Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

One reason is this:

1. Daniel De Caluwé July 16, 2018 at 10:59 AM

   Dear Dr. Rossi,

   As gas turbines (in combination with alternators) at the moment are used to deliver/cover the peak load of the electricity production (at the moment with a higher cost for the thus produced electricity), and as the need of these peak load units rises with the increasing use of renewable energy sources (like wind and solar), thus stabilizing the grid (maintaining the frequency to the wanted value), the use of the E-cat SK in combination with a gas turbine and an alternator is a very smart solution, also because you will deliver the peak load electricity with a much reduced price! Congratulations to you and your team.

   Kind Regards,

   Daniel De Caluwé

   (Belgium).

Of course this is of no interest to the babblers who are more excited by pointless speculation about who writes the comments om JONP.

Electricity from a LENR turbine should be cheaper than solar or wind as well as being available continuously.

It also implies that the difficult problem of heat transfer from the SK has at least been partially solved.

Display More

Adrian - since you seem so well skilled in engineering, even in the area of gas turbines: may I ask you to enlighten the audience here how in hell Rossi might redesign such a turbine to make his SKat fit into such an existing industrial device? Shall his SKat replace the gas ignition parts to save the fuel? Probably a hard one, since even very hot air from his SKat remains hot air, without the ability to multiply pressure and volume to run this machine without combustion by ignition of high pressure gas-air-oxygen.... If Rossi has been able to come up with a newly designed gas turbine running on SKats, made in his garage workshop within a couple of weeks, he will for sure write history. Looking forward to this new gadget.

To help you to please check this little animation of how a common gas turbine used in industry works...

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

One reason is this:

1. Daniel De Caluwé July 16, 2018 at 10:59 AM

   Dear Dr. Rossi,

   As gas turbines (in combination with alternators) at the moment are used to deliver/cover the peak load of the electricity production (at the moment with a higher cost for the thus produced electricity), and as the need of these peak load units rises with the increasing use of renewable energy sources (like wind and solar), thus stabilizing the grid (maintaining the frequency to the wanted value), the use of the E-cat SK in combination with a gas turbine and an alternator is a very smart solution, also because you will deliver the peak load electricity with a much reduced price! Congratulations to you and your team.

   Kind Regards,

   Daniel De Caluwé

   (Belgium).

Of course this is of no interest to the babblers who are more excited by pointless speculation about who writes the comments om JONP.

Electricity from a LENR turbine should be cheaper than solar or wind as well as being available continuously.

It also implies that the difficult problem of heat transfer from the SK has at least been partially solved.

Display More

Adrian, this is an example of stories triumphing over reality.

Suppose Rossi has a working LENR reactor => kW of heat power available essentially for free.

In fact - he claimed he had this 7 years ago (heating his factory) and 5 years ago (those demos people got excited about with COP > 20) and 3 years ago (demos done by scientists showing COP = 6 or later 3). In all cases this can and should be commercialised as a heater - we have still much need for heaters and something that gives you energy for free is relatively easy to use and valuable. Quite apart from the fact that technically COP = 3 with electricity going into heating coils should be easy to turn into COP = 100.

Electricity? That is a whole extra level of complexity and once you have viable for free heaters it can be considered. The only people who consider this before they have viable heaters are those like Rossi who peddle fun stories not working technology.

So: the same information that convinces you Rossi is likely to be for real, is evidence for me that he is at best a vapour-ware merchant who habitually lies. (It is attested fact that he lies).

Quote from zorud

Shall his SKat replace the gas ignition parts to save the fuel? Probably a hard one, since even very hot air from his SKat remains hot air, without the ability to multiply pressure and volume to run this machine without combustion

Convection alone can transfer enough heat into a gas, to replace combustion - assuming enough energy flux, surface temperature, area and 'combustion chamber' gas velocity.

Rough calculations show the purported specs of Rossis latest creations would be able to replace gas combustion, in a suitably sized turbine, but it seems you'd need to spin it up really fast before starting it, otherwise the e-cats would overheat very quickly.

Quote from THHuxleynew

we have still much need for heaters and something that gives you energy for free is relatively easy to use and valuable.

That depends on what kind of heat, for what purpose, at what temperature. I hate the term "COP" applied to cold fusion. It is a misnomer! It only applies to heat pumps. But anyway, suppose it is 3, meaning the reactor inputs 1 W of electricity and produces 3 W of heat. That might be commercially valuable, or it might not. If it produced only warm air, for use in space heating, than in a climate such as Atlanta, it would be nowhere near as economical as a heat pump. Heat pumps in Atlanta have an average COP (more properly HSPF) of 10.20. See:

https://www.peachtreeserviceex…-to-maintain-home-comfort

If a heat pump had an HSPF of only 3, it would be useless. It would more expensive than natural gas heating, when you take into account losses in electric power generation and transmission.

If the temperature was much higher than what is needed for space heating, that would be valuable for space heating. The effective HSPF would be higher than 3. It might be cost effective for things like curing wood, which calls for higher temperatures than ordinary space heating. Maybe, but I doubt it. Probably, for curing wood, gas fired heating would be cheaper, again, taking into account power generation losses.

If it were hot enough, it could be used for ordinary water heating, but that would not be economical. At a COP of 3, it would cost more than a gas-fired water heater, again because of power generation losses. It would have to be hotter still, to allow low pressure steam used for things like sterilizing or cooking.

If it were hot enough to produce super-heated steam, at ~200 deg C and above, in principle it might be used to generate electricity. But at a COP of 3 the generator would barely be able to keep itself going. It would not produce any excess electricity. It would, however, produce copious waste heat, so this could be used as a source of heat for space heater, water heating, or low pressure steam. It would be a Rube-Goldberg machine, and it would cause a great deal of contamination in the working fluid, so the steam could not be used for cooking or sterilization.

Actually, all of this discussion is irrelevant. It is nonsense. If Rossi -- or anyone else -- demonstrated a reliable cold fusion device that produces 3 times output, or even 2 times output, at any power level, even 10 W, it would be worth billions of dollars immediately. If the inventor could and would demonstrate it in a convincing way, I.H. and many industrial corporations would pay millions up front and billions more in a few years. I have no doubt that if a COP of 3 can be achieved, any other ratio can be. I say this because infinite ratios, with no input power, have often been demonstrated. There is no fixed relationship between input and output power in any cold fusion cell. In all cases, input can easily be reduced by methods that everyone knows about. These methods are not used because it is easy to subtract input power, and the methods complicate the experiment for no benefit, without improving the s/n ratio or making the experiments more convincing (except to people who do not understand calorimetry and who would not be convinced no matter how good the experiment is).

Quote from JedRothwell

If a heat pump had an HSPF of only 3, it would be useless. It would more expensive than natural gas heating, when you take into account losses in electric power generation and transmission.

I have a heat pump. In Atlanta, heat pumps are always installed along with a conventional gas-fired heater. When the temperature falls below a certain level, the COP falls to somewhere around 3, the heat pump shuts off and the gas heater turns on. The gas heater is the cheapest, least efficient model the vendor offers, because it is not needed often. It is an auxiliary heater.

Modern gas heaters are incredibly efficient. As I recall, water is injected into the burned gas, to extract as much heat as possible. The installer told me it is now legal to have the exhaust vent 5" in the air, instead of on the roof, because you can touch it without scalding yourself and it produces little carbon monoxide. My house is old and the vents are on the roof.

http://www.homeownersnetwork.c…as-vent-roof-termination/

Quote from Alan Smith

I think you possibly mean that the exhaust gases are cooled until the water vapour they contain is condensed (thus giving up its latent heat of vapourisation) to improve efficiency. Such 'condensing' systems are now mandatory for new and replacement heating systems in the EU.

I think you are right. I was confused.

I think the one at my house has an AFUE of less than 90. It uses the old flue pipe, not PVC. On-line sites say that means it is not a condensing unit. As I said, it is one of the cheapest the vendor has, because it is seldom needed.

It makes sense to use cheap but inefficient equipment for auxiliary or occasional use. In rural Virginia I saw a ~1-MW diesel generator in a utility building in the middle of nowhere. I looked it up in the power company website and learned it was a peak generator. Normally, using a diesel generator is a waste of money, but the equipment costs are low and the thing starts up quickly, so it is good for occasional use.

Here is an example of rural megawatt-scale generator:

https://www.odec.com/generatio…on/generation-facilities/

Quote from Timo Ylhainen

Why to discuss abt Dottore Rossi. Just ignore him.

Rossi and his technology will be hard to ignore when he is succesful in the market

place with it.

Quote from Shane D.

Well, he just won't go away...that is why. I sometimes wonder if he did not have his JONP, would he have disappeared off the LENR scene back after the 28 Oct 2011 customer acceptance test? or would anyone pay him any attention today? He has used it effectively as a propaganda tool that is for sure. I never thought he would get past the devastating revelations the court documents revealed, but by plugging away on JONP, he somehow has overcome (to some) his own deceitful words, and actions.

And let us not forget, according to Alan he has a following within the LENR research community. Guess he will be a round for awhile, so better get used to it.

Rossi says he has learned a lot off his blog.

1. Gerard McEk July 10, 2018 at 9:50 AM

   Dear Andrea,

   I am sure that you are aware of the fact that Net Power in Huston uses a gas-turbine that is fired by pure O2 and natural gas in atmosphere of super critical CO2 which is recycled.

   Pure CO2 is stored.

   A large part of the installation can be omitted when using the E-cat SK. It seem to me a perfect match.

   See: https://qz.com/1292891/net-pow…-fossil-fuel-power-plant/ but there are other articles as well.

   Kind regards, Gerard

2. Andrea Rossi July 10, 2018 at 3:05 PM

   Gerard McEk:

   Interesting.

   Warm Regards,

   A.R.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

One reason is this:

1. Daniel De Caluwé July 16, 2018 at 10:59 AM

   Dear Dr. Rossi,

   As gas turbines (in combination with alternators) at the moment are used to deliver/cover the peak load of the electricity production (at the moment with a higher cost for the thus produced electricity), and as the need of these peak load units rises with the increasing use of renewable energy sources (like wind and solar), thus stabilizing the grid (maintaining the frequency to the wanted value), the use of the E-cat SK in combination with a gas turbine and an alternator is a very smart solution, also because you will deliver the peak load electricity with a much reduced price! Congratulations to you and your team.

   Kind Regards,

   Daniel De Caluwé

   (Belgium).

Of course this is of no interest to the babblers who are more excited by pointless speculation about who writes the comments om JONP.

Electricity from a LENR turbine should be cheaper than solar or wind as well as being available continuously.

It also implies that the difficult problem of heat transfer from the SK has at least been partially solved.

Display More

Adrian,

Please, “pointless speculation” is what your ilk has been doing since January, 2011.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

Rossi claims to have an SK powered gas turbine running.

This is a most important development for several reasons.

1. Chuck Davis July 14, 2018 at 7:01 PM

   Dr Rossi:

   1- do you already have a gas turbine operating?

   2- if yes, which dimensions vs power?

   Regards,

   Chuck Davis

2. Andrea Rossi July 15, 2018 at 2:39 AM

   Chuck Davis:

   1- yes

   2- the power density is the highest I ever reached. Premature to give numbers.

   Warm Regards,

   A.R.

Display More

Rossi claims!

Have you personally seen it?

Have you been told by anyone who has personally seen it, other than Rossi?

Is your statement that "This is a most important development for several reasons" supported by any verifiable evidence or is it based on giving Rossi the benefit of the doubt?

If it is based on verifiable evidence, have you personally seen the evidence or is it "you heard from someone" or something analogous?

If it is based on verifiable evidence, please describe, without of course violating any NDA or promises to keep confidential.

If the source/verifiable evidence cannot be detailed, please tell us if the source, unnamed I assume, has previously acted as a source for prior Rossi revelations and, if so, which ones. That way we all can assess the reliability of the source. If you cannot do that, it would seem reasonable to doubt the reliability and veracity of the source. If the source is not reliable or truthful, then the evidence of a working turbine, unless personally seen by you in action, is worthless.

As to giving Rossi the benefit of the doubt, I remind you that, as I am sure you already know and must acknowledge, Rossi has, on many occasions in the past, touted that he has a working widget, which working widget somehow never seems to see the light of day. I suspect it will be the same story this time.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

I am thinking about getting t-shirts made. Here is one example logo, but this is for a company so we will need to design our own, with the LENR Forum prominently displayed. Can any of the mods get permission and are their any graphic artists that can help design the logo?

Put me down for one, 2XL. Dark blue if possible.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

I am thinking about getting t-shirts made. Here is one example logo, but this is for a company so we will need to design our own, with the LENR Forum prominently displayed. Can any of the mods get permission and are their any graphic artists that can help design the logo?

Quote from THHuxleynew

Adrian, this is an example of stories triumphing over reality.

Suppose Rossi has a working LENR reactor => kW of heat power available essentially for free.

In fact - he claimed he had this 7 years ago (heating his factory) and 5 years ago (those demos people got excited about with COP > 20) and 3 years ago (demos done by scientists showing COP = 6 or later 3). In all cases this can and should be commercialised as a heater - we have still much need for heaters and something that gives you energy for free is relatively easy to use and valuable. Quite apart from the fact that technically COP = 3 with electricity going into heating coils should be easy to turn into COP = 100.

Electricity? That is a whole extra level of complexity and once you have viable for free heaters it can be considered. The only people who consider this before they have viable heaters are those like Rossi who peddle fun stories not working technology.

So: the same information that convinces you Rossi is likely to be for real, is evidence for me that he is at best a vapour-ware merchant who habitually lies. (It is attested fact that he lies).

Display More

I don't think we should question the points made by Mr. De Caluwe. After all, he is a member of the JONP Board of Advisers and I am sure that he is completely impartial re: Rossi.

Also, re the shirts, one for me, dark blue if possible, 2XL. Thanks.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

You are mistaken that the combustion in a gas turbine adds much to the pressure. Even the example you show states that the compressed air from the compressor is fed through the wall of the combustion chamber (to cool it). You couldn't do that if the pressure was higher inside. The energy from combustion acts to expand the gas.

Adrian is the only "Engineer" I know, who doesn't know the relationship between P,V and T.

Increase Pressure and Temperature goes up for the same volume.

Increase Temperature and Pressure goes up for the same volume.

Presumably AA didn't need to know that little tidbit when designing the vast array

of furnaces he was involved in.

AA - hint: look up Ideal Gas Law before coming back at me with your ususal babbler comment.

Conclusion, he is/was an "Engineer" in the same sense as a "Refuse Engineer" aka garbage/bin man.

Pete

Edited to add that for the "expanding gas" that Adrian is talking about, he surely knows that heat being driver here results in an increase of pressure or (whoops) no expansion.

Quote from zorud

since even very hot air from his SKat remains hot air, without the ability to multiply pressure and volume to run this machine without combustion by ignition of high pressure gas-air-oxygen

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

You are mistaken that the combustion in a gas turbine adds much to the pressure. Even the example you show states that the compressed air from the compressor is fed through the wall of the combustion chamber (to cool it). You couldn't do that if the pressure was higher inside. The energy from combustion acts to expand the gas.

Adrian is correct, even accounting for the possible confusion with by-pass air. The pressure inside (and after) the combustion chamber is lower than the pressure between the compressor and combustion chamber. it wouldn't work otherwise. Pressure can't build up as the combustion chamber is essentially open to the atmosphere through the exhaust.

Quote from PIH

Edited to add that for the "expanding gas" that Adrian is talking about, he surely knows that heat being driver here results in an increase of pressure or (whoops) no expansion.

Compressor compresses, combustion chamber heats isobarically, turbine wheel expands... The Brayton cycle.