I can confirm the problems which occur during plasma electrolysis: The
excess heat measured by Rossi would be correct if indeed all the water is
converted into steam , but in practice water can be taken away with the
watervapour in e.g plasma electrolysis experiments. In the past I did many
plasma electrolysis experiments and I witnessed ( when I used a small amount
of radioactive 201 Tl to investigate the claims of remediating radioactivity
by plasma electrolysis and the production of excess heat) that about 20-40%
of the water was not evaporated during this test, but was transported in
small droplets (mist) to the condensor. This led to an overestimation of the
excess power of the system. So the only way to exactly measure the energy
output of the Rossi device is to increase the waterflow and to avoid steam
formation. One could also measure the recovered heat from the condensed
water which would allow an estimate of the claimed energyproduction.
Peter van Noorden
the Netherlands
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael McKubre" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: CMNS: Loss of heavy water as mist instead of as vapor, on open
cell CF experiments.
See below
On Jan 22, 2011, at 9:08 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
The first objection is "misting."
Misting refers to the loss of heavy water as liquid, from a CF cell,
instead of as vapor. Because the model of CF calorimetry as elaborated by
Miles and Fleischmann includes a term for water vapor loss, but no term
for liquid water loss, if there is misting and the loss of heavy water
from an opoen cell is significant, the correction for water vapor will
produce an apparent excess heat. In some experiments this might explain
all the excess heat, if the amounts are sufficient. Misting would occur
most prominently during conditions of high current, even more if there is
boiling, it may be speculated.
The correction for the chemical energy of D2 and O2 release in
thermodynamically open cells is normally and most conveniently made by
integrating the product of the current and a thermoneutral voltage*.
Water (light or heavy) lost from the cell as vapor or mist results in an
uncounted energy loss, and is therefore endothermic or conservative in
calorimetric calculation. In fact a possible problem of open cell
calorimetry occurs when the amount of water consumed is less than that
expected from electrolysis, not more. This criticism seems to be upside
down.
* The origin of this term and its derivation can be found in Ed's book.
What is known about loss of D2O as water? What measures have been taken
to prevent misting? What measures have been taken to detect such loss, as
distinct from loss of vapor?
Over the years we have run cells both thermodynamically closed and open.
Open cells running at low currents (most loading studies) have usually
relied on manual addition. In bigger, longer experiments we used liquid
metering pumps for which the amount of water added was calculated and
delivered based on Faraday's Law (relating charge and moles). This law we
observe by both methods to be well obeyed and slightly conservative. At
"modest temperatures" (30 - 40°C) we measure about 1% more D2O leaving the
cells than nFQ** (this percentage increases with temperature and
bubbling). This difference we attribute to the release of molecular D2O
as vapor. Possibly fine droplets (mist) contribute some, but the egress
from the cells is so tortuous that very little of occurs in practical
cells. Two points:
1) This is a small term
2) It is thermodynamically conservative
** n = charge/species, F = Faraday constant, Q = integral charge.
In plasma electrolysis experiments, misting is a major factor, and some
of the work by Naudin or others seems to neglect misting; Kowalski has
definitely considered mist, though. I am not referring to plasma
electrolysis, but to normal CF work as performed by Pons and Fleischmann
and others, with open cells.
The situation of plasma experiments (and the Bologna demonstration) are
different from FPE studies where the primary agent of water elimination is
electrolysis (which is very easily and accurately quantified).
Misting would not affect closed cells, nor would it affect work with open
cells operated within a Seebeck enclosure. The critic has a separate
attempted explanation for McKubre's closed-cell work, I will ask about
that in a separate mail.
I can't wait.
m
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"CMNS" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cmns?hl=en.
