Axil, I doubt the QuarkX is that dangerous. It is not like it could cause a nuclear explosion. Rossi seems to think The QuarkX is the future and the real problem is him being tied up in a legal battle. In answer to a comment on anther thread, suggesting that because IH claimed they had tried and failed, consider that MIT and Caltech concluded that Fleischmann & Pons could not be replicated 0 and we now know it can be. I don't see IH giving up without getting their hands on the Quark technology.

On 9/20/2016 4:40 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
September 20, 2016 at 7:28 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi:
Update of the work on the QuarkX?

Andrea Rossi
September 20, 2016 at 8:29 AM
Still in very good standing, but also still dangerous. Working mainly on safety issues now.
Warm Regards,

If seems that LENR reactors are not as inherently safe as we all once thought. But the safe deployment of LENR technology could still be accommodated into the current power infrastructure.

The development of ocean deployment of huge wind turbines will serve LENR reactor deployment well. A safe method of LENR deployment will entail the use of those floating platforms located just off shore.

The technical feasibility of deepwater floating LENR platforms will not be questioned, as the long-term survivability of floating structures has been successfully demonstrated by the marine and offshore oil industries over many decades. However, the economics that allowed the deployment of thousands of offshore oil rigs have yet to be demonstrated for floating LENR reactor platforms. For deepwater wind turbines, a floating structure will replace pile-driven monopoles or conventional concrete bases that are commonly used as foundations for shallow water and land-based reactors. The floating structure must provide enough buoyancy to support the weight of the reactor as a function of its size and power production rating and to restrain pitch, roll and heave motions within acceptable limits.

Since muon shielding is so problematic, distance from any population is the one dependable risk mitigation method.

The distance of LENR deployment offshore would be a function of the range of muon travel before decay and the inverse square law dilution of muon density together with safe muon exposure limits.

The floating LENR reactor will be bigger than a sea buoy, but smaller than a floating wind turbine. Robotize remote controlled maintence could allow for human free maintenance of the LENR reactor such as refueling. The activated waste fuel could be dumped into the deep water or dissolved in acid.

Reply via email to