Mat Lewan Meets Rossi in Sweden, Rossi Bidding on Factory For QuarkX Production

I'm glad to be out of the technical analysis here! I have found the rumoured 100.1C fascinating. But, unless the ERV report includes proper pressure measurement, there can be no power assured beyond 70kW or so - and that would depend on many other unknowns being correct. So very many unknowns it would not possible to comment (were I commenting) except to say that the claimed 1MW is impossible to measure with safety. I said that before, so it is not a new comment.

I will be fascinated to find out what the setup really was...

Tom

@Hank

Don't you think the ability to change views in the light of new evidence is a valuable quality. Who you think shows that here?

Would it not be possible to measure 1MW with a margin of error of 90% (i.e. 100kW + which would mean COP>5) if pressure and temperature were measured and under a less error prone scenario than 100.1C/1 atm?

Quote from keieueue

Nice job Hank on proving Jed's lies. What pieces of shit those people are. Spending time and energy to prevent technological progress...

I think this is really an unhelpful comment. If you believe Jed has lied, you should be precise so that all can judge this, or at least offer to do this. I've read what Hank says and do not from it conclude Jed is lying, though there are certainly matters that could be explored further and I'd welcome that.

Your comment polarises things and makes further exploration difficult. It is also very highly insulting to Jed.

Unless you can substantiate it, in detail, you should be ashamed of that post.

My hypothesis is that water temperature was measured at a value significantly higher than 100C when the plant was in operation, but the ERV used a 100.1C value for his calculations (just as he used a ~99C value for the input water even though it was at 60C)

I think this is way more likely than assuming Rossi is stupid enough to run his output at 100.1C for a year. Moreover it would take quite a bit of skill to keep water at exactly that temperature.

There is no way temperature was at 100.1C without going to values such as 99.8C, 100.4C, etc.

I stated also clearly, that we have to wait for the publishing of the ERV report, before correct conclusions are possible.

But as already leaked, the ERV was manipulated by Rossi, who had instructed the ERV what and how to calculate. I see this as an indication, that not only the report would be needed but also the raw data.

Quote

The water heated by the MW plant was circulating in a closed loop, and since the return temperature was varying, due to different load in the process of the customer, Rossi insisted that the energy corresponding to heating the inflowing cooled water (at about 60˚C) to boiling temperature would not be taken into account for calculating the thermal power produced by the MW plant. The ERV accepted.

This might also be an indication, that the whole test is BS.

I'am glad to see that my post on page 18 in this thread, was a wakeup call for the whole Troll familiy!

Thanks for posting that fast!!

Now I know all of the group, what it makes much easier to understand Your motivation.

I won't read Your fuzz anyway. But just to let You know it again.

My info is real. This Swiss newspaper has access to the highest hierarchies in the US because it's a free mason's Trumpet!

I will give a shit for the US naval interrests to get an advance...

There are higher values in this world!

Now write on earn Your money !

Quote from Hank

He already thinks that Andrea Rossi is reckless and any powerful LENR technology should be EXHAUSTIVELY tested and figured out by government scientists before it is allowed to enter the marketplace.

This is something I had not considered. Suppose someone invented a way to get fission power - really easily - but with all the pollution issues we know. Would you want that to be controlled and regulated, or left to some eccentric and highly secretive inventor whose statements about basic science have in the past been falsified?

Now let us go to the Rossi effect, and imagine it works. How do you know it does not generate nasty radioactive products or other unknown risks? Do you view this unknown as safer or more risky than the known nuclear risks from fission?

Those are not rhetorical questions, I'm interested in the answers.

Quote

"Think of the children ;_;"

That is why I'm a strong advocate of (regulated) nuclear fission as an energy source over the next 50 years.

Quote from Thomas Clarke

Now let us go to the Rossi effect, and imagine it works.

Most countries have regulations in place, which could be applied to LENR technologies/devices. The conformance with these regulations would be enforced consequently.

Quote from Hank

On one hand, we have Dewey mentioning 100.1 degrees C, and on the other Andrea Rossi claims that figure is not in the ERV report.

I'm getting perilously close to what I said I would not do, but you realise that as with many things Rossiesque this oxymoron is misleading?

It is very possible for 100.1C not to be in the ERV report, and for IH to have cast iron evidence that the output was at 100.1C. I have no idea what evidence if any IH has, but we DO know that Rossi excels in the type of misleading statement that this would be if in fact the output was known to be 100.1C for reasons outwith the ERV report.

Quote

Most countries have regulations in place, which could be applied to LENR technologies/devices. The conformance with these regulations would be enforced consequently.

I agree. I was checking whether Hank would want this to happen... it would no doubt slow down the LENR revolution, but make it safer. Jed seems to be on the slow but safe side.

I don't think I would say Rossi is "healthy". This is a photo of him off Lewan's site...he looks like a different man from 12 months ago.

Quote from Kei

I'm baffled that the author of extensive walls of text aiming at dismissing practical applications of LENR, would so support the status quo in energy production processes. However what about the children of Fukushima?

What status quo? Fission has been largely stopped in the US due to scientifically unfounded scare stories. And Fukushima shows why the scares are unfounded:
(1) You should not build an old-style, known unsafe nuclear reactor
(2) You should not build any reactor in a known earthquake/tsunami danger reason without doing safety analysis for both earthquaked and tsunami.

But even with Fukushima the affects of teh accident are relatively small (nowhere near comparable with Chernobyl) but vastly overestimated in teh popular press.
The Fukushima children got iodine, quickly. It is tragic that they lost their homes, with such disruption. Yet more tragic that the (real) risks from the accident have been exagerrated by the media. And that for that reason or otherwise, they were screened and overtreated with consequent suffering.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news…ldren-aftermath-fukushima

Quote

The March 2011 meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant caused extensive human suffering—evacuations, emotional trauma and premature deaths, disrupted jobs and schooling. What they have not caused, so far, is radiation-related illness among the general public, and few specialists expect dramatic increases in cancers or other ailments. The reactors spewed just a tenth of the radiation emitted by the Chernobyl disaster, winds blew much of that out to sea, and evacuations were swift. Yet one wave of illness has been linked to the disaster—the ironic result of a well-intentioned screening program.

One result, says Kenji Shibuya, a public health specialist at University of Tokyo, was “overdiagnosis and overtreatment,” leading dozens of children to have their thyroids removed, perhaps unnecessarily. Activists trumpeted the findings as evidence of the dangers of nuclear power. The large number of abnormalities appearing so soon after the accident “would indicate that these children almost certainly received a very high dose of thyroid radiation from inhaled and ingested radioactive iodine,” antinuclear crusader Helen Caldicott wrote in a post on her homepage.

Scientists emphatically disagree. “The evidence suggests that the great majority and perhaps all of the cases so far discovered are not due to radiation,” says Dillwyn Williams, a thyroid cancer specialist at University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom. In journal papers and in a series of letters published last month in Epidemiology, scientists have attacked the alarmist interpretations. Many acknowledge that baseline data from noncontaminated areas were needed from the outset and that the public should have been better educated to understand results and, perhaps, to accept watchful waiting as an alternative to immediate surgery. But most also say the findings hint at a medical puzzle: Why are thyroid abnormalities so common in children? The “surprising” results of the screening, Williams says, show that “many more thyroid carcinomas than were previously realized must originate in early life.”

Quote from Hank Mills

Stephen,

Do you realize the damage eating poorly (or hardly at all) and getting almost no sleep in a high stress environment can do to you?

Especially when you are older, changing your routine and giving your body such a shock can be deadly. For…

Ummm are you agreeing with me then Hank? Everything you said is correct...he does not look well at this point. His health has obviously taken a turn from what we saw just months ago. His hair has gone grey, his skin does not look healthy and his face is more sunken in especially in the eyes. I am not pointing these things out to be mean....I may joke but not about a persons health. He does not look well.