On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Alan Fletcher <a...@well.com> wrote:
> Stefano Landi: > > 1) in your conference in Italy you said about a procedure of Ni isotop > enrichment. Is this in agreement what the results of the Itp report? The > amount of Ni isotopes before the run do not seem enriched as compared to > the natural Ni isotopes composition > > Rossi: > > 1- At those times I could not say other than what I said, due to IP > constraints. As a matter of fact, the enrichment system is the process made > by means of the ECat. Nevertheless, the results from the test have gone > well Beyond what we found before during our internal R&D. As I said, now we > are studying how to reconcile, but during these last days we arrived to > understand possible explications; much more study is necessary, though. > > In the Lugano report the material inserted into the reactor was called the "fuel" before the run and the "ash" after the run. These labels imply the source of energy is located in this material as if it were acting like a pellet of uranium fuel in a fission reactor. I get the impression that these labels may be misleading which is why he speaks about an "enrichment system". The enrichment process provides evidence that nuclear activity can or does occur inside the ECat and it might enable the generation of energy. Harry​ > - - -- > > So maybe the hotcat wasn't running OUT of fuel at 32 days : it had > completed the Ni isotope conversion (to a greater degree than Rossi > expected), and was then running at peak efficiency? > > This could explain the improvement in efficiency over the first half, when > the input power could be reduced. > >
