JedRothwell Verified User
  • Member since Oct 11th 2014
  • Last Activity:

Posts by JedRothwell

    But the Joule heating of the cathode itself is very small, since it is designed to have a very low electrical resistance while the electrolyte is the high resistance part of the system that soaks up the amperes.

    There was no joule heating, and no electrolysis.


    The boiling shown in the video continued long after electrolysis stopped. You could see it stopped because the small bubbles of oxygen stopped coming off of the anode. Only the cathode was producing bubbles, and they were much larger than bubbles of hydrogen.


    It is easy to see electrolysis starting and stopping. Bubbles appear almost instantly. You can see it yourself with some wires attached to a D-cell battery in salt water. I recall there was an early telegraph system in the UK that used electrolysis as the signal. Bubbles meant "on" and no bubbles "off." There was also one in Spain in 1804.


    Well, here is a straw in the wind . . . I posted a comment in a New York Times article:

    Biden’s Big, Bold, Surprising Plan for a Green Transition (I Hope)


    Opinion | Biden’s Big, Bold, Surprising Plan for a Green Transition (I Hope)
    Our energy policy is a mess. The president needs to devise a new strategy with America’s biggest oil producers.
    www.nytimes.com


    For the past several years, the Times has rejected most comments mentioning cold fusion. But they allowed this one, which I hope is technically correct. No backsies at the Times. Here is what I said:


    Here is what we need: cold fusion, the Fleischmann Pons effect. There is a conference going on now in Silicon Valley, sponsored by by various venture capitalists and the Bank of America. U.S. government participation is especially notable. Important breakthroughs were announced by NASA, the U.S. Army, and a consortium of the Navy and various other U.S. labs. DARPA announced new funding starting in August 2022. Japan's largest boiler manufacturer, Miura (with over half the market in Japan) announced cold fusion prototypes and commercial sales by 2025.


    This is far ahead of the ITER plasma fusion project, and it costs billions of dollars less. With enough R&D funding, cold fusion can begin supplanting other energy sources in a few years. The cost is at least 20 times less than any other source of energy, based on the cost of materials and manufacturing techniques of the prototypes.


    See: https://www.iccf24.org/

    In one of my previous comment I already mentioned "an average temperature of just 100 °C above the boiling point is able to produce more than 100 times its [cathode] volume in vapor bubbles.". Anyway, this is a conservative assumption. Someone reported that, in a F&P cell, cathode can reach 300°C.

    Suppose it did reach 300 deg C. Heck, suppose it is incandescent red at 1500 deg C. Put it in water and in a few seconds the boiling stops. That is a fact. That has been know for thousands of years. If you do not believe me, try it yourself. The fact that it produces 100 times the cathode volume in steam is utterly irrelevant. The steam leaves the cell immediately. There is a hole in top of the cell!


    This is disappointing. I wonder why such a significant document is kept secret.

    It was not secret at all. It was broadcast on a major TV channel as I recall. It is lost.


    You wrote that "The reaction continued far longer than any chemical reaction could have, according to the people who made the video." Does it means that you know who they are?

    It was made by F&P and a TV reporter. I don't recall who.


    "normal" nail is what everyone has usually at home for hanging a frame on a wall. And its diameter is much less than the 4 mm of the F&P cathode.

    This is ridiculous. You can buy a box of large nails, or you can heat up a dozen small nails, or use any piece of steel approximately this size. Stop with the bullshit and evasions. Try it, or shut up. Make a video showing an incandescent nail boiling water for 20 minutes with no input power. You will win the Nobel Prize.


    At second 35, the image change almost immediately after the blacksmith immerse the piece of steel into the barrel of water. The same happens for the next image, when the piece of steel is put in a transparent vessel. How can you say that "within a few seconds boiling stops"?

    Watch the video and you will see that in few seconds, the boiling in the transparent vessel has nearly stopped. Or look for another video. Or TRY IT YOURSELF, for crying out loud.


    Anyway, your making reference to that video means that you have not well understood the difference between a barrel of cold water and a well insulated Dewar bottle containing well stirred water at boiling temperature. In the first case you have a huge sensible heat capacity for quenching the pieces of metal, that is the cool water has plenty of room to increase its temperature before reaching the boiling temperature. On the contrary, the boiling water in a F&P cell has no more sensible heat capacity, it can't no more absorb heat by increasing its temperature.

    This is complete and utter bullshit. The steam leaves the cell immediately. It goes right out the top, because the cell is open. If the water temperature is already close to boiling, the temperature does not increase. The water vaporizes and leaves the cell, carrying off the enthalpy. Try it with a Dewar if you do not believe me. (Never mind. You will never try anything, or believe anything, even common knowledge going back 7,000 years, to the beginning of the iron age.)

    They had the ICARUS cell designed by Fleischmann and Pons as well as five other systems setups. He shows a graph claiming excess heat, and then he claims that there is a possibility of systemic error.

    I missed that. I wasn't watching at that minute. Fleischmann and Miles strongly disagreed with them. Is this the graph shown on pages 15 - 18 here?

    https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmanlettersfroa.pdf


    Do a search for "NHE " (with a space) in this document and you will see that Fleischmann had a low opinion of them.


    Miles comment in the conference Chat:


    Melvin Miles14:32


    I worked at NHE in 1997-1998 using this same F-P Dewar calorimetry. Using selected cathodes from China Lake and proper calibrations, I found excess power (heat) in nearly every experiment, but NHE ignored my results for some reason. Political?


    Melvin Miles14:35


    They had already decided to close NHE and did not want any reports of excess heat to get in their way.

    They are looking for more capital to advance making 10 - 15 of these Tubes a week.They are looking to get a clean room environment. They need a lower level of clean room than say Intel Corp has.

    In my opinion they should stop trying to develop this on their own. They should do what Clean Planet is doing. Partner with big industrial companies such as Miura and let the industrial company do the engineering. Let them figure out how to make it reliable and scaled up. If Brillouin has what they claim, they could easily persuade large companies to do joint R&D projects.


    I have no reason to doubt they have what they claim. On the other hand, I have no reason to believe it, either, since their demonstration did not include any quantitative data. Maybe some of their other demonstrations do include data. Does anyone know?

    YET - Yes I assure you...


    Stephen Bannister sure knows what he's talking about.

    A liquid hydrogen lattice may comprise a layer within the Sun's core.

    He may well be right. I wouldn't know. However, it is politically unwise for an economist to talk about theory at a physics conference. As the Brits say, it is not on.

    One question I have... despite the nine hours time difference (MEZ vs PT) is it possible to review the presentations either on hopin or YouTube?

    They said the videos will be available online a week or two after the conference. I think they might be available only to participants. They said something about being available for a year. Not sure what that means.

    Here is Clean Planet's development plans. They have partnered with some very impressive large corporations. In my opinion, this is the only way to commercialize cold fusion.


    Transitioning to wind or solar is very desirable but needs to be part of a mix and needs some kind of battery storage to smooth out the demand on the grid.

    Yes, it probably does need battery storage, which makes the cost much higher. Solar is a great way to meet peak demand in a hot place like Atlanta, but once you get above a certain percent of generation capacity it starts to need batteries, which increases the cost a lot. As you say, with today's technology we need a mix of different sources.


    At the present percent of capacity, solar can easily be augmented by natural gas, so there is no need for batteries. When it is cloudy or night, you use natural gas. When the sun shines, the gas turbine is turned down or shut off, and the power company saves money. No batteries needed, as long as there is abundant gas turbine capacity, or hydroelectricity, or even wind.

    I am not against nuclear per se but it takes a lot of time to get a nuclear plant up and running.

    Time and money. You should read about the Vogtle plants under construction in Georgia. They were supposed to be finished in 2016 and they were supposed to cost $16 billion. Still not finished and the cost is over $30 billion.


    GDPR Support


    How two cutting edge U.S. nuclear projects bankrupted Westinghouse
    In 2012, construction of a Georgia nuclear power plant stalled for eight months as engineers waited for the right signatures and paperwork needed to ship a…
    www.reuters.com

    I have heard that nuclear is possibly the most expensive way to produce energy (Sabine Hossenfelder on YouTube) but I would have thought one of the advantages is that at least nuclear should be pretty reliable.

    Nuclear used to be the cheapest source of electricity. The Fukushima accident made into the most expensive source by far, bankrupting TEPCO, the world's largest power company. One accident is all it took. It resembles the Concorde supersonic passenger airplane. That was the safest modern airplane until July 2000. No one was ever hurt or killed on a Concorde. Then one of them exploded on takeoff, killing everyone, and it instantly became the most dangerous modern airplane.


    Fukushima, and before that Rancho Seco, Three Mile Island, Connecticut Yankee and other accidents showed that nuclear is not reliable. It is brittle. It goes from being utterly reliable to being a nuclear waste dump after an accident or negligent operation, as state attorney general described Connecticut Yankee. It is also not reliable because when there is a problem, the entire plant shuts down almost instantly, in a SCRAM. You lose ~1 GW. A problem at a gas fired plant may shut down 200 MW. A problem with a wind farm may shut down 1 MW, unless it is a storm, which can be predicted days ahead of time.

    This was a little disappointing because they only got 2 W. They were hoping for more:


    Excess Heat in a D2(H2)-Ni(Pd) Reaction System with Multiple Oxidation of the Ni-Pd Alloy Powder [virtual] - Si Chen | Qiuran Lab, Xi'an, China


    However, they got consistent, reproducible results. For me, given the state of the research, that's better than high power. As long as you are sure the power is real, 2 W consistently beats 100 W but you can't make it happen again.

    Here are Hasegawa's results. This is impressive. Let me go over this slide, which is a little difficult to read.


    Power turns on at 10 minutes. There is a 10 minute endothermic period, I assume from loading. This is shown in the box labeled "1." Then it becomes exothermic in the box labeled "2." At the top it says Wex = 26 W. "Wex" is excess power. This is 26 W, not 2.6 W. After 60 minutes, excess drops in the box labeled "3." It stabilizes at 16 W, continuing for 2.5 h in this graph.