As I said to Jones Beene, Rossi is often secretive. You might say he is openly secretive, meaning he makes no bones about the fact that he is hiding information. That is partly what he did in his response to me, below.
He claims he can enrich Ni cheaply. It may be that he is lying about this. But in any case, his story is consistent. He said it costs an extra 10% only. He acknowledged (in effect) that with ordinary monoisotopic samples this percent is too low. He claims he can do it more cheaply. Take his story or leave it. I cannot judge, but I would note that cold fusion processes have been known to transmute the host metal. I have never heard of anyone who could transmute a significant, macroscopic amount on demand; say 1% or 2%. Then again, I have never heard of anyone who can make a 1 liter cold fusion cell run at 16 kW for 18 hours, or (reportedly) for several months. It is clear that Rossi can do things other researchers only dream of doing. So it is not inconceivable that he knows some inexpensive variation on the heat-generation technique that optimizes the fuel isotopic ratios. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TWO QUESTIONS: Jed Rothwell April 11th, 2011 at 8:44 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=338&cpage=3#comment-32552 Mattias Carlsson asked “Did you enrich for heavier nickel isotopes to make the nickel fuel?” and you replied: “Yes, we do.” Elsewhere you said that processing the Ni adds only about 10% to the cost. Yet monoisotopic elements are very expensive. To enrich the sample even 1% would make it cost far more than normal Ni. How do you explain this? Perhaps there is some confusion. (Incidentally, Piantelli says in his patent that his Ni is enriched. See patent WO 2010/058288) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - William April 11th, 2011 at 8:34 PM Hello Mr. Rossi, Thank you for revealing that your nickel fuel is enriched to include more Ni 62 and Ni 64. To many of us, your technology is like an addictive and exciting puzzle just waiting to be put together! It holds the potential to change the world and our entire civilization for the better! Your revelation also brings a few questions to mind. 1) If the enrichment process removes some isotopes from a certain quantity of nickel powder, the final quantity of refined fuel would be less than the quantity of nickel powder you started with. Can you tell us what percentage of nickel powder remains (from lets say one kilogram of ordinary nickel powder) after the enrichment processing takes place? 2) You once stated that the nickel powder you utilize costs approximately $20 dollars per kilogram. If we add a 10% processing cost to this (probably to pay for the chemicals you use) the cost goes up to $22 dollars. However, if lets say only a small percentage of the original powder remains after processing, the cost per kilogram of enriched fuel would be higher than the cost of the raw nickel powder. Can you give us an idea of how much a kilogram of enriched fuel costs? 3) Are the catalysts added during the processing of the nickel powder? Thanks for being willing to continue communicating with us! You have made the past few months very exciting for me and have personally given me a great deal of hope for the future. Sincerely, William - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - RESPONSES: Andrea Rossi April 11th, 2011 at 10:05 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=338&cpage=3#comment-32560 Dear William: 1- I cannot give more information about this issue 2- I can say that the cost for enrichment is not substantial for the global economy of the process 3- I cannot gove this information Warm regards, A.R. Andrea Rossi April 11th, 2011 at 10:01 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=338&cpage=3#comment-32558 Dear Jed Rothwell: I am not going to give more information about this issue. Just can say we have invented a process of ours to enrich Ni without relevant costs. To elaborate Ni powders along classic processes is the invention of the hot water. It is as invent and patent the sputtering in 2010… Warm regards, A.R. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [MY RESPONSE not displayed yet] You wrote: “I am not going to give more information about this issue. Just can say we have invented a process of ours to enrich Ni without relevant costs. . . .” Thank you, that is a good answer. I think all readers here understand why you cannot give more information. Please do not feel obligated to answer questions that might put your intellectual property at risk, or upset your patent attorney.
