>Then earlier assertions that the steam was totally dry >must have been ... I hate to use the word ... lies.
Not necessarily... More than likely the % of water in the steam varied depending on the power level they were running the reactor at. Still, I think they are trying to save some face after this recent breakthru of 'our reactors now produce a totally dry steam'. That means that everyone, including Krivit, who has been questioning them on this issue were spot on... This is a bit of a chink in their credibility. I don't think they're going to be making that error anymore... So I guess Krivit's visit achieved something! -Mark -----Original Message----- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com] Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 3:35 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi: our reactors now produce a totally dry steam On 11-06-18 04:22 PM, Akira Shirakawa wrote: > Hello group, > > I'm quite sure I'm playing his game by reporting this here, but I > found this message by Rossi on his blog of interest on many levels and > probably bound to generate many reactions: > > * * * > > http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=96&cpage=1#comment-47000 > > Dear Paolo: > The 1 MW plant which we will start up in Greece in October will > generate heat. For power we are not yet ready, but we made a very > important step forward in this week, because our reactors now produce > a totally dry steam (no more traces of water in the steam) and this is > a step forward to couple the turbines. Then earlier assertions that the steam was totally dry must have been ... I hate to use the word ... lies. A "lie" is when someone makes a contrary to fact statement, with the full realization that it's contrary to fact. That certainly seems to have been the case here, as this statement by Rossi seems to imply he's known all along that the steam wasn't really quite dry. So if the earlier assertions of dryness were lies, why should we believe the new statement that this time, for sure, the steam really is dry?
