Sorry, you may be correct. However, I downloaded the paper and found this:
In the central region of this slab, part of
the electron population was initialized as a beamlike bunch
with an average energy of 1 MeV at an intensity of 5
1018 W=cm2. All other electrons were thermal electrons
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 2 Apr 2013 01:59:38 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Sorry, you may be correct. However, I downloaded the paper and found this:
In the central region of this slab, part of
the electron population was initialized as a beamlike bunch
with an average energy of 1 MeV at
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 2 Apr 2013 01:14:51 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
I disagree. The words was corroborated by the rear-side hot electron
spectra. would not be used to determine the power of a laser beam.
They don't need to determine the power of the laser beam. They already know how
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:38:11 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Can I change my mind?
Tin Sn126 looks good. It has a 0 nuclear spin like the isotopes of nickel
that work for LENR.
It also has 76 neutrons. That means we have 26 neutrons over the neutron
magic number.
And the
Sn126 is in the middle of the mass range for fission products. Thermal
reactors, which make up almost all current nuclear power plants, produce it
at a very low yield (0.056% for U235), since slow neutrons almost always
fission U235 or Pu239 into unequal halves. Fast fission in a fast reactor,
or
WL now includes a reference to spasers in the following on page 26:
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Mon, 1 Apr 2013 19:06:00 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
WL now includes a reference to spasers in the following on page 26:
I disagree. The words “was corroborated by the rear-side hot electron
spectra.” would not be used to determine the power of a laser beam.
I believe you misread the sentence.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 9:28 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Mon, 1 Apr 2013
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:21:44 -0400
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
In LENR, the delicate balance within the nucleus between nuclear attraction and
the electrical repulsion between protons is disturbed in the opposite
fashion.In
:
--
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:21:44 -0400
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
In LENR, the delicate balance within the nucleus between nuclear
attraction and the electrical repulsion between protons is disturbed
can you use your insight to tell what fuels would work best, instead of what
products are produced.You have to get the reaction working before you can start
looking for products. d2
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:11:03 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
From: janap...@gmail.com
Axil,
How can you say that Nickel-48 is stable?
Arnaud
_
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: jeudi 28 mars 2013 20:11
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
Physics has seven magic numbers. An atom with a magic number of protons
to get the reaction working before you can start looking for
products.
d2
--
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:11:03 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Physics has seven magic numbers. An atom with a magic
...@lakoco.bewrote:
**
Axil,
How can you say that Nickel-48 is stable?
Arnaud
--
*From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* jeudi 28 mars 2013 20:11
*To:* **vortex-l@eskimo.com**
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
I saw it on the internet, but maybe it is not true.
Maybe you need to have the number of neutrons equal or exceed the number of
protons for the element to be stable.
In Ni48 there are only 20 neutrons. That might not be so good.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 4:36 PM
--
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:11:03 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:thoughts on LENR energy
From: janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Physics has seven magic numbers. An atom with a magic number of protons or
neutrons is super stable.
When both the protons and neutrons are magic, that's
DGT has found that “Ni58, Ni60, Ni62 and Ni64 stable isotopes where
“willing” to participate in a LENR reaction, whilst Ni61 was not. So there
was no need for any costly enrichment method.”
The number of nucleons (Z) is a known parameter in the fission of heavy
metal isotopes U233, U235, Pu239,
Replace
In explanation, the binding energy of the nucleus is when there are pairs
of protons and neutrons.
with
In explanation, the binding energy of the nucleus is *greater* when there
are pairs of protons and neutrons.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
At 12:50 AM 12/12/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
I think it is Bob Rohner's company that has the
kits, and he appears to be making them
available, contrary to John Rohner's wishes,Â
if I remember correctly. Â It also looks like
Bob Rohner's kit is the one that Russ Gries is
testing out in the
Abd
ul-Rahman Lomax
Mon,
10 Dec 2012 19:42:40 -0800
At 08:36 AM 12/10/2012, chan.fusion.po...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI:
http://papp.scienceontheweb.net/Forming.html
www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P2.pdf
BTW Trying to pass off LENR as
I gather “chan.fusion” is accusing Mr. Rothwell of using the lenr-canr
website specifically for the purposes of a tax dodge.
Oh, give me a tax break! I think not.
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
I gather “chan.fusion” is accusing Mr. Rothwell of using the lenr-canr
website specifically for the purposes of a tax dodge.
I missed that. This would be the world's worst tax dodge, since it costs me
a lot more than I can reduce in
One can read these optimistic noises with only a day to go as implying
that they are delaying any public demonstration of their engine until
January's CES show in Vegas. It all hinges on the meaning of the phrase
the show as binding to the temporal context of the PowerGen show -- or
binding to
From James:
One can read these optimistic noises with only a day to go as implying
that they are delaying any public demonstration of their engine until
January's CES show in Vegas. It all hinges on the meaning of the phrase
the show as binding to the temporal context of the PowerGen show --
Actually, if one reads the entire tome JR posted at
http://inteligentry.com/report.html there are a couple of contingencies
that must be met before demonstrations either live or via video:
1) There is the matter of pending patents which sets some sort of
contingency that may block demonstration.
At 09:44 AM 12/11/2012, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
I gather âchan.fusionâ is accusing Mr. Rothwell of using the lenr-canr
website specifically for the purposes of a tax dodge.
Oh, give me a tax break! I think not.
Yeah. I would assume that Jed is using another
approach. That is
Just to be clear on something I recently opined. It’s one thing to
express a personal opinion of extreme doubt and suspicion, as I have
recently done. It’s quite another thing to assume one’s personal
opinion is the correct one that other’s should emulate.
If there is the slightest chance that
At 10:54 AM 12/11/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.comsvj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
I gather chan.fusion is accusing Mr. Rothwell of using the lenr-canr
website specifically for the purposes of a tax dodge.
I missed that. This would be the
Inteligentry announced this Popper kit, earlier this year, with a
huge fanfare, to allow people to test the technology. Great idea, really.
What happened? http://www.plasmerg.com/kits.html
Currently, the page says that the original kit is not available. Not
to worry, it is being replaced with
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Yeah. I would assume that Jed is using another approach. That is a
charitable activity. It is definitely *not* a profit-making business.
Actually, LENR-CANR.org has no legal existence at all. It is informal.
However, I get some money from the
Answer at bottom:James Bowery Wrote on Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:07:00 -0800On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Cy Cle c...@inbox.lv wrote: No working Papp engine will be displayed or videos shown. It has not been replicated as yet. Rohner brothers do not understood the mechanisms of Papp's engine.
This guy checked:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHn5gTtLGkc
the technology cited at:
http://www.oocities.org/waterfuel111/water_explosion_menu.html
which was cited by:
http://papp.scienceontheweb.net/Forming.html
item 12
He apparently didn't want to release his technology because it would
At 12:42 PM 12/11/2012, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Just to be clear on something I recently opined. Itâs one thing to
express a personal opinion of extreme doubt and suspicion, as I have
recently done. Itâs quite another thing to assume oneâs personal
opinion is the correct one
From Abd:
...
What we have is Sterling Allen, who cut John Rohner a lot of slack.
And who is now about as negative as I can imagine him getting.
http://pesn.com/2012/12/10/9602241_Inteligentry_Egg-on-Face_PowerGen/
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
They could say so. But what they actually do is to claim that they have
something already. They actually did have Popper kits. The question is
whether or not they worked, that is, sure, they might pop. the piston
FYI:
See: http://open-source-energy.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=659page=56
Copy below:
Today, 12:26 AM
Post: #1120
Chan Offline
Junior Member
**
Posts: 20
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 0
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Let's build A Popper Noble Gas Engine AKA Ppap Engine.
Russ,
Papp dissociates
Thoughts on reading the Papp patent - #2.
I have been reading the Papp patent to understand what Papp originally had
in mind and was really doing. It looks to me like no present day
replicators that I know about are doing what Papp did.
As an example from the patent as follows:
*“It is
http://papp.scienceontheweb.net/
FYI:
http://papp.scienceontheweb.net/Forming.html
www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P2.pdf
BTW Trying to pass off LENR as a business when you admit it is your
hobby to avoid paying taxes to the IRS is a ploy used by the dishonest
born or lucky Rich and that is illegal, JR. Vortex is read by citizens
Speaking of, Power-Gen starts tomorrow in Orange County, FL. Wasn't
Rohner supposed to do his thing there? Here is the map of exhibitors:
http://fp32.a2zinc.net/clients/fppennwell/events12/public/fphtml.aspx?eventid=178AEID=129,172,170,171,176IMID=170
I don't see PlasmERG or Rohner
John Rohner will show his version of the Papp engine through his
subcompany, PTP Licensing.
Axil
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of, Power-Gen starts tomorrow in Orange County, FL. Wasn't
Rohner supposed to do his thing there? Here is the
No working Papp engine will be displayed or videos shown. It has not been replicated as yet. Rohner brothers do not understood the mechanisms of Papp's engine. Perhaps they should try to contact Chan.Cheers,IntellectAxil Axil Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:30:16 -0800 John Rohner will show his version of
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Cy Cle c...@inbox.lv wrote:
No working Papp engine will be displayed or videos shown. It has not been
replicated as yet. Rohner brothers do not understood the mechanisms of
Papp's engine. Perhaps they should try to contact Chan.
Hmmm, so what's the point?
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Cy Cle c...@inbox.lv wrote:
No working Papp engine will be displayed or videos shown. It has not been
replicated as yet. Rohner brothers do not understood the mechanisms of
Papp's engine. Perhaps they should try to contact Chan.
1) How would Chan know?
2)
Inteligentry is still making optimistic noises with only a day to go
/*_Wow_!! It looks like we'll be busy with News and Media for several
months. We are getting invites to other shows as well.!!*/
We may take a /big booth/ at the *CES* show here in Vegas in
January. *ANY LICENSEE
At 08:36 AM 12/10/2012, chan.fusion.po...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI:
http://papp.scienceontheweb.net/Forming.html
www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P2.pdf
BTW Trying to pass off LENR as a business when you admit it is your
hobby to avoid paying taxes to the IRS is a ploy used by the
dishonest born or
In addition to the Papp reaction, Anderson localization is critical in our
understanding of the mechanisms underway in many other gas based LENR
reactions. As an example, take the DGT reaction as follows:
If you take a look at the ionization potential list of gases again
Sorted by 1st Ionization
I was thinking about the PAPP engine and had a couple of interesting ideas to
pass on. When I look at the design of the device I see that it has some
similar features of a cross field system. The magnetrons that generate large
amounts of RF at high efficiency are one type of cross field
David,
I agree, the He ions end up at the intersecting point of the 160 kV plugs
firing (4x40kV per plug) due to the coil. After that POOF (and what ever
that implies)
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 2:15 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I was thinking about the PAPP engine and had a
Hi,
my thesis is that matter sucks up energy and this is the reason for gravity.
I dont know in which frequency range this happens, but I think matter
sucks up zeropoint energy and converts it to matter.
There was a similar theory that was discussed by Clerk Maxwell and
Boltzmann and others.
Hi,
It just occurred to me that in IRH the proton is revolving very fast around the
electron. The back of an envelope yields a kinetic energy of 291 eV. With that
amount of kinetic energy, and at that orbital frequency, it may have a chance of
tunneling into another nucleus in a reasonable time,
IRH sounds like an atomic version of a geocentric solar system.
Harry
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:47 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Hi,
It just occurred to me that in IRH the proton is revolving very fast around
the
electron. The back of an envelope yields a kinetic energy of 291 eV. With
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sat, 5 Nov 2011 21:03:06 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
IRH sounds like an atomic version of a geocentric solar system.
Indeed! :)
Harry
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 5:47 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Hi,
It just occurred to me that in IRH the proton is revolving very
Peter, thanks for this idea. This superheating process to eliminate
corrosive agents might be plausible with Rossi. Therefore we might not be
able to trust thermometer as a reliable pressure sensor, if it is not placed
under the liquid water level. But we need to find other means to measure
About multiple e-kittens in a box, question 2) from the exchange below on JONP:
Andrea Rossi
September 16th, 2011 at 4:23 AM
Dear Alessandro Casali:
1- I prefer not to give this info, for security reasons
2- multiple
3- see 1
4- yes
5- longer
6- will need drive time to time
7- everything upgrades
At 01:41 AM 9/20/2011, Michele Comitini wrote:
About multiple e-kittens in a box, question 2) from the exchange
below on JONP:
Alessandro Casali
The 27MW e-cats are single core or do they have multiple cores?
Andrea Rossi
2- multiple
I missed that one! Now I really, really don't know how to
Am 16.09.2011 21:26, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 11:57 AM 9/16/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
The important information is: There is no superheated steam because
inside the ecat is everything almost at boiling temperature. For
superheated steam you need an extra heater that heats the steam and
At 05:52 PM 9/18/2011, Colin Hercus wrote:
Woops, sorry Alan. I should be more careful.
Good grief ... no problem!! The superheater chamber idea was
directly from Lewan's report (and the literature).. All I added was
direct overflow (which may or may not be true).
I've updated my Sept ecat analysis
http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_sep11_e.php
No radical new conclusions, but I shifted the analysis point from 130C to
118C, when the output fluid measurement was made, and interleaved the
calculations with the explanatory text. (And the pressure calculations
2011/9/19 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de
.
Someone had the idea Rossi might have multiple small e-cats in this big
box.
Peter
Me too. I don't know why but I haave a strong feeling that inside the
fat-cat there are the 4 well known e-kittyes that Rossi showed us in the
past demos plus
Woops, sorry Alan. I should be more careful.
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote:
Hi Colin,
Alan Fletcher gets the credit for that scenario.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Colin
I'm still trying to figure out what's going on!
The outlet port is very high on the unit ... if it was just the overflow
from a kettle boiler then there wouldn't be any room for steam.
I might have to go back to thinking of it as a Tube boiler, where the
flow of the steam carries the water with
2011/9/16 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com:
I'm still trying to figure out what's going on!
The outlet port is very high on the unit ... if it was just the overflow
from a kettle boiler then there wouldn't be any room for steam.
I might have to go back to thinking of it as a Tube boiler, where
2011/9/16 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com:
Electric power was just less than 10% of the core
heat production that was still increasing and as there is lots of
thermal inertia, it could absorb 2.5 kW loss of heating power that we
did not even notice it.
Here was mistake, I of course
I think the problem is, that you look too much at unimportant information.
First we must decide which of the information is imortant and which is
unimportant.
Also we must see if there is any important information missing. (This is
the most difficult part)
If nothing is missing, then we have
At 11:24 AM 9/16/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Thanks for your comments I'm still looking at the whole picture.
This is also the reason, why I do not believe that two chambered inner
structure. We do not have any evidence that would support the idea of
superheated steam and also I do not
Am 16.09.2011 21:10, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
Lewan told me that Rossi insists that there are no internal
obstructions to the outlet which would cause the internal pressure to
be significantly above 1 atmosphere. If that is true, then
superheating is the only alternative.
Quite often Rossi
At 11:57 AM 9/16/2011, Peter Heckert wrote:
The important information is: There is no superheated steam because
inside the ecat is everything almost at boiling temperature. For
superheated steam you need an extra heater that heats the steam and
there is none.
Because the temperature inside
Am 16.09.2011 21:20, schrieb Peter Heckert:
Am 16.09.2011 21:10, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
Lewan told me that Rossi insists that there are no internal
obstructions to the outlet which would cause the internal pressure to
be significantly above 1 atmosphere. If that is true, then
superheating is
At 11:45 AM 9/16/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Still I find it baffling why there was no bump in the graph, when
power was cut off? Do you Alan or anyone else have any ideas?
There isn't a bump in the graph when it's heating up,
either. Previously we've seen a distinct increase in the slope
At 12:26 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
To maintain an internal pressure of 3 Bar (needed for 130C) you'd
need a pretty small orifice : less than 1/32 inch ?.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/steam-flow-orifices-d_1158.html
(Unfortunately, that's in engineering units .. I'll look for a
If the E-Cat is going to truly be analyzed as black box, we need all inputs
and outputs. Obviously, a thermometer stuck inside the E-Cat, when we don't
know the pressure, physical construction, etc., does nobody any good. (Hell, we
don't even know if it's in water, or what type of thermal
Am 16.09.2011 22:13, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 12:26 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
To maintain an internal pressure of 3 Bar (needed for 130C) you'd
need a pretty small orifice : less than 1/32 inch ?.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/steam-flow-orifices-d_1158.html
(Unfortunately,
On 2011-09-16 22:19, Robert Leguillon wrote:
[...] This is still supposition and silliness. Every time Rossi let's the E-Cat out
of the bag, the demonstrations get worse, and the power gains get smaller. Please
let NASA evaluate this device, with no phase change, so we can have real answers in
Given that his new test will be a prototype of a nuclear reactor, look at
the examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boiling_water_reactor_english.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PressurizedWaterReactor.gif
All of them have the characteristics of operation of the e-cats presented
At 01:13 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I'm still looking for the 'orifice' needed to create 3 Bar internal pressure.
Napier's formula (accurate to about 3%) for steam going through an
orifice in a flat plate, to atmospheric pressure.
W = p * a / 70
Where W is flow lbs/sec
p is
2011/9/16 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de:
The volume of water at end of hose is measured and fortunately this equals
the mass of water.
Problem with that there is only one data point, and you have no way
know whether the system was in equilibrium or not or if the power
production was
2011/9/17 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
Given that his new test will be a prototype of a nuclear reactor, look at
the examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boiling_water_reactor_english.svg
Finally someone realized that E-Cat is just typical miniature BWR! ^^
Therefore Rossi's
Am 16.09.2011 23:25, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
At 01:13 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I'm still looking for the 'orifice' needed to create 3 Bar internal
pressure.
Napier's formula (accurate to about 3%) for steam going through an
orifice in a flat plate, to atmospheric pressure.
W
About basic of operation of BWR and steam related to nuclear there is
good reference and also theory of operation on CANDU
http://goo.gl/6iXex
look for thermodynamics and hydraulics.
mic
2011/9/16 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com:
2011/9/17 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
Given
At 12:26 PM 9/16/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I still think that the 2-chamber
design explains more than the 1-chamber 3-bar design. The core
could easily be engineered with a water-efficient heat exchanger in one
chamber, and a steam-efficient heat exchanger in the
other.
From Lewan's report :
Am 16.09.2011 23:52, schrieb Alan J Fletcher:
That's super-heating.
So to confirm Rossi's statements (130C, 1 Bar Pressure, No restrictor
orifice, No direct fluid overflow) we would need to show that 130C (or
maybe 120C) superheated steam (ie NO liquid water) at 11 kg/hr will
condense to
I was just throwing some random thoughts. I am not sure where you were
ironic, if you were anywhere at all...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
Date: 2011/9/16
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thoughts on the eCat and 130C steam
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
2011/9
Hi Horace,
Your 3rd scenario may be right. From mats Report
According to Andrea Rossi the increased
dimension is due to a larger volume inside where the water is heated,
approximately 30 liters, and a larger heat-exchanger with a greater
surface which should result in a more effective heat
Hi Colin,
Alan Fletcher gets the credit for that scenario.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Colin Hercus wrote:
Hi Horace,
Your 3rd scenario may be right. From mats Report
According to Andrea Rossi the increased
dimension is
-Original Message-
From: Kyle Mcallister [mailto:kyle_mcallis...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 6:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Thoughts on this and that
8. Republicans...now I turn to you. Why are so many of
you HOPING Obama et al trash the place? Wouldn't
Vortexians, left, right, center, up, down, backwards,
sideways, snakebit, and/or whatever
political/religious/etc. leanings you may have:
A few points, directed in seemingly random directions
at no one party (all seem equally guilty here), but
maybe not so random?
1. Someone should go read the
4. When you get down to it, no one owes anyone
anything. It all cancels out. You highminded geeks owe
the lowly greasemonkey and metal press operator just
as much as he owes you. So shut up.
preach on brother! That opinion pisses me off a lot, Some of my
friends that were able to go to a REAL
Brian Prothro wrote:
I agree, thanks... and BLP will certainly be a test case. I know XOGEN
http://www.xogentechnologies.ca/ left and came back without their previous
power generation claims and is now directing their process towards treatment
of wastewater instead. Maybe that was a smart
89 matches
Mail list logo
