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”

[Kevmo]

It’s time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you.

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.

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

[Toddsterpatriot]

[Kevmo]

It’s time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you.

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.

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

[Toddsterpatriot]

Or you could keep pretending to ignore.

Sounds like whining.

[Kevmo]

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.

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

[Wonder Warthog]

I probably won't get to many of your points until this weekend, but this needs response:

"I can’t even make the claim that because some of these experiments resulted in heat output, that LENR must be real. For all I know, the experiment was laced with all or any sort of catalyst they could lay their hands on and a few of them blew up....not surprisingly...This author uses the fact that a window was melted to assert that a vast amount of heat was produced. This is the kind of claim that I find very misleading and unscientific."

"So if this is what all the LENR advocates believe, then I can say that they are clearly more believing in faith then they are believing in science.

"But that is just my opinion and like everyone knows, everyone has at least one."

You are very full of opinions on the basis of having studied almost nothing about the topic. You are GROSSLY ignorant of the reality of the subject, which is covered in literally thousands of scientific papers.

PLEASE do some homework. READ BEAUDETTE'S BOOK. It is THE best, most concise introduction to the SCIENCE of the subject. If you don't want to put out the bucks, your local public library can borrow it from another library either for free or a small charge (typically postage).

If you take the above as an insult, it is not intended to be. At this point you are in the "...knows not, and knows not that he knows not..." stage.

[Cold Heat]

I’m not insulted....I was responding to what the writer of a piece on a NASA site had said about it.

It also tied to “thousands of tests” phrase that I continually get from advocates of this technology which I view as a mishmash of private efforts by all sorts of people trying to discover the “Big One”.

Kinda like my own personal quest (just a mental exercise) with “anti-gravity”.

So no, I’m not insulted...I am just trying to flesh out the underlying emotional connection to this.....”potential” science inquiry. To me all this is essentially anecdotal evidence and until it’s matured into something useful and proved, it’s hard for me to get attached to it. So I won’t do that no matter how much I read about it, and I have read a number of papers about it, all different but yet the same.

I keep reading about this transmutation angle, and all I see as proof of that is either theoretical or it’s purported to be proven by a picture of a piece of nickel partially destroyed that has copper like particles adhering to it.

Sorry...but that won’t do for me. I know Nickel pretty well. I have seen it partially melted, melted it, watched it boil in a arc furnace. It actually does gain a copper like sheen to it when exposed to high temps. (in this case over 2200 degrees F) I don’t particularly know why but I was told it was normal when I asked...

There are far too many questions here and few answers about this reported reaction so rather than remain silent any wait for the cows to come home, I thought I would participate in some debate which I find often to be stimulating.

[Cold Heat]

“PLEASE do some homework. READ BEAUDETTE’S BOOK”

Not adverse to reading books....lol

I’ll see if it’s available electronically. I have not been inside a library since college, more than 40 years ago....arrrgh.....time...time...time..

[Cold Heat]

You are very full of opinions on the basis of having studied almost nothing about the topic.

Just wanted to address this comment while I am thinking about it because tomorrow I will not recall it.

Yes...I do have a lot of opinions on this without too much study into what has been said by others. The reason is the same reason this entire concept has been more or less shunned by the science community. The opinions, as I dissect them, are connected to the claim of transmutation to a large degree. Other issues as well but this is the big one.

I think I have already said many times that I don't question that some sort of energy release is in fact taking place and releasing heat. Now that should suffice to satisfy accusations that my opinions are flat wrong, denier liar, yaddadadadada....

My objections largely revolve around the explanations of how the heat is produced and to a degree, because of the limited manor of the test referenced on this thread, I have issues with the potential viability of the civil use of this heat and it's sustainability and it's cost/benefit.

The transmutation thing is likely the beginning and the end of my problems with this and to describe the thinking that is going on in my mind will require at least a hundred thousand words to cover this single point.

If I had to shorten it up to a paragraph or two I would say that Nickel, the primary component of this device, has always been to me to be a mystery metal. I don't think we have it classified properly. In fact I don't think the metallurgists understand exactly what it is!

As I mentioned at some point, I once worked for a metal specialty business that had it's own large foundry and machine shop facilities. I was a maintenance tech with other responsibility's connected to testing, measurements, heat treating....whatever they wanted me to do...

Nickel was a big part of the alloy business and it was discussed often, and there were mostly questions with no answers as to it's qualities. It's not that well understood and even as a element on the chart, they can't seem to make up their minds as to the atomic structure. So they use two different atomic configurations. Years ago, the thought crossed my mind that perhaps they had it wrong and that there something very special about nickel.

I could go further into it and even explain that my fascination with nickel eventually through circumstances beyond my control caused the loss of my job there.

I think that is enough for now....but I wanted you to understand that my numerous opinions have roots in my past and in what I know, they are not just off the cuff. At least not all of them...lol