The amount of heat used by the customer could have been determined by the flow rate of water and its temperature of that water as it left the reactor and re entered the reactor. Is that not the basis of heat production measurement?
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Robert Dorr <rod...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Jed, >> >> Heat is heat. It makes no difference if the heat (water/steam) was used >> to make chemicals or whether it was used to heat the air in the room next >> door. >> > > Robert, for goodness sake, get real! If they were only releasing the heat > in the air in the next room, you still need proof of that. You need to see > the ventilation equipment. Anyone making a serious evaluation of this claim > cannot simply take it for granted that some mysterious entity in the next > room is getting and using an extraordinary amount of process heat -- enough > to run a factory. That claim by itself is preposterous. It is, as I said, > prima facie evidence of fraud. > > In 6,500 sq. ft?!? Have you seen industrial equipment that uses this much > process heat? > > Do you really think anyone would pay $89 million without confirming every > aspect of this claim, by every possible means? What kind of insane person > would accept this claim without seeing the equipment next door; without > talking with the dozens of people operating that equipment day and night; > and without examining whatever industrial product they are producing by the > ton? You need to confirm that X tons of Widgets per week really does call > for a steady stream of 1 MW of process heat. > > This is an elementary step in the verification of the claim, at the most > basic level. > > - Jed > >
