The “Thunderstorm” reactor as another potentially easy to replicate, and very useful, possibly LENR device

I am starting this thread to review and discuss an experiment that seems relatively easy to replicate and has recently summoned the focus of Bob Greenyer, as a potentially really useful system to reduce carbon emissions and increase fuel efficiency implementing it as a retrofit for ICEs.

For those wondering where does LENR comes up into this, the “magic” is observable in the exhaust gas composition: CO2 and CO emissions are greatly reduced (some older videos have even less than 1% CO2 in the exhaust), and O2 is increased (up to the same level in normal atmospheric air). This is apparently transmutation “on the fly”.

The apparatus being tested in the videos (in a recent conference held in Zurich) had to be built in a couple of days as the one that was already built and tested for this presentation got shipped ahead of the conference, and never arrived. This is to say that it is “relatively” easy to build and it still performed well enough to show the effect even under such an adverse scenario.

This is a couple of readings of the exhaust of a 300 kW natural gas generator connected to the grid, in the UK, that has one of these systems installed, albeit in an incomplete way due to impossibility to make the complete implementation as it requires modifications that would render the generator unlicensed to be operated. Still, it apparently manages to reduce the CO emissions in a way that is commercially relevant.

Exhaust analysis prior to enter the reactor.

Exhaust analysis after process in the reactor.

These are other results released some weeks ago. This level of CO2 and CO emission reduction is not independently verified, but this is for showing the claims that is being made and that has been at least partially verified by third parties.

This thread was posted on the ISCMNS space without intention now I moved to an appropiate topic in the open forum.

Quote from axil

That leaves only ionization of air as the active agent in this reaction.

Not “only”, you are forgetting the tube and spheres where two different counter flowing vortexes of air interact.

Quote from Shane D.

Which experiment? I looked through STRIKE FOUNDATION GUARANTEE LIMITED and couldn't find a connection.

Sorry Shane D. , the experiment is the one shown in the third video of the first post of this thread. The following link is probably the more suitable source for getting an objective view about this, as it is the replication project started by the MFMP.

THOR

Quote from Frogfall

Just bear in mind that the internal combustion engine has probably attracted more R&D money, involved more researchers, more lab tests, and experienced more permutations, than any other type of machine over the last 2 centuries. Various combinations of fuels, exhaust gas recirculation, lean burn, water vapour injection, etc, have all been tried over the years.

But I’m afraid that this just looks like the bastard child of the Stan Meyer device and the Joe Cell, overlaid with a bunch of random gibberish “sciencey words”. The UV lamp, “plasmoid bubbler” and “thunderstorm generator” are all misdirection.

BTW, I’m not claiming that they might not see some overunity, under some circumstances. But their “explanation” for it is either self-delusion, or deliberate obfuscation to hide their lack of proper theory.

Have there been any results published from proper dyno tests at an accredited engine test house?

Display More

I agree with all that you say. There's no "overunity" claims anyway, just increased fuel efficiency that is claimed to be up to 50% but has been more or less accurately measured to be around 13%, which is a plus. But the potential LENR at play aspect that I want to highlight is the exhaust composition that has been measured to at least partially reduce, but also almost totally eliminate, CO2 and CO emissions. The only way to explain this, barring some sort of trick (that so far has not been found by those that have gotten involved hands on), is that this system creates condition for on the fly gas transmutation.

Quote from Alan Smith

For me this seems like the '1000 mile carburettor' - but who knows.

The famous Pogue carburetor, that could get hundreds of miles per gallon, but at very low speeds. How not remembering it!

Well, but the fuel saving aspect here is completely secondary, and it is probably modest, tho a 13% is not insignificant. The part that motivates me to bring this topic to the forum is the possibility that this device is making on the fly gas transmutation, which would allow to explain the at least partial but significant, and in some tests, almost total, reduction in CO2 and CO emissions. This is where "the money" is: this system, once properly mastered, has the potential to solve the fossil fuels C emissions problem in any kind of ICE and other kind of fossil fuel driven energy converting devices. It has been tested in jet turbines with allegedly good results, also.

Quote from Frogfall

When the "valve" is opened, the depression in the inlet manifold is altered, and when idling (or on light loads) the engine is running on a mixture of air and electrolysed water (2H2 + O2). As no petrol is sucked through the carburettor, there is no CO2 (or CO) in the exhaust

Puzzling thing is that it seems to work better under load. Anyway there's a number of things happening simultaneously, and no one seems to really understand what excactly is really happening. The so called "GEET" system bears some similarities, and in that case the claim was that water was being used as fuel, but in the "Thunderstorm" reactor, water is allegedly very slowly consumed.