<[email protected]> wrote:
> Over the long haul, it's going to need to come from electrolysis anyway. > That's > where most of our hydrogen is. It doesn't need to cause explosions if done > correctly. Of course. Over the short-haul too. But it should be done at specialized facilities by experienced people. Do-it-yourself or automated electrolysis equipment has been tested. It often explodes. It is really bad idea when all you need is a tiny amount anyway. > As to purity, I seriously doubt that the purity need be any less than > that obtained from natural gas (once again, if done correctly) . . . Not according to Mizuno, who is an expert. He designed elaborate equipment to purify hydrogen that was already commercial grade. Doing it "correctly" is the key point. It cannot be done correctly with a small-scale, automated, do-it-yourself machine. Perhaps this will be possible in the future. There is no need for it now. Commercial-grade hydrogen from a tank will not add any measurable extra cost to a cold fusion device. > . . . and I don't > think purity is of such a concern for the Rossi device anyway, judging by > procedures used during testing. Mizuno, Storms and others have told me that purity is always an issue. Also, Rossi's tests have been short, and in the laboratory. These are crude devices with bad performance. For a cell that will run in an automobile, an airplane or factory for years flawlessly, you want the cleanest, best materials you can get. > Furthermore, it may eventually even prove > possible to ensure that any impurity comprises the catalyst itself, so that > it > may even be beneficial. > In that case you would want carefully controlled dopants added to the hydrogen. Not random contamination. - Jed
