Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: Assume that Ni-H anomalous heat gain will soon be demonstrated to be the > robust kind of energy source that its most fervent supporters (Rossi > fanboys) . . .
The term "fanboy" irks me. Please stop using it. No one here fits that description, and Rossi does not have many fans elsewhere. > Assume that the upper limit for reliable heat extraction is 400 C. > There is no reason to think this. Many reactions have been hotter than this, including ones that cause explosions, and things like glow discharge. Rossi never said the limit is 400 deg C as far as I know. > There is independent evidence for this limit, but DGT claims much higher. > Where is the independent evidence? > To move the Ni-H technology into other important markets - such > as transportation and grid electricity, conversion into electricity > is desirable if not required. Toyota and GM have done a lot of work on hybrid electric cars, so I think this is the best way forward. If they had not already put billions into this technology then perhaps some sort of direct drive would be better. Hybrid Diesel electric railroad locomotives are also the standard, as are big marine engines on cruise ships and the like. Generally speaking, technology takes what already exists and improves on it, even if the existing solution is suboptimal. If we use grid electricity 50 years from now it will only be because we use it now. The infrastructure is paid for (although it will have to be maintained), and we know how to use it. > Even though the cost of heat is low, it is far > from free - and other considerations (nickel replacement cost) favor the > highest efficiency possible. > I disagree. Other considerations will put favor some measure of efficiency, but it will be much lower than present-day efficiency. This is what we see in conventional nuclear fission power reactors. They are much less efficient than combustion generators. They run at lower temperatures. They waste more heat because that reduces wear and tear. > Of course, everyone agrees that solid state is the way to go in the long > run, once the efficiency of that tech gets to a much higher level. Definitely. It is already good enough for some critical applications, such as pacemaker batteries or remote telephone repeaters. - Jed
