I guess Piantelli said this . . . or there is a misunderstanding. Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
> [Piantelli?] also spent a lot of time on the all important matter of > credibility in claims. Principally about the HUGE amount of energy that can > be stored in various forms of Hydrogen and that must absolutely be excluded > before any meaningful conclusion could be had about anomalous heat. > What is that supposed to mean? It isn't all that huge. It is the heat of formation of water, 285,800 joules per mole. That is the most energy-dense chemical reaction there is. Palladium holds more hydrogen than any other hydride. In my book, I computed how much hydrogen 0.2 g of palladium can hold when loaded 100% (which no actual hydride can achieve) will produce 286 J: ". . . 0.2 grams = 0.002 moles of Pd. Fully loaded at a 1:1 ratio with hydrogen, 0.002 moles of Pd hold 0.002 moles of H (0.002 grams) which converts to 0.001 moles H2O. The heat of formation of water is 285,800 joules per mole. It is very difficult to load as high as 1:1, except at very low temperature. The palladium cigarette lighters would have achieved no more than a 1:0.5 ratio in a mixture of alpha and beta loaded Pd-H. In other words, a 1 ounce (28 gram) palladium lighter would hold roughly as much energy as 20 wooden matches." That's 1,430 J/g. A few 1 g samples of palladium have produced 50 MJ and more. 50,000,000 is a lot more than 1,430. It is easy to see this is not a chemical reaction. He talked about ionisation, absorption, re-combination, para and ortho and > various charge states etc. > These changes cannot produce more net energy than the formation of water. That is the absolute upper limit to what a hydride can produce. 1430 J/g. No chemical system can produce more than ~4 eV/atom which is close to what the heat of formation of water is. > Just ionisation energy of 1.008 g (1 mole of Hydrogen) is 1,312 > kilojoules, the re-combination is 423 kilojoules and so on. > That would make great rocket fuel if you could store it! NASA would pay you a billion dollars and you would get a nobel prize. But no one can. As I said, the upper limit is 285 kJ and that's for 2 moles of H (and one of O). That's why NASA used H2 and O2 to power the space shuttle. There is no better fuel measured in energy per gram. You can subject a mole of hydrogen to a laser and make it real hot for a nanosecond too, but that doesn't count. That is not energy storage, and you cannot release that in any system. If Piantelli said this, he has a screw loose. > Without a full account of the amount of potential hydrogen in a reaction, > results are a fantasy and will not be taken seriously. > The full account is what I said: 285 kJ per 2 moles. End of story. NASA and every automobile maker on earth will pay you billions if you release more energy than that. - Jed
