On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]>wrote:
>> It occurred to me that the Fukushima disaster occurred partly *because* it depended on external power for cooling in the event of an unintentional shut-down. Modern reactors have passive emergency cooling systems that do not depend on power of any kind. > Sure. But why didn't they do that in the beginning? > Answer that question and you will know why Rossi, if it's a real effect, doesn't have passive control. > It's a first-generation, demonstration device. In the beginning, the first fission reactor did not use external power. They just withdrew the control rods, and counted neutrons. No one ever doubted the reality of fission energy from then on. One experiment, one demonstration, and complete unanimous consensus. So very different from cold fusion. And it's precisely because the Rossi device is a demonstration device, not a commercial device that is already proven, that it should try to make the demonstration convincing, and produce heat in an obvious way. In any case, even Fukushima only used external power as a contingency, and then only to cool the device. Rossi used mains power continuously to do exactly the same thing the reactor was supposed to do: produce heat. It would be less than ideal, but if Rossi only needed power to run a pump to provide cooling, it would be a major improvement.
