We will know soon enough. Rossi says he will release a description, pictures, and data about his “new” design in a matter of weeks.
Here is what he has to say about this subject. 1. Dear Andrea Rossi, The PESN article was very interesting. It speculated on a higher temperature eCat (1000C?). Since the melting point of nickel is 1,453C, I suspect you will be limited in temperatures beyond 1000C. Still, there are thermodynamic advantages of producing steam above 600C but still technological challenges (for the turbine designers) in using it. Looking forward to your report on the current testing. An eCAt cooktop would be wonderful (as mentioned in the PESN article). Applications appear to be unlimited. 2. Andrea Rossi July 3rd, 2012 at 7:31 AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=629&cpage=6#comment-269134> Dear Steven N. Karels: As you correctly said: Let’s wait for the report. Warm Regards, A.R. 1. Prof. Azimuth July 7th, 2012 at 2:57 AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=666&cpage=1#comment-271898> Please ing. Rossi post some pictures of your twenty 600° reactors at works. Warm (600°) Regards Prof. Azimuth 2. Andrea Rossi July 7th, 2012 at 4:56 AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=666&cpage=1#comment-271956> Dear Prof. Azimuth: Photos will be published along with the report. WQarm Regards, A.R. 1. Greg Leonard July 8th, 2012 at 1:08 AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=60#comment-272522> Dear AR, There have been references to the newest Ecat (600C) models as ‘solid state’. I have great difficulty in imagining how micro/nano particles of Ni in an H or H2 gas could be regarded as ‘solid state’. Do you regard the Ecat2 as solid state? I am, as always, full of admiration for your innovation and hard work Greg Leonard 2. Andrea Rossi July 8th, 2012 at 3:14 AM<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=60#comment-272565> Dear Greg Leonard: We will give all the possible information about the high temperature E-Cats in the Report. Warm Regards, A.R. On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote: > At 10:29 PM 7/8/2012, Axil Axil wrote: > >> So soon you forget. His first customer absolutely required the 1 MW power >> factor. >> > > According to? > > > As I posted in the past, a 1 MW thermal reactor is the ideal reactor size >> for a drone with a 100 HP electric engine operating with a thermal to >> electric conversion ratio of 15%. >> > > Great. The 1 MW device we were shown was many individual smaller reactors. > A shipping container is not going to be stuffed in a drone. If there really > is such a customer, what they would want delivered would be a single > reactor, or a small number of them, with a contract for the delivery of > more. They would not want someone with Rossi's background and resources > putting together the combination, wasting time and money on efforts not > actually needed. > > > Now that the Rossi core operates at 600C, the thermodynamic efficiency is >> up to 45%. >> > > According to? > > > And these playing card pack size 10 KW cores, numbered at about 100 >> cores, this new drone LENR power supply can be packaged in a volume that is >> less than that occupied by a current drone engine. >> > > According to? > > I'll answer here. According to Rossi, then with Axil Axil drawing > conclusions from Rossi's reports. > > > This saves the volume now reserved for long duration sized fuel storage >> tanks. >> > > And the original point has now been buried. The point is that the original > 1 MW reactor is not what someone would want, who wanted to do what Axil > imagines as the purpose. > > > Such a LENR drone can take off from the us and get to the patrol zone >> anywhere in the world in just a few days saving the hassle of field support >> and fuel logistics, stay on station for a year and return back to its base >> in the US for a quick refueling and be back on station in less than a week. >> > > Summary: if anyone can build a LENR reactor with performance > characteristics like those claimed, countless applications become possible. > > This is belaboring the obvious, avoiding the obvious. > > It all depends on Rossi. > > Okay, there is a little more, there are now apparently independent > business people working on the problem. But we don't know what they have > actually found, and they are also secretive. That's not a complaint. They > have the right to be secretive. > > But secrecy has a consequence that cannot be avoided. We can't trust > rumors and claims when the truth is a secret. > > Indeed, secrecy on cold fusion, in 1989, on the part of Pons and > Fleischmann, was a critical factor that allowed the general physics > community to -- improperly -- reject cold fusion. That secrecy may have > been justifiable for commercial reasons, but ... it also allowed an > atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust to flourish, and the result was that > cold fusion did not get the continued massive research funding that might > have been necessary to break through ignorance of the mechanism, and which > is still needed, probably, even though secrecy is not much of an issue any > more (for the Pons-Fleischmann Heat Effect). > > And replication remained difficult for years, for similar reasons, and > thus the "intellectual property" being protected became worthless. Even > though the FPHE is definitely real, and that's practically a certainty. > Real, but impractical, so far. > > Unless Rossi's claims are real, which looks very shaky. (And that's not > the FPHE, it is obviously a different process, possibly LENR, and some LENR > theories do claim a mechanism that might work with NiH. Storms is > predicting that the ash with NiH is deuterium. Not immediately easy to > detect in a hydrogen environment where deuterium is always an impurity, but > with long operation at high power, it should be easy to confirm this > prediction. Trivial, in fact. That is the kind of work that has made > "fusion" of some kind -- mechanism still unknown -- highly likely as what > is happening with PdD experiments. Helium was the ash, demonstrated by > correlation with heat across many experiments and research groups.) >
