I have had quite a bit of experience at costing generation schemes,, and must say Jed is pretty much 'on the ball' with his figures for the cost of conventional systems. However, for small scale CHP for single dwelling use I would pick a Kubota diesel with Mitsubishi or Bosch alternator. Good value for money and lowest running costs all round.
-
-
The rotary motion to electricity phase is 98% efficient. See:
mpoweruk.com/steam_turbines.htm
Jed did address many issues in his paper that I only touched upon. However, sure, rotary motion to electricity is efficient. How about heat to rotary motion?Fuel burn is fast and easily controlled, i.e., fuel can be metered. It is entirely unclear if this can be done with LENR. Diffusion takes time.
Heating is a seasonal application, typically. LENR will be most efficient with heating applications, we can expect, because no relatively expensive power conversion will be needed. There is little waste heat. This is where LENR will have its first impact. (If Rossi has something real -- which I've come to doubt -- selling heat to heating co-ops in Sweden would be cracker-jack, and why he didn't do that, years ago, would be a mystery.)
Again, crucial element in this study: "fuel cost." Yes, the difference in cost between the small generators and that power company monster (does it really cost $80 million?) is justified at present by savings in fuel, which are enormous over the life of the generators, as well as by differences in maintenance costs per kilowatt. Will LENR require high maintenance? How long will the fuel charge last? Does the catalyst need renewal frequently? These questions cannot be answered until we know much more.
So, really, Jed's ideas are based on imagining zero fuel cost. It's understandable, but .... as for public discussion, it sets up a ready impression that those who think cold fusion is real are blinded by their own imagination of a rosy energy future.
What I would suggest as very possible is that LENR will be used for base load, LENR power will be sold to the grid, which will continue to exist, individuals will choose how much capacity for power conversion -- the major cost, probably -- to install (from zero to all they would need and more, with anything above average power usage creating revenue to pay for it), grid power will become cheaper as local generating capacity increases, assuming low LENR fuel cost. As to automobiles, I assume they will become electric, some with on-board LENR generators.
The actual transition will not be some sort of tornado.
I cannot predict, at this point, when it will happen.
-
The strategy of Darden et.al is obvious, outgoing from this patent, which belongs to http://causam.com/
https://www.google.com/patents/US9225173
...in cooperation with these companies
http://pogens.com/partners/
http://www.powerprotech.com/... provide the market with energy based on small grid technology, where in the midterm LENR technology could easily be integrated.
-
Jed did address many issues in his paper that I only touched upon. However, sure, rotary motion to electricity is efficient. How about heat to rotary motion?
That is in the equation already. You brought up the issue of an automobile motor output converted to electricity. That's what you pointed to. A 20 kW gasoline motor with an alternator (generator) converts that power to nearly 20 kW of electricity. There is no significant loss once you have rotary power. The conversion from heat to rotary power is very inefficient, but there are no significant losses after that. So, the 20 kW rating is the same.Again, crucial element in this study: "fuel cost." Yes, the difference in cost between the small generators and that power company monster (does it really cost $80 million?) is justified at present by savings in fuel, which are enormous over the life of the generators, as well as by differences in maintenance costs per kilowatt. Will LENR require high maintenance? How long will the fuel charge last? Does the catalyst need renewal frequently? These questions cannot be answered until we know much more.
I covered this issue in my book, although not in this paper.The fuel is hydrogen or deuterium. I do not think the host metal is transmuted much, or at all. If the host metal is palladium, that might be a significant expense, but no more than today's automobiles, which use palladium in the catalytic converter where some of it is lost over time to sublimation. A cold fusion generator should take about as much palladium per kilowatt of output as an automobile engine, because the limiting factor is how hot you can make thin film palladium. Most of the heat from an ICE is wasted, and much of it goes to the catalytic converter.
The cost of highly purified heavy water is insignificant. An automobile would use about 1 g per year, which costs about $1 today, but it will cost less than a penny in a cold fusion economy. Nearly all of the cost of heavy water is for the energy used to separate the water from ordinary water. Using today's separation techniques, which are inefficient and obsolete, this would take 0.05% of the energy you get from Pd-D cold fusion. In other words, the energy overhead is 0.05%, compared to 20% or 30% for oil.
Because today's machines are so inefficient, and there is so much energy overhead from fuel production and distribution, I predict that even with low efficiency heat engines cold fusion technology will produce less waste heat overall.
What I would suggest as very possible is that LENR will be used for base load, LENR power will be sold to the grid, which will continue to exist, individuals will choose how much capacity for power conversion -- the major cost, probably
This is not a major cost. Poor people in India convert gasoline to electricity with millions of portable generators which cost about $200 each. The fuel costs them a lot; the heat engine and conversion costs are negligible. Because the power grid is so inadequate, on market days and weekends you see small generators everywhere. The air is filled with choking clouds of pollution from them.Maintaining a power grid with cold fusion would be like placing huge hot water heaters in every neighborhood, and piping hot water to houses, instead of installing individual boilers in each house. This would be an engineering nightmare. It would end up costing far more than individual heaters. As I said, cold fusion will be hundreds of times cheaper than gas and electricity from centralized companies. It will save the average American household $2000 per year. There is no way the gas and electric companies can compete with that. Once cold fusion becomes a reliable commodity, the gas and electric companies will be put out of business in the time it takes to replace most household central heaters and air conditioners -- which is 15 years. That is as certain as the demise of minicomputers was after the introduction of Apple and IBM personal computers circa 1980. Minicomputer makers such as DEC and Data General were dead ducks, and they were gone by 1990. PCs were far cheaper than minicomputers.
-
Display More
The strategy of Darden et.al is obvious, outgoing from this patent, which belongs to causam.com/
google.com/patents/US9225173
...in cooperation with these companies
pogens.com/partners/
powerprotech.com/... provide the market with energy based on small grid technology, where in the midterm LENR technology could easily be integrated.
What is remarkable here is the conversion of "somewhat plausible" to "obvious." Further, this speculation -- which I agree is plausible -- actually would be about utilizing LENR, as Rends writes. Yet this, covered in the thread I created to discuss this, shut down by Alan Smith, was used by Rends as part of a claim that Darden wants to suppress LENR in order to prevent damage to the "solar industry," in which Darden is allegedly heavily invested. (The evidence of that is quite thin, and it has been exaggerated by Sifferkoll.)People in Darden's position hedge investments, so if one attempts to infer what they "want" from some narrow example of how they invest, it can be radically misleading.
From Darden apparently wanting to hold the Rossi License (that's not actually clear, it's inferred from alleged failure to accept a buyback offer, but we do not actually know that there was any such offer, this all falls under "Rossi Says," plus IH has much more than $11.5 million invested in the Rossi approach), it is inferred that then he must believe it is valuable, and therefore, the thinking goes, he must be lying about being unable to confirm results. In fact, at this point, it's a hedge, with some value as such. IH can decide later what is more valuable, the hedge or some return of investment, etc.
In any case, this bit about that patent was part of Rends "evidence" that IH was lying and has this ulterior motive, but, in fact, examined more closely, it doesn't mean that at all.
This is all highly constrained thinking, knee-jerk, appealing to those who view the world in black and white terms, good and evil, and who are ready to classify others on the thinnest of evidence.(Jed, here, is arguing that the grid will disappear, and he has listed, as a benefit of this, removal of a need for synchronizing power -- i.e., keeping contributed power in-phase --, but there is obvious utility to being able to share power, and synchronization is not a difficult problem; any converter from heat to AC must run with a clock or the like, and synchronizing these is electronically simple. The microgrid patent may apply to all forms of power generation, including solar, wind, and, when available, LENR.) The greatest synchronization difficulty is with rotary engines, where the rotation might vary. However, that is, again, not difficult if a system is designed to generate power than can be integrated.)
-
The greatest synchronization difficulty is with rotary engines, where the rotation might vary.
Advances in inverter technology have made this problem disappear, since it is a trivial matter to generate DC which can be done very efficiently. DC is then converted to AC by the solid state inverter which can be regulated easily by a system clock, or more usually by a sine wave 'reader-synchroniser' system permanently connected to the local grid.
-
Quote
Jed:
I did not think much of that paper.Perhaps, considering Darden's statement that nothing Rossi claimed actually worked, you should reconsider that paper. And the internet discussion. Why would everything Rossi told Darden be incorrect yet the experiment Levi did worked? How does that happen, exactly? With appx $100M at stake?
-
Suppress is a word that can have many meanings.
I think the individuals who proclaim that Darden wants to "suppress" cold fusion by stopping it from ever seeing the light of day are flat out wrong. If he wanted to stop cold fusion from ever being commercialized, he would have never started Industrial Heat.
I think that it is plausible, not a certainty, that he want to control, manage, and even "spin" the introduction of cold fusion to the marketplace. In this scenario, suppression would be making sure that cold fusion was managed in such a way that it would not rapidly proliferate. There are many growing renewable energy industries that Tom Darden would probably NOT like to see utterly demolished by cold fusion. Solar and wind are probably two of these. If the "Rossi Effect" (a power dense type of LENR with a capability to produce 1,000 watts plus per gram of fuel) was to spread across the globe, being copied a dozen times over, and being put to use in thousands of applications, the demand for all other forms of renewable energy would drop. Of course, before cold fusion could ever supply .1% of the demand, all subsidies for solar and wind would be dropped. The billions of dollars they receive from governments around the world would vanish. The same would go for any other energy technology that wasn't cold fusion based.
The way I view the situation is that to protect the status quo and existing energy industries -- which I don't think deserve any protection -- is to first launch the technology in remote locations in China to reduce the emissions of the dirtiest coal burning power plants. Then, if I held the vast majority of the world's cold fusion intellectual property, I'd lobby the governments of the world to severely restrict the application of the technology while an exhaustive research project is undertaken. I'd propose a ten year project be completed -- testing all sorts of variations of these reactors in the world's nastiest power plants -- being any other applications are allowed. I'd argue this by saying, "LENR is a poorly understood technology which may have unknown safety issues. We must fully understand and characterize this technology before allowing further commercialization, or we risk the lives of millions." Basically, I'd use the "nuclear" boogie man and the threat of a very unlikely but plausible "criticality" to scare the world into compliance. This decade would give the existing energy industries time to adapt or slowly phase themselves down without sudden disruption.
This is the type of suppression I find plausible. I'm NOT saying this is the case. This is only a hypothesis.
-
Quote
Designing a calorimetric measurement by means of a cooling fluid would have been more complex, especially in the light of the high temperatures reached by the E-Cat.
As I have been reminding people for several years, this is categorically wrong. See this article about just such an excellent and simple calorimeter:
Original article: https://gsvit.wordpress.com/20…te-calorimetria-a-flusso/
Google English translation: http://tinyurl.com/kx4opjq
This paper should also be in Jed's data base. I don't know if it is.
Anyway, complexity is not the main issue. Whether the method actually measures the heat output *and* has been properly calibrated are the issues and those considerations fail miserably for all of Rossi's hot cat experiments, whether done by Penon or by Levi and the Swedish scientists (AKA blind mice).
-
The fuel is hydrogen or deuterium. I do not think the host metal is transmuted much, or at all. If the host metal is palladium, that might be a significant expense, but no more than today's automobiles, which use palladium in the catalytic converter where some of it is lost over time to sublimation. A cold fusion generator should take about as much palladium per kilowatt of output as an automobile engine, because the limiting factor is how hot you can make thin film palladium. Most of the heat from an ICE is wasted, and much of it goes to the catalytic converter.
1. From the known effect with PdD, transmutation of the "host metal" is not an issue. However, there are hosts of unanswered questions for which Jed is assuming answers. How much palladium is necesary for how much reaction? Yes, because the reaction is a surface effect, it might not be all that much palladium, but this is unproven, and, as Jed knows, some in the field still do not accept "surface effect."2. The problem could be that palladium layer. Sublimation will result in loss of palladium if there is exhaust. We don't know details of how a long-term, high-heat device would operate. Does helium poison the reaction? Some think so, and it is plausible. My understanding, though, in general, is that palladium will not be consumed or lost, it will be in the device for recovery. However, it will need to be reprocessed, and we have no idea of how expensive this reprocessing will be. Jed is here comparing the use of palladium in the primary reaction taking place in an engine, with an after-burn catalyzed oxidation of unoxidized fuel, hot, gas-phase, very simple. Yes, the heat generated in the catalytic converter is waste heat. However, the claim that the same amount of palladium will be required for LENR is simply made up. Existing and confirmed LENR devices have used far, far more palladium. We can then imagine that mature devices could use less, perhaps much less, but .... we do not know the mechanism, we have some plausible guesses about NAE (i.e., Storms), and the necessary thickness of the active layer is unknown. Surface catalysis as in catalytic converters only takes a very thin layer, which is why there is very little palladium in those converters.
3. If PdD cold fusion becomes practical, we can expect the price of palladium to rise dramatically, and it is already quite expensive.
4. With NiH LENR, the catalyst would be, as to the raw material, quite inexpensive, but then necessary processing could still be very expensive. I find Jed's analysis to be a little like considering the cost of an iPhone to be the cost of the raw materials, and much of it is sand, literally dirt cheap.
5. Jed also looks at deuterium cost, and states how much deuterium would be consumed in a year of operation, allegedly 1 g per year. At present prices, that is well under $1. I do not expect, by the way, that deuterium prices would rise dramatically, it's not like palladium. However, even in this, there is a problem. The device does not just contain 1 g of deuterium, it must contain much more, very likely, to create an appreciable reaction rate. What happens to that deuterium? Does it become contaminated? If the catalyst must be replaced, the deuterium will go with it, I expect. Contrary to Jed's claim of "zero fuel cost" there will be a cost, but it is not yet possible to come up with strong estimates until we know how long a refueling will last.
-
Aw, I peeked.
Mary Yugo wrote:
Perhaps, considering Darden's statement that nothing Rossi claimed actually worked, you should reconsider that paper. And the internet discussion. Why would everything Rossi told Darden be incorrect yet the experiment Levi did worked? How does that happen, exactly? With appx $100M at stake?
There is something about pseudoskepticism that fries the brain even more than naive belief. Jed has not claimed that the "experiment that Levi did worked," but this seems to be what our long-term resident troll is claiming.As I understand Jed's position, the Levi paper at least appeared to use decent calorimetry. This does not require "believing" the results. There could still be a different artifact or fraud.
There is a hypothesis I have seen expressed privately, however, that Rossi actually did have an effect, back then, (before and perhaps into 2011) but lost it amidst all the work he did to "improve" it. This has actually happened to CF researchers, where they saw an effect and later could not replicate it, almost certainly because there was some uncontrolled condition that was unrecognized. It's a hazard of the field, and one reason why extensive experimental series are very important, as distinct from one-off results.
As well, Darden did not say what MY reports. This "translation" of what people actually stay to a simplified story is part of how we fool ourselves.
If that hypothesis has some truth to it, then it is entirely possible that the Levi experiment "worked," and that what Rossi told Darden later was total BS.
-
(Jed, here, is arguing that the grid will disappear, and he has listed, as a benefit of this, removal of a need for synchronizing power -- i.e., keeping contributed power in-phase
That is a minor benefit. As noted, inverters have reduced the severity of this problem. In places like Hawaii there is now a great deal of solar power which is integrated into the system. There is so much solar power it may soon bankrupt the power company. That is what will happen if cold fusion succeeds. The power company in Hawaii is doing all that it can to prevent the use of solar power. See:https://www.scientificamerican…cessfull-its-been-halted/
Synchonization is not as big a problem as it used to be, but during the last big east coast power failure, I read that it held up recovery by a day or two in some places.
The biggest benefit by far is that cold fusion will soon be far cheaper than power company electricity. The biggest savings will be in the distribution network, which accounts for roughly a third of your electric bill, depending on where you live. The network costs a lot to maintain. After even a small storm thousands of customers are without power, and trucks have to be dispatched, day or night. They do not have enough people to fix every outage quickly. After a major storm in Atlanta, I have sometimes had to wait days for power to be restored. It took a week in one instance. Even in good weather, at this moment, there are 63 outages in Georgia with 427 customers affected. See:
http://outagemap.georgiapower.com/external/default.html
If cold fusion generators are as reliable as HVAC equipment or refrigerators, hundreds of people per day in Georgia will be affected, but it should be about as reliable as it is today, and it will be no worse in bad weather, so you will not have to wait for days to have power restored. You can have HVAC equipment repaired on an emergency basis even in the middle of the night, if you are willing to pay extra.
People who depend on electricity for medical reasons will have an extra generator. Nowadays they have emergency backup generators.
-
As I understand Jed's position, the Levi paper at least appeared to use decent calorimetry. This does not require "believing" the results. There could still be a different artifact or fraud.
Yes. The first Levi paper describing tests in Rossi's lab. I wouldn't say it was totally convincing but I thought it was pretty good, and I was optimistic that the next paper (Lugano) would be better. I was disappointed.There is a hypothesis I have seen expressed privately, however, that Rossi actually did have an effect, back then, (before and perhaps into 2011) but lost it amidst all the work he did to "improve" it.
That sounds plausible to me. I have heard of other researchers doing that. I do not have detailed information about Rossi's earlier work, but people who have visited him tell me that he oftens tears apart old equipment to make new equipment, and he does not save notes, sample materials or photos. As I recall, he himself told me that once. Other inventors and researchers have done that. In his book, Mizuno describes throwing away physical evidence that was worth "more than diamonds and gold" as he put it. Stan and Martin kept nothing from the meltdown event that supposedly destroyed the table and made a hole in the floor. When I asked Martin about that, he ruefully admitted it was big mistake to throw out the evidence. -
However, there are hosts of unanswered questions for which Jed is assuming answers. How much palladium is necesary for how much reaction? Yes, because the reaction is a surface effect, it might not be all that much palladium, but this is unproven, and, as Jed knows, some in the field still do not accept "surface effect."
I am not assuming answers. I am looking at the power density demonstrated in the best experiment so far, Icarus 9, and I am looking at actual thin film experiments. Based on this we can make a rough projection of how much palladium will be needed. We also know that the limiting factor will be the temperature the palladium can reach.These conclusions stand whether it is a surface effect or not.
The problem could be that palladium layer. Sublimation will result in loss of palladium if there is exhaust. We don't know details of how a long-term, high-heat device would operate.
There will be no exhaust! That is out of the question. You cannot let air anywhere near the hydride. That will poison it. It has to be a tightly closed cell like a battery.Why on earth would you have exhaust? This is a strange thing to say.
Does helium poison the reaction?
It would not matter if it did. That would just mean the cell has to be remanufactured periodically, and the palladium recycled. This would cost no more than recycling lead acid batteries. These batteries are extremely cheap. When they are recycled, over 99% of the lead is recovered.Thin film palladium from catalytic converters is also successfully recycled. It is lost because of sublimation, not because of inadequate recycling. If we can recycle catalytic converters I am sure we can recycle used cold fusion cells.
About half of the world supply of palladium goes into catalytic converters.
-
A new document (doc. 70) and four largish exhibits have been added to the docket. They look interesting. Perhaps someone will be interested in offering a brief summary?
-
Actually, to be honest, present world production of palladium would probably not be enough to produce all of the energy we need. If cold fusion only works with palladium, we would probably not have low duty cycle machine such as automobiles and possibly not even home generators. However, palladium production might increase. It is not clear how much could be mined every year.
Other metals might work. People have reported the cold fusion effect from titanium and nickel. These results have not been widely replicated so they may not be real. Ohmori reported the cold fusion effect from gold. He was a superb electrochemist and he did pretty good calorimetry so it might be true. I do not know anyone who has tried it. I saw his collection of gold cathodes. They were not thin-film but they were thin, like aluminum foil, or like the palladium cathodes Violante makes.
If cold fusion works with gold, we will have no difficulty supplying all the energy we need. There is a huge amount of gold in the world. A lot of it is sitting in places like Fort Knox, doing absolutely no good for anyone. A ridiculous waste of resources. A lot is used in jewelry, which is a form of household savings in India. Some is used in electronics. Some is used by dentists to fill cavities. My dentist told me that gold fillings are obsolete, and better materials are now available, mainly composites. Even with these uses for gold there would be plenty left over for cold fusion.
You may need deuterium, but as I mentioned, the cost of deuterium would fall by a large margin in the cold fusion economy because energy is the main expense in separating heavy water from ordinary water. The energy overhead would be infinitesimal compared to present-day sources of energy, especially oil.
Wind and solar do not have energy overhead, but they do have payback time. That is, the number of months you have to run a wind turbine before it generates enough electricity to manufacturer, ship and erect another wind turbine. I think this is 3 to 6 months depending on how much wind there is. This is in line with the payback time for other sources such as gas turbine generators, and it is better than nuclear power. In the 1990s, the DoE estimated solar payback time ranged from 1 to 4 years, depending on the type of PV and the installation. I think it has improved since then. Another site says it is now 0.5 to 1.4 years in Europe. See:
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/35489.pdf
-
Rossi had an effect "back then" and he still has an effect.
As far as I can tell, every single optimization he has made has been about improving hydrogen absorption. In his first experiments, everything indicates he used primitively derived nickel powder (nothing fancy or high surface area) combined with reverse spill over catalysts such as palladium and copper powder. The is a published non-LENR paper detailing how the addition of palladium and copper powder to nickel can enhance absorption. I also have an absolutely VIVID memory of a post on the JONP (now seemingly removed) in which he states something very similar to the following, "the most important aspect of my technology is the creation of atomic hydrogen and the transportation of it to where it needs to go."
Then, at some point, he started adding lithium. My guess is that this was right around the time of his first public experiments and the opening of the JONP. At that time he specifically and categorically denied the presence of any precious, expensive metals. I think, however, he was still using copper -- at least on occasion. Also, by this time, he had switched over from his crude nickel powder to high surface area nickel powder created by the mond process (carbonyl nickel powder).
Lithium is interesting because it has many properties that could alter the nickel's interaction with hydrogen. One example is the fact lithium is highly electropositive, with may allow it to act as a catalytic supporter instead of a catalytic poison. Another is the highly corrosive potential of lithium, which could possibly allow it to etch the nickel surface. Yet another is how lithium can help with the transport of hydrogen. Finally, there is the fact that lithium is an aneutronic fuel -- even according to mainstream physics. And if you look at the work of Ikegami and Unified Gravity Corporation, there seems to be multiple ways of enhancing the rate of proton-lithium reactions. Lithium seems especially susceptible in the liquid form or at certain low energies around 200eV.
I don't think Rossi lost the ability to produce his effect. Conversely, I think he learned more and more about his effect as time went on. For example, I think instead of providing massive thermal shocks to the nickel to drive out the hydrogen and build up massive pressures, he learned how to continually "drive" the stimulation of the hydrogen using electromagnetic fields such as dirty three phase high voltage AC. A constant stimulation (once the nickel was "active") could keep the reactions going without damaging the lattice of the nickel which would reduce the lifespan of his fuel mixtures.
But at the same time, I'm not saying everything with the Doral test was on the up and up. I see a plausible worst case scenario in which a sometimes overly paranoid inventor ran the test HE desired to run while playing games with I.H. and potentially behaving in a very dishonest manner. Again, we don't have a fully detailed, exhaustive report of the plant's operation from any party involved: not Rossi, Penon, or I.H. So we really know very little. But I don't find it out of the range of possibility that he played fast and loose with numbers, exaggerated total heat output to compensate for failing reactors, and even found the whole thing "fun" in a certain diabolical type of way -- all the while closely monitoring several very real, working reactors that consistently performed at high COP. These working reactors were probably what "mattered" to him. Probably, he considered that they were all that really mattered. If he would play games with hydrofusion he would do the same with I.H. or anyone else, because his technology has became his idol above all else. People, contracts, ethics: everything else is secondary to the continuation of his work.
Again, the above is my worst case scenario which would include the possibility of no real customer. Although I don't think there is ANY scenario where he comes out of the Doral test spotlessly clean, I think the reality is somewhere between the above and that every work that has came out of his mouth about the Doral test has been God's honest truth.
To get back to the point, Rossi has spent years gaining experience on how to get these systems to work. And I think the number one issue has been and continues to be the absorption of hydrogen where it needs to go in the nickel. I don't think he can simply unlearn or forget this. Everyone is so angry at his antics and shenanigans that I think they are allowing themselves to be partially blinded. A rigorous uncovering of the facts about the Doral test IS needed. My hope is that the court case reveals more information than would have ever been revealed even if I.H. had accepted the results and paid him. But the fundamental truth, in my opinion, is that his technology remains valid.
-
I don't think Rossi lost the ability to produce his effect. Conversely, I think he learned more and more about his effect as time went on.
He did not produce any excess heat in the one year test. His own data proves that. You are saying that he knows how to produce it and he could have if he wanted to. We know that he would have been paid $89 million if he had. Yet, even though you say he is capable of it, there is no doubt whatever that he did not. I cannot believe this. It is far, far too incredible. However strange or crazy Rossi may be, he would not hide an ability to produce excess heat and casually throw away $89 million. -
Regarding Document 70-1, there is the Penon Test Protocol attached as Exhibit 1, at the end of the document.
-
Is this new?
