In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Jan 2006 20:42:40 -0700: Hi Ed, [snip] >Robin, you ignore the main problem associated with this phenomena. The >NAE is unique and delicate. If the electrolyte is circulated, it will >pick up impurities that will accelerate destruction of the cathode. If >the gas is circulated, it also will pick up impurities that will react >with the hot NAE causing its destruction. These impurities would have >to be removed, thereby adding complexity and expense. On the other >hand, heat can be removed by simple conduction through the walls of the >container and into thermoelectric converters. The whole apparatus can >be sealed with no moving parts. Doesn't this sound better? > >Regards, >Ed You may be correct, but I fear the situation may be worse than you think. Given the micro-photographs taken by some experimenters, revealing "eruptions" at reaction sites, it's very possible that the reaction itself is what is destroying the NAEs (as a consequence of the large local energy release). IOW NAEs might only be "use once". Then the question becomes, how much energy is required to create one, and how much is produced by it.
If this is so, then contamination may only be a minor issue. However it's also possible that the only requirement is that certain trace elements (or isotopes) be present, in which case it may not matter whether or not the actual crystalline structure is rearranged at a local level. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means.
