Did you read/understand Paul's analysis? This is impractical and maybe impossible unless he can improve efficiency.
Carnot conversion just isn't great enough to turn the heat into usable electricity. On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 3:24 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't know why Rossi doesn't do this. I think he must hardly have any > ingenuity - or the scientists/engineers that are in a position to advise > him! (Or you could think of more insulting terms). > > To convert the output heat to electricity, and then convert it back to > input heat would have to be the craziest approach imaginable to use! > > To feed the output heat back in as input heat all you need to do is > insulate the device. What could be easier than that!? > > Then to stop it running away and melting down all you need to do is pump > water or blow gas through it to cool it down in a controlled manner with a > thermostatically controlled switch (which could even be a passive device > like the old thermostats used in the cooling systems of auto-mobile > engines). The cooling necessary to prevent melt-down represents your > output energy. > > If you need some electrical "excitation" in addition to plain old > resistive heating, then this would be a very small component and could > easily be subtracted from the output energy to determine the energy > balance. But the fact that the system "runs away" if it is allowed to get > too hot - even after the "excitation" has been turned off - proves that > this "excitation" is not really required. > > > On 18/10/2014 7:32 AM, Paul Breed wrote: > >> Closing the loop with a hot side temperature of 1200C and a COP of 3, is >> right on the very edge of possible... >> >> You need close to 50% of theoretical carnot efficiency... >> >> 100C cold 1200C hot gives carnot of 0.76 >> >> Best possible heat to mechanical work.. (3*.76) = 2.28 >> Best possible Work to electricity 0.95 >> >> gives 2.116 so to break even close the loop and have ZERO excess energy >> you would need to get to 46% of carnot >> Commercial large scale power plants don't get to 46% of carnot.... >> >> Using something really simple like thermo electric (seebeck) generator >> would require a COP of 20.2 to get to break even >> assuming that electrical conversion efficency was 99% >> > >
