From: Jack Cole Ø
Ø Jones, It would be relatively easy to set a boil off calorimeter on top of one of those induction heating plates. That would certainly be a lot easier than anything else we've tried. Yes. “Easy” is good when we desire to get decent data coming in from many experimenters, all of whom can become involved in low-cost efforts which can contribute incrementally to the general understanding. Everyone, it seems, has a slightly different take on this. If TiH2 will suffice instead of LAH – that finding alone is HUGE. Any small change can be important, and Rossi seems to have lately become a liability to progress, instead of an asset. A boil-off calorimeter is not perfect, but it is superior to anything thus far employed in the entire field. The advantage could be seen immediately in economy of time, and if a there is a medium-level temperature regime for gain, which is almost certain due to Thermacore’s work, twenty years ago, then we will be positioned to move the field forward at an accelerating pace. It is crazy to pursue a threshold of 1200 C for 3:1 gain, given the likelihood of failure, when 2:1 gain can be had at 400 C which is much easier to pull off. When properly designed, the only difference between the “control” and the “active” run in a well-designed experiment is that the active run has a capsule of fuel inserted; but it is placed in the same water container as the control. The fuel can be held in a short tube, but a small sealed crucible is probably a better container for use with the induction cooktop. Jones
