Cold Fusion part deux, short every oil, gas & utility on the planet??

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by tmarket, Jan 23, 2011.

  1. Where have you guys been the last three days? I rely on this website for the most eye catching news, controversies and conspiracies.

    Italian scientists claim to have demonstrated cold fusion (w/ Video)
    January 20, 2011 by Lisa Zyga

    ( -- Few areas of science are more controversial than cold fusion, the hypothetical near-room-temperature reaction in which two smaller nuclei join together to form a single larger nucleus while releasing large amounts of energy. In the 1980s, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleishmann claimed to have demonstrated cold fusion - which could potentially provide the world with a cheap, clean energy source - but their experiment could not be reproduced. Since then, all other claims of cold fusion have been illegitimate, and studies have shown that cold fusion is theoretically implausible, causing mainstream science to become highly speculative of the field in general.

    The claim

    Rossi and Focardi say that, when the atomic nuclei of nickel and hydrogen are fused in their reactor, the reaction produces copper and a large amount of energy. The reactor uses less than 1 gram of hydrogen and starts with about 1,000 W of electricity, which is reduced to 400 W after a few minutes. Every minute, the reaction can convert 292 grams of 20°C water into dry steam at about 101°C. Since raising the temperature of water by 80°C and converting it to steam requires about 12,400 W of power, the experiment provides a power gain of 12,400/400 = 31. As for costs, the scientists estimate that electricity can be generated at a cost of less than 1 cent/kWh, which is significantly less than coal or natural gas plants.
  2. i would not be surprised if the whole thing is a fraud. check out this paragraph:

    "....“My process has nothing to do with the process of Piantelli,” Rossi wrote. “The proof is that I am making operating reactors; he is not.”

    When I visited Piantelli, I began to understand some of the reasons that he had not moved his LENR work into commercialization. His real passion is to help heal people with cancer through his innovations in biophysics. He claims to have a very high success rate. I covered this in more detail in my 2008 article..."

    so one scientists cures cancer and his student/colleague creates cold fusion - sounds too improbable to me.
  3. dave4532


    Sure, no problem, with a 1000 W light bulb I can heat 292 grams of water to 101 deg. C. They are confusing power with energy. Power is energy divided by time. It will take them forever to generate the energy required to move generators. By that time, previously heated water will cool again and more energy will be required to keep it hot. Efficiency will drop below 1. No free lunch.
  4. Pekelo


    OP. before you ejaculate (or bother us with stupid shit like this again) please read the feedback section of your own link.

    Also read about closed loop demonstrations, what these "scientists" refused to do so...

    Now in other news, I know of a start up with a working perpetuum mobile. Anyone interested??? :)
  5. jprad


    Dry steam at only 1°C above boiling?

    Sounds like bullshit to me.

    Dry steam is superheated and has a very low water vapor content, like around 5% or so. The minimum temperature for that is in the 300-400°F range.
  6. 377OHMS


    The whole thing stinks.

    It works! Buy a reactor and you will see!
  7. Okay, healthy skepticism all around, that's good. Rossi and Focardi also claimed a 1 MW reactor being assembled in the US.

    What they are describing is not a perpetual motion machine, it is a two stage nuclear fusion process at near room temperature that converts nickel and hydrogen to copper. Anyone long nickel futures? Not that this process will use a lot of nickel. Notice that no palladium is required in this process.
    "they in fact ARE describing a second stage positron/electron annihilation occuring in the second describing this

    NiX + P1 -> Cu(X+1)

    Which then decays to:

    Cu(X+1) -> Ni(X+1) + Positron + Neutrino

    Then the positron is annihilating with an electron, which explains a decent portion of the missing mass to energy conversion.

    Then one process produces a neutrino while another process produces an anti-neutrino, so while incredibly unlikely, I suppose if these two collide they too would annihilate.

    All of these things taken together would be in the ball park for the right energy for going all the way from Ni58 to Cu63. Since the annihilated electrons are coming from locations other than the atomic nuclei, their mass-energy did not originate in the nuclei, but in the orbitals of surrounding atoms. Positrons, being charged, would naturally be attracted straight to electrons: they probably can't miss..."
  8. Those of us who are old enough will remember the promise that nuclear generation of electricity would be so cheap that we would not need meters.
  9. Oh yes and to be fair before UK utilities were carved up and privatised it was cheap.

    And before anyone jumps in and cries "state support" sorry folks it kept house rather well.
    #10     Jan 24, 2011