Homepage Forums Noise, ZPE, AGW (capped*) etc. Rossi’s Cold Fusion

This topic contains 45 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by Avatar TimS 8 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 46 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #9543
    Avatar
    Rezwan
    Member

    How is it classifiable as “aneutronic fusion”?

    Yes, I see the issue. This should be in the “Noise” forums as an unlikely energy idea and possible “Pons-Fleischman Award winner”. Note we diplomatically say for those forums that we don’t dismiss the ideas out of hand (after all, on one level it would be nice if we could all pack up and go home to easy energy), but it’s not ours to validate. They need to do as Jamesr says.

    Jamesr – do you mean “LPP”? Also – what people post in the forums is their own opinion, although it does reflect on the community. I was wondering how to – or if to -make a post about this in the website. Don’t know what category to put it under. People do ask about cold fusion and need to see the difference between that and thermonuclear variety. We do have a post up there somewhere.

    [post duly moved from “aneutronic” to noise]

    #9546
    Avatar
    Aeronaut
    Member

    Let’s start with the lack of translations to any of the world’s technical languages, and proceed through the lack of theory to arrive at potential financial motivations. Part of the reason Wall Street’s been in trouble stems from selling concepts which turned out to have untraceable collateral. To paraphrase Jamesr, if he can show me the land (or the legal description of it), I’m in a better position to see if it might be of use to me.

    #9618
    Avatar
    QuantumDot
    Member

    some one has come up with a theory which looks quite interesting and i’m a little surprised after reading it that it has not been more publicly discussed. the basic idea is that,
    step one it creates a heavy surface plasmon polariton
    step two the electron from the plasmon combine with a proton from the hydrogen to create an ultra low momentum neutron
    step three which then join with atoms creating unstable isotopes
    step four the unstable isotope then under go beta decay creating gamma rays which when they hit the surface plasmon polarition are converted to infra red radiation and some x rays

    http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/35/SR35913widomlarsen.shtml

    #9619
    Avatar
    QuantumDot
    Member

    so from the explanation fusion is not involved at all, in any way, at any step.

    #9713
    Avatar
    Brian H
    Member
    #9714
    Avatar
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    http://pesn.com/2011/02/14/9501766_Rossi_catalyzer_clarity_interview/

    Rossi estimates an energy price of around 1¢ per kW/h using his device. Assuming it is actually shown to work, and work consistently, and that he is right about the cost, it would certainly be competitive with existing technologies.

    According to Rossi the first 1MW devices are already under production in the US (by his own Leonardo Corporation, based in Bedford, New Hampshire), while Defkalion Green Technologies, based in Athens, Greece, will manufacture the first devices for the European market. Defkalion is supposed to make some sort of announcement, apparently in March. Rossi has set an October deadline for the delivery of the first device.

    Well, I suppose we shall see what we shall see.

    #9716
    Avatar
    zapkitty
    Member

    Still smells cheesy to me, but working with the given assumptions…

    Getting past the translation errors and obvious typos… apparently a standard 10 kwt “E-cat” unit can be expected to produce 3 to 3.5 kwe (an optimistic assumption given that it’s a very low grade heat source) and that 3.5 kwe would be 3.1 kwe net as it’s supposed to take ~400 watts to run the unit. The cost is supposed to be $2000 per kwt so a standard 10 kwt unit would cost $20,000 US.

    So an E-cat array capable of producing 5 mwe would need 1428.57 units… call it 1429 units at a cost of $28,580,000

    For comparison a 5 mwe FF unit is hoped to come in at ~$300,000 and comparative costs per kw/h are similarly disproportionate even given the varied estimates for FF.

    So with these assumptions, and if the tech pans out, would the E-cat unit be better than fossil fuels? Hell yes, and on several fronts.

    But in a market with multiple fusion sources working FF or Polywell units would beat E-cat easily in economics at the subdivision or town scale and up… and FF at least is aiming at the same sort of distributed market as E-cat.

    Rossi steps hard on the idea of selling to the individual home market, which is good if only because our lords and masters would kill outright if they thought that was a possibility, but at these figures such micro-marketing may the only venue where E-cat could compete with FF or PW.

    But it sure would be nice to have the choices, wouldn’t it? 🙂

    #9717
    Avatar
    Aeronaut
    Member

    zapkitty wrote: Still smells cheesy to me, but working with the given assumptions…

    Getting past the translation errors and obvious typos… apparently a standard 10 kwt “E-cat” unit can be expected to produce 3 to 3.5 kwe (an optimistic assumption given that it’s a very low grade heat source) and that 3.5 kwe would be 3.1 kwe net as it’s supposed to take ~400 watts to run the unit. The cost is supposed to be $2000 per kwt so a standard 10 kwt unit would cost $20,000 US.

    So an E-cat array capable of producing 5 mwe would need 1428.57 units… call it 1429 units at a cost of $28,580,000

    For comparison a 5 mwe FF unit is hoped to come in at ~$300,000 and comparative costs per kw/h are similarly disproportionate even given the varied estimates for FF.

    So with these assumptions, and if the tech pans out, would the E-cat unit be better than fossil fuels? Hell yes, and on several fronts.

    But in a market with multiple fusion sources working FF or Polywell units would beat E-cat easily in economics at the subdivision or town scale and up… and FF at least is aiming at the same sort of distributed market as E-cat.

    Rossi steps hard on the idea of selling to the individual home market, which is good if only because our lords and masters would kill outright if they thought that was a possibility, but at these figures such micro-marketing may the only venue where E-cat could compete with FF or PW.

    But it sure would be nice to have the choices, wouldn’t it? 🙂

    I’ll believe it if I see it. Beginning with next month’s announcement. Will he provide ordering information? That sort of question. Until then, anybody can get some publicity, so only working hardware coming from a production facility through some sort of distribution network matters in my opinion. Assuming he overcomes that reality check, his price and the FF price you cited above are FOB factory. A more accurate cost for either is going to involve sales channel and other expenses, such as financing, to arrive at a true installed price for any given installation.

    10kW caught my eye because that’s enough to run my house on. And even if it cost $30k installed, that’s on par with solar, but without the uglification factor of the array or the current local wiring infrastructure, which FF will not be able to eliminate on its own. If Rossi really does produce, that would expand my view of practical clean energy possibilities to Rossi for small scale installations (residential is the most obvious), FF for smaller businesses, and PolyWell for dense, large-scale applications such as defending the Status Quo.

    But hearing “lords and masters” and/or conspiracy theory is a dead give-away that somebody hasn’t done their homework about how the system works, why it works that way, and why any emerging technology needs to fit itself within that system. This doesn’t mean sell out. It means design lots of ways for existing energy providers and distributors to look good and profit more by doing the right thing in our opinion. I outlined this last year on the FaceBook discussions tab.

    #9718
    Avatar
    zapkitty
    Member

    Aeronaut wrote: But hearing “lords and masters” and/or conspiracy theory is a dead give-away that somebody hasn’t done their homework about how the system works, why it works that way, and why any emerging technology needs to fit itself within that system. This doesn’t mean sell out. It means design lots of ways for existing energy providers and distributors to look good and profit more by doing the right thing in our opinion. I outlined this last year on the FaceBook discussions tab.

    I mentioned no “conspiracy theory.”

    I only referenced the oft-demonstrated fact of the importance of energy to the elites… and the unimportance of human lives to said same. The most recent example being several hundred thousand dead Iraqis but there have been many other examples in US history alone.

    Now the plutocrats may indeed rely on the web of inertia inherent in the current infrastructure of power generation and regulation to slow down and hobble a disruptive technology… but bypassing them completely by offering a home heating and power plant solution at a fraction of the price of a new home is guaranteed to cause a rash of small plane crashes.

    And your argument seems to want to have it both ways… paying toll to the oligarchs while declaring “freedom!”

    Now, even I intimated that paying that toll may indeed be the only way forward… but to pay that toll while pretending that otherwise the oligarchs would just let you slide with toppling one of the pillars of their power is naively optimistic at best.

    I know you envision jump starting a fusion infrastructure with a relatively small amount of money but please don’t go all talk-polyglenbeck on me and say that the oligarchs are the solution and not the problem and that the best thing i s to make more oligarchs 😉

    #9719
    Avatar
    vansig
    Member

    departing from all hype and conspiracy theory,

    what’s the smallest of these reactors that produces greater than break-even?
    can an individual buy one today?
    what is the parts list and cost?
    physical size and mass?

    #9720
    Avatar
    zapkitty
    Member

    vansig wrote: departing from all hype and conspiracy theory,

    … spoilsport 🙂

    vansig wrote: what’s the smallest of these reactors that produces greater than break-even?

    Unknown.

    vansig wrote: can an individual buy one today?

    No. They claim they are awaiting patent protection before proceeding.

    vansig wrote: what is the parts list and cost?

    Unknown.

    vansig wrote: physical size and mass?

    Unknown, but by appearances not nearly as large as an FF unit.

    So…

    … good questions but there is a severe lack of facts or even assertions that we can even argue about 🙁

    #9721
    Avatar
    Ivy Matt
    Participant

    vansig wrote: what’s the smallest of these reactors that produces greater than break-even?

    From this article:

    According to Levi, the input electrical power to ‘ignite’ the device was about 1250 watts for five to ten minutes. It was then reduced to about 80 watts, equivalent to the power consumption of the control unit.

    So, if I’m not missing anything, even a 100-watt reactor should be over break-even if you run it for a day or more.

    vansig wrote: can an individual buy one today?

    No. Whether Rossi has investors and/or customers at this point is unclear, but according to this interview, the first customers will probably be industrial corporations. I would imagine the devices (or something) will be made available for purchase to select customers sometime between Defkalion’s announcement (probably in March) and the October deadline for the delivery of the first device.

    vansig wrote: what is the parts list and cost?

    The patent application describes the basic device. The interview linked to above mentions a price of $2000 per kW for the device. However, there are apparently some catalysts needed for the device to work whose nature has not been disclosed by Ing. Rossi.

    vansig wrote: physical size and mass?

    From the first article I linked to in this post, the mass is 30 kg, mostly from lead. I’m not sure of the exact size, but photographs of the device can be seen here and here. Tabletop fusion indeed—if it is fusion.

    zapkitty wrote: They claim they are awaiting patent protection before proceeding.

    If Ing. Rossi wants patent protection he will have to disclose more than he has disclosed so far.

    EDIT: Changed patent application link from Rossi’s site (which now brings up a 403 error) to WIPO site. There’s also a US application here.

    #9723
    Avatar
    Francisl
    Participant

    Ivy, I wasn’t able to use your patent application link but it led to this article about a possible explanation of how it works.

    #9724
    Avatar
    Francisl
    Participant

    QuantumDot wrote: some one has come up with a theory which looks quite interesting and i’m a little surprised after reading it that it has not been more publicly discussed. the basic idea is that,
    step one it creates a heavy surface plasmon polariton
    step two the electron from the plasmon combine with a proton from the hydrogen to create an ultra low momentum neutron
    step three which then join with atoms creating unstable isotopes
    step four the unstable isotope then under go beta decay creating gamma rays which when they hit the surface plasmon polarition are converted to infra red radiation and some x rays

    http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/35/SR35913widomlarsen.shtml

    It would be interesting to see if fission would occur if some of the uranium isotopes were used as the metal. It could be a spectacular test of the theory.

    #9731
    Avatar
    vansig
    Member

    Ivy Matt wrote:

    what is the parts list and cost?

    The patent application describes the basic device. The interview linked to above mentions a price of $2000 per kW for the device. However, there are apparently some catalysts needed for the device to work whose nature has not been disclosed by Ing. Rossi.

    zapkitty wrote: They claim they are awaiting patent protection before proceeding.

    If Ing. Rossi wants patent protection he will have to disclose more than he has disclosed so far.

    yes. failure to disclose could invalidate the patent. on the other hand, it is a common tactic used by scammers, who seek to bankroll a “patent pending” technology.

    by the way, there was a technical difficulty downloading from the above link (503 Service Unavailable); but, here is an alternate
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/pdfb/documents/wipo/patent_pdf/2009/125/WO2009125444A1/pdf/WO2009125444A1.pdf

    curiously, their description seems to require elevated pressure (2 to 20 bars preferred), and ß+ decay of unstable Cu isotopes, with consequent annihilation with an electron.

    Looking at cost and yield of reactions in terms of mass excess, in keV, I can see that the lowest cost reaction would be
    61-Ni + p +1422.9 keV –> 62-Cu; and the best yield reaction among these would be
    60-Cu –> 60-Ni + ß+ +6128 keV

    The minimum cost of 1422.9 keV (did i get that value right?) would seem to suggest that the fusions are rather endothermic and will occur at low probability, even at high pressures and temperatures.

    At 500°C, what’s the fraction of protons with > 1423 keV energy?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 46 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.