocha]

Why do you assume there were no tubes taking the heat through the ceiling.
  Even in the 10/28/2011 1MW there were. And indeed, there was a model of
fan similar to the smallest model displayed on the site you gave the link.
At least that  I could see in the video by Mats Lewan.

2016-05-21 16:37 GMT-03:00 Alan Fletcher :

> And that's assuming the air is vented directly from the machine to the
> fan. It would actually rise by convection, spread over the whole ceiling,
> and lose a lot of heat through the roof.
>
> I think this puts it WAY below the "fatal" level.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

And that's assuming the air is vented directly from the machine to the fan. It 
would actually rise by convection, spread over the whole ceiling, and lose a 
lot of heat through the roof. 

I think this puts it WAY below the "fatal" level. 


From: "Daniel Rocha"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 12:29:44 PM 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal 

That's a surprisingly small volume. The machine has one of its smaller 
dimensions 3 meters. So, even 1.5m/s per second at one end would cool the 
device. 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

Previous link was for wall-mounted fans. I think the sub-unit has two roof 
fans, so 2 * 16K CFM 36 inch fans would do the job. eg 
http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/IND-FA-R-TXB/SP-TXB36RHULWH3S.html 


From: "Alan Fletcher"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 12:21:04 PM 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal 

Correction ... the photos on that page were lower CFM ... 36 to 42 inch 
diameter, not so teeny tiny. 
eg http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/IND-FA-EF-PM-A/LFI-ADD36T11000B.html 30K 
CFM, 36 inch 


From: "Alan Fletcher"  
That's a teeny tiny little fan! 
http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/wall-ventilation.html?=CIb8x7zb68wCFQEJaQodk4AMnQ
 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Daniel Rocha]

That's a surprisingly small volume. The machine has one of its smaller
dimensions 3 meters. So, even 1.5m/s per second at one end would cool the
device.

2016-05-21 15:51 GMT-03:00 Alan Fletcher :

> Back-of-the-envelope calculation
>
> I'm going to look at a column of air of volume V -- with area A ... and a
> height H sufficient to hold
> 1-second's worth of 1MW of heat. This has to be vented in 1 second.
>
> 1MW is 1000 kJ /second.
> Q = 1000 kJ in one second
>
> Specific heat of air at 100C is 1 kJ / (kg K)
> Density of air at 100C is r = 1kg/m^3
>
> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html
>
> Ambient air is 20C, heated air is 100C dK = 80
>
> Q = S * dK * M
>
>
> Mass = 1kg * r * V = r * V
>
> Q = S * dK * r * V
>
> Solve for V :
>
> V = Q / ( S * dK * r ) = 1000 / ( 1. * 80 * 1.)
> = 12.5 m^3 per SECOND
> = 750 m^3 per MINUTE
>
> = 26,486 CFM (Cubic Feet per Minute)
>
> That's a teeny tiny little fan!
>
> http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/wall-ventilation.html?=CIb8x7zb68wCFQEJaQodk4AMnQ
>
> --
> *From: *"Alan Fletcher" 
> *To: *"vortex-l" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:37:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without
> industrial ventilation would be fatal
>
> This chimney sizing link doesn't really apply --- it's for natural draft
> up a chimney of a given height and diameter --  WITHOUT a fan.
>
> (The longer the chimney the higher velocity of the draft, so a given
> diameter can exhaust more heat.  They recommend "The velocity of air and
> flue gas in a smaller furnace should not exceed *2 m/s*. " -- so I
> presume that the charts are based on this, and not the maximum 10m/s.).
>
> I haven't put a ruler on the aerial photos of the vents on the roof ...
> but it looks like they could easily be 22 inches.
>
> Since  a 22-inch vent WITHOUT a fan at a velocity of 2 m/s can handle 1MW,
> it seems likely that a vent WITH a fan could also do so.
>
> There's probably a vent/fan sizing chart somewhere, but this isn't it.
>
> --
> *From: *"Jed Rothwell" 
> *To: *"vortex-l" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, May 21, 2016 9:16:31 AM
> As I said, 1 MW in this space would be like running 16 space heating
> furnaces continuously without thermostats. To remove that much heat, you
> need a 22" vent and a large fan. An expert from I.H. would have to confirm
> this ventilation equipment is installed and working to confirm the claim. 1
> MW of heat release calls for at least at 22" vent:
>
> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/chimney-sizing-d_175.html
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[H LV]

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Jed Rothwell 
wrote:

>
>
> 4. Apply some common sense. Ask yourself: what other reason would Rossi
> have to refuse admittance, other than the fact that there is no 1 MW
> machine, and no ventilation system or other means of getting rid of the
> waste heat? Can you propose ANY reason why an honest person would hesitate
> to open the door?
>
> -
>
>
​
You maybe invoking a concept which at present doesn't exist in US contract
law.
​


The concept of
​ ​"
Duty of honest contractual performance
​" was
only adopted in Canada
​ in 2014​.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_honest_contractual_performance
<>


However, it seems the foundation of most contract law in the US is the "implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing"
​see ​
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith_(law)
​<>


Please read and compare the two principles and you will see the question
you pose appears to carry no legal significance in the context of "the
covenant good faith and fair dealing".

Harry

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

Correction ... the photos on that page were lower CFM ... 36 to 42 inch 
diameter, not so teeny tiny. 
eg http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/IND-FA-EF-PM-A/LFI-ADD36T11000B.html 30K 
CFM, 36 inch 


From: "Alan Fletcher"  
That's a teeny tiny little fan! 
http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/wall-ventilation.html?=CIb8x7zb68wCFQEJaQodk4AMnQ
 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

Back-of-the-envelope calculation 

I'm going to look at a column of air of volume V -- with area A ... and a 
height H sufficient to hold 
1-second's worth of 1MW of heat. This has to be vented in 1 second. 

1MW is 1000 kJ /second. 
Q = 1000 kJ in one second 

Specific heat of air at 100C is 1 kJ / (kg K) 
Density of air at 100C is r = 1kg/m^3 

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html 

Ambient air is 20C, heated air is 100C dK = 80 

Q = S * dK * M 


Mass = 1kg * r * V = r * V 

Q = S * dK * r * V 

Solve for V : 

V = Q / ( S * dK * r ) = 1000 / ( 1. * 80 * 1.) 
= 12.5 m^3 per SECOND 
= 750 m^3 per MINUTE 

= 26,486 CFM (Cubic Feet per Minute) 

That's a teeny tiny little fan! 
http://www.industrialfansdirect.com/wall-ventilation.html?=CIb8x7zb68wCFQEJaQodk4AMnQ
 


From: "Alan Fletcher"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 10:37:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial 
ventilation would be fatal 

This chimney sizing link doesn't really apply --- it's for natural draft up a 
chimney of a given height and diameter -- WITHOUT a fan. 

(The longer the chimney the higher velocity of the draft, so a given diameter 
can exhaust more heat. They recommend " The velocity of air and flue gas in a 
smaller furnace should not exceed 2 m/s . " -- so I presume that the charts are 
based on this, and not the maximum 10m/s. ). 

I haven't put a ruler on the aerial photos of the vents on the roof ... but it 
looks like they could easily be 22 inches. 

Since a 22-inch vent WITHOUT a fan at a velocity of 2 m/s can handle 1MW, it 
seems likely that a vent WITH a fan could also do so. 

There's probably a vent/fan sizing chart somewhere, but this isn't it. 


From: "Jed Rothwell"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 9:16:31 AM 
As I said, 1 MW in this space would be like running 16 space heating furnaces 
continuously without thermostats. To remove that much heat, you need a 22" vent 
and a large fan. An expert from I.H. would have to confirm this ventilation 
equipment is installed and working to confirm the claim. 1 MW of heat release 
calls for at least at 22" vent: 

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/chimney-sizing-d_175.html 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[John]

On 21/05/2016 11:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Once again people have claimed you can release 1 MW with no ill 
effects in a small facility, without industrial scale ventilation. 
People should apply some common sense metrics!


Rossi says the facility is 6,500 sq. feet. Conventional heating calls 
for no more than 20 BTU/sq. ft. in Florida. That's 130,000 BTU. 1 MW 
is 3,412,142 BTU/h. So that is 26 times more heat than normal heating 
would supply. More to the point, it would not be thermostatically 
controlled. It would be turned on continuously. If you turned on 26 
times more room heating furnaces than normal, and left them on at full 
blast, obviously the room would soon be too hot for a person to 
survive in.
Your assumption that all the power used by the customer's plant must end 
up in heat in the room is not valid.  A quick search of J.M Products 
Corp indicates that they are in the chemicals business - wholesale and 
_manufacturing_.  I am not a chemist but I would guess that there are 
plenty of endothermic chemical reactions that would absorb heat energy 
to change one set of chemicals into another.  Much the same as a hectare 
of crop absorbs radiant heat from the sun to change water and CO2 into 
stored energy which is then trucked away to market.


My guess is that some process they are using to manufacture useful 
chemicals not only converts heat energy into chemical energy (which then 
exits the building by truck), but that this process also contains some 
confidential know-how that the company does not want their competitors 
to find out about.  So this would be a perfectly good reason why they 
would rather not have smart people getting a good look at exactly what 
goes on in their chemical manufacturing process and so wrote that 
condition into the contract.  After all it _really should be possible_ 
to accurately determine energy transfer by measuring temperature and 
flow rate at the single inlet (specially since Rossi discounts the lack 
of heat in the return pipe).


Also the amount of heating or cooling that an area needs depends 
entirely on the temperature in neighboring volumes and heat leak rate to 
or from those volumes.  Thus in a large-area multi-story building the 
central zones _always need cooling_ even when outside air is cold and 
the perimeter zones need strong heating to cope with the heat loss 
through the outside walls.  While it may be valid in very simple cases 
to estimate heating or cooling requirement from _floor area_, in general 
this must be useless because for a factory which runs 24/7 hardly any of 
the heat is lost through the floor (once it reaches equilibrium), but 
rather through the walls and ceiling - which must depend heavily on 
their level of insulation and whether neighboring volumes are 
temperature controlled or not.

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Alan Fletcher]

This chimney sizing link doesn't really apply --- it's for natural draft up a 
chimney of a given height and diameter -- WITHOUT a fan. 

(The longer the chimney the higher velocity of the draft, so a given diameter 
can exhaust more heat. They recommend " The velocity of air and flue gas in a 
smaller furnace should not exceed 2 m/s . " -- so I presume that the charts are 
based on this, and not the maximum 10m/s. ). 

I haven't put a ruler on the aerial photos of the vents on the roof ... but it 
looks like they could easily be 22 inches. 

Since a 22-inch vent WITHOUT a fan at a velocity of 2 m/s can handle 1MW, it 
seems likely that a vent WITH a fan could also do so. 

There's probably a vent/fan sizing chart somewhere, but this isn't it. 


From: "Jed Rothwell"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 9:16:31 AM 
As I said, 1 MW in this space would be like running 16 space heating furnaces 
continuously without thermostats. To remove that much heat, you need a 22" vent 
and a large fan. An expert from I.H. would have to confirm this ventilation 
equipment is installed and working to confirm the claim. 1 MW of heat release 
calls for at least at 22" vent: 

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/chimney-sizing-d_175.html 

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
If, as likely, the output of the E-Cats was not much above 100C, one 
would need some provision to ensure there wasn't excessive water carry 
over.  Indeed without that the whole system might fill with liquid.  
Until shown otherwise I expect that was done.  I also expect the steam 
to be wet in this circumstance and for accurate calorimetry some 
provision would have to be made to measure the wetness.

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
There is a difference between saying "in my opinion Rossi is a fraud" 
and a statement of fact, that you have made several times. "Rossi is a 
fraud."  For the latter you could be sued for libel in court.

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

Peter Gluck  wrote:

Jed you say you know the data but have to keep them secret.
> Correct?
>

Rossi himself revealed some of the most important details in his interview
with Lewan. His numbers show that the temperature was close to 100 deg C.
With just a little pressure, a slight error in the temperature measurement,
or a little antifreeze in the water, there would be no steam. Just hot
water. Other data confirms that was the case. That eliminates most of the
enthalpy. He made other large errors which eliminate the rest.

You do not need any information from me to confirm this.



> Can you please tell the most 'innocent' ones- the daily consumes of
> electric energy from the grid by the 1MW plant?
>

I know what Rossi claimed. He says the output was 1000 kW and that was 50
times input, so the input would be 20 kW.

I cannot vouch for that. He did not describe how input power was measured.
However, looking at the machine, the temperature in the equipment shipping
container, and considering the smaller prototypes, ~20 kW sounds about
right to me.

This is also roughly how much heat the calorimetry shows was released by
the machine and the cooling loop. The calorimetry was dreadful -- the error
margins were huge! -- but after correcting for Rossi's idiotic mistakes it
was about 20 kW.

(Maybe these were Penon's idiotic mistakes. I wouldn't know.)

Experts say they have done better calorimetry, and confirmed there was no
excess heat. I have no knowledge of the details. I have only seen Rossi's
data and methods. I am now sure it was Rossi's because the numbers were the
same as the ones he gave Lewan.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Peter Gluck]

Jed you say you know the data but have to keep them secret.
Correct?

Can you please tell the most 'innocent' ones- the daily consumes of
electric energy from the grid by the 1MW plant?
peter

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 7:16 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> a.ashfield  wrote:
>
>
>> Jed, I gave you one example from first hand experience, that was a 1.5
>> ton/day art glass furnace and someone else provided examples of 4 MW
>> boilers.  So common sense tells me it is not unreasonable to do so.
>>
>
> How much power did your glass furnace consume?
>
> Was the facility enclosed, or was it open to the outside? The large kilns
> and glass making furnaces I have seen had open walls, like a steel mill, so
> they did not need as much ventilation equipment as an enclosed space.
>
> It is not unreasonable to run this kind of equipment in the enclosed
> customer warehouse as long as there is industrial scale ventilation. But
> the I.H. expert would have to confirm there is such equipment, and it is
> operating. He would have to measure the heat flow.
>
> As I said, 1 MW in this space would be like running 16 space heating
> furnaces continuously without thermostats. To remove that much heat, you
> need a 22" vent and a large fan. An expert from I.H. would have to confirm
> this ventilation equipment is installed and working to confirm the claim. 1
> MW of heat release calls for at least at 22" vent:
>
> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/chimney-sizing-d_175.html
>
> A 4 MW boilers in an enclosed space needs even larger vents and fans.
>
> Portable 1 MW Diesel electric generators produce 3 MW of waste heat. They
> cannot be operated indoors. They are outdoors, and they have large built in
> radiators that produce a massive flow of hot air, similar to railroad
> locomotive cooling. Much larger than semi-truck engine radiators. Here is a
> photo of a 1 MW generator:
>
> http://www.turbinemarine.com/generators.html
>
> - Jed
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Assuming Rossi (and others) are guilty before the trial is not the
> American way.
>

This only applies to the courts and the legal system. A citizen outside the
legal system is free to decide someone is guilty or innocent. That is no
violation of tradition or law. I am not a judge or lawyer, so I can have
any opinion I like, and I can express all I want. That's free speech, which
is the American way.

It is obvious to me that Rossi is guilty. He admitted it himself when told
Lewan that he did allow the I.H. expert into the customer facility. By
saying that, he didn't just admit he was a fraud. He bragged about it!

- Jed

[Vo]:was my editorial of yesterday a complete failure?

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-21-2016-lenr-was-my-yesterdays.html


I do not consider personal failures as unusual or extraordinary or bad
events
However regarding my editorial about LENR history published yesterday- yes
it was about
a partial failure- but is it a complete falure itself?
History will tell.

A fine weekend, my friends!

Peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Jed, I gave you one example from first hand experience, that was a 1.5
> ton/day art glass furnace and someone else provided examples of 4 MW
> boilers.  So common sense tells me it is not unreasonable to do so.
>

How much power did your glass furnace consume?

Was the facility enclosed, or was it open to the outside? The large kilns
and glass making furnaces I have seen had open walls, like a steel mill, so
they did not need as much ventilation equipment as an enclosed space.

It is not unreasonable to run this kind of equipment in the enclosed
customer warehouse as long as there is industrial scale ventilation. But
the I.H. expert would have to confirm there is such equipment, and it is
operating. He would have to measure the heat flow.

As I said, 1 MW in this space would be like running 16 space heating
furnaces continuously without thermostats. To remove that much heat, you
need a 22" vent and a large fan. An expert from I.H. would have to confirm
this ventilation equipment is installed and working to confirm the claim. 1
MW of heat release calls for at least at 22" vent:

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/chimney-sizing-d_175.html

A 4 MW boilers in an enclosed space needs even larger vents and fans.

Portable 1 MW Diesel electric generators produce 3 MW of waste heat. They
cannot be operated indoors. They are outdoors, and they have large built in
radiators that produce a massive flow of hot air, similar to railroad
locomotive cooling. Much larger than semi-truck engine radiators. Here is a
photo of a 1 MW generator:

http://www.turbinemarine.com/generators.html

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
Assuming Rossi (and others) are guilty before the trial is not the 
American way.

Or do you prefer Napoleonic law?

Re: [Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[a.ashfield]

Jed.  "Once again people have claimed you can release 1 MW with no ill 
effects in a small facility, without industrial scale ventilation. 
People should apply some common sense metrics!"


Jed, I gave you one example from first hand experience, that was a 1.5 
ton/day art glass furnace and someone else provided examples of 4 MW 
boilers.  So common sense tells me it is not unreasonable to do so.

[Vo]:1 MW of heat in a 6,500 sq. ft. facility without industrial ventilation would be fatal

[Jed Rothwell]

Once again people have claimed you can release 1 MW with no ill effects in
a small facility, without industrial scale ventilation. People should apply
some common sense metrics!

Rossi says the facility is 6,500 sq. feet. Conventional heating calls for
no more than 20 BTU/sq. ft. in Florida. That's 130,000 BTU. 1 MW is
3,412,142 BTU/h. So that is 26 times more heat than normal heating would
supply. More to the point, it would not be thermostatically controlled. It
would be turned on continuously. If you turned on 26 times more room
heating furnaces than normal, and left them on at full blast, obviously the
room would soon be too hot for a person to survive in.

If there were large scale ventilation equipment in use, you could release
this much heat. If the heat is real, the I.H. expert who insisted on access
to the facility would have been able to verify there was a large duct and
fan, and he could have measured the air temperature and flow rate using a
conventional HVAC anemometer. This would augment the calorimetry performed
on the reactor itself. Rossi's calorimetry was abominable, so it needed to
be augmented.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Whether the output is dry steam depends largely on the temperature, which
> is also easy to measure.  So if the temperature was say 120C, it would be
> dry.


The temperature was just over 100 deg C according to Rossi. Do the number
from the interview and that is what you come up with. That is also what his
data shows directly. Temperature may be easy to measure, but Rossi's
instruments and methods were ridiculous, it is likely his numbers are wrong.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[a.ashfield]

Jed.  "I have no knowledge of this alleged agreement, but I know that 
Rossi constantly lies about all kinds of things, including me. However, 
as I pointed out above, even if there were such an agreement, any 
sensible person would agree to modify it when the I.H. expert insisted 
he needed access. I gave the reasons above. I suggest you address these 
reasons, rather than pretending that an agreement of this nature is a 
suicide pact that both parties must blindly adhere to."


Jed,  The only evidence we have is that IH made the agreement that each 
party would not visit the other in order to protect IP.
You keep saying Rossi lied about it but have no proof of this.  I am not 
persuaded that it was necessary to visit the customer in order to prove 
the output of the 1 MW plant.  It should be straight forward to measure 
the input and the output of the plant with appropriate instrumentation.  
If that was not done, it is a different argument.

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> AA.  Jed, you have made much of Rossi's refusal to allow IH to visit the
> customer's plant.  Now that statement looks very misleading unless you have
> some evidence that Rossi lied about it being IH's written agreement.
>

I have no knowledge of this alleged agreement, but I know that Rossi
constantly lies about all kinds of things, including me. However, as I
pointed out above, even if there were such an agreement, any sensible
person would agree to modify it when the I.H. expert insisted he needed
access. I gave the reasons above. I suggest you address these reasons,
rather than pretending that an agreement of this nature is a suicide pact
that both parties must blindly adhere to.

Let me partially repeat the reasons for your convenience. I suggest you
address them, honestly, instead of dancing around the issue and making
absurd excuses for Rossi.

1. Rossi himself in the interview said that the I.H. expert insisted upon
seeing the customer side. Surely you realize that this is a reasonable
request, and that any expert would insist on it. Agreement or no agreement,
Rossi should have acquiesced. It would have instantly proven his case. It
would instantly resolve all doubts. There is no rational reason to deny
this request.

2. Whatever they agreed to, it is common sense to alter an agreement in
response to a reasonable request. I cannot imagine a more reasonable
request than this, or one that would better serve Rossi's own purposes --
assuming he is honest and he actually has 1 MW. Opening the customer site
would have as many advantages to Rossi as to I.H. . . .

3. Rossi is not a reliable source of information. . . .

4. Apply some common sense. Ask yourself: what other reason would Rossi
have to refuse admittance, other than the fact that there is no 1 MW
machine, and no ventilation system or other means of getting rid of the
waste heat? Can you propose ANY reason why an honest person would hesitate
to open the door?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[a.ashfield]

Jed.  "His refusal to allow access to the customer site tells you he is 
running a scam."

"Their statement about blocking the door to the customer convinces me. "

AA.  Jed, you have made much of Rossi's refusal to allow IH to visit the 
customer's plant.  Now that statement looks very misleading unless you 
have some evidence that Rossi lied about it being IH's written agreement.