Really? Show me.
I can admit the POSSIBILITY that a liquid chemical fake for those setups where the coolant was contained in a tank,
Excellent! Some people have claimed, even some here, that no chemical reaction could possibly release enough energy, by orders of magnitude! I'm glad you don't agree with that claim.
Simply doing an enthalpy calculation for a single experiment and trying to use that to draw conclusions for ALL experiments is ridiculous.
The purpose of my enthalpy calculation was simply to show that a chemical fake was possible.
Sure. The actual energy output was 233KWH, not 16. The 16KW ran for 18 hours. Now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually intended to type KW instead of KWH, and didn't make the sophomoric mistake of using the wrong units.
"Excellent! Some people have claimed, even some here, that no chemical reaction could possibly release enough energy, by orders of magnitude! I'm glad you don't agree with that claim."
In all cases, this statement MUST be related to the specific experiment/demonstration under discussion. I have yet to see a PLAUSIBLE "chemical fake" proposed.
"The purpose of my enthalpy calculation was simply to show that a chemical fake was possible."
Your choice of experiments was pretty much misleading, as this experiment is the ONLY one in which an H2O2 "fake" will work. I have to wonder if that choice was deliberate.
Re-do your calculations for the other demonstrations. I think you will find that H2O2 WILL NOT WORK for the tank-fed experiments (4.9 g/s flow instead of 833 g/s, outputs of 12kW and 16kW respectively).