While quiet lately, judging by this Shareholders Presentation, BLP has been quite busy behind the scenes. Heavy emphasis on commercialization, showing "progress", and a timeline:
BLP update
-
-
-
BLP has always been better at commercial fundraising then anyone else. Mills is very good at it. He has a compelling story for anyone who does not trust expert review of his voluminous and impressive output. And he has always had rich backers - once you have those it is easier to get others.
So:
- the fundraising is because they need more money
- the timeline is because you need a timeline to get funds
That is business as usual for any company in their situation. And certainly business as usual for BLP who have been doing the same thing for a long time. It does not tell you anything about whether they have what they claim. It does tell you that Mills is good at raising funds.
I will be happy to wait for the end of their timeline and see what emerges?
It is the same position as Clean planet. they also have a timeline to commercialisation. It has been revised to be longer than initially. That process can go on for some time until those who accept claims on zero independent evidence (the "independent" BLP evidence is not credible when you look at the claims in context of all BLPs similar part claims - and lack of better validation over time).
So I don't expect anything useful to be concluded until BLP next runs out of funds 9the timeline can be stretched).
-
BLP has always been better at commercial fundraising then anyone else. Mills is very good at it. He has a compelling story for anyone who does not trust expert review of his voluminous and impressive output. And he has always had rich backers - once you have those it is easier to get others.
Randy also has a brother in Wall St. and (I heard) the Sage of Omaha as a shareholder.
-
Mills is very good at it. He has a compelling story for anyone who does not trust expert review of his voluminous and impressive output
They have checked that "expert review" block many times over.
-
They have checked that "expert review" block many times over.
They have something that produces plenty of heat/light: it works. But they baffle us with volumes of not quite completely logical reports. So, expert review is good enough for funding. But they seem to be incapable of actually making their technology work in order to meet a timeline.
-
What I find troubling is how Mills plan has become more "Rossiesque" in the sense that he claims to need a fully commercial solution before getting any traction. I may be naive but I think a working prototype could convince university professors the technology works. He acts like they can never be convinced. Of course Rossi has nothing. I'm not saying BLP's tech doesn't work.
-
He acts like they can never be convinced. Of course Rossi has nothing. I'm not saying BLP's tech doesn't work.
You must read more carefully. They built 10 working prototypes for customer verification. But hot plasma definitely will never fit all his dreams and any direct electric power generation by X/UV light certainly needs 10 more years of development and shielding etc...
-
It depends, in my mind, devices releasing energy under strong UV/X are especially relevant for planes or space applications.
This wavelength range is able to heat directly air ( nitrogen/oxygen) so the perfect way for ramjets.
You must read more carefully. They built 10 working prototypes for customer verification. But hot plasma definitely will never fit all his dreams and any direct electric power generation by X/UV light certainly needs 10 more years of development and shielding etc...
-
Well, it's strongly correlated with the place you are. In the case of Mills it's helpfull. Jobs succeeded because was born where the history went further .. If Musk came in US, probably there was a special reason too.
Surely more difficult in the north of France.
BLP has always been better at commercial fundraising then anyone else.
-
It depends, in my mind, devices releasing energy under strong UV/X are especially relevant for planes or space applications.
Not at all. These chips ae used in PV concentrators where lenses are used to enhance the power 1000x.
These chips are multilayer for optical and X-UV . But in Mills case the X are already to hard.
-
Not well understood what you tried to explain me. I understood that Mills xsh were released in VUV/X range that is right or not ?
Not at all. These chips ae used in PV concentrators where lenses are used to enhance the power 1000x.
These chips are multilayer for optical and X-UV . But in Mills case the X are already to hard.
-
From the presentation:
QuoteDisplay MoreThe light emitting subsystem consists of an enclosed reservoir
where tin is melted and pumped to form 2 streams of molten metal
that intersect and act as the 2 electrodes of the system. At the
intersection point the reaction is initiated, thus generating an intense
light plus heat. There are no moving parts as the pumping is done
with electromagnets. The light exits this subsystem via a transparent
quartz dome.
So where, exactly, are the hydrinos?
-
I understood that Mills xsh were released in VUV/X range that is right or not ?
Correct! But the intensity is several 100 Suns's.
-
Wavelength range ? Spectrum ? Now if it's too powerfull in the same way that should be less usefull.
Usable i meant.
Correct! But the intensity is several 100 Suns's.
-
Wavelength range ? Spectrum ? N
The spectrum goes down to 10nm what is no more solar...
-
They have checked that "expert review" block many times over.
Not if you read the "expert" reports!
for me, and I used to be fascinated by BLP, the killer is this.
As time has progressed their demos have changed to completely different systems - and each system has got more difficult to do precise measurements on than the previous.
1. Large cylinder full of chemicals - measure how hot it gets. Claims are that total energy out is larger than anything chemically possible.
2. Electrolysis/battery with alternated charge-discharge and claimed output << charge/discharge energy.
3. Explosion caused by large transient energy input - with energy output estimated from light detection.
-
Display More
Not if you read the "expert" reports!
for me, and I used to be fascinated by BLP, the killer is this.
As time has progressed their demos have changed to completely different systems - and each system has got more difficult to do precise measurements on than the previous.
1. Large cylinder full of chemicals - measure how hot it gets. Claims are that total energy out is larger than anything chemically possible.
2. Electrolysis/battery with alternated charge-discharge and claimed output << charge/discharge energy.
3. Explosion caused by large transient energy input - with energy output estimated from light detection.
To be fair, the concept of a transient producing more energy than the input to create it has shown up in numerous times in the energy literature, not just BLP.
To maximize energy production at least semi-continuously, one has to push the design to material limits where the container or equipment fail because that where it appears that the largest transients are. It's an optimization based on trends.
It like deciding to create conditions like hottest part of the sun because you want a result, but you don't reality know how it works.
-
The EUV tin plasma machine already exists and is commercially used to etch semiconductor chips. If it made more substantial heat more than the known input then it would be known already, because it uses MW of power.
-
If anyone wants to follow this up (again from the presentation)
2022 published paper (on our old friend the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy)
Alternative 2021 preprint, with supplementary data.
(n.b. Neither of above mention molten tin)
Fred Hagen's ORCID page - showing the range, number, and subjects of his published papers
