A part of the energy. And that needs to be demonstrated by Rossi. It is not trivial. And Rossi didn't say that is the case, he said it was used in chemical reactions. That makes no sense.
Giovanni On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: > But I have explained about the heat exchangers. Energy consumed and sent > underground. Do you exclude this simple possibility for apart of energy? > peter > > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Also Peter can you explain the difference between use and consumed? What >> that means? >> Unless there was a black hole inside the building of the "customer" >> doesn't matter what you do with the energy eventually the energy needs to >> be somehow radiated or removed from the building to the outside environment >> in a way or another. It cannot be "consumed". >> It can maybe stored if this is what you mean but what kind of process can >> store all that energy in this efficient manner? If the "customer" invented >> such a storing process it would be even more valuable than a working ecat. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Peter, >>> It is not a straight answer at all. >>> Where is Rossi evidence that there was a real chemical plant having any >>> use of the energy at all? >>> Yours are just incredible speculations. >>> >>> Giovanni >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> when things go too far, they must be stopped, situation calmed down >>>> >>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/08/aug-14-2016-lenr.html >>>> -- >>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>> Cluj, Romania >>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
