Andrea Rossi has started commercializing ECAT nuclear fusion devices

Post by dublinben » Tue, Nov 26, 2013, 3:55 PM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #26

dublinben wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 200kW generator can fit on a small trailer. It's pretty common in the electrical generation field to use smaller generators to kick-start successively larger generators. That's how conventional hydro and nuclear plants must be started. http://www.kohlerpower.com/rental/detail.htm?sectionNumber=2...

You're missing the point that, if the claims were real, 200 KW of the claimed output power of 1 MW cold be used to sustain the reaction, thus removing the input power requirement. This kind of "fact sheet" can only persuade people who don't understand physics.

Post by stox » Tue, Nov 26, 2013, 3:57 PM UTC

zokier wrote: post #10

lutusp wrote: post #9

> The ECAT 1MW plant contains 106 smaller ECAT units mounted in a shipping container. Valve for filling the Hydrogen is on the front of each unit, together with electrical connection to the immersion heater used to start the reaction. Not mentioned in the article is that the "immersion heater" required power -- to sustain the cold fusion reaction, of course -- totals just over 1 MW continuous. > Current delivery time…

> Not mentioned in the article is that the "immersion heater" required power The tech data page specifies 200kW input power

Post by CWuestefeld » Tue, Nov 26, 2013, 4:03 PM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #33

busterarm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not swayed by the fact sheet. I understand physics. I also know enough to know that we don't really know shit. Things happen that prove earlier notions to be wrong. It used to be that we all KNEW that the Earth was flat, and that it was the center of the universe too. There could be something going on here that we don't understand. I'm not saying that's what's happening, but I want to attack his claims ONLY by me…

> There could be something going on here that we don't understand. In science, the null hypothesis rules. The null hypothesis -- the premise that something is false until evidence proves otherwise -- is why scientists have a reputation for skepticism. It also filters out claims like this one. A scientist wouldn't give Rossi the benefit of the doubt. A scientist would demand scientific evidence, not a marketing sheet…

Post by crusso » Tue, Nov 26, 2013, 4:11 PM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #27

sp332 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1 MW output is in heat, not electricity.

So is the required input power! The input power is required in order to generate heat to initiate the reaction, and the output power is heat. In any case, it would be child's play to use a thermoelectric converter to efficiently generate electricity from the vast claimed heat output.

Post by lafar6502 » Tue, Nov 26, 2013, 4:25 PM UTC

lafar6502 wrote: post #48

As stated in technical parameters: the water pump output is 30-1500 liters/hour, it means max 0.4 liter per second. Assuming it raises the temperature of water by 40 degrees K, the energy output per second is 4200J/kg K 0.5kg * 40K = 84000 Joules/sec = 84 kW. Assuming it draws 167kW, it's much worse than any electric water heater.