Posted on 11/28/2011 9:18:01 PM PST by Kevmo
Rossi... visited the State House last week ...
Andrea Rossi made the trip at the invitation of the Senate’s minority leader, Bruce Tarr, a Republican from Gloucester, and met on Tuesday with representatives from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northeastern University, and the University of Massachusetts.
....
At this point, however, the E-Cat is widely considered to be unproven. Tests have been scarce and secretive, perhaps because Rossi has said that his technology is still unpatented.
Andrea Rossi was invited to Massachusetts by the Senate’s minority leader, Bruce Tarr (left), a Republican from Gloucester. ‘‘If it works, I want this technology to be developed and manufactured in Massachusetts,’’ Tarr said of cold fusion.
... Last month, he conducted a test of a small cold fusion power plant in Bologna, Italy, for an unnamed customer, who he said was impressed enough to purchase the unit.
Rossi said he has received orders from 12 more customers.
Tarr, who is active in alternative energy legislation, said he invited Rossi to put the state in line for hosting any prospective development of cold fusion.
“Knowing the reputation of cold fusion, I went in with a very healthy level of skepticism,’’ he said.
....
Tamarin said the meeting was mostly used to discuss the possibility of setting up manufacturing, rather than the validity of the science.
“Rossi said he was not ready for a full academic investigation of his technology because he doesn’t yet have full patent protection,’’ Tamarin said. “That’s consistent with it not working, but it’s also consistent with it working very well.’’
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
They never stop costing us taxpayers money.
I had to laugh at the idea we might put that sort of technology in private hands without government supervision of any kind.
It really doesn’t matter what they are, except that they are equipment for the purpose of investigating hot fusion processes at the particle physics level. Nobody really expected a Tokamak to break even. The Federal government shouldn’t be asked to pick winners and losers, especially by means of subsidy.
Now are you a contrarian troll too, with your own share of straw man arguments? Most nuclear reactors (they furnish about half the electric juice up here in Ill-noise) are in “private hands” and yet that doesn’t mean pieces of scrap get trucked out to landfills and other foolish things.
The private part is about building the containment facility, the reactor facility, etc. The government part is about regulating every single step in the use of the fissile material.
Still radioactive CRP ends up in landfills.
Do a Google.com search for “nuclear waste in landfills” ~ kind of jarring!
This has ceased to happen in the US precisely because there IS “government supervision” — which does not equate to government OWNERSHIP like you would have us believe it does. Would it were the EPA concentrated on issues like that rather than penalizing homeowners for doing things in perpetually dry “wetlands.”
If you followed LENR at all, you would know that it has been developed to this point without signficant gov't funding at all, while the "hot fusion" effort has been sucking down billions upon billions of dollars with negligible results.
And it isn't just about LENR. There are several different approaches to "hot fusion" that have more promise than the Tokamak (Bussard Polywell, for one). But the tokamak crowd has managed to monopolize virtually all fusion funding.
"Putting all one's eggs in a single basket" has never been good policy.
"I was a mere skeptic about what Rossi has supposedly found, but this kicks the action into a whole nother plane, a US subsidy one. If this is not grounds for Freepers to say Enough, what is?"
Guess what. Your purist position that "government shouldn't fund research" has never existed in the history of the US. It started with the Lewis and Clark expedition, and has continued ever since. As an entirely practical matter, the US has found over and over again that funding research is essential to national survival.
Looking for land to occupy isn’t the same as buying temperamental gadgets from a convicted con man. And everybody must be DEAF as I said the Tokomak should be private, yes with the disposal of its ultimate waste supervised by authorized public authorities. Anyhow, it is very easy to boondoggle something that the market would have quickly euthanized, like Solyndra. I do not share your view that largesse should be bestowed upon Rossi boxes.
They never stop costing us taxpayers money.
***That sorta leaves me with a sickening feeling in the pit of my gut.
Where do you get these numbers?
***If it weren’t for the seagulls, FR could have a proper FAQ on LENR.
The bar that cold fusion should be compared to isn’t garage experiments, it’s $10B Tokomak reactors that produce less than 100th as many Joules as these LENR experiments.
That’s the thing about cold fusion — the bar keeps getting raised for it while the bar for plasma fusion gets lowered.
According to Jed Rothwell, the excess heat experiment has been repeated worldwide roughly 14,000 times successfully according to an estimate by J. He (Front. Phys. China, 2007). There are 4,700 authors in his database. He says at least 2,000 have authored or co-authored experimental papers. He has counted major journal peer-reviewed papers reporting excess heat — more than 150 papers with more than 300 authors and co-authors in 50 publications. There are about 150 other papers describing other nuclear effects such as tritium and neutrons. They far outnumber the negative reports. In 1989 there were 20 negative peer-reviewed papers with 135 authors and coauthors. The reasons these early efforts failed are now well understood. There are also roughly 2,500 non peer reviewed papers including some excellent papers published by the U.S. Navy, Mitsubishi, Amoco, the Japanese Nat. Synchrotron Lab., Los Alamos, BARC and others that are much better than most peer-reviewed papers, in his opinion. You can read ~500 papers at LENR-CANR.org or at a university or national laboratory library. Most of the papers at LENR-CANR.org are copied from conference proceedings and from the libraries at Los Alamos and Georgia Tech, with permission. Plus he has copies of an additional 1,100 peer-reviewed papers that he cannot get permission to upload, regrettably.
http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_rel...e_if_you_say_so
More papers:
http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/reports/S...tedPapers.shtml
A typical cold fusion experiment using Seebeck calorimeter
costs roughly $50,000 including all equipment. Some have produced 50 to 300 megajoules in one run. They have achieved the two goals hot fusion has failed to reach for 60 years: breakeven and full ignition.
The Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) at the Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy cost “about a billion dollars” to construct and $70 million a year to operate. It produced 6 megajoules in one experiment, the world record run for hot fusion.
40 posted on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:29:59 PM by Kevmo (So America gets what America deserves - the destruction of its Constitution. ~Leo Donofrio, 6/1/09)
You are such a putz. So, what is it like to look into the mirror in the morning and see a coward looking back, what is that like?
***You know what, I’m giving up on you. This is the 3rd thread in a row, so that’s that. I’ll generate a standard ‘ignore me’ post.
This will be my standard post to you that says you’re not worth trying to have reasonable discussion, also says “buzz off” & doesn’t leave crickets. Maybe you should sign up for a few more years of therapy.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2813439/posts?page=91#91
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2811976/posts?page=165#165
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2811976/posts?page=164#164
• Sven Kullander On Rossi And eCat
Saturday, November 26, 2011 1:55:59 PM • 164 of 169
Lx to Kevmo
Again with the I know you are but what am I.
Is it possible for you to post something original instead of cribbing my posts?
I see...years of therapy on your horizon, better start now.
It’s really helped me be nicer, more sympathetic and understanding.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies
This will be my standard post to you that says you’re not worth trying to have reasonable discussion, also says “buzz off” & doesn’t leave crickets. But if it offends you to the point that you get it removed like my prior innocuous citation then I’ll have to come up with some other ‘ignore button’ post.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/2800058/posts?page=55#55
To: Moonman62
This means I have nothing more to say to you about LENR. Bye.
55 posted on Sunday, October 30, 2011 4:41:07 PM by Kevmo (Caveat lurkor pro se ipso judicatis: Let the lurker decide for himself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
1. Hot fusion is known to work.
***Then where is our hot fusion cars & jet packs?
2. Cold fusion has not been convincingly demonstrated, not by bona fide scientists, and certainly not by Rossi.
***Uh huh. So when his customer laid down €2M and put in an order for 12 more, it was not convincingly demonstrated.
3. If Rossi had a genuine process, it would be a simple matter to allow independent investigators demonstrate it without Rossi being anywhere near the demonstration.
***Sure it would be simple, if he had international patent protection. But he doesn’t, so it isn’t.
If you think that the Lewis and Clark expedition was only about "looking for land to occupy", you're as ignorant of history as you are of LENR. There have been any number of very valid researchers looking into "cold fusion" since Pons and Fleischmann who were most definitely NOT "con men", and could have been legitimately funded. Unfortunately, the "hot physicists" have pretty much had a monopoly on the reins of "who gets funded" and have frozen out pretty much ALL research funding for CF, except for a very few tiny efforts within DARPA.
"And everybody must be DEAF as I said the Tokomak should be private, yes with the disposal of its ultimate waste supervised by authorized public authorities."
I heard you and I disagree with your position that it should "be private". Like it or not, there are times in the development of technologies when the "private market" simply will NOT fund research. "Seed Money" from the gov't has proven, as a pragmatic fact, to benefit society in very practical terms, as witness this conversation we are having and the means by which we are having it.
"Anyhow, it is very easy to boondoggle something that the market would have quickly euthanized, like Solyndra.
"Crony capitalism" like Solyndar is indeed bad, and should be rooted out. OTOH, fostering competition is good, and most well-managed federal R&D funding does precisely that.
To give you a very personal example. My company has been working with the gov't to develop technology to detect biowarfare agents. At the earliest stage, quite a few companies had small "seed funding" contracts. As the different technological approaches were tested, various different technologies proved "non-viable". One of our competitors was from California, and had an "in" with some powerful folks in Washington. Despite the fact that their approach had failed to deliver not just once, but several times, they managed to get themselves back into the process through their "crony capitalism" contacts. In the last stages of the project, it came down the my firm and them. Fortunately for us, they "flopped" again, and our technology is now being implemented (by a private company under federal contract) with us as a subcontractor.
"I do not share your view that largesse should be bestowed upon Rossi boxes."
"Assume"....ASS-U-ME....the "Rossi boxes" at this point don't NEED federal funding. But the overall field of LENR has probably been set back 10 or 15 years due to the lack of "seed funding" during early stages. As I said above...monopolies OF ANY SORT are bad.
Here's the gist of what I read. The 1MW E-Cat was started and stabilized in "power modulated mode" (i.e. some power provided to heat the reactors). After stabilization, it ran in "power modulated mode" for some period of time (length of which I don't recall), during which its output was measured at 1MW with a COP of 6:1 (exactly on spec). At that point in time, the customer was asked whether he wanted to continue for the rest of the run in "power modulated mode" at the 1MW level, or in "self sustaining mode". The customer chose the latter option. Due to the "finickiness" of the "self sustaining mode" it was found necessary to decrease the run power to ~480KW. NO HEATING POWER WAS DRAWN FROM THE GENSET during that period....only parasitic loads. The "pathological skeptics" are ASSUMING that the generator provided all the power and the whole thing was a fake. There was certainly a means of measuring the applied power...this is fundamental to the whole test.
"They had to make the choice before it started up, and they chose to do the self-sustain at half power.As far as I can find it never ran 1 MW at all. they had to pick either 1 MW/powered or half power/self-sustain.
I have read NO articles even hinting at the above, and it contradicts a lot of the other tests (in particular the 8 October test, which was a virtual duplicate in methodology to the 28 October test.....just with a single E-Cat instead of many).
The genset had to provide not just "cooling"(and other parasitic loads) but STARTUP power, so it had to be as big as it was. See my earlier point about splitting the "parasitic loads" from the "startup load". Rossi simply chose not to do that. You or I might have chose otherwise.
But your fundamental flawed assumption is that no measurements of power from the genset were made. It is ridiculous to assume that, as that is the key to what the "validation engineer" was looking for. Do you "really" think that he didn't make measurements to determine that the supplied load was reduced??
.....bet Kevmo, just a few threads back you said it was fully patented ..... “perhaps because Rossi has said that his technology is still unpatented.”
Look, hot fusion goes on INSIDE THE SUN. What you actually see for the most part is the corona. According to Widom and Larsen the process that takes place there is actually the same as what you call Cold Fusion (but it's not quite cold. In fact, it's intensely hot. Still, the way it progresses follows the same pathways they propose for LENR processes that've successfully shown the production of excess heat).
This is why you have to read the Widom-Larson paper. Also, there's a physicist at Purdue University who is looking at the exact same process from a slightly different view point and he's found he can tackle it with reference to Bose-Einstein condensate theory.
BTW, that's what the guys DOING THE WORK say is going on.
Now I'm ot a physicist and don't pretend to be one, but if you want to claim you see HOT FUSION on the Sun you gots' to show us the paper that puts forth the theory behind that process. And that's because I just named three fellows who say what you see on the Sun is NOT Hot Fusion.
I made no such assumption. I never said that. But the articles did not report this and apparently if this was done, this technical info was either not shared and reported, or was shared and not reported. I tend to believe from so many different reports on the test at least one article would have included this information if it was given out.
Given Rossi’s background, a ‘reasonable person’ would have a higher degree of skepticism about what he’s doing. Again, I’d love it if it works, but given his past, he’s really his own worst advocate.
It might be a good idea for him to split required startup power from the cooling power. Then turn off the power for startup, and let the unit run for 3-4 weeks in standalone mode.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.