Lennart Thornros <[email protected]> wrote: Jed with your numbers, which I am sure you have right . . . >
No necessarily! You should not trust my arithmetic. I sometimes drop 1 or 2 orders of magnitude. . . . it seems to me that nuclear power is great for H production when we > implemented LENR on a local level. > Hydrogen production?! Why would we need that? All of the energy in the world can be supplied with the hydrogen from 60,000 tons of water a year. That's 6 tons per hour. That is actually 10 times more than we need, but I assume most would not actually be fused. You could make that in a single factory machine like this: http://www.hydrogenics.com/docs/default-source/default-document-library/poer-to-gas-mw-class-series.pdf?sfvrsn=0 If we need deuterium the facility would be larger but still a tiny fraction of a 1 GW fission reactor. In any case, these machine run on electricity, and the electricity from cold fusion will far cheaper than from fission, wind or any other source. In actual applications I would expect each factory making cold fusion engines or power supplies to generate their own purified hydrogen, or to bring in a tank of hydrogen every week or so. The hydrogen source in an automobile plant would be single cabinet. I guess they will need ~10 g of hydrogen gas per automobile (a ten-year supply of fuel). Maybe 12 kg per day in a large factory. These machines produce 10 to 15 nm^3 of hydrogen per hour (0.9 kg to 1.3 kg): http://www.hydrogenics.com/docs/default-source/pdf/211-industrial-brochure-english.pdf?sfvrsn=0 Power consumption is "4.9 kWh/Nm3 at full load" (18 MJ per 90 g of H). 90 g of hydrogen is enough to produce 9e14 MJ, if I have done my arithmetic right. In other words, the overhead is small; 1 MJ of electricity produces enough hydrogen to generate 5e13 MJ of heat. http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2012/01/nuclear-fusion/ - Jed
