Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas

Intrade Gateway via Extreme Tech ^ | May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm | Sebastian Anthony

[Kevmo]

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1563 ... ity-of-gas

Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas By Sebastian Anthony on May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm 338 Comments

Share This article

110 inShare.

Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.

The device being tested, which is called the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat for short), was created by Andrea Rossi. Rossi has been claiming for the past two years that he had finally cracked cold fusion, but much to the chagrin of the scientific community he hasn’t allowed anyone to independently analyze the device — until now. While it sounds like the scientists had a fairly free rein while testing the E-Cat, we should stress that they still don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the sealed steel cylinder reactor. Still, the seven scientists, all from good European universities, obviously felt confident enough with their findings to publish the research paper.

As for what’s happening inside the cold fusion reactor, Andrea Rossi and his colleague Sergio Focardi have previously said their device works by infusing hydrogen into nickel, transmuting the nickel into copper and releasing a large amount of heat. While Rossi hasn’t provided much in the way of details — he’s a very secretive man, it seems — we can infer some knowledge from NASA’s own research into cold fusion. Basically, hydrogen ions (single protons) are sucked into a nickel lattice (pictured right); the nickel’s electrons are forced into the hydrogen to produce neutrons; the nickel nuclei absorb these neutrons; the neutrons are stripped of their electrons to become protons; and thus the nickel goes up in atomic number from 28 to 29, becoming copper.

This process, like the “conventional” fusion of hydrogen atoms into helium, produces a lot of heat. (See: 500MW from half a gram of hydrogen: The hunt for fusion power heats up.) The main difference, though, is that the cold fusion process (also known as LENR, or low energy nuclear reaction) produces very slow moving neutrons which don’t create ionizing radiation or radioactive waste. Real fusion, on the other hand, produces fast neutrons that decimate everything in their path. In short, LENR is fairly safe — safe enough that NASA dreams of one day putting a cold fusion reactor in every home, car, and plane. Nickel and hydrogen, incidentally, are much cheaper and cleaner fuels than gasoline.

As far as we can tell, the main barrier to cold fusion — as with normal fusion — is producing more energy than you put in. In NASA’s tests, it takes a lot more energy to fuse the nickel and hydrogen than is produced by the reaction. Rossi, it would seem, has discovered a secret sauce that significantly reduces the amount of energy required to start the reaction. As for what the secret sauce is, no one knows — in the research paper, the independent scientists simply refer to it as “unknown additives.” All told, the E-Cat seems to have a power density of 4.4×105 W/kg, and an energy density of 5.1×107 Wh/kg.

If Rossi and Focardi’s cold fusion technology turns out to be real — if the E-Cat really has 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline — then the world will change, very, very quickly. Stay tuned; we’ll let you know when — or if — the E-Cat passes peer review.

Now read: Nuclear power is our only hope, or, the greatest environmentalist hypocrisy of all time

Research paper: arXiv:1305.3913 - “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device”

[djf]

He needs to cut the crap with the whole “secret sauce” spiel and just lay it on the line.

He would get the Nobel prize, his name would be in every history book printed from now till doomsday next to Edison and Bell, he would soon be one of, if not the, richest men on the planet.

But the longer this drones on with the teasers, the more ridicule he will stir up. And IMHO, he will deserve it!

[UCANSEE2]

I am skeptical of Rossi, and there are tons of reasons available.

That doesn't mean that his experiment is a fake. It may be working without the fakery of carnival sideshows, and may be the 'next step' in the technical evolution of mankind.

HOWEVER, what I am most 'skeptical' about is whether those whose WEALTH and POWER depends on OUR DEPENDENCY will allow this technology to be used, and even if they do, It will not be FOR FREE.

I guess the bottom line is that while there may be a new device that produces more energy OUT than IN, There still is NSTAAFL, mainly because if LUNCH WAS FREE, then there would be NONE OF THESE...

[Moonman62]

***There is just no pleasing the hyperskeptic.

That's it. Resort to name calling.

As I said before, an engineering firm would have been more qualified and convincing than Rossi's motley group of associates and obscure academics. It would also help if an independent and trustworthy group put together the contraption and tested it on their premises. A camera guarantees nothing when a con-artist is involved. David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty disappear on camera.

[Kevmo]

He probably would if he could get the patent, but the USPTO rejects cold fusion patents.

His box outputs 10,000 more energy density than gasoline. That part is independently verified. It is no longer a stretch to accept that he sent similar boxes to customers, which he claims he did. So the ball might have started rolling.

[Kevmo]

time to start following the admin mod’s advice and ignore you

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19

[UCANSEE2]

***Lots of things have more energy in than out. Like a gasoline motor.

Aren't you ignoring the energy required to turn crude oil into gasoline in the first place ?

[Kevmo]

like the RELIGIOUS threads, often a FLAME WAR ensues with massive personal attacks.
***Religious threads have gotten far calmer with the implementation of caucus type threads. Religion mod does a great job.

[UCANSEE2]

And with all that math, it gets even more difficult.

(source: Hugelol.com)

[Kevmo]

Of course. You’re testing a system. The gasoline motor is a system. That’s what black box testing is. And this system was tested & the finding is that it has 10,000 times more energy density than gasoline.

[djf]

Until he releases detailed specifications about how to build it and reproduce the results, this is not science. It is snake oil.

And don’t take this the wrong way, I am as hopeful as anyone, but you can repeat the 10,000 number until you are blue in the face, that by itself doesn’t add to Rossi’s credibility (or lack thereof).

[UCANSEE2]

Right. FR is for discussing politics.

FR is an open discussion forum. Although I agree it is for CUSSING POLITICS, and cussing Politicians.

And the biggest things in politics today are oil, energy, money.

Just one.... the the power that money gives over others. Energy resources are just a means to that power. All of that is due for a huge upheaval if LENR is a scaleable technology, but LENR is a “chat” topic.

Please... your premise has nothing to do with your conclusion. Besides, you are the one who chose 'chat', correct?

As a result, freepers are behind the curve on such things as this out-of-the-cylinder thinking being discussed.

Thanks for adopting my 'terminology', I consider it a compliment.

They are behind the curve and they regularly denigrate those who are ahead of them. So, you’re right. That’s not where we are. We are behind them, even though freepers look down on them.

"They", "we", "behind", "denigrate", "look down".... and you wonder why the MODS pull your threads?

Look... the topic of 'free energy' is just going to be controversial.

Let's get back to some basics, if you don't mind.

Is LENR a scaleable technology ?

[count-your-change]

The question is not whether they can measure but what are they measuring? How can they know?

I've only pointed out why this “verification” is hardly more than a rubber stamp for a convicted con man since the observers are basically doing nothing more than taking temperatures (none has said they weren't competent to do that)and measure heat output.

As for the “it's a secret” ploy....that's what NDA’s are for, besides these are people of integrity (an assumption not extended to me!) aren't they???

[UCANSEE2]

***Then maybe posting it to the smoky backroom is the right thing to do after all.

Like the Phoenix, it may one day rise from the ashes of the smoky backroom to dominate the world.

It's just that I don't believe that those 'in power' around the world want CHEAP ABUNDANT ENERGY.

They wanted WINDMILLS, which were neither CHEAP, nor produced ABUNDANT ENERGY. What the WINDMILLS did was produce a lot of INCOME for the makers of the windmills.

[UCANSEE2]

Unless you somehow think a gasoline motor has more energy in than out?

If you add up the energy required to create a gallon of gas and make it commerically available to YOU, and the fact that gas engines are notoriously inefficient, then yes, it does take more ENERGY in than out.

Your statement is very similar to the 'concept' that Electric Vehicles are 'free' because all you have to do is plug it into the wall. On top of that is ignoring all the 'energy' it took to create the batteries in the first place.

[UCANSEE2]

***why do you put a quote around the word?

Why do you put three asterisks at the beginning of your sentences?

***That is exactly my quest, without the hint of sarcasm.

Nothing wrong with that.

I must say that all the personal attacks and abuse from fellow freepers is unexpected and disappointing, especially when this “new development” has been independently verified by 7 scientists.

I sympathize with you on the personal attacks, but I think the issue was that you keep insisting that this has been 'independently verified' by 7 scientists, and there seems to be considerable proof that these 7 scientists are not really 'independent'.

That still doesn't prove their conclusions wrong, but it does make one skeptical. Like Eric Holder stating that Obama did nothing wrong.

But so many people resort to classic fallacies that it’s astounding they have college degrees. Critical thinking is a freshman level, required course. Yet we see classic fallacies from people who claim graduate level exposure in sciences.

Yet you claim to trust the invention of a man who has been proven to have made falsified claims in the past. Is this not true ?

[count-your-change]

When a truly extraordinary claim is made I want to see behind the curtain.

“One thing everyone needs to admit, though. There are groups, very, very powerful groups who have an enormous vested interest in making sure this type of thing NEVER gets public acceptance.”

That will always be the case but remember the Luddites failed in their efforts.

[count-your-change]

“David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty disappear on camera.”

He’s the one who should do the e-cat tests.

[UCANSEE2]

Remember you asked me why the MODS pulled your threads?

---------------------------------------

Or will they ask about how the nickle lattice was maintained at far above/below it’s transition phase temperature?

***It was a black box test. Measure Power In and Power Out. Report the results. Pretty simple, except that people like you seem to think they can’t measure power.

---------------------------------------

1. The poster asked you a pertinent question. You dodged it, and went back to 'black box' measurements. Why didn't you answer his question? Is it because 'people like you' can't answer a technical question like that?

2. See... personal attacks come in many forms, and you keep making them. It doesn't feel good to have someone question your intellect, does it ?

Prove me wrong by answering his original question, if you don't mind. I, for one, am curious as to the answer, aren't you?

[UCANSEE2]

***Religious threads have gotten far calmer with the implementation of caucus type threads.

Thank you. That's good news.

[UCANSEE2]

And this system was tested & the finding is that it has 10,000 times more energy density than gasoline.

As long as we don't account for any of the energy it took to produce the component parts, especially the pixie dust.