Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kevmo

If someone told you that you would get less energy out of the cold fusion cells than it took to construct them, they’d tell you to take a flying leap. And you got to count ALL the energy that it takes to construct them. Mining the metal. Refining it. Shipping it. Manufacturing the cells. Building the buildings. If you have a gain in one stage but too many losses in another stage, you do not have a viable energy production process! You only have a means of shuffling existing sourced energy around, while losing some of it. This is one of the great criticisms of gasoline ethanol, incidentally. When you count the energy expended to get it, you might as well just have used pure gasoline. It might or might not fight pollution but it won’t fight energy waste.


72 posted on 03/13/2014 12:46:45 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: HiTech RedNeck
Then it should please you to find out that the latest INDEPENDENT test on a LENR device found it to have 10 THOUSAND times more energy density than gasoline.
73 posted on 03/13/2014 12:50:35 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson