October 11, 2014 – Cold fusion has once again entered the conversation with the release of an independent test of Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat cold fusion device. The results appear in a paper entitled, Observation of abundant heat production from a reactor device and of isotopic changes in the fuel.
I have described the pursuit of cold fusion in the past as an unsuccessful adventure into alchemy, the transmutation of elements that was pursued in Medieval times. I have commented frequently on the lack of independent verification of the energy output of cold fusion devices, particularly those promoted by Andrea Rossi, the Italian inventor of the E-Cat seen in the picture below.
Rossi’s behavior has been secretive. On numerous occasions his E-Cat reactor when demonstrated has been hidden in a black box. His justification, a fear of losing his competitive advantage. Tests run with his device have produced anomalous heat but sufficient and consistent enough for commercial application? Not necessarily. When Rossi has applied for patents in Europe and the United States, his applications have been rejected. Announcements of commercial agreements have been made and about imminent product shipments of E-Cats capable of replacing home furnaces and the like. But no commercial E-Cat has ever been shipped. You can read some of the past history on this blog site by typing “cold fusion” in the search window.
This latest paper, however, sheds new light on cold fusion and although I remain a skeptic, should reignite the conversation and controversy. The testers included participants from Bologna University (who have been involved in past demonstrations of the E-Cat), Uppsala University and the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm.
In this test of an E-Cat containing “hydrogen-loaded nickel power plus some additives, mainly lithium” and conducted over 32 days beginning in March of this year, the reactor ran at temperatures between 1,260 and 1,400 Celsius (2,300 and 2,552 Fahrenheit) degrees. The measured energy input to output yielded a COP factor of between 3.13 and 3.74. If you are unfamiliar with COP, it stands for coefficient of performance, comparing the amount of power input to output. Compare the E-Cat results to conventional air conditioning and heat pump systems which yield COP values of between 2 and 4 and have theoretical efficiency of up to 32.9 based on maximum ranges in temperature between outside and inside air. At the COP ranges produced the E-Cat results lie within a reasonable range of output performance related to energy input. Over the full 32 days of testing the E-Cat generated about 1.5 Megawatt hours of electricity.
The researchers noted that the E-Cat they tested in this experiment appeared “quite different from the ones used in the tests held in past years.” You can see below a picture of it being weighed by the researchers.
The graph below provides a plot of the net power output of the E-Cat through a 32-day time span with each segment representing a 2-day period. Net power is the difference between total watts produced versus watts consumed to generate output. As you can see E-Cat output varies but this can be explained by power consumption throughout the test which follows a similar curve, i.e., when the E-Cat temperature was raised. COP results are also consistent with power input increases. The more power in, the higher the COP ratio, with the highest results occurring in the last few days of the test period.
The researchers note that the COP values obtained only “refer to the performance of the reactor running at the capacity selected by us, not at its maximum potential” They continue stating, “we do not know what the limits of the current technology are, in terms of performance and life span of the charges.”
The researchers did a fuel analysis looking at the powder and concluded the “large amount of heat is…way beyond what can be expected from chemical burning.” They could not reject the notion that some form of fusion reaction was happening within the reactor but no radiation was detected.
Which brings us to an analysis of the fuel containing nickel powder containing hydrogen and combined with lithium, aluminum, iron, carbon and oxygen. In their analysis they found the quantities of these elements varied from grain to grain within the powder. That may speak to a lack of uniform mixing of the fuel in the production process.
Further analysis of the fuel after the test noted a depletion in lithium and changes to nickel composition. The conclusion, a nuclear reaction had taken place. The researchers stated it was very hard to comprehend how a fusion process could take place at the low levels of energy involved in the E-Cat’s operations, but nevertheless observed an isotope shift in both lithium and nickel.
One caveat in their conclusions. They could analyze the fuel but lacked detailed information on “the internal components of the reactor, and of the methods by which the reaction is primed.”
In summation the report states:
“The performance of the E-Cat reactor is remarkable. We have a device giving heat energy compatible with nuclear transformations, but it operates at low energy and gives neither nuclear radioactive waste nor emits radiation. From basic general knowledge in nuclear physics this should not be possible. Nevertheless we have to relate to the fact that the experimental results from our test show heat production beyond chemical burning, and that the E-Cat fuel undergoes nuclear transformations. It is certainly most unsatisfying that these results so far have no convincing theoretical explanation, but the experimental results cannot be dismissed or ignored just because of lack of theoretical understanding.”
So there you have it. What should happen next? Many more independent studies akin to this one I would think. The corroboration of similar results. And a drill down on the internal components of the reactor and the priming system to ensure a better understanding of its workings. Such testing using rigorous scientific protocols should validate Rossi’s invention. And then maybe we will finally have a commercially viable working E-Cat.
In any event, the cold fusion pot got warmer with the release of this report.
Related articles across the web
Related Posts
The Present And Future Internet of Things For Sustainable Construction
I Had Knee Replacement Surgery in 2020 But Could 3D Bioprinting Do The Job In The Future?
ExxonMobil Seabed Lease For Carbon Storage Does Little To Mitigate Global Warming
When Will An AI Win A Nobel Prize?
Can Humans Direct The Weather? Ask Marjorie Taylor Greene
What’s Next After The International Space Station Retires?
Chinese EVs Are A Climate Change Solution So Why Are The U.S., Canada And Europe Blocking Their Sale?
The Evolution of Hybrid Cooling Towers That Balance Water Efficiency and Energy Conservation
Over the last several years, yhe Rossi E-Cat project in all its various curious, complex, misrepresented and inconclusive antics and incarnations has so far proven to be a complete waste of any honest objective investigators time. All the “demonstrations” are deliberately overly complex and leave many open avenues for misinterpretation and out-right fraud. I’m not wasting any more time investigating the fantastical E-Cat claims until a simple public test melts a few hundred pounds of ordinary cracked ice. Rossi and company certainly understand that a simple and cheap ice phase change test would be definitive. My guess is such a test would definitively reveal a negative COP. I’ve predicted the cracked ice test will never happen, and I’ll confidently stand on that. I don’t know how a magician does all his tricks, but I do know his tricks are tricks.
Stefan-Boltzmann 4th power black body radiation law? All this to support a COP claim of 3.2, when any HS physics class could do the simple, cheap, unambiguous, and cheat-proof, ice phase-change test? Give us all a break and give it up. Every time a new “objective test” of E-Cat is rolled out it smells like baloney. How many times does one need to smell baloney before he surmises there must actually be some baloney around?
you clearly did not read honestly the report.
there was a calibration, and even if the method is broken you cannot remove the reality that the reactor was much hoter, with less power.
what does annoy you with the reality of cold fusion ?
that it was proven since 1991 beyound any doubt and that because 2 montha after F&P announce incompetent physicist simply failed to reproduce… while competent chemist tooks few years?
you are lost in denial
this test is independent and finally quite simple.
the precision they have obtained by calibration, modelisation of the emmisivity, is not really important. the dummy need more electricity to be less hot anyway…
forget it it work.
goatguy theory is refuted.
conspiracy theories on the wattmeter are absurds when you know how it work.
ther mess around the strange isotopic shift is even more absurd. first some simply assume that if they don’t have the theory it cannot exist… then they imagine a fraud that is not useful to rossi (as he remind, if he frauded it should at least not look so strange)…
end of the story.
Elfors, LENr cities, launch research efforts soon.
visibly Industrial Heat have done a very professional improvement of the reactor… it is an engineered device.
And just when did the E-Cat team, or any of its many infatuated dreamer supporters, bother to conduct the simple and definitive “melt some ice” test. Sorry, your fervent asseverated word for it is not nearly as compelling as the conspicuous absence of a single simple ice phase change test. We do not need a million dollars worth of problematic lab gear to prove a COP of 3+ or even 1.5. We just need to melt a couple hundred pounds of ordinary cracked water ice, record the elapsed time, and weigh the melt water on bathroom scales. Why is that so hard? Why do you suppose all the Rossi E-Cat “independent” tests emit the odor of baloney? The magician might be able to make an elephant disappear behind the curtain, but he can’t make the elephant disappear naked before our eyes. If Rossi can make the ice melt to the satisfaction of a HS physics class, then I might begin to believe; otherwise I must surmise the strong and long lingering scent of baloney is very likely coming from bologna.
((what does annoy you with the reality of cold fusion ?))
Nothing would please me more than the “reality” of cold fusion. I’ll freely stipulate that an obstinate insistence that infatuated faith in a faint apparition of cold fusion is the same as the “reality” of cold fusion is as much a source of annoyance as an obstinate insistence of the “reality” of the “virgin birth.”
Most of us don’t need help with how to think. In the E-Cat case we need help finding compelling cheat-proof evidence. Compelling evidence would be the simple phase change test. Nearly the entire scientific community of skeptics would promptly yield to the simple and conclusive ice phase change evidence; Rossi knows that as well as anyone. Why isn’t he melting some ice?
I really would not know why you suggest that 6 honorable scientists would make a report public that would damage there reputation. Those men are fully convinced that the Ecat produces much more heat than is put in. Further they found that this is caused by a nuclear reaction, which made the heat effect plausable. By the way, as you should know, the COP of a fridge or a heatpump cannot be compared with that of the Ecat. Those devices extract energy from a medium by cooling it down. Ecat obviously did not do that, so it had to come from elsewhere and has now been clearly proven from a nuclear reaction. Like hundreds of other small scale tests in the Cold fusion area it prooves that this effect exists and Ecat proves it is getting mature. I would like to see your face when the first commercial Ecat plant proves its claims.
Hi Gerard, I cannot answer for Allen and I’m sure he will. But I can state that I would be thrilled to see a commercial LENR technology in the market. I just wonder, after so many false starts, if this will ever come to fruition.
I would also like to see a scientific journal accept the paper and its findings through peer review before I am fully convinced that the experiment meets the rigor of good science.
Indeed Len, I would love to see the scientific society less hostile and more cooperative. Why not an open and good conversation with te scientists that did the test? Why would Nature or Science or Scientific American not be a bit more cooperative and have the thousands of claims of the fellow (LENR) scientists verified. The only reason I can imagen is that scientist would lose their reputation if they openly accept to peer review Cold Fusion tests, because they still assume that it is ‘pathetic science’.
If this is the reason, that the only thing we can do is wait untill the commercial LENR products hit the markert and proove that they work.
((I really would not know why you suggest that 6 honorable scientists would make a report public that would damage there reputation.))
I would really like to know why 6 “honorable scientists” would make a report public that pretends scientific rigor, but which is in fact full of pathways for potential fraud and misconstruction of the “data.” Every one of these “honorable” scientists understands that a cheap, simple, cheat-proof, ice phase-change test that is powered by a battery bank, and completely isolated from the invisible domain of possible digital data manipulation, would be the compelling test of whether or not the E-Cat actually produces significant amounts of “excess” energy. All the scientific world wants to know about the E-Cat is whether or not it actually works. If it should be proven that it actually works, then, and only then, would mainstream science much concern itself with precise details and theoretical speculations and investigations as to how it actually works.
Curiously, from the outset of his promotions, Rossi could have made simple cheat-proof, and highly credible, public demonstrations. Yet he chose instead to make his enterprise seem legitimate by inducing “honorable” scientists to lend (lease?) their reputations to his efforts. All of the recruited “scientists” have frankly stipulated that only Rossi knows the “secrets” of how it actually works. Today, that still remains the case.
((Those men are fully convinced that the Ecat produces much more heat than is put in. Further they found that this is caused by a nuclear reaction, which made the heat effect plausible.))
These men (and a woman) are fully convinced that the general effect of their problematic report would be to make true believers out of doubtful non-scientists and quasi-scientists. These men did not find the reported excess heat was caused by a nuclear reaction. They reported detailed isotopic analysis of a tiny amount of “fuel” and resultant “ash,” which had no credible provenance and chain of custody, and reported nickel isotopic mass increase consistent with a postulate of excess heat. The report stipulates the investigators can only speculate about what might be happening within the Hot Cat at the atomic level.
Speculations about nuclear reactions would logically follow from data showing 2 kW of excess energy continuously over a period of some 750 hours. But, the critical thinker must focus only on the credibility of the claim of excess energy, not on the exquisite and tedious details of the complex methods of thermal radiation and microscopic geometry measurement and interpretation.
((By the way, as you should know, the COP of a fridge or a heatpump cannot be compared with that of the Ecat. Those devices extract energy from a medium by cooling it down.))
Well, I won’t quibble with the thrust of that. I didn’t introduce the notion of heat pumps or refrigeration systems into this discussion, and it is not my place to defend any possible relevance.
((Ecat obviously did not do that, …)
So stipulated.
((so it had to come from elsewhere and has now been clearly proven from a nuclear reaction.))
The evidence is not compelling that any excess heat came from anywhere at all. Until simple cheat-proof phase-change tests prove excess heat is actually produced, all the rest is smoke, mirrors, distraction, and diversion.
((Like hundreds of other small scale tests in the Cold fusion area it proves that this effect exists and Ecat proves it is getting mature.))
All highly problematic.
((I would like to see your face when the first commercial Ecat plant proves its claims.))
Probably not as much as I would. Don’t you find it strange that China, India, and much of the developing world are still building and starting up new coal-fired power plants every week. If Hot Cat is real, why are these great nations with their millions of scientists and engineers still designing, building, and bringing on line thousands of new coal-fired plants? Why hasn’t Rossi and company gone to the major nation energy departments and the UN with a simple cheat-proof demonstration of his Hot Cat, and said, “Hold up fellows; don’t build any more of those expensive and polluting coal plants; I will provide you with clean Hot Cat steam for 1/3 the cost of nasty coal steam.”? There is only one plausible answer. Neither Cool Cat nor Hot Cat actually works.
You are obviously very engadged with the subject Alan. You must come from an environment where everybody cheates and fraud is the most ultimate form of professionalism. I guess you are a politician. Am I right?
90% of the people are not like that but are instead reasonably thrustworthy. Honorable people, like professors are very rarely fraudulous and to find six of them is an impossible task and extremely unlikely.
Based on their report Elforsk is going to build a LENR lab and invest considerable money. They obviously also thrust these real scientists. Why don’t you, bad youth perhaps?
Then there is your suggestion that heat energy can only be reliably measured using melting ice. I am sure that if they had used the melting ice method you would have suggested that that method was completely fraudulous, because the ice could have been treated with eg thousands of different salts or CO2 ice etc, etc, wouldn’t you? To my professional judgment is the probability of fraud for the latest Third Party Test of the Ecat very low wheras your arguments seem extremely tedious and fraudulous so I conclude that you lose, sorry.
((You are obviously very engadged with the subject Alan. You must come from an environment where everybody cheates and fraud is the most ultimate form of professionalism.))
Yes I do come from an environment where a significant percentage of the population attempts to actualize its desires by deceit, pretense, lying, cheating, extortion, and sometimes even torture and murder. That environment is generally known as human civilization on Earth.
((I guess you are a politician. Am I right?))
You couldn’t be further from the truth of it. My cardinal dedication is to truth, justice, and kindness, so I’m disqualified from being a politician; but I am a student of mechanical/electronic engineering, Western civilization, economics, history, military science, and current affairs. If you would bother to study the foundation stones of political science, Plato’s, “Republic,” Tacitus’s, “Annals of Imperial Rome, Machiavelli’s, “Discourses on Livi,” Hobbes’s “Leviathan,” Locke’s, Two Treatises of Government, “Montesquieu’s, “The Spirit of the Laws,” “Hitler’s, Mein Kampf,” etc., you might immediately see the common theme. They each try to speculate on how to counter or exploit the ancient tendency of clever men to advance their ambitions by the most expedient means possible, and ethics/morality rarely impedes their methods.
Our war colleges teach a doctrine that the great general obtains his objectives according to the ignoble doctrines of Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, and Liddel Heart.
In his “Republic,” Plato produces the famous dialogue between Socrates and Thrasymachus, where the sophist argues for realizing his personal desires through deception, fraud, and theft, and Plato tries in vain to produce a truly telling counter-argument
.
History teaches that in most cases where the stakes are high, people will lie, cheat, and steal. Rossi took his legitimate college degree in moral philosophy not nuclear physics. If anyone on Earth knows how to lie, cheat, and steal, it would be Rossi.
So I’m unashamed to confess that I don’t believe in the virgin birth, the 20% return on secure investments, or that clapping of hands will save poor little Tinker Bell. It seems plausible to me that middle class physicists will sell or lease some or all of their reputations to gain something they value more. I think it doubtful that any of the physicists engaged in the latest Hot Cat report would refuse $100,000 to slant their findings, fake some aspect of an E-Cat test, or conspire with Rossi to do so
.
For a number of years I worked in the US space program, and my experience there taught me that senior scientists and engineers would unashamedly and routinely sell out their honor for a pleasant job that paid in today’s money about $100,000/year
.
((90% of the people are not like that but are instead reasonably thrustworthy. Honorable people, like professors are very rarely fraudulous and to find six of them is an impossible task and extremely unlikely.))
That sounds more like a Pollyannaish creed of faith than an objective report where the integrity of the 90% is tempted even to the $50,000 level. It would be a trivial task for Rossi. Neither the scientific community nor I will believe anything as incredible as the Hot Cat report based on the integrity of academic physicists.
((Based on their report Elforsk is going to build a LENR lab and invest considerable money. They obviously also thrust these real scientists. Why don’t you, bad youth perhaps?))
My method and standards of character judgment does not derive so much from my wonderfully innocent wild-Indian childhood, but more from a study of history and personal hands-on experience above the age of 40.
((Then there is your suggestion that heat energy can only be reliably measured using melting ice. I am sure that if they had used the melting ice method you would have suggested that that method was completely fraudulous, because the ice could have been treated with eg thousands of different salts or CO2 ice etc, etc, wouldn’t you?))
I have asserted several times I will not believe and share your naïve faith until a technically cheat-proof test of excess energy is passed. The simplest and cheapest such test is just to melt some ice. You don’t like that approach because it threatens to reveal your feel-good faith is false. Rossi doesn’t like it because then his game would be over. He doesn’t know how to make the elephant disappear while the audience is watching in front of the curtain and he is never going to try.
((To my professional judgment is the probability of fraud for the latest Third Party Test of the Ecat very low wheras your arguments seem extremely tedious and fraudulous so I conclude that you lose, sorry.))
Just what do I lose?
I’ll confess a faith in reason, but not in the priceless value of reputation. There is little historical shame in the prostitution of honor; the shame is in prostituting it too cheaply.
In his late 1600s letter to Mr. Clifford, George Villers the 2nd Duke of Buckingham, wrote, “The world is made up, for the most part of fools and knaves, both irreconcilable foes to truth, the fools being slaves to their blind credulity, which we may properly call bigotry, and the knaves too jealous of that power they have usurped over the folly and ignorance of the others, which the establishment of an empire of reason would destroy.” You are doing your part to support the blind credulity factor.
It is hard to say why these 6 honorable men do what they do. But the facts are against them.
I would love to see a working e-cat, by the way.
Hi Alain, If you are right then we should have commercial LENR technology on the market shortly. We’ll see what follows but I have been waiting and so have you for several years as this hot potato keeps being tossed around with no commercial technology emerging. I’m hoping this isn’t just more obfuscation and hot air.
The calibration is bogus, it is quite obvious.
[…] Is there a cold fusion commercial reactor on the horizon and will physicists finally unlock the secret to low energy nuclear reactions? […]
As if ice won’t melt at 1260 C over 32 days! So stupid! What a Clown!
For all you posters who chime in with the whole conspiracy, fraud, trickster posting. You are ridiculously ignorant. It doesn’t matter what anyone who post here thinks. What matters is that people who actually do something are putting their time and money into this technology. Some of you will continue to argue about it until its in the store for sale down the street. Unless you have first hand knowledge of the science your opinion is useless, unless you can back it up with verified facts. Those of you who are snakes trying to protect the status-quo I have no sympathy for you, you are like the candle makers at the beginning of the electric bulb you will say anything to undermine the technology. Snakes and Clowns. Avoid them both.
What an absurd comment. This technology would be a welcome breakthrough. The problem is simple. Rossi has made the credibility of the technology suspect.
That’s an asinine comment and here is why; the credibility of the technology does not rest solely on Andrea Rossi, there are hundreds of people, thousands of hours and millions of dollars currently being invested in this technology. A continuous stream of LENR patents have been filed referencing this technology over the past 10 years. The only reason this technology is suspect is because it is difficult to protect the intellectual property on a new invention such as this and there are powerful interest that would love for this technology not to be real. Have you ever filed a patent? If so, you know that it is costly and time consuming to insinuate that all these people are filing patents to scam people is ludicrous. The science involved with LENR is complex, everyone wants the secrete formula without doing the actual work.
Consider this patent application from Inventors Pekka Soininen, Applicant Etiam Oy
https://www.google.com/patents/WO2013076378A2?cl=en&dq=WO2013076378&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GPw7VLTILs7uoASCmIGICw&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA
Consider this company: http://www.solarhydrogentrends.com/
Rossi and Industrial Hear are not the only people utilizing the technology. It has become a race. Pay attention.
Well, Liberty, there seems to be no end to the free-energy silliness of true believers. Your link to a site that won’t open: ((Consider this company: http://www.solarhydrogentrends..)).
But, by wasting time one can get some problematic information from other sites. The definitive test of these preposterous claims would be to merely burn the hydrogen produced in a COP 1345 LENR system under a SS barrel of crushed ice and weigh the melt water produced per unit of time. The claimed COP of 1345/1 is so incredible that the obvious definitive “test” would be to burn the H2 produced in a small boat steam engine boiler (say 11% thermal efficiency of the steam engine), let the engine drive an electrical generator, which would power the LENR water disassociator apparatus. Then in principle the excess hydrogen and electricity could go to power civilization. If the huge COP claims are actually true, a sealed system that produces more hydrogen than it burns and dumps out free electricity is an almost trivial mechanical execution. But I’m sure Solar Hydrogen Trends is never going to do either that or melt any ice, because the results will promptly prove the strong scent of baloney surrounding the claims is coming from actual bologna, not from LENR energy disassociation of H2 from water molecules.
My link to: http://revolution-green.com/hydrogen-production-breakthrough/ does work, and it handily demolishes all the silly COP claims by the Solar Hydrogen Trends true believers. Just like everyone else on Earth, Solar Hydrogen Trends can only break the H20 molecular bonds by investing more energy into breaking the bonds than will be released when the H2 produced is burned. Solar Hydrogen Trends would go broke trying to sell H2 derived from the LENR disassociation of water. The cheapest way to get commercially significant amounts of H2 is through the well-developed process of steam reforming of methane. Do try to keep George Villers’s keen observations in mind.
As if ice won’t steam away at 1260 C over 32 days! So stupid! What a Clown!
So your argument in support of LENR is to insult the character and intelligence of those who say they will only believe based upon cheat-proof ice phase change demonstrations. Your position is logically the same as the preacher asserting those who cannot/will not believe in the virgin birth are going to hell. I’m guessing neither the preacher nor you understand enough physics to deliver a credible reconciliation of the kinetic theory of gases with the workings of an ordinary household refrigerator.
A simple coil of 0.030 wall 3/16″ SS tube pressurized to 500 psi with helium or hydrogen gas and coiled around the Hot Cat wouldn’t melt and could easily transfer 2-3 kW of heat to the water filled sump of a garbage pail full of crushed ice. The helium loop would transfer the heat from the glowing hot cat cylinder to water in the garbage pail sump. A ½” hole drilled 6” above the bottom of the garbage pail would drain melt water for weighing. If you want to waste more time past a few hours of testing you could always dump more ice into the garbage pail.
The only definitive data you would need to collect would be input energy, initial ice temperature, volume of melt water, and elapsed time. I’m guessing you will need to add ice at a rate that would compensate for the melting from about 95% of input energy. There is no need for pressurized helium/hydrogen in the heat transfer loop. Tap water would work just fine. Rossi’s old peristaltic pump from his earlier cool cat demonstrations could just circulate sump water in the ice pail through the heat transfer loop. It doesn’t matter if some phase change from liquid to steam happens at the point of Hot Cat heat exchanger contact, all gas phase water would condense and release all its heat of vaporization in the garbage pail sump. Nearly all the heat absorbed from the hot cat cylinder would be transferred to the pail of cracked ice. That heat would be absorbed by the ice to liquid phase change. You could play the futile Hot Cat game as long as you like merely by adding more ice, but even the slower HS physics class students would soon observe the rate of melting is within 10% of what would normally be expected from the external energy supplied to the Hot Cat.
Even though you are trying hard to be a true believer, after a few hours of watching ice melt at a rate consistent with only the input energy, your faith would be shaken and you would give it up and decide not to stand around for the next 31 days waiting for the rate of melt water production to significantly increase. The whole world of mainstream science and technology, and certainly myself, would immediately snap to attention if the ice melted faster than normally expected from the amount of energy supplied to the hot cat. Yet you true believers, and LENR promoters don’t like the simple, cheap, cheat-proof, method of measurement. Instead you either ignore or mock and ridicule the cheat-proof method. Why is that? Why not just melt some ice and settle the question?
Just because the Hot Cat cylinder is heated to a dull cherry 1260 C is no sign that the heat transfer medium would be 1260 C. The garbage pail sump water temperature might be near +3 C, and that would be the temperature of the fluid returned to the heat exchanger coil around the Hot Cat. Heat exchanger fluid exit temperature might reach near 100 C, but that would depend on fluid flow rates.
Any one vested in LENR knows that so many of the “successes” enjoyed in the lab have never translated to a commercial product. An Aussie company signed up to deliver LENR home systems several years ago. Did we see one? Patent filings have been rejected. Defkalion, the new U. S. company that acquired Rossi’s product, and others keep promising a product. But the anomalous heat measured in experimental settings doesn’t seem to be consistent. So I remain a skeptic about the practicality of LENR. Something may be happening in the chemistry. Something atomic may be happening. But is it a technology capable of becoming an everyday product? I would be thrilled if it were so. It is clear you think the product is ready to go. Belief doesn’t make it so.
Whatever anomalous heat is in these tests, it is not nuclear in origin. LENR is combination of wishful thinking, sloppy science and fraud.
The excess heat remains a bit of a puzzle. I too believe that what is being observed is not nuclear, rather a chemical reaction. If it is sloppy science and fraud then there are a number of so called scientists and engineers to blame. I keep going back to Allen Gage request for a very simple test such as melting a bucket of ice. Instead we get readouts on graphs.
Believers say there is a race on to produce the first commercial LENR. Well when it arrives will we have egg on our face, or will we expose what you refer to as a fraud. In the interim these anomalous heat demonstrations show up about once every 6 months or so and I get to write about them.
It is incredible this scam goes on and on for years. Well, this new test and report is so full of holes, that I believe Rossi’s time should be over soon.
[…] Independent Testing Report on LENR Cold Fusion Technology Released […]