The first phrase is correct.
Most glass furnaces are fired by gas: some have electric boost. The few all electric furnaces are the most expensive to run.
I know. You are clueless and just babbling.
The first phrase is correct.
Most glass furnaces are fired by gas: some have electric boost. The few all electric furnaces are the most expensive to run.
I know. You are clueless and just babbling.
Adrian,
Edited to include gas,
Now please respond to the rest of the post
It is brave to argue with Adrian given, as he continually points out, that he is the only person who knows anything about pretty much any subject you can name.
It's been a while but if I recall, Alan Fletcher was very aggressive with Rossi skeptics in the past, supporting insults and eventual bans on the Vortex mailing list. This is IIRC. If I am confusing you with a colleague of yours from that time, please correct me and I regret the error. It may have been Jones Been or others.
I think you are confusing me with someone else . I restricted myself to analyses of the various ecats. See lenr.qumbu.com, vortex and here. I have challenged (or endorsed) other peoples opinions, but I have never attacked them personally.
I think you're right, Alan Fletcher , in which case, I apologize. There were quite a few participants on Vortex who attacked any and all Rossi skeptics and fought to have the effective ones banned... which Beatty was all too eager to do (no sneering, no ... whatever, I forget)... I recall Jim Bowery as especially rabid. I doubt that he has apologized or explained since Rossi vs IH. I can't recall the others any more. Anyway, thanks for the response and again sorry I mistook you for someone else.
It is brave to argue with Adrian given, as he continually points out, that he is the only person who knows anything about pretty much any subject you can name.
Well, he responded immediately pointing out a small error which had nothing to do with the post.
He has not responded to the edit because he cannot.
So if we consider this as an investment it is an up-front contracted outlay of the whole (say 1 year) cost, with a return on this of 20% only if the contracted power is used 100% of the time.
Your lack of understanding is so great it's hard to know whereto begin.
The only investment the customer makes is the cost of connecting Rossi's plant to the factory.
Companies that use a lot of energy always make contracts with their suppliers for at least a year, and probably longer.
I suppose you have never heard of a cancellation clause.
The rest of your comment almost qualifies for thee 105 th,. time. Anyway, I suppose you will continue to fill these pages with your misinterpretations of what Rossi says for the next six months.
Display MoreYour lack of understanding is so great it's hard to know whereto begin.
The only investment the customer makes is the cost of connecting Rossi's plant to the factory.
Companies that use a lot of energy always make contracts with their suppliers for at least a year, and probably longer.
I suppose you have never heard of a cancellation clause.
The rest of your comment almost qualifies for thee 105 th,. time. Anyway, I suppose you will continue to fill these pages with your misinterpretations of what Rossi says for the next six months.
Adrian, your naivete here is unbounded.
(1) You think Rossi will build a 40MW power plant without money up front to do so? Nope.
(2) Sure they do: I'm just pointing out that the price model here is risky, for reasons obvious.
Of course it is risky for many reasons doing business with Rossi, as DoD personnel involved in TEG project, or IH, will tell you.
1) You think Rossi will build a 40MW power plant without money up front to do so? Nope.
(2) Sure they do: I'm just pointing out that the price model here is risky, for reasons obvious.
1. That is Rossi's stated plan. Further, the customer does not pay in advance for the heat. Do tell us, how do you know better than Rossi what he plan is ?
2. No youdidn't. You are clueless. You obviously know nothing about how corporations work
1. That is Rossi's stated plan. Further, the customer does not pay in advance for the heat. Do tell us, how do you know better than Rossi what he plan is ?
I know better because a conventional 40 MW heater costs roughly $60 million. Not to design, debug and certify. $60 million is what it costs to make one. There is a limited market for such things. As I mentioned, the entire Cornell campus with 608 buildings uses about 30 MW of centrally generated heat. How many institutions in the entire world have more than 608 buildings for which they would buy heat from Rossi? Zero.
http://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/…geothermal-heating-plant/
There is a much larger market for a 40 MW electric generator, so it costs $8 million. I am sure Rossi does not have $60 million or $8 million. More to the point, to design, debug and certify a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles and has never been safety tested would cost far more than $60 million. More like $600 million or $6 billion, depending on who you ask. Only an crazy person would think Rossi is capable of making one.
In short, anyone knows better than Rossi about this. It is obvious he is lying. You cannot see this because you have not considered what it would cost and what steps have to be taken to manufacture and install a 40 MW nuclear reactor based on unknown principles.
I restricted myself to analyses of the various ecats. See lenr.qumbu.com, ...
The qumbu page (1) contains links to your document "Proving the Rossi eCat is Real -- Version 4.30" (2) where you analyze many possible fakes of the Ecat tests carried out in 2011. The last version is dated March 2013.
I would ask you:
- Do you think that that document is still important in order to evaluate the Ecat story and reality?
- Do you still endorse the conclusions drawn in the last version?
- Do you think that the set of the possible fakes taken into account is complete?
- Are you going to issue a new updated version of that document?
QuoteI suppose you have never heard of a cancellation clause.
Rossi's claims are about as real as a Santa Clause.
Display MoreI know better because a conventional 40 MW heater costs roughly $60 million. Not to design, debug and certify. $60 million is what it costs to make one. There is a limited market for such things. As I mentioned, the entire Cornell campus with 608 buildings uses about 30 MW of centrally generated heat. How many institutions in the entire world have more than 608 buildings for which they would buy heat from Rossi? Zero.
http://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/…geothermal-heating-plant/
There is a much larger market for a 40 MW electric generator, so it costs $8 million. I am sure Rossi does not have $60 million or $8 million. More to the point, to design, debug and certify a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles and has never been safety tested would cost far more than $60 million. More like $600 million or $6 billion, depending on who you ask. Only an crazy person would think Rossi is capable of making one.
In short, anyone knows better than Rossi about this. It is obvious he is lying. You cannot see this because you have not considered what it would cost and what steps have to be taken to manufacture and install a 40 MW nuclear reactor based on unknown principles.
Regarding: "More to the point, to design, debug and certify a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles and has never been safety tested would cost far more than $60 million."
How do you know that this reactor is nuclear?
QuoteHow do you know that this reactor is nuclear?
Perhaps he meant "unclear"
It was obviously hypothetical. Rossi's reactor doesn't react except to its electrical power input.
Display MoreThe qumbu page (1) contains links to your document "Proving the Rossi eCat is Real -- Version 4.30" (2) where you analyze many possible fakes of the Ecat tests carried out in 2011. The last version is dated March 2013.
I would ask you:
- Do you think that that document is still important in order to evaluate the Ecat story and reality?
- Do you still endorse the conclusions drawn in the last version?
- Do you think that the set of the possible fakes taken into account is complete?
- Are you going to issue a new updated version of that document?
I would ask you:
- Do you think that that document is still important in order to evaluate the Ecat story and reality?
Yes, but the main 'proof' document only covers the 'steam' versions
- Do you still endorse the conclusions drawn in the last version
Neither proven nor disproven : yes
- Do you think that the set of the possible fakes taken into account is complete?
Yes / probably
- Are you going to issue a new updated version of that document?
No -- Though I should wrap up the front page with comments similar to these
Note also the separate documents on a)steam quality b) thermal analysis of the heat exchanger c) emissivity by wavelength
40 MW system : wait and see
Robert Dorr:
Leonardo Corp will pay for the power consumed by the Ecat plants.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Does this imply Rossi will supply the electricity himself, or that he will reimburse the customer for it? I believe the former, as Rossi is a stickler for protecting his IP, and that best accomplishes that.
Regarding "More to the point, to design, debug and certify a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles and has never been safety tested would cost far more than $60 million."
How do you know that this reactor is nuclear?
Assume it works the way Rossi claims. In that case, if it is not nuclear, it must be something totally unknown to science, and inexplicable. In that case it will take even longer to establish that it is safe. A large group of scientists will have to first establish some understanding of what it is and how to control it. Rossi cannot be the only person in the world who thinks he understands it, and has confidence he can control it. Small cold fusion reactors have gone out of control. Rossi often claimed that his other reactors went out of control. If a 40 MW device went out of control, it might create a tremendous explosion. If it is some sort of nuclear device, it might irradiate the surroundings.
To scale up this device at this stage in its development, and to put it anywhere near a populated area would be so foolhardy, no one in the last 400 years would do it, and no government would allow it.
That is assuming it works. I assume it does not work, any more than the Doral, FL device did. That was a blatant fraud. People who spent 5 minutes in the building instantly saw that it was fake. Anyone with an ounce of common sense who reads the Penon report will see it was fake. I assume the 40 MW unit (if it is ever actually constructed) will be another inept fake. The purpose of the Doral fake, and probably this one, was to fool gullible people on a jury, not an observer who actually goes into the building and looks at the machine. There may be another fake customer as well, just to lend verisimilitude from a distance. Rossi's "tests" resemble inflated rubber tanks in WWII used to fool air reconnaissance. They did not fool anyone on the ground. See:
https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/to-make-a-fake-tank/
Regarding: "More to the point, to design, debug and certify a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles and has never been safety tested would cost far more than $60 million."
How do you know that this reactor is nuclear?
Rossi has claimed that he changes Ni to Cu. Sounds nuclear to me. Either that or his patent applications are not truthful.
It must be a genetic anomaly that defines the remainIng Rossi believers. They are intrinsically incapable of forming the thought: “wait a minute, that makes no sense.”
You are the star of the show for the anti Rossi crowd on this thread.
Dagnabit, I wanted to be the star. Can I at least be a co-star and get a full screen credit?
Display MoreA few corrections:
1. The babbler talking about Rossi posting questions on ECW doesn't know what he's talking about. Rossi doesn't post on ECW. I suppose he has never seen Rossi's blog.
2. The 40 MW plant is just in discussion. There is no contract. I hope he starts with a smaller plant.
3. Any large company would be interested in cutting energy costs by 20% The cost to connect to Rossi's plant is pocket change and would be repaid for in a couple of weeks. The risk is negligible for a plant with an existing energy supply.
4. It is not as difficult as Jed makes out to get approval in an industrial setting.
I could go on, but why bother? You prefer making ad hominem attacks on Rossi.
AA, based on your experience, would it be correct that the companies that own the facilities to which Rossi is going to sell heat will be required to have property and liability insurance (unless self-insured). If insurance is to be provided by a third party insurer, again, based on your experience, won't the insurer want to inspect and understand the technology in order to properly underwrite the insurance? If self insured, won't the companies risk management department want the same, to inspect and understand the technology. I very much doubt that any reputable insurer is going to provide any liability or property insurance on the terms that Rossi is proposing. Do you disagree and, if so, please explain why and why an insurer would take such a risk.
I understand you will have an urge to call this babbling, but it seems to me that these are real life, practical questions. And if your only answer is that you are confident that Rossi has already thought of all of these things, what is your evidence of that other than RossiSays?
