In terms of micro turbines, a good fit for the Rossi reactor would be the
supercritical carbon dioxide (S-CO2) Brayton-cycle micro turbines.
The supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle provides the same efficiency as helium
Brayton systems but at a considerably lower temperature (250-300 C). The
S-CO2 equipment is also more compact than that of the helium cycle, which in
turn is more compact than the conventional steam cycle.
The size of such a micro turbine operating at 65% efficiency might be
comparable to that that of an auto water pump matching  the power production
of a Rossi reactor in the megawatt range.

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Robert Lynn <robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -Micro-turbines (capstone et al) have low efficiency compressor and
>> turbines and under 100kW probably won't work at all until the temperatures
>> are >600°C, and then only with very low efficiency (<15%).
>
>
> I have heard that a Rossi reactor can go to 600°C. It works well at that
> temperature. Most cold fusion reactions work better at higher temperatures.
> Proton conductor-types do not work at all at lower temperatures. They do not
> conduct protons (load).
>
> Anyway, efficiency does not matter much with cold fusion because the heat
> costs nothing. The only reason you need a modicum of efficiency is to keep
> the waste heat down to a reasonable level. You would not want a 30 kW home
> generator that produces 300 kW of waste heat. It would make the air around
> the house too hot. If it was compact, it would be dangerously hot, and might
> burn someone or start a fire, and if it was not compact it would take up a
> lot of space.
>
>
>
>> -Micro steam turbines are very inefficient, (steam's high specific heat
>> requires multi-stage due to blade speed limits) and with small sizes are far
>> more prone to water erosion damage.
>
>
> As I said, efficiency does not matter, but longevity and the lifetime cost
> of the equipment does matter. See chapter 14 of my book.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Reply via email to