At 11:14 AM 5/27/2011, Peter Gluck wrote:
My former post at the Ego Out blog about how to NOT buy an E-cat in
the sack has
revealed the existence of many problems for the startup and
development of this device.
I'll agree. There are lots of questions, and we simply have way too
little data to answer them.
I think E-cat skeptics and E-cat believers could jointly work out a
PERFECT EXPERIMENT
this could terminate a lot of lenghty disputes
<http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/05/call-for-perfect-e-cat-experiment.html>http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/05/call-for-perfect-e-cat-experiment.html
Nothing new or original here- but a CALL to action..
The problem is that there is nothing in it for Rossi, at this point,
to hold any more demonstrations until he's got that 1 MW plant built.
If he falls short on that, if the deadline starts slipping, a motive
for a better demonstration might appear, but not until then, I'd say.
The obvious thing to do, in a public demonstration, is to increase
the water flow so that the water doesn't boil, as with the February
demonstration, only this time it would be observed by others than
Levi and Rossi. Then the observers would examine the E-Cat,
presumably everything except the contents, all the connections, the
water hoses, etc., and there would be sweeps, as done before, for
electromagnetic radiation, calibration of energy input, searches for
any hidden connections or power sources outside the device itself,
etc., and the demonstration would be for long enough to rule out all
chemical storage or battery-like effects, given the size of the
E-Cat. That should be by a large margin, because what if Rossi
*actually discovered* was a new -- but possibly impractical -- energy
storage mechanism.
$2000 for an E-Cat that can generate 3.5 kW for six months ....
that's 15 MWh, working out to 13 cents per kilowatt-hour. Nothing
spectacular about that, Massachusetts is running about 15 cents right
now for residential, but if refueling is only $1000, 6.5 cents per
kWh might be interesting! The cheaper the refueling, the more sense
this makes. With improvement in manufacturing and volume -- there is
no sign that material costs will be truly high -- it might get very cheap.
