Mats Lewan: New Energy World Symposium,

  • It seems nobody relayed that announce.


    After Rossi's demo, Mats Lewan is organizing an event on LENR (It was suspended after Rossi-IH battlle about Doral test)


    https://new-symposium.org/


    A radically new energy source—abundant, cheap, carbon-free, compact and clean—may change the world. It promises Planet Earth clean water, zero-emission vehicles with unlimited mileage, a solution to the climate crisis and much more (read more below).

    At the New Energy World Symposium, holding its first session on June 18-19, 2018, in Stockholm, Sweden, high-profile speakers (see below) will address the disruptive implications that this energy source will have for industry, financial systems, and society.

  • Jim Dunne? I think you mean Jim Dunn (no e) formerly with NASA? IIRC, he's the one who was pressing Dick Smith to invest a million dollars in Defkalion. He also believed Rossi much longer than warranted by any reasonable observations. I wonder what he will say about Rossi now.


    How is he a "leading investigator" in LENR? What did he actually investigate in a reasonable manner with credible results? Maybe I missed it.

  • I notice comments elsewhere that Mat's Symposium is primarily for Rossi's benefit. Since there is no suggestion that he is even attending, it should be regarded as having a more general focus.


    Alan, the PR for it contains extensive unsubstantiated claims stated as fact that will be viewed by many as puff for Rossi. That makes a more general focus problematic, and I'm sure would put off many contributors from attending.


    While those observations regarded reactions that were weak and difficult to reproduce, the Italian inventor Andrea Rossi made a breakthrough in 2011, demonstrating his so-called E-Cat technology, releasing kilowatts of heat in what seemed to be a stable, repeatable process. Since then Rossi has continued to develop the technology and in August 2015, he was granted a US patent.


    In February 2015, Rossi started a one-year test of the technology with an industrial scale heat plant producing one megawatt of thermal power—the average consumption of about 300 Western households, including electricity, space heating, water heating and air conditioning. The test was completed on February 17, 2016. An independent expert who controlled the test delivered a report confirming the energy production and the validity of the test.

    Unfortunately, a litigation between Rossi and his U.S. licensee Industrial Heat, IH, slowed down the development of the E-Cat, but a settlement agreement was reached in July 2017, forcing IH to return its license. During the litigation, IH claimed that neither the report, nor the test was valid, but no conclusive proof for this was ever produced.

    Meanwhile, Andrea Rossi continued to develop the third generation of his reactor, the E-Cat QX, which was demoed on November 24, 2017, in Stockholm, Sweden. Andrea Rossi has now signed an agreement with a yet undisclosed industrial partner for funding an industrialization of the heat generator, initially aiming at industrial applications.

    The E-Cat reaction has also been replicated by others. In March 2017, the Japanese car manufacturer Nissan reported such a replication.

  • Quote

    During the litigation, IH claimed that neither the report, nor the test was valid, but no conclusive proof for this was ever produced.

    Seemed pretty conclusive to me and to many others. If the test and report claiming that Rossi could produce a megawatt for a year from nuclear fusion were correct, is anyone so naive as to think IH would have failed to pay what they would have owed? And then gone on to make billions of dollars from ... say... maybe simple space heaters? Sold world wide by the billions? Oh yeah. Mr. Lewan. The one whose repertoire of high technology never seems to include a) calibration and b) truly "indipendent" verification.

  • Why is Mats still with Rossi? That is the most puzzling question left in this tale.

    timo,


    Mata is “All In” with Rossi now, he simply cannot back down from his belief that Rossi has what he says he has.


    Like most of the believers on that side of the ledger, they consider themselves relatively smart people and in no way, shape or form could they ever be hoodwinked by a scam artist, so, they believe what they are told to believe, no questions, no demands for proofs other than what Rossi offers them.

  • Why is Mats still with Rossi? That is the most puzzling question left in this tale.


    I think part of it is his: "AnImpossibleInvention" book sales. That is not to say Mats lacks integrity, because he has plenty of that, but money can never be factored out as an influence on ones judgement. As long as Rossi stays out of handcuffs, maintains the slimmest veneer of plausibility, the longer the royalties continue. In his shoes, heck, maybe even I would become a Rossi believer again. Same goes for ECW, and the sites advertising revenue...the color green can turn a skeptic into a believer.

  • June 18-19: Two radically new energy sources…

    https://new-symposium.org/


    Now with presentation of speakers.


    If the E-Cat lets you down you can always make free hydrogen from your empty beer cans:


    "In contrast, the Hydrogen Mine process solves the recycling problem, while also producing hydrogen, tapping into an estimated global stockpile of crushed cans between 3 and 5 million tons. It uses a proprietary aluminum oxidation catalyst, water, shredded cans, and nothing else—no acids, no solvents, nothing toxic—and produces high-grade aluminum oxide and pure hydrogen."


    To produce 1 kg of aluminium the smelter requires around 14 kWh of electricity.

    Aluminium is very easy to recycle and this requires only 0,7 kWh per kg.

    Scrapped cans are worth 660 US$ per ton.

    Who would stockpile crushed aluminum cans, one might ask.

  • There are somewhere between 2 and 5M tons stockpiled globally. Nobody wants them. Available on long-term contract (36-48 months) at $250 tonne FOB Copenhagen (for example) or even less from china in total contract quantities of up to 100 ktons per contract. Aluminium cans are despised by all the smelters, since recovery of the aluminium from them requires gas smelting and releases dioxins and furans from the thermal decomposition of the 1% (by weight) of Bisphenol-A based lacquer they are coated with. Also the sugar syrup and the paint makes for very slaggy-high carbon aluminium and to boost metal recovery rates beyond around 75-80% generally requires anything up to three melts altogether. This end product is then generally sold into the market as 'recovered metal' for around $600/tonne and sold on to arc smelters for a 4th melt and further refining operation. It is neither green or eco-friendly or profitable to smelt and re-smelt metal 4X to recover it.


    I have spent 2 years working on this with experts on the metal market, and they know a lot of things about this market that you won't find on the internet. 85% of all cans globally end up stockpiled waiting for the Al price to pass $1800/tonne -or land-filled. Collection is not recycling, any more than planting trees is making a forest.

  • And don't even look into bauxite mining and the Bayer process. Every ton of Al2O3 produced means 8 tons of CO2 emissions, 3 tons of red mud pollution, thousands of gallons of polluted water and quite a few square meters of virgin land ripped up for strip-mining.

  • I think part of it is his: "AnImpossibleInvention" book sales. That is not to say Mats lacks integrity, because he has plenty of that, but money can never be factored out as an influence on ones judgement


    I doubt he has sold many copies. Enough to buy a few coffees maybe. It's very readable, but it isn't Harry Potter.

  • Alan,


    Thank you for this insider information. At least here in Sweden the proponents for recycling never told us that recycling aluminum cans was that problematic. And since we have a deposit system a high percentage of aluminum cans do not end up as landfill.


    According to your info it seems no better to recycle aluminum cans than to recover mixed household plastic packaging material.

    I was happier before you told me this. Maybe a little googling can cheer me up.


    http://www.aluminum.org/news/a…-historically-high-levels


    “Aluminum cans are recycled more readily and more frequently than any other beverage packaging type -- period,” said Heidi Brock, President and CEO of the Aluminum Association. “The can’s sustainability advantage is a real differentiator for the product and something we know consumers care about.”


    Here you can come along on a nice aluminum plant tour:


    It seems like a smooth ride for the spent beverage cans. But they totally left out the multiple remelts and they did not mention the inferior quality of the final product.


    Wikpiedia has a process description for recycling of beverage cans:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…Process_for_beverage_cans


    "The top-five aluminium alloys produced are 6061, 7075, 1100, 6063, and 2024."


    Seems to be fairly straightforward. Do you think I can allow myself to feel a bit happier now?

  • Depends on what you want to feel happier about. You can swallow the Kool-Aid dispensed by the packaging industry and their chums, or you can do what I did and spent 2 years checking out what really happens. Then you will realise what the true situation is. Why do you think they are so cheap? It certainly isn't because they are 'a product in demand'. Don't swallow the slick PR campaigns, just check this out.


    https://www.alibaba.com/showroom/aluminium-can-scrap.html

    Code
    1. Alibaba.com offers 1,348 aluminium can scrap products. About 100% of these are aluminum scrap. A wide variety of aluminium can scrap options are available to you, There are 1,352 aluminium can scrap suppliers, mainly located in Asia. The top supplying countries are United States, Philippines, and Thailand, which supply 33%, 19%, and 18% of aluminium can scrap respectively. Aluminium can scrap products are most popular in South Asia, Domestic Market, and North America. You can ensure product safety by selecting from certified suppliers, including 12 with ISO9001, 1 with Other certification.



    ETA - and ask yourself why white aloxite from the Beyer Process sells for $600/tonne? It produces far less aluminium than re-smelting cans (because of the oxygen) yet is worth twice as much. Strange, eh?

  • Real nice Alan! Sounds like you and your friends are sitting on top of a gold mine. If the market agrees with you, at the end of your first day of operation you will have done more to save the planet than LENR has in 29 years. Just your presentation alone should make the conference worthwhile to attend.


    Definitely a Science Digest newsworthy type thing. Do you guys intend to get this out there anytime soon?

  • Anything related to this? https://www.newscientist.com/a…on-demand-just-add-water/

  • Thank you Shane.


    Nobody has done this trick before, unless they use micronised Al powder and some fairly expensive and nasty chemicals. On a bigger scale, reducing scrap cans to hydrogen and sodium aluminate with sodium hydroxide is trivial chemistry. But the sodium aluminate you end up with requires extensive and expensive post-processing to make it useable for almost anything. Doing it with nothing but hot water and recoverable catalyst is a game changer, since our pre and post-processing systems are easy and low energy. That's because 'there's no crap in there'. No lacquer dioxins and no sodium. No plant emissions at all and a COP of around 8.5 in terms of electrical energy in vs hydrogen energy out.


    It has been 3+ years extensive study and experiment for me and a colleague, plus a number of 'informed people' with knowledge of all the various commercial strands, it has taken this long on the bench since can scrap requires extensive pre-processing and we have done a lot of work on both that and catalyst development. Currently we are involved in writing 'end-to-end' patents to satisfy our investors, who are currently forming what might be described as a 'short but impatient' line.


    I think the full reveal will have to wait till June, by which time we should have the 5th generation plant up and running in the UK and sufficient patents in place. We keep building bigger and bigger systems, which has somewhat overtaken the LENR research and cost a lot of cash in relative terms. But on the topic of LENR, I think we should have something very surprising and easy to do to show in Stockholm too. Full reveal then- and I mean full description of every aspect, but right now we have de-bugging and system reliability tests to run. That's why my short posts are mostly getting shorter!


  • Not even a kissing cousin. The devil is in the detail, nano-aluminium which they are using is a a very expensive product, probably $10k/tonne. especially when you add gallium (and possibly bismuth) to is as these guys must do. And when you have produced the very expensive hydrogen you have a difficult and expensive clean-up to do on the sludge, There are a few systems like this around, but with the hydrogen costing around $100/kilo they are only of interest to the military, who can just throw the crap over the nearest hedge, and need fuel 'at any cost'.

  • Max Nozin Nowhere near. Ton for ton cans contain as much hydrogen energy as crude oil. And crude oil yields around 50% gasoline by weight. But they also displace another 1/2 ton or so of crude oil that would be used to mine, refine and ship the 2.5 tons of aloxite we can make from the cans. Don't get blindsided by the nearly free hydrogen - the very high-grade aloxite is the most valuable product the process produces

  • Not even a kissing cousin. The devil is in the detail, nano-aluminium which they are using is a a very expensive product, probably $10k/tonne. especially when you add gallium (and possibly bismuth) to is as these guys must do. And when you have produced the very expensive hydrogen you have a difficult and expensive clean-up to do on the sludge, There are a few systems like this around, but with the hydrogen costing around $100/kilo they are only of interest to the military, who can just throw the crap over the nearest hedge, and need fuel 'at any cost'.

    Thanks. Interesting.

    But not as interesting as that which you seem to be getting on with! Good luck with that.

    Very pleased to know that work is being done in the UK, and I hope you have sufficient backing.