Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Calculating very "generously"- how many tons of palladium could be used in > Cold Fusion generators worldwide? All of them. We will have no other use for the stuff. > Again, what could be, realistically the W/g power obtained by1 g of Pd? > That's easy. As I said, the limiting factor is how hot you can make the stuff in a thin-film or finally divide configuration. Presumably that technology is mature in today's catalytic converters. A catalytic converter has 3 to 7 ounces of Pd = 200 g. An automobile engine produces 150 hp at top speed = 112 kW. Assuming it is 20% efficient, that means 448 kW of hot gas is rolling past the Pd surface. An obscene figure. If you ran an automobile 24 hours a day at top speed I suppose it would wear out after a few months, but anyway that is the limit to how much heat palladium can stand. ~2.2 kW/g. As I said this is a materials engineering problem. That is the limiting factor. We know that palladium can get so hot it vaporizes. Cold fusion itself can produce more heat than we can handle with any engineering technique. > And what could be the lifetime of Pd in such a source? > That depends upon whether it transmutes or not. if it does not transmute nearly 100% of it can be recycled. It is in a closed cell, like a battery. Much of palladium in a catalytic converter is lost because the hot gas blows it out. > I repeat it was a historical misfortune of LENR to be discovered in > palladium . . . > I do not see what difference it made. Fleischmann himself recommended the use of nickel early on. People would have discovered the nickel version sooner or later. up until now it has been much easier to detect Pd-D because power density has been much higher. - Jed
