At 05:18 AM 5/29/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
1. First and foremost, the device must be completely and obviously
standalone. So, disconnect the hydrogen bottle, and the mains power input.
- The hydrogen bottle should be easy because they claim so little
hydrogen is consumed, and in some experiments they claim the valve
was closed, and in at least one, it is disconnected. Given that, it
is completely baffling that in the only somewhat public display they
have had, the bottle was left connected, with the valve open.
Yes. This one is easy. Not so the electricity. As Joshua notes, it
could be done. But this is the problem, and it's an engineering and
economic problem. To design and build and test the demonstration
device would take months, perhaps many months. Engineering isn't free.
So what's the value in this? If Rossi doesn't need it to accomplish
selling the 1 MW plant to Defkalion, it's a fish bicycle. You want to
build this, you pay for it. There is *nothing* in this for him.
There could be something in it, if for some reason Defkalion falls
through. If he needs to raise more capital, then he might need such a
bulletproof demonstration. However, assuming that he's not a fraud,
he has no reason to do this at this time, and it would actually harm his plans.
One more point:
Rossi claims the thing has run without power, but that
it's dangerous, although he doesn't explain why. The speculation is
that an input control is needed to prevent some sort of runaway
condition, but it seems counter-intuitive to use additional heat
input to prevent runaway.
That depends on how the device is operating. Let's assume that the
only control variable is the temperature of the reaction chamber.
There are two controls on that chamber, heating by resistor(s) and
cooling by water and boiling water.
In particular, it is implausible that cutting the power by 10% or
less would stop a runaway condition, when the variation in claimed
output levels is far greater than 10%.
I don't want to get far into details, and I am -- as I often am --
disappointed by how little is reported, and I even find this in
experiments reported in peer-reviewed journals. If you really want to
replicate, or just to independently analyze the data, what is needed
is often missing.
This is merely an idea of what Rossi might be doing. The device, if
water is present in the cooling jacket, and with no power, will cool
below the temperature at which the heat effect appears. Thus turning
off the power will turn off the reaction. The power raises the
temperature to the point where the heat effect starts up and becomes
reasonably strong, but only to that point. Water will still quench it.
What has been done in designing the E-Cat is to engineer the reaction
chamber so that it heats and cools in this way. If the operating
temperature is 450 C, then the thermal resistance must be such as to
allow this heat, only if there is supplemental heat from electrical heating.
There may be other effects operating, and some of them are worrisome,
as to commercial application. What if the heat is variable, or if it
fairly rapidly declines with time? We don't have experimental data,
and a rapid decline effect could blow this out of the water
commercially, even if it's real.
But Rossi is claiming six months of operation before refueling is
necessary. (Refueling, here, means more nickel, it's not clear if
hydrogen refueling is needed, will that be supplied during operation
from an included reservior? What?)
Still, the heat might vary, and how this thing is engineered could
get quite tricky, but, yes, it's possible that heat could be
controlled by heat, as long as you understand that this is extra heat
added to keep the temperature to a value above what the reaction
itself would sustain, if there is no extra heat.
There is a bottom line here: wait for Rossi's E-Cats to appear on
sale, look at the performance specifications and costs, and *then*
make a decision about this. Or, if he gets his full patent
protection, try independent replication. If the E-Cats work, even
most of the time, this is real, I assume, unless the specifications
have evaporated to practically nothing. I think he's only
guaranteeing 6 to 1. Given the high initial numbers, what's going on?
This is all fluff, I don't trust any of it. Rossi can legally lie
about what he's doing, as long as he does not lie to investors and
customers. He can lie to everyone else to throw them off the track.
It's completely legal.
