ENG8 - new plasma energy system

This latest evaluation is really great news!

I'm still confused about the continued need for thermal calorimetry though. What is preventing the use of rectification and filtering of the output pulses into a DC output? Advanced silicon rectifiers have reverse recovery times of <40nS at many kilovolts with just a few picofarads of junction capacitance.

Does an excess of reactive impedance in the load quench the reactor output? If so, has a threshold of this sensitivity to reactance been characterized? Surely there is circuitry that can be applied to harvest this energy without thermalization. Since the output waveform seems to follow a well-characterizable form, perhaps a dynamic impedance response could be applied to present an optimized load impedance to the reactor output stage if necessary. The length of single-ended wiring in the output stage of earlier demonstrations suggests a tolerance for nontrivial levels of inductance at least.

Quote from Alan Smith

Managing Director EnergyNetiQ Full-time Jan 2017 - Present

You can still watch their video via Vimeo.

In the mean time, I shall re-post something that was actually related to the earlier Eng8 water-arc cells (although it applies to all water arc devices, in general).

A little story...

In the UK, in the 1970s, there was a rather mad-looking TV science presenter named Magnus Pyke. He was renowned for his presenting style - which involved him being very enthusiastic, while he waved his arms around a lot.

Pyke appeared in a Popular TV Science show called “Don’t Ask Me”, which was broadcast from 1974 to 1978. The show consisted of various regular panel members answering “scientific” questions from the public – either in a studio, or out on location.

I can still clearly remember one episode where some chap had written to the show about a device he had developed, which he said produced surplus energy from water and electricity. Magnus Pyke was duly dispatched to this guy’s house, with a film crew, to “investigate”.

We were subsequently shown this old bloke, in his shed, with a Heath Robinson (US translation: Rube Goldberg) contraption - consisting of glass jars, tubes, wires, and electrodes. A water filled “cell” was sparking away, and the water was boiling. There was even hot water turning a small paddle wheel. It all looked rather crude, and the paddle wheel wasn’t a serious attempt at extracting power - it was really just an indicator to show that something was happening – with the main product being heat.

Magnus Pyke proceeded to explain to this guy, in a rather condescending manner, that the device could not possibly produce any more energy than was going into it in the form of electricity. As far as I could see, there was no attempt made by the TV crew to measure anything, or assess the energy flows in any way. This old guy, in his shed, was made out to be some poor deluded soul – who was clearly just too dumb to know any real science. During the broadcast he hardly said a word, and just had to stand there while Pyke continued to pontificate and wave his arms around.

The scenes from that TV show have always stuck with me. The guy who built the device will have carried out his own measurements, and had clearly decided that it was producing anomalous heat. He was probably naive in contacting the TV show (possibly hoping they would carry out a proper assessment), but instead they decided to simply display him as an example of how ignorant “ordinary people” (i.e. non-scientists) could be. I thought his treatment, on air, was a disgrace.

All of this happened nearly half a century ago. It is highly unlikely that this chap was the first to notice anomalies involving water and electric arcs – and (as we all know) there have been numerous similar claims ever since.

But if a simple arc in water is supposedly able to produce excess energy – how come we are still pondering these devices, and seem to lack any conclusive answer?

What is actually the relationship between ENG8 and George Egely? When you check ENG8 Website George is not mentioned.

The LinkedIn Page of ENG8 lists lots of people in roles of business development, marketing, sales, IT but no one in R&D. On the webpage of ENG8 the same. Persons seem to live all across Europe and pretty much everybody seems to have two or three other current jobs listed on LinkedIn.

I made some google-based checks on the persons involved in ENG8 and the companies listed in their LinkedIn profiles. Not all of the former activities I found were completely convincing. I'd take everything with a grain of salt here.

Quote from Kursiv

On the webpage of ENG8 the same.

On the Eng8 website, a chap named Michael Peters is listed as CTO.

Interestingly, Ms Tyutina (CEO of Eng8) was a former director of Biaco (and also a director of the precursor, E-NETIQ)

I suspect that this has some bearing on the legal dispute...

Ms Tyutina was as well involved with multiple companies named Napier and Rapid Offside Composite, in which Haslen Back was involved (check the filings for these companies) who you can find on the ENG8 website as Founder, BDO and "co-developer of the EnergiCell technology".

The name Haslen Back has al long list of companies founded and dissolved in various industries, and has some interesting hits when you google his name, including an article in The Guardian, a Youtube video praising army equipment, and an entry from the American justice department (However, I can not check if this is the same person).

Quote from Frogfall

Hi Shane D. - over 2 months ago, you snarfed all the posts from this thread that you had decided were Biaco-related, and stuck them somewhere that was not accessible by "ordinary" forum members. Can we now have access to those posts, please - or do you want to keep them hidden for some reason? (e.g. the company might be particularly litigious)

Post

RE: ENG8 - new plasma energy system

Moved 14 posts to Biaco, a fairly new UK based LENR company that may be close to market. You decide. - Page 2 - Future and developments - LENR Forum (lenr-forum.com)

because we were mixing up Biaco, with ENG8. As a reminder, both are in a legal tussle about the same technology. Alan just came back from ENG8, and may go may visit Biaco soon.

Shane D.

Aug 12th 2023

Post

Biaco, a fairly new UK based LENR company that may be close to market. You decide.

BIACO

Interesting UK company that surprisingly slipped below our radar the past 3 years. By all appearances they are legitimate, with an LENR based "domestic heating system" that is "patented and validated". Here are their latest results:

https://uploads-ssl.webflow.co…8f1_1st%20Feb%20table.jpg

https://uploads-ssl.webflow.co…d_CoP%20History-p-800.jpg

What could be called promising for us but not for Biaco, they appear to be in a legal dispute with another new LENR company named ENG8, headquartered…

Shane D.

Jul 16th 2023

I suspect the UKAEA lawyers might start issuing "cease and desist" letters to a few people (not least Mr E Viking, here) for implying their involvement in any "validation".

They are getting press

Startup using water as nuclear fuel claims net energy gain milestone

ENG8 says it can generate five times as much power as it puts into its fusion energy process.

Startup using water as nuclear fuel claims net energy gain milestone

Achieving energy gain in fusion has been extremely difficult but Gibraltar based company is claiming runaway success with its new approach.

interestingengineering.com

Quote from Fm1

They are getting press

They are also playing fast and loose with quotes. Have a look at their press release - which contains the following:

Quote

Alan Smith, CEO/Sec. International Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ISCMNS), said: “I visited Culham Innovation Centre to observe three test runs. All three concluded with higher temperatures in the output side calorimeter than on the input side, so it is clear that comparative thermometry indicates an energy gain. This new work is supported by many previous studies going back decades.

“Most encouragingly, a representative of Underwriters Laboratories also attended and said that their tests of the device indicated a COP (Q) of five plus the possibility to improve that figure even further.”

I wish they were more sensible and cautious in their PR campaigning approach. Alan Smith clearly said thermometry, most people will fail to realize the difference between thermometry and calorimetry.

One problem is that the temperature of each oil bath can not be directly related to power without using the individual power/temperature calibration curves for each. The rate of temperature rise depends on the power dissipated in each resistor, the heat capacity of each oil bath, and the rate of heat loss from each bath to the surroundings. Once you can be sure that each temperature has stabilised, then the power dissipated by each resistor then equals the rate of heat loss of each bath at the indicated temperature (regardless of heat capacity). The temperature/time curve for each will be asymptotic, of course, with the asymptote being the final temperature for each. The cell would have to run for sufficient time for the temperatures to get close to their individual asymptotes, within the accuracy of the temperature gauges, such that neither is continuing to rise. The two final temperatures then need to be compared to each individual calibration curve in order to translate them into powers.

If the two calibration curves are identical, then the comparison is a bit easier, of course. But the curve would still need to be used.

Frogfall I think most of us “LENR obsessed freaks” are well aware of these technical issues, or should be. My concern in this case is more of a Public Relationships point of view. I have no doubts this thing probably does what it is claimed to do, or I wouldn’t be here, but the degree of development is in no way enough to produce a marketable product and won’t be for some years. Anyone claiming this is around the corner and pitching it as investor opportunity is IMHO not being serious.

Quote from Curbina

I have no doubts this thing probably does what it is claimed to do, or I wouldn’t be here, but the degree of development is in no way enough to produce a marketable product and won’t be for some years.

From what I've seen (albeit remotely, through last year's testing) is that cells of this type can be quite variable in their performance, and nobody seems to know why. On top of that, all suggested explanations for the supposed power generating mechanism are still so far outside the "mainstream" that they will invite ridicule. This will not end well - and sensible research is likely to suffer as a result.

Quote from Frogfall

and sensible research is likely to suffer as a result.

This is my main concern when such a thing happens. It can become another e-cat all over again.