Posted on 06/23/2011 11:30:41 AM PDT by Kevmo
Presented on Thursday, finally, officially, the energy investment project of the Greek company Defkalion Green Technologies SA on the industrial application of scientific discovery of the famous "cold fusion nickel and hydrogen" Italian professors Sergio Foccardi and Andrea Rossi has created great interest internationally.
Investing a total budget of 300 to 400 million, includes three industrial units, which will settle in Thrace.. This will produce a massive reactor nickel - hydrogen, the second, based on the reactor will produce household units for heat energy capacity 10 - 30 KW and the third will produce large units 1 - 3 MW. Based on the timing of investors by the end of July we produced the first laboratory reactors, and since November there will be regular industrial production. In January the planned market introduction of small household units. Funding is completely private and comes from Greek Canadian funds through the Cyprus company will participate by 64%. The remaining 36% belongs to various Greek investors, none of which has not been up over 4%. The product
. The starting point of the matter is the revolutionary invention of fusion reactor Hydrogen and Nickel (cold fusion in a controlled environment), made by two Italian scientists from the University of Bologna, the Sergio Foccardi and Andrea Rossi, which was officially presented on January 14 in Italy. Based on this discovery can be produced cheap energy, with very low, almost negligible compared with the current data, since the reactor can produce more energy than it consumes in its operation. The rights to use and industrial use (for non-military purposes) of the invention of the Italians for the whole world except the United States took the Greek-diversified company Defkalion. The company took care, supported by Greek scientists, to "translate" technical scientific results and create a device that after initial activation, generates heat without need for additional power and without creating pollution or harmful radiation to humans The thermal energy that can be used to produce hot water and space heating and a rate of around 40%, be converted into electricity through a common converter (inverter). According to company officials, the cost for acquiring the device will not exceed 4,000 to 5,000 euros, while around 500 - 900 euros is the cost of the converter to produce electrical energy. The excess electricity, as with domestic PV systems can be fed into the electrical system and is bought by DEI, providing income to the producer The method, apart from domestic use, can be applied to energy production in agriculture, livestock, crafts, businesses, public buildings and, under conditions in industry. The scientific basis of unit
. The cold fusion process that is underlying science unit, is a "hot" field of physics that has caused heated debates in recent years. It is a reaction that occurs at room temperature, in which two smaller nuclei together to form a larger simultaneously releasing great amounts of energy. During the 80's Pons and Fleishmann claimed that they had reached a cold fusion reaction, but their experiment could not be repeated. Από . Since any theory and hypothesis of cold fusion was rejected, thus creating a stream of scientific reticence on the subject . Despite this skepticism a small portion of scientists continued to investigate the matter.
. The last new subversive came from Italy and are those which have started to create the specific application . Two scientists, engineer Andrea Rossi and Prof. Sergio Focardi, University of Bologna, was demonstrated publicly on January 14 of this year's time, a cold fusion device capable of producing 12.400 Wh heat entering only 400 W power. . The Italian scientists showed that a new production of green energy with common materials (Nickel and hydrogen catalyst), with little cost and without emitting air pollutants or radioactive waste. Their results were confirmed by independent measurements already third and receiving positive reviews from physical size first as professor at the University of Uppsala Sven Kullander, president of the National Academy of Sciences Energy Committee, the Hanno Essén, professor at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology, the Dr Edmud Storms etc. There are few who argue that the specific effect of Engineering and Natural Rossi Focardi creates the need to ... . rewrite certain chapters of physics.
---------------------- ----------------------
Front company #2
Let me add a nonsensical comment: Developing this process to convert lead into gold instead of nickel into copper might generate more interest. Not only do you get the cheap energy, you are handsomely paid for your trouble.
.
.
. sorry lol
Who took the rights for the U.S.?
***Ampenergo
http://pesn.com/2011/05/17/9501827_Ampenergo_Amps_Up_Rossis_Energy_Catalyzer_in_America/
Ampenergo Amps Up Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer in America
An American company named Ampenergo has made a deal with Andrea Rossi to market his Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat) technology in the Americas. Ampenergo, which has ties to people in the U.S. DOD and DOE, will share royalties with Rossi, and are in the middle of talks with multiple potential customers.
Screenshot of the Energy Catalyzer as seen in the video The Magic of Mr. Rossi.
by Hank Mills
The saga of Andrea Rossi’s cold fusion technology (called the Energy Catalyzer or E-Cat) continues to accelerate. His game changing technology consumes tiny quantities of nickel and hydrogen to produce huge quantities of clean, safe, and cheap energy. Unlike conventional fission based nuclear power, no radioactive materials are used and no nuclear waste is produced. Multiple companies are now positioning themselves to market the E-Cat, both in Europe and the Americas. One of these companies is Defkalion Green Technologies which is based in Greece. Another is company is Ampenergo, which is located in the United States.
Defkalion Green Technologies has acquired a license to manufacture, distribute, and market the E-Cat in all areas of the world except the Americas. It has recently been announced that another company named Ampenergo, has made a deal with Andrea Rossi (through his company Leonardo Corporation) to market and develop the technology in North and South America. Ampenergo has paid Andrea Rossi for these rights (an undisclosed amount), and in return they will receive a share of all royalties from the sale of E-Cat licenses and products in the Americas.
In this latest deal, there seems to be three companies involved. First, there is Leonardo Technologies Inc. (LTI) of Bedford New Hampshire, that was co-founded by Rossi. He sold his interest in the company over ten years ago, and has apparently used the proceeds to develop his cold fusion technology. It appears he has stayed in contact with the company since that time, and has worked with them to develop the technology. After selling his stake in LTI, Rossi started his own company named, “Leonardo Corporation.” This company has a manufacturing plant in Miami, Florida that is producing the E-Cat modules. In 2009, LTI branched off to create Ampenergo which is located in the USA as well.
Ampenergo was founded by Karl Norwood, Richard Noceti, Robert Gentile and Craig Cassarino. It is important to note that Robert Gentile was the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Fossil Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during the early 1990’s. This helps confirm Rossi’s claim that tests of the E-Cat have been observed by the U.S. Department of Defense and the DOE. It is very likely that at least certain individuals in the DOD and DOE are aware and interested in the Energy Catalyzer. However, their silence is deafening.
It is unknown if any military or secret government research is taking place, but there are unsubstantiated rumors floating around the internet of the US Navy using a nickel-hydrogen cold fusion reactor to power a submarine. Although the rumor is not likely to be true, if they have known about the technology for a couple of years, it is possible testing is taking place. Trillions of dollars go missing from the DOD budget on a regular basis, and the money is obviously being spent on something.
Interview with NyTeknik
In an interview with the Swedish website NyTeknik, Craig Cassarino of Ampenergo disclosed several interesting tidbits of information about the deal, his company, and their plans for the technology. Importantly, it is clear that Ampenergo is very impressed with Rossi’s technology. Craig claims that his company witnessed three demonstrations in the USA, and at least one in Bologna, Italy. They do not fully understand the exact reactions taking place, but are certain that the E-Cat technology works.
Craig also claims they are in talks with multiple companies in North and South America. Some companies are very skeptical about the technology, but others are more open. The companies they are talking with have many potential applications for the technology. One company they contacted considers the technology as a high power density fuel. This would be correct, because the reaction chamber for a 2.5 kW output is about the size of an adult fist, and with this technology one hundred grams of nickel powder can replace many barrels of oil. In addition, the fuel would be very cheap. Andrea Rossi has recently stated that a recharge that would power a unit for six months would only cost approximately $100 dollars. To produce the same amount of energy from oil would cost thousands of dollars. Most likely, the cost for the fuel would eventually be much lower than $100 dollars for 100 grams (the quantity that can power a reactor for six months). The $100 dollar figure probably does not factor in cost savings that would take place when mass production of the powder starts, and of course the company would be making a profit off the powder.
During the interview, space travel is mentioned as a potential application of the technology. We know that NASA is among those showing interesting the E-Cat. My hope is that the energy produced by the E-Cat would not be used to power a nuclear rocket, but to power something truly exotic. For example, could the E-Cat produce enough electricity to power an electrogravitic craft such as those suggested by Townsend Brown?
It seems that the race is on to commercialize the E-Cat. Defkalion and Ampenergo seem to be leading the way. Of course most of the dumbstream media is remaining silent of this race towards the commercialization of cold fusion technology. As of right now, the best sources for news and information are from alternative news sites such as PESN. I expect this to be the case even after CBS, FOX, ABC, NBC, and MSNBC start covering the technology. By staying alert and keeping an open mind, we have a huge head start!
More Info from Rossi’s Blog
Andrea Rossi frequently posts responses to questions on his blog at the Journal of Nuclear Physics. He has been revealing many interesting tidbits of information. However, he still declines to disclose information about the catalyst used.
One piece of information he has revealed is that all 330 E-Cat modules for the one megawatt plant in Xanthi, Greece have been manufactured and are being tested. In previous posts, he indicated that testing consists of modules being in continuous operation. Basically, this means that the one megawatt plant is running right now, but just not in Greece yet. Also, the enclosure for the one megawatt plant is being designed. It is relatively small, being only 3 x 3 x 2 meters and weighing only 2 tons.
A few additional bits of information from his blog...
* Rossi has began using the term “new fire” to describe his technology.
* An E-Cat can be throttled down to a lower power level in approximately one minute.
* He is using the term E-Tiger to describe the one megawatt plant.
* He has stated that it is possible a one megawatt plant will be opened in the USA by November.
* In private testing, the temperature inside of the reactor can reach 1,600 C which is hot enough to melt the nickel powder (probably not desirable).
* E-Cats will be sold to the public by the end of this year.
More Test Results on the Way
It has been rumored on the Vortex L discussion list (one of the best sources for cold fusion information on the web) that the University of Bologna is about to disclose additional test results from the E-Cat. As we have mentioned here at PESN, the University of Bologna is in the middle of a one year research program on the technology. Most likely, the data they release will be from extended tests of E-Cat units. Already, all chemical energy sources have been ruled out, and nuclear energy is the only possible source of the excess heat. For example, one test had an E-Cat running for 18 hours producing a constant output of around 15 kilowatts with an average input of only 80 watts. Maybe they have had a similar test running for weeks or months!
Another rumor on Vortex-L indicates that the Swedish scientists (one of which was the former president of the Swedish Skeptics Society) who tested the E-Cat earlier in the year, have submitted a paper about an additional test of the E-Cat to a peer reviewed journal. Apparently, they are waiting on it to be published before sharing the results of that test.
Rossi has also stated that the University of Uppsala in Sweden will receive an E-Cat unit for testing. It will be interesting to see what results they get from the E-Cat. Every test of the E-Cat so far has been a success, so there is little reason to think their testing will yield different results.
Catalyst Patent Application
Andrea Rossi’s technology produces huge amounts of energy due to an undisclosed catalyst that is composed of two elements that are not radioactive and are not precious metals. He has filed a patent application covering this catalyst. Although a patent covering his reactor design has been published (and granted in Italy), it does not disclose the catalyst. It has been speculated that the patent application for the catalyst is about to be published. This may or may not be the case, because there are ways to prevent a patent application being published before the patent is granted. For example, making many changes to the patent application delays it being published. No one knows if Rossi is taking such steps to prevent his secret from being revealed.
If the catalyst is revealed, it would allow replicators to test the technology themselves. Although individuals would not be able to sell units for a profit, I do not see anything stopping individuals from building units for home use. Although this might be dangerous due to the small amount of gamma rays produced by the device (that can be shielded with 2cm of lead and a layer of boron) and nano-nickel powder being slightly toxic, the technology is so simple, I doubt anyone could prevent such replication attempts from being made.
The saga of the Energy Catalyzer continues to accelerate. The end of this year could be very exciting.
As more information about this ongoing saga is obtained, it will be reported on here at PESN. We have also registered the domain name http://RossiColdFusion.com to forward to our feature page at PESWiki, and we have a news page dedicated to the coverage of this topic. Remember that PESWiki is publicly editable, so if you know of significant coverage we’ve not included, you are free to add a link to it. Our Help page gives instructions for those not familiar with wiki syntax.
# # #
This story is also published at BeforeItsNews.
Indeed. I also hope it works out for them!
The vortex-l mailing list has the best insight as far as I can tell.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
[Vo]:Rossi calorimetry, volume vs mass, etc.
Horace Heffner
Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:13:58 -0700
It has been brought to my attention that my posts from January-April have been discussed. I can sum up my position by simply saying that RH probes do not measure steam quality. The following links provide more detail.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
There are of course many more relevant links. Since few people seem to read links I’ll post some highlights below.
***
I believe the HP474AC probe actually measures the capacitance of the air, and converts that to relative humidity. The more the capacitance, the more water in the air, by volume. Another important thing is heat content is carried in proportion to mass, not volume. I have appended the computations I posted earlier showing the huge proportion of mass that is contributed by a small volume of liquid, and that estimates of the heat flow from the device can be off by 96%, i.e only 4% of the estimated heat value due to vaporization, if only 1.4% of the volume flow is liquid water droplets. Therefore a very small error, less than 1%, in measuring capacitance can produced huge errors in calculated heat flow. The stated error of the probe is +-3.5% where it counts, at 99% water content.
It is also notable the meter/probe requires calibration:
Most important is the fact the probe is designed to detect the percent of water vapor in air, not percent of water microdrops in pure steam. Pure vapor should have more capacitance than 100% humid air, and be way beyond the meter’s measuring limits. Adding water droplet should push the capacitance even higher. Once the meter is maxed, the question arises: can extra water droplets make any difference to an already maxed out 100% reading? The +-3.5% error could thus actually be irrelevant.
This whole issue may be of academic interest only. Even if all the heat flow due to vaporization is negated, the COP is still over unity, assuming the water is not heated much above 13 °C by ambient conditions before entering the device. Further, if the device can run without energy input at all, then none of this matters, provided the total energy to start up the device is way less than the device produces. This would clearly be the case if the device can run 6 months as stated.
Here again is my analysis showing the importance of the huge difference in mass vs volume ratios:
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(properties)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_heat_capacity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H2o
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/DmitriyGekhman.shtml
The following approximate values for water can be used from the above refs:
Liquid Density: 1000 kg/m^3 = 1 gm/cm^3
Heat of vaporization: 40.6 kJ/mol = 2260 J/gm
Heat capacity: 4.2 J/(gm K)
Molar mass: 18 gm/mol
Density of steam at 100 C and 760 torr: 0.6 kg/m^3 = 0.0006 gm/cm^3
Now to examine the importance of mass flow vs volume flow measurements for the steam.
If x is the liquid portion by volume, then x/((x+(1-x)*0.0006)) is the portion by mass. This gives the following table:
Liquid Liquid Gas
Portion Portion Portion
by Volume by Mass by Mass
-———— -——— -—————
0.000 0.0000 100.00
0.001 0.6252 0.3747
0.002 0.7695 0.2304
0.003 0.8337 0.1662
0.004 0.8700 0.1299
0.005 0.8933 0.1066
0.006 0.9095 0.0904
0.007 0.9215 0.0784
0.008 0.9307 0.0692
0.009 0.9380 0.0619
0.010 0.9439 0.0560
0.011 0.9488 0.0511
0.012 0.9529 0.0470
0.013 0.9564 0.0435
0.014 0.9594 0.0405
We can thus see from this table that if 1 percent by volume of the steam is entrained water micro-droplets, easily not seen in tubing or exhaust ports, that only 5.6 percent of the heat of vaporization is required to produce that mixture.
Rough calculations based on Rossi specifics:
Suppose for the Rossi experiment the mass flow of a system is 292 ml/ min, or 4.9 gm/s, the inlet temperature 13 °C.
The delta T for water heating is 100 °C - 13 °C = 87 °C = 87 K.
If the output gas is 100% gas, we have the heat flow P_liq given by:
P_liq = (4.9 gm/s)*(87 K)*(4.2 J/(gm K))= 1790 J/s = 1.79 kW
and the heat flow H_gas for vaporization given by:
P_gas = (4.9 gm/s)*(2260 J/gm) = 11.1 kW
for a total thermal power P_total of:
P_total = 1.79 kW + 11.1 kW = 12.9 kW
Now, if the steam is 99% gas, we have:
P_liq = 1.79 kW
P_gas = (0.1066)* (11.1 kW) = 1.18 Kw
P_total = 1.79 kW + 1.18 kW = 2.97 kW
or 23% of the originally estimated power out.
It thus seems reasonable to do calorimetry on the steam-liquid out.
***
The isotopic analyses and contradictory claims about isotopic abundances thus far make Rossi’s claims look absurd. The theories proposed do not match results. For example:
http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3080659.ece/BINARY/Rossi- Focardi_paper.pdf
ignores the highly radioactive nature of the outputs.
Rossi’s main claim of utility is excess heat. Yet no one has made any effort at even very basic calorimetry measurements on the output.
Estimating heat output is really very simple to achieve, as I have noted here before. Simply direct the output into an insulated barrel and keep track of the temperature. If the output is in the form of steam, pre-load the barrel with cold water and run the steam trough a copper coil in the barrel and sparge any steam output of the copper coil by releasing it at the bottom of the barrel. Stir the water in the barrel. Measure the temperature change of the water in the barrel through time. Direct the water output from the top of the barrel to a sink, as is done now. This is chidren’s science fair difficult. All that is required is a barrel with a water drain hole and fitting installed at the top, and maybe some insulation, though even that is not required if a no-flow temperature decline curve is obtained after the experiment. The thermocouple presently used can be moved to the barrel. A stirring device driven by a low wattage motor could be used, but the water could even be stirred by hand periodically. Measure the volume of water in the barrel.
It is incredible that it could be expected that anyone would invest a dime in this technology without the most basic and inexpensive science being applied.
****
This is a case of a lot of hoopla and maybe money changing hands, when the basic science applied to the main claim, excess heat, is laughable. The science applied to that issue is less than amateur. Personally, I don’t see any sense in wasting much time even discussing further, because the evidence is so shabby. The whole thing looks like a big joke at this point. It looks like a Barnum and Bailey act, “the greatest show on earth!”
Rossi’s main claim of utility is excess heat. Yet no one has made any effort at even very basic calorimetry measurements on the output.
Estimating heat output is really very simple to achieve, as I have noted here before. Simply direct the output into an insulated barrel and keep track of the temperature. If the output is in the form of steam, pre-load the barrel with cold water and run the steam trough a copper coil in the barrel and sparge any steam output of the copper coil by releasing it at the bottom of the barrel. Stir the water in the barrel. Measure the temperature change of the water in the barrel through time. Direct the water output from the top of the barrel to a sink, as is done now. This is chidren’s science fair difficult. All that is required is a barrel with a water drain hole and fitting installed at the top, and maybe some insulation, though even that is not required if a no-flow temperature decline curve is obtained after the experiment. The thermocouple presently used can be moved to the barrel. A stirring device driven by a low wattage motor could be used, but the water could even be stirred by hand periodically. Measure the volume of water in the barrel.
I discussed the wet steam issue here back in January, and also another simple cheap enthalpy measuring method, ice calorimetry:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
It is incredible that it could be expected that anyone would invest a dime in this technology without even the most basic and inexpensive science being applied to the most important aspect.
***
Despite my dismay at the calorimetry, or lack thereof, and lack of due diligence, I should note that I have made an effort to understand how Rossi’s results might be real. For example:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
I still hope beyond all reason that Rossi’s methods are real and useful. If not, this could be the worst thing that has happened in the field of LENR. LENR is clearly very real, if not useful yet. I think everything is still purely a matter of speculation though regarding Rossi’s results, for those outside Rossi’s inner circle. It is thus best to simply wait and see what unfolds.
I can not hope to even read the many posts occurring now, much less respond. Resuming lurk mode.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hhe
This whole brouhaha about "steam quality" is ridiculous (and bogus). First, the "wet steam" supposed energy loss notion is denied by the "no-steam" experiment/demonstration, the data from which can be found on the LENR-CANR website and many other places, yet in all these threads is totally ignored.
And a capacitance probe certainly CAN measure "steam quality". It is simply a question of re-calibration to match the conditions used. I suspect such calibration data is available from the manufacturer, but if not, it's certainly possible to set up a simple rig to do so.
But even THAT is not necessary, as all that is required to know whether the steam is "wet" or "dry" is an accurate temperature measurement inside and the knowledge of barometric pressure in the lab at the time readings were taken. The temperature sensors used in all experiments were platinum RTD's, the most accurate and stable thermal sensors currently available to technology. Calibrations (even NBS certified calibrations) can be had for such sensors, and we know that the atmospheric pressure WAS measured in the lab, because Galantini said it was.
I have only just started reading up on these measurements and it sounds like sparging is the best approach.
This is the normal pattern for this kind of scam. Find a few people willing to say it’s possible, then put spin on that to make it seem like they have blessed it. No scientist would ever say anything is “real” unless it was independently reproduced by multiple labs, apparently not the case here. That should be your first clue.
Three months will come and go, and nothing will be apparent other than pleas for “just a little” more funding. This is how they get investors to throw good money after bad and keep the scam going. Seen it over and over again, it is a standard playbook.
In the end, to avoid prosecution, they will claim the big energy companies conspired to destroy them. Again, standard playbook. The truth is: the big companies would be the first to license this if it were real. They would be falling over themselves to bid for it.
The truth is: the big companies would be the first to license this if it were real. They would be falling over themselves to bid for it.
***You mean, like NASA? or the US NAVY SPAWAR?
Cold Fusion #1 Claims NASA Chief (Focardi & Rossi - not cold fusion but close enough)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2730240/posts
Sunday, June 05, 2011 11:56:09 AM · by Titus-Maximus · 52 replies
PESN ^ | June 2, 2011 | Hank Mills
Navy Chemist May Have Rediscovered ‘Cold Fusion’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2214837/posts
Wednesday, March 25, 2009 5:17:10 PM · by nickcarraway · 38 replies · 2,029+ views
Fos News ^ | Wednesday, March 25, 2009
The article on the NASA guy is extremely weak. He makes an offhand comment about the technology. Even says he doubts it is fusion, throwing cold water on that aspect of it. Nowhere does he say he’s going to “invest” in it as you say. Bushnell appears to be mainly overseeing climate projects. Yeah lots of credibility there.
The navy article is a little better, at least it shows there maybe something there. But it has to be replicated by an independent lab, of course. Plus nowhere does that prove you get more energy out than you have to put in.
But why argue? According to the inventors we’ll have a prototype up and running and cranking out the kilowatts by october.
So, sit back, have a nice summer! If greece has the world’s first fusion plant up and running by fall I will gladly congratulate you on this find. I just think it’s far more likely this fades into the sunset after a bunch of investors pour money into it, like has happened dozens of times before.
The article on the NASA guy is extremely weak.
***I think I’ll believe the chief scientist at NASA Langley as well as a few Nobel Prize winning Nuclear Physicists over you, today.
He makes an offhand
***Not quite, in fact it is rather pointed.
comment about the technology. Even says he doubts it is fusion,
***You obviously have no clue why. Let’s see, we have 2 Hydrogen atoms and they wixilicbpaicleinnionize into one Helium atom through the roundabout Widom-Larson theory or somesuch, but it’s definitely NOT fusion. Uh huh. This would have NOTHING to do with the fact that cold fusion has been dragged through the mud by the hot fusion boys for 20 years, nahhh...eyeroll... /s
throwing cold water on that aspect of it.
**It’s actually quite fun to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel.
Nowhere does he say he’s going to “invest” in it as you say.
***No, he just says it’s the number one contender for the future, we can fill in the blanks all we want.
Bushnell appears to be mainly overseeing climate projects. Yeah lots of credibility there.
***More credibility than you, shortpants.
The navy article is a little better, at least it shows there maybe something there.
***But that won’t stop you from being a naysayer, now, would it?
But it has to be replicated by an independent lab, of course.
***Already been done. Not that I would expect you to be current on this information.
Plus nowhere does that prove you get more energy out than you have to put in.
***That’s how we know you’re a naysayer, there’s always some aspect that you pick that isn’t covered in the paper. Let’s just ignore all the 14,000 other replications of excess heat, and focus on this one little piece of gnat shiite in this pile of pepper.
But why argue? According to the inventors we’ll have a prototype up and running and cranking out the kilowatts by october.
***And your point is?
So, sit back, have a nice summer! If greece has the world’s first fusion plant up and running by fall I will gladly congratulate you on this find.
***You’re a complete idiot. You would be the guy who watches Jesus rise from the grave and say, “good for you”. My approach is to see where I can make a better world and work it to my own benefit at the same time.
I just think it’s far more likely this fades into the sunset after a bunch of investors pour money into it, like has happened dozens of times before.
***Obviously that is a likely outcome. But you give us nothing in terms of more insight into the possibility one way or the other. Ignoring you is worth more as a result, because after reading all the folly you throw together, we are no further along the path than when we started. But we sure have a loudmouth naysayer with us on the trip, now. Like that’s worth something /s
Gee, nothing like resorting to name calling to prove your point. Yeah that certainly makes you seem more credible.
As far as my qualifications, I ran a renewable energy company a few years back, and I saw so many energy scams I cannot begin to recount them all to you. All I am saying is, this one fits the exact pattern I have seen many times before. To the letter.
So, we’ll see what happens in October.
You’ve seen this before?
97 prototypes in operation
at least one running for 2 years
working with university to develop theory
400M euros invested within 1 year
Swedish Skeptic Society says it’s legit, and nuclear
Multiple demonstrations of device
Nobel Prize Winning Nuclear Physicist says it’s real
If it’s a scam, it’s the biggest renewable energy scam ever. It’s worth following just for that aspect.
Did you actually view the video of the swedish skeptics society? They don't really confirm anything. They say only that they cannot rule it out. In fact they say flat out that they are relying only on information the inventor provided and therefore they cannot confirm anything without further details. They most certainly did not say it was nuclear.
Again, in scams like this it is common to take the words of established experts out of context and claim they are "endorsing" the technology, when in fact they are not. Someone with credentials says it looks "interesting" and all the sudden the press release says it was endorsed by them.
Why are you so emphatically caught up in this? You seem to take it all very personally.
They most certainly did not say it was nuclear.
Why are you so emphatically caught up in this? You seem to take it all very personally.
***I intend to comment on these two points. My Network is acting up and it is likely that it will fall apart, so I’m going to copy & paste out of MSWord, just to be safe. It is gonna take some time.
They most certainly did not say it was nuclear.
*** On that first point, please visit this thread and let me know what you think.
Swedish Skeptics Confirm “Nuclear Process” in Tiny 4.7 kW Reactor (Rossi E-cat)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2715435/posts
Thursday, May 05, 2011 7:47:16 AM · by Free Vulcan · 186 replies
Renewable Energy World ^ | 5.5.11 | Thomas Blakeslee
They most certainly did not say it was nuclear.
*** On that first point, please visit this thread and let me know what you think.
Swedish Skeptics Confirm “Nuclear Process” in Tiny 4.7 kW Reactor (Rossi E-cat)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2715435/posts
Thursday, May 05, 2011 7:47:16 AM · by Free Vulcan · 186 replies
Renewable Energy World ^ | 5.5.11 | Thomas Blakeslee
They most certainly did not say it was nuclear.
*** On that first point, please visit this thread and let me know what you think.
Swedish Skeptics Confirm “Nuclear Process” in Tiny 4.7 kW Reactor (Rossi E-cat)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2715435/posts
Thursday, May 05, 2011 7:47:16 AM · by Free Vulcan · 186 replies
Renewable Energy World ^ | 5.5.11 | Thomas Blakeslee
Why are you so emphatically caught up in this? You seem to take it all very personally.
***Perhaps you should read these 2 articles I wrote. Other than that, it’s just the basic hope that this solves a lot of problems.
How I Made Money from Cold Fusion
Saturday, January 23, 2010 12:28:49 PM · by Kevmo · 28 replies · 1,013+ views
Exclusive Article for Free Republic | 1/23/10 | Kevmo
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2435697/posts
The End of Snide Remarks Against Cold Fusion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2265914/posts
Friday, June 05, 2009 5:56:08 PM · by Kevmo · 95 replies · 1,770+ views
Free Republic, Gravitronics.net and Intrade ^ | 6/5/09 | kevmo, et al
But then beyond that is the Biblical prophecy coming true: 1 Thessalonians 5:3
While they are saying, “ Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape.
1 Thessalonians 5:2-4
Does that answer your question?
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.