Posted on 11/02/2011 11:41:45 AM PDT by isaiah55version11_0
A physicist in Italy claims to have demonstrated a new type of power plant that provides safe, cheap and virtually unlimited nuclear power to the world, without fossil fuels or radiation concerns.
The only hitch: Scientists say the method -- cold fusion -- is patently impossible. They say it defies the laws of physics.
Andrea Rossi doesn't seem to care. He told FoxNews.com that his new device takes in nickel and hydrogen and fuses them in a low-grade nuclear reaction that essentially spits out sheer power, validating the strange science.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
14,700? That many? Says who? and where is the “sea gull” rant?
100% BS Hoax.
Yes, 14700 times.
Jing-tang He
• Nuclear fusion inside condense matters
• Frontiers of Physics in China
Volume 2, Number 1, 96-102, DOI: 10.1007/s11467-007-0005-8
This article describes in detail the nuclear fusion inside condense matters—the Fleischmann-Pons effect, the reproducibility of cold fusions, self-consistency of cold fusions and the possible applications
http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22)
and where is the “sea gull” rant?
***The admin moderator told me to stop chasing seagulls. Apparently seagulls get their feelings hurt quite easily.
My favorite cold fusion movie is "The Saint" with Val Kilmer and Elizabeth Shue. Very entertaining
Gotta disagree with you.
Yes, you need accuracy better than 20%; this is why. The Devil is and always has been in the details. 2 temperature points do not, and have never told the story in any exo-thermic device. They tell what is happening at 2 points in space - and only when you are looking at them.
Thermocouples tell you what is going on - constantly and very accurately. They are cheap, and intentionally have insifignicant thermal mass. This is why jet engines have more than 2 temperature points - and this is every bit as complex as a typical jet engine. Heck, your car uses more probes and far more accurate probes than what this is using. Input air temp, water temp, manifold temp, transmission temp, exhaust manifold temp, exhaust temp, ambient temp, brake temp and that’s just off the top of my head. My car had 5 oxygen sensors on top of this.
Depending upon what you are measuring, and when; this could be returning more heat than is put in, or LESS. This is apparent in the LERN-CANR.org website.
“Unfortunately, this test was marred by problems that make it impossible to accurately determine how much energy was produced”.
Not my quote - this is from LENR-CANR.org. I suggest you read the article (www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm) yourself. We do not know how much energy this unit is actually producing. That’s a hell of a condemnation on the measurement strategy used.
Again...”Experts from Motorola and elsewhere have analyzed the data. Most of them have concluded that the excess heat was real, and anomalous” - so it appears something cool is happening; but we don’t know how much because we have sh*tty instrumentation.
I've read it. I've also read the reports of the experiments/demos themselves. And as a result of that, I disagree with the conclusion. I repeat, Rossi's rigs can be completely characterized with two thermometers, a barometer, and a beaker.
And I suggest, as i always do, that you need to read the actual reports, and not the commentaries thereon. You say you know something about measurement.....check the facts, not the opinions.
This guys is a QUACK!! You heard it here first.
Then I would suggest you tell that to the 'experts' that have repeatedly stated that they have no idea how much heat is being generated. Surely, you must be far more experienced with such matters than they are. Maybe you you ought to patent your methodology - Agilent, Omega and a host of other companies that specialize in data-logging will be demolished.
Whole context please .... They told you to quit the personal attacks and seagull nonsense.
Hmmm....
I think Rossi is on something, like crack!
So what if the unit itself “gets warm”. If it isn’t at a usefully high temperature (hot enough to make steam), what good is it? Maybe you could use that heat to warm air in an HVAC system or an incubator, but some unquantified heating of the unit itself proves nothing.
So far, I see more similarity of the E-Cat with my television than an energy production device. Both have to be plugged into external power to activate, and both “generate” heat while in operation.
Honestly, I hope it works for the good of everyone. However, I have real hope for the thorium reactors, which WILL produce energy, safely.
Did you also get your engineering degree from Kennsington U?
I see that Wonder Warthog is going too fast for you.
An analogy from WW2. Enrico Fermi, with a stopwatch and a fistful of confetti, was able to estimate within 5% error the energy of the Trinity nuclear test at Alamogordo. Of course there were a multitude of sensors in the vicinity of the atomic blast but Enrico did his calculations within 15 minutes after the blast while one had to wait at least a weak to collect all the data from the sensors and monitors and compute the results.
Have you ever heard of the Fermi solution?
Homework for you: how would you use the 2 thermometers, barometers, and beaker?
The post that was pulled had no other personal attack other than calling moonboy a seagull.
Almost any reactor requires power to initiate itself. Jet engines don’t start themselves, nor does your car. This is no different; you put energy in, you start some reaction - and you get energy out. Hopefully you get a lot more out, than it took to start the reaction. Even a Dam required powerful electric motors to lift the flow gates to start the process. I can’t think of any energy device that starts itself without some energy input.
Even if this is a simple factory heater; that would be a heck of a device. If this does nothing other than heat water - that would reduce electrical demand substancially in the winter months for homes and factories. Steam turbines are neat; but if this can’t produce the volume of steam - if what heat it does generate is cheaper than other means, then this is still a good thing.
The first internal combustion engine was horribly inefficient and unreliable. It took several years, and thousands of engineers/scientists dedicating their lives to studying what was going on in that engine to get where we are today.
The onl thing that disturbs me about Rossi, is sloppiness. There is no excuse for sloppy data collection, especially at this stage of the operation.
I am sorry I am not as technically inclined as you. Can you please explain to me how characterize the reactor with 2 thermometers, barometers, and beaker?
Again I apologize. I have only spent the last 40 years designing, testing and operating power plants. Maybe I missed something.
There is actually a book titled “Fermi’s Solution.” Read it.
There is a cartoon with the caption (more or less): “On the Internet, no one knows if you are a dog.”
Saying you have 40 yrs experience in engineering means nothing. If you know your stuff, you can talk “turkey”.
Go home and do the homework. Laziness is not tolerated.
Homework for you: Go look up that actual numbers, not the ones you want to post to make yourself look smart.
That would be enough to include at least several channels to monitor the running 500 kw generator set sitting next to the e-cats which were generating 470 kw.
Fox News E-Cat Article Needs Work
http://pesn.com/2011/11/02/9501944_Fox_News_E-Cat_Article_Needs_Work/
The mainstream media organization “Fox News” has posted an article about the recent test and sale of Andrea Rossi’s one megawatt cold fusion plant. It’s great that they are covering the introduction of the E-Cat technology to the market, but the article could be more accurate.
Andrea Rossi consults with Giuseppe Levi during the test of the 1 MW E-Cat on Oct. 28, 2011
Photo by Sterling Allan
By Hank Mills
Pure Energy Systems News
If you have not read it already, Fox News has posted an article about the test and sale of the world’s first one megawatt cold fusion E-Cat plant. Fox News should be commended for being one of the first mainstream media outlets to cover the historic launch of the cold fusion age. However, their article does not seem to be as well worded as it could be, and is not exactly accurate on all counts. To be blunt, the author could have been much more helpful to the readers of the article.
The first issue with the article is that early on it states scientists say cold fusion is impossible. This is not entirely accurate. The fact is many scientists say it is very possible, and some even claim it is an absolute reality. Over the last twenty years hundreds of scientists have been involved in cold fusion research, and thousands of successful cold fusion experiments have taken place. One example of a scientist who claims cold fusion is very possible, is Chief NASA scientist, Dennis Bushnell. He has went so far to state that cold fusion is perhaps the most promising of all cutting edge, alternative energy technologies. You can read an article about his statements, here.
http://pesn.com/2011/05/31/9501837_Cold-Fusion_Number-1_Claims_NASA_Chief/
As the article continues, it claims that many people in the scientific community have dismissed the technology. This is true to an extent, because many scientists are skeptical of breakthrough technologies that challenge the status quo. A good example of this is how there were scientists and engineers declaring that powered flight was impossible, weeks or months after the Wright Brothers few into the sky. However, there are many scientists and engineers that have witnessed demonstrations of the E-Cat technology over the last year, and came away impressed — convinced that the technology represents a novel new source of energy. Dr. Levi of the University of Bologna, Professor Christos Stremmenos, and Dr. Sergio Focardi are just a few names out of many experts that have praised the technology as being valid and real.
Next, the article gives a quote from a scientist who states that the E-Cat test should be treated as a hoax, until independent scientists are able to replicate the results. This statement is overlooking a few important issues. First, there have been many independent scientists witness and participate in tests of E-Cat units. Secondly, the test of the one megawatt plant was complete controlled by the expert engineer representing the customer who was purchasing the plant. If the engineer was not satisfied with the test — that he could conduct in any manner he wanted — he could have easily canceled the purchase. It is important to note however that in these tests Rossi has not allowed scientists to examine the inside of the tiny reactor cores, because inside of them resides the proprietary information that makes the technology work. Namely, a proprietary catalyst and nickel powder that has been treated in very special ways to create an abundance of reaction sites. To protect his industrial secrets and intellectual property, he has had to put some limitations on the information he can provide.
The article also talks about radiation, and how fission reactors produce large amounts of radiation. But the details about how Rossi’s technology works — in terms of radiation produced — is not elaborated on. The fact is his system does produce small amounts of radiation in the form of low energy gamma rays, but they are completely shielded by a couple centimeters of lead. Zero radiation escapes into the environment. It would also have been nice for the author to mention that the E-Cat technology utilizes no radioactive elements, and produces no nuclear waste. It is a completely safe and “green” nuclear technology. In fact, due to the very nature of the way the energy is produced, it is impossible for it to “melt down.” This is because if the temperatures inside of the reactor cores rise too high, the nickel powder just melts, and the nuclear reactions cease. There is no disaster like in a fission based nuclear reactor, the system just stops producing heat.
Perhaps the most silly part of the article is the quote stating cold fusion defies the laws of thermodynamics, and a self sustaining cold fusion system is impossible. This statement is not just ridiculous, but is offensive to the intellect of many readers of Fox News. In a cold fusion reaction the energy produced is not “free” coming from no where, but comes from the atomic bonds of the hydrogen and nickel, when they ‘fuse” together. Just like in conventional fission energy, the energy comes from a portion of the mass of the atom being converted to energy. There is no difference with cold fusion, except that the radiation released is tremendously less, no nuclear materials are consumed as fuel, and no nuclear waste is produced. Basically, cold fusion has all of the advantages of nuclear power, with none of the drawbacks!
When Fox News reports about cold fusion, they need to provide their researchers with more detailed and accurate articles. I applaud Fox News for covering the one megawatt test, but I think they need to do more homework before they start writing up content.
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.