Brillouin Energy Corporation (BEC) updates.

  • Quote

    -solidly at a little over COP2. Needs 6X's to compete in the thermal market. Get up to 30Xs input, and bring in cars and everything else in between (planes/locomotives).

    So prove it. Get an independent test that Brillouin has excess energy Eout=2*Ein or better. You will have entrepreneurs up the wazoo offering abundant and generous funding.


    This business about competing in markets, planes and locomotives troubles me. I am not saying Brillouin is a scam but the claim that "we can't do anything meaningful until we can power a, b or c" is a hallmark of scammers. Why? Because it is so obviously false that saying it only appeals to dummies. Everyone else realizes it's just dumb. Appealing to lowest common denominators is the hallmark of the Nigerian type scam.

  • Oh, look, Brillouin is up to Eout=4x Ein!


    Quote

    In the interview, McKubre discusses the high level of control that Chief Technology Officer Robert Godes achieved with their Brillouin Energy Corp electro-chemical wet boiler design, effecting the level of excess heat with their Q-wave electromagnetic pulses, with an energy output of 4x. There is a new gas-loaded system that is being engineered to produce that same level of control with a higher output.



    Oh wait. That was 2014! Now it's dramatically improved from 4X to 2X.


    https://coldfusionnow.org/pesn…ael-mckubre-on-brillouin/


    And then, there is this:


    Quote

    But the development that Bob (Robert W. George) said is "the most significant event" they've had, and which I could be the first to announce, is that just before Christmas, they signed a multi-million dollar licensing contract with a firm in South Korea, with $750,000 up front, half of which has already been wired, the other half of which is due within 90 days


    So we should soon see dozens of reactors making power under license, right? Oh wait. That was 2013 -- five years ago! Darn! The fault must be with all those pathological skeptics.


    https://web.archive.org/web/20…rillouin-LENR-technology/


    Looks like SRI hitched on with some credible people. Sure they are. BTW, what firm was that in Korea which contracted with Brillouin? Can we ask them how they're doing?

  • There should be a "SRI Final report (2018)" out soon on BEC's website. I have been waiting 3 weeks for it. Nothing but human inertia holding it up from my understanding. AFAIK it will cover up until July. Unfortunately the best progress has been since then, as the Next Big Future Godes interview/article showed.

  • Darn! The fault must be with all those pathological skeptics.


    You seem to have a very high opinion of your own importance.


    It takes little imagination or wit to be 'skeptical' of something you've never made the effort to inform yourself about.


    It's either a form of attention seeking, or suggests a lack of better ways to spend your time.

  • It's a shame you waste your time and intelligence on such 'unique' theories.


    I don't understand which theories are you meaning, those trying to explain an inexistent excess heat or those explaining why the excess heat doesn't exist?


    Anyway, in both cases, there is no time waste. LENR is one of the most fascinating topics and one of most meaningful to understand our human nature and fate. It's so important that even the higher academic echelons recommend to keep at least one eye on it (1).


    Furthermore, if humankind will have the chance to avoid the scenario B (2), the future historians - who will study how their ancestors fell into the illusion trap of being able to produce clean, safe, cheap and almost inexhaustible energy - will put CF/LENR on top of their interest.


    (1) http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…hatching-cold-fusion-egg/

    (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMSU6k5-WXg#t=4m32s

  • -He confirms that Microsoft funded Texas Tech (Robert Duncan), so it is no longer a rumor that Gates is funding LENR research.

    Lots more in there, as it runs 42 minutes, so make sure to listen to all.


    I listened to the whole thing but somehow I missed the part where he said Microsoft funded Texas Tech. Where is that?


    I was disappointed in this presentation. I think it is misguided. His business strategy makes no sense. He makes absurd assertions such as: he must produce a finished product, and he has to reach a manufacturing level where fewer than 1% of the production line output fails and must be scrapped. This is like the Wright brothers claiming they cannot sell airplanes until they perfect a retractable landing gear. He says he is having trouble getting funded. Assuming the reactors work as claimed, if he would put five of them in the right hands, the skies would open up and billions of dollars would fall into his lap. This would happen even if the excess heat was only 10%. It would happen even if 99% of the reactors fail. For some types of transistors in the 1950s, the failure rate was above 90%. That did not slow down the development of transistors. It just meant they were expensive for a while. The present practicality of this device, and the engineering details that must be ironed out before it can be mass produced, are completely irrelevant.

  • 12:20: "McKubre was lured away (from SRI) by Microsoft with big bucks to set up an LENR Research Lab in Lubbock, Texas."


    Ah. But I wonder if he has this on better authority than I do, or others do. Perhaps he has only heard the rumor. Also, I thought McKubre retired. I don't think he was lured away.



    Seahorse Research/Texas Tech are both located in Lubbock.


    What, pray tell, is Seahorse Research? The only "Seahorse" Google finds in Lubbock is a swimming school. Quote:


    "Seahorse is a privately held company in Lubbock, TX and is a Unknown business. Categorized under Public Swimming Pools. Our records show it was established in 1986 and incorporated in Texas. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 1 to 4."

  • He makes absurd assertions such as: he must produce a finished product, and he has to reach a manufacturing level where fewer than 1% of the production line output fails and must be scrapped.


    He says he is having trouble getting funded. Assuming the reactors work as claimed, if he would put five of them in the right hands, the skies would open up and billions of dollars would fall into his lap. This would happen even if the excess heat was only 10%. It would happen even if 99% of the reactors fail. For some types of transistors in the 1950s, the failure rate was above 90%. That did not slow down the development of transistors. It just meant they were expensive for a while. The present practicality of this device, and the engineering details that must be ironed out before it can be mass produced, are completely irrelevant.


    I inferred from his answer to my question that the failure threshold was told to him by those who would fund manufacturing. But that would be a good follow-up question because I don't know the origin of that directive.


    Also, the recent results of 100+ Watts at over 2x COP is only in the last couple weeks, and we recorded the interview mid-December. Things are changing quickly for the Brillouin and I imagine this new data would generate some interest and cashflow. But that is speculation on my part.


    BTW, I learned how to say it: Brillo - (like a Brillo pad) , then "in" (like "go in-side!"). so it's Brillo-in (say it fast), and not "Brill-yoon", the way I had been saying it since 2011!