Solar Hydrogen Trends's patent has published. I remain pretty skeptical but for those who are interested, the patent has the first purported explanation of their proposed mechanism of operation.
Solar Hydrogen Trends Mechanism
-
[feedquote='E-Cat World','http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/06/15/solar-hydrogen-trends-publishes-patent/']Thanks to Fyodor for posting a link to this article from the New Energy Treasure website which discusses a new patent published by Solar Hydrogen Trends, who claim to have developed a technology that can produce huge amounts of hydrogen from a previously undisclosed manner. Here’s the abstract from the patent application: “The present invention […][/feedquote]
-
There are many reasoçn to be cautious with SHT claims.
Their claimed result is very different whom what is well known in PdD LENR, and NiH LENR as it seems, all based on transition metal hydrides producing heat when excited in a way, producing He4, trace of tritium, even less neutrons, and some transmutations of heavy nucleus by addition of few hydrogens/neutrons.
the hardest to swallow is the claim, as we interpret it, that oxygen nucleus is fissioned into hydrogen, which is an endothermic reaction.
There is some test report but not very public and recognized...
Usual LENr does not break the usual conservation laws, despite the myth. LENR hydrogen to He4 reaction is exothermic and the only "miracle" is how this possible reaction is made possible despite barrier observed in free space for two-body reactions.
SHT reaction as we understand it seems impossible.
The is two possibility I see to reconcile with usual conservation laws.
One is that , as it often happen, and because SHT is keeping some secrets, that we badly interpret the reaction as simple fission of oxygen.
like Ni62 in Lugano, it maybe a reaction caused by a huge production of energy by fusion of lighter elements. Of course to make that, there should be other participants to the reaction, and products of the reactions... They claims there is many steps in the reaction, and this may be the secret.The second hypothesis is that simply SHT makes a big mistake in interpreting the reaction.
Some say that maybe simply oxygen is captured by a component of the reactor, and it is only an improved electrolysis as some Russian LENr scientist have show at ICCF18. The massive production of heat, cause an improvement of "Faraday efficiency" by some thermal dissociation. the article cited refers rather to cavitation, which may cause thermal dissociation too if some nuclear reaction happens, LENR or hot fusion.Until SHT propose fairly made independent test, we should simply wish them good luck and wait for good independent measurements.
This article finish with the same conclusion.
-
I wonder what the people at SHT are up to? If their technology really works like they claim it does, why don't they just drive to Bill Gates' house and show him. It will be a 2 day drive or one hour flight. Simple, this will will solve all their problems.
-
New name? SHT >Energy Renaissance
https://rusarminfo.ru/2017/01/…toplivo-budushhego-video/
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
-
They could use a new name. SH_T just doesn't cut it.
-
This got to be HST new team after they dropped the guy who was pushing huge overunity claims to draw attention.
It still uses aluminum in the process but can be safe alternative for hydrogen tanks and cheaper than a battery pack.
-
I went a long way down the road with these guys. As you say, they use Aluminium to make Hydrogen, not of itself a bad thing, I have applied for a patent on a clean, zero carbon catalytic process doing just that. Unfortunately they do it using sodium hydroxide. The chemistry is trivial, not involving the amazing transmutation phenomena of their early claims, the one that showed a picture of a bottling plant in China claiming it was their laboratory. There are big problems with using NaOH to strip off the oxide coating that forms on aluminium as the process goes on. NaOH is not cheap, and is itself produced by very 'ungreen' and energy intensive processes, as is Aluminium.
The SHT process thus requires the production of around 15 tons of CO2 for every ton of Hydrogen. I can prove that btw, but it is very boring!
The other problem is with the reactor residue. What they end up with a something called Sodium Aluminate. This can in theory be used as part o the aluminium arc-smelting process, but it requires extensive pre-treatment to remove the sodium part- a highly polluting and water-hungry process called 'ponding. So it is a low value product.
Thus, they take what can be done cleanly and efficiently by (for example) the process I am working on, which produces pure hydrogen and high quality pure alumina from despised and thus inexpensive grades of scrap aluminium and they (SHT) make a total mess of it. Doing it my way the hydrogen ends up so cheap you could almost give it away. The alumina produced ends up worth around 5X the cost of the scrap consumed and the process being exothermic has very high COP. around 8-9. My advice- avoid them.
-
I went a long way down the road with these guys
AS,
Which "guys"...the old SHT, or this new bunch?
-
Whatever else can be said, the "SHT" acronym is an unfortunate one.
-
Whatever else can be said, the "SHT" acronym is an unfortunate one.
Eric,
In this case, it may not be.
-
Which guys? The old ones. Jack Balakyrian (?) and his friends, hucksters to a man. The claims were so ridiculous, and the scientific credentials (none) and the poolside demos so comical that they generated quite a few hard questions and a lot of ridicule from the tech-watching crowd. But it did get me interested in the concept and gave rise to a serious study of the usefulness of using scrap aluminium to make hydrogen and pure alumina.
-
Alan Smith, I'm sorry but I can't help but notice and point out the yuge conflict of interest you have there with LFH.com. In your website it's claimed that you "provide the shovels for others to do the digging" and that therefore you're not in position to guarantee positive excess heat results. However, if you're really obtaining a COP of 8-9 as you mention above, then even if just for the excess heat results alone, this could be considered LENR. You can't cop out of this saying that it has nothing to do with it and therefore that it doesn't apply to your website. I don't even think this would be fair to your potential customers.
By the same "gold rush" analogy it would be as if the shovel seller sold dull, weak shovels and pickaxes to clueless gold diggers, while also at the same time reserving for himself the best equipment and information on where to effortlessly find the gold. Why then sell the shovels at all?
-
Not at all. The COP has nothing to do with LENR, it comes from measuring the amount of energy in the released hydrogen, and from the fact that the use of aluminium to reduce water thus releasing hydrogen is an exothermic process. This is pure chemistry, and nothing to do with LENT at all. Whar we are doing in fact is liberating some of the energy that goes into arc-smelting alumina to make metallic aluminium in the first place. It is SHT who claim some LENR magic. And that is nonsense.
-
Alan Smith: I'm aware that Aluminium amalgams prevent the formation of the permanent passivating Al2O3 layer on the surface, making the metal prone to fully oxidizing in water and allowing facile hydrogen production. However this process can also occur at room temperature or slightly above it. In this case the "COP" would be close to "infinite", if only the hydrogen release was considered. Where does the COP 9 come from exactly?
-
We sell the ingredients for a very simple early version of this tech at www.lookingfor heat. Look for 'catalytic carbon/hydrogen on demand' - there are videos too. We like to share you know. The version I have applied for a patent for is very different and includes all necessary steps in pre-and post processing the ingredients and the ash. It has been almost 3 years work for me, predating the establishment of 'looking for heat'.
We don't require the use of anything more exotic than the most despised kinds of aluminium scrap, water and catalyst. Using amalgams means you are adding expensive additional materials, and also producing a contaminated end product. not good. Our end products are pure aluminium oxide and pure hydrogen. That's all.
The process runs at 80-90C. The COP figure is obtained by totting up all the various energy inputs to the reactor - pre-heating, stirrers, pumps, post-processing the exhausted reactor contents etc etc and subtracting this from the amount of energy contained in the evolved hydrogen. Very simple.
BTW, I think you owe LFH collectively an apology for suggesting we take liberties with our LENR clients, this process has been developed in my time (and that of several others) and entirely at my expense and though some of the tech is hosted by LFH is nothing to do with that business.
-
Quote
Whatever else can be said, the "SHT" acronym is an unfortunate one
If completely appropriate. Quite a while ago, these guys were called out as phonies on Moletrap -- seems to me it was years. And they have hardly improved since then. The tip off was their stealing a photo off the internet (as Alan Smith points out) and pretending it was their building. What can you say about people who will stoop this low? Can you believe anything they do or say after that?
Captain Obvious says: it's never enough to examine a claim in isolation -- if it's unusual or extravagant, you have to consider who made it! If Rossi didn't teach someone THAT lesson, then that person is hopeless as a student.
