H Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not sure what Piantelli meant, but even if the magnitude of the heat > anomaly is real, can we say with confidence that "cold fusion" will be a > cost effective means of generating energy, i.e. will the energy required to > a manufacture a "cold fusion" reactor be significantly less than the energy > it can produce? > Yes, we can be sure of that. A cold fusion device is not particularly expensive or complicated. Something like a 50 kW cold fusion fusion device should cost roughly as much money and energy to manufacture as something like a Prius hybrid engine. It should be roughly the same size too, giving today's heat engine technology. A hybrid engine reaches "energy payback" very quickly. Wind turbines take about 3 months to reach energy payback. Most of the energy used to manufacture them goes into the towers. I think conventional generator plants take about 6 months to generate the energy needed to construct another generator plant. They continue to incur a large energy cost to mine the coal or the uranium ore, or to pump the natural gas in the pipeline, whereas wind turbines stop consuming energy as soon as you finish constructing them. - Jed
