by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA
Abstract
Recent accelerator experiments on fusion of various elements have clearly demonstrated that the effective cross-sections of these reactions depend on what material the target particle is placed in. In these experiments, there was a significant increase in the probability of interaction when target nuclei are imbedded in a conducting crystal or are a part of it. These experiments open a new perspective on the problem of so-called cold nuclear fusion.
Introduction
Experiments of Fleischmann and Pons made about 20 years ago [1], raised the question about the possibility of nuclear DD fusion at room temperature. Conflicting results of numerous experiments that followed, dampened the initial euphoria, and the scientific community quickly came to common belief, that the results of [1] are erroneous. One of the convincing arguments of skeptics was the lack in these experiments of evidence of nuclear decay products. It was assumed that “if there are no neutrons, therefore is no fusion.” However, quite a large international group of physicists, currently a total of about 100-150 people, continues to work in this direction. To date, these enthusiasts have accumulated considerable experience in the field. The leading group of physicists working in this direction, in our opinion, is the group led by Dr. M. McKubre [2]. Interesting results were also obtained in the group of Dr. Y. Arata [3]. Despite some setbacks with the repeatability of results, these researchers still believe in the existence of the effect of cold fusion, even though they do not fully understand its nature. Some time ago we proposed a possible mechanism to explain the results of cold fusion of deuterium [4]. This work considered a possible mechanism of acceleration of deuterium contaminant atoms in the crystals through the interaction of atoms with long-wavelength lattice vibrations in deformed parts of the crystal. Estimates have shown that even if a very small portion of the impurity atoms (~105) get involved in this process and acquires a few keV energy, this will be sufficient to describe the energy released in experiments [2]. This work also hypothesized that the lifetime of the intermediate nucleus increases with decreasing energy of its excitation, so that so-called “radiation-less cooling” of the excited nucleus becomes possible. In [5], we set out a more detailed examination of the process. Quite recently, a sharp increase of the probability of fusion of various elements was found in accelerator experiments for the cases when the target particles are either imbedded in a metal crystal or are a part of the conducting crystal. These experiments compel us to look afresh on the problem of cold fusion.
Recent experiments on fusion of elements on accelerators
For atom-atom collisions the expression of the probability of penetration through a Coulomb barrier for bare nuclei should be modified, because atomic electrons screen the repulsion effect of nuclear charge. Such a modification for the isolated atom collisions has been performed in H.J. Assenbaum and others [6] using static Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The experimental results that shed further light on this problem were obtained in relatively recent works C. Rolfs [7] and K. Czerski [8]. Review of earlier studies on this subject is contained in the work of L. Bogdanova [9]. In these studies a somewhat unusual phenomenon was observed: the sub-barrier fusion cross sections of elements depend strongly on the physical state of the matter in which these processes are taking place. Figure 1 (left) shows the experimental data [8], demonstrating the dependence of the astrophysical factor S(E) for the fusion of elements of sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of the matter that contains the target nucleus 7Li. The same figure (right) presents similar data [7] for the DD reaction, when the target nucleus was embedded in a zirconium crystal. It must be noted that the physical nature of the phenomenon of increasing cross synthesis of elements in the case where this process occurs in the conductor crystal lattice is still not completely clear.
Figure 1. Up – experimental data [8], showing the energy dependence of the S-factor for sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of matter that contains the nucleus 7Li. Down – the similar data [7] for the reaction of DD, when the target nucleus is placed in a crystal of zirconium. The data are well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV.
The phenomenon is apparently due to the strong anisotropy of the electrical fields of the crystal lattice in the presence of free conduction electrons. Data for zirconium crystals for the DD reactions can be well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV. It is natural to assume that the corresponding distance between of two atoms of deuterium in these circumstances is less than the molecular size of deuterium. In the case of the screening potential of 300 eV, the distance of convergence of deuterium atoms is ~510ˆ12 m, which is about an order of magnitude smaller than the size of a molecule of deuterium, where the screening potential is 27 eV. As it turned out, the reaction rate for DD fusion in these conditions is quite sufficient to describe the experimental results of McKubre and others [2]. Below we present the calculation of the rate process similar to the mu-catalysis where, instead of the exchange interaction by the muon, the factor of bringing together two deuterons is the effect of conduction electrons and the lattice of the crystal.
Calculation of the DD fusion rate for “Metal-Crystal” catalysis
The expression for the cross section of synthesis in the collision of two nuclei can be written as
where for the DD fusion
Here the energy E is shown in keV in the center of mass. S(E) astrophysical factor (at low energies it can be considered constant), the factor 1/E reflects de Broglie dependence of cross section on energy. The main energy dependence of the fusion is contained in an expression
that determines the probability of penetration of the deuteron through the Coulomb barrier. From the above expressions, it is evident that in the case of DD collisions and in the case of DDμcatalysis, the physics of the processes is the same. We use this fact to determine the probability of DD fusion in the case of the “metal-crystalline” DD-catalysis. In the case of DDμ- catalysis the size of the muon deuterium molecules (ion+) is ~5×10ˆ13m. Deuterium nuclei approach such a distance at a kinetic energy ~3 keV. Using the expression (1), we found that the ratio of σ(3.0 keV)/σ(0.3 keV) = 1.05×10ˆ16. It should be noted that for the free deuterium molecule this ratio [ σ(3.0keV)/σ(0.03keV)] is about 10ˆ73. Experimental estimations of the fusion rate for the (DDμ)+ case presented in the paper by Hale [10]:
Thus, we obtain for the “metal-crystalline” catalysis DD fusion rate (for zirconium case):
Is this enough to explain the experiments on cold fusion? We suppose that a screening potential for palladium is about the same as for zirconium. 1 cmˆ3 (12.6 g) of palladium contains 6.0210ˆ23(12.6/106.4) = 0.710ˆ23 atoms. Fraction of crystalline cells with dual (or more) the number of deuterium atoms at a ratio of D: Pd ~1:1 is the case in the experiments [2] ~0.25 (e.g., for Poisson distribution). Crystal cell containing deuterium atoms 0 or 1, in the sense of a fusion reaction, we consider as “passive”. Thus, the number of “active” deuterium cells in 1 cmˆ3 of palladium is equal to 1.810ˆ22. In this case, in a 1 cmˆ3 of palladium the reaction rate will be
this corresponds to the energy release of about 3 kW. This is quite sufficient to explain the results of McKubre group [2]. Most promising version for practical applications would be Platinum (Pt) crystals, where the screening potential for d(d,p)t fusion at room temperature is about 675 eV [11]. In this case, DD fusion rate would be:
The problem of “nonradiative” release of nuclear fusion energy
As we have already noted, the virtual absence of conventional nuclear decay products of the compound nucleus was widely regarded as one of the paradoxes of DD fusion with the formation of 4He in the experiments [2]. We proposed the explanation of this paradox in [4]. We believe that after penetration through the Coulomb barrier at low energies and the materialization of the two deuterons in a potential well, these deuterons retain their identity for some time. This time defines the frequency of further nuclear reactions. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the mechanism of this process. After penetration into the compound nucleus at a very low energy, the deuterons happen to be in a quasi-stabile state seating in the opposite potential wells. In principle, this system is a dual “electromagnetic-nuclear” oscillator. In this oscillator the total kinetic energy of the deuteron turns into potential energy of the oscillator, and vice versa. In the case of very low-energy, the amplitude of oscillations is small, and the reactions with nucleon exchange are suppressed.
Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the mechanism of the nuclear decay frequency dependence on the compound nucleus 4He* excitation energy for the merging deuterons is presented. The diagram illustrates the shape of the potential well of the compound nucleus. The edges of the potential well are defined by the strong interaction, the dependence at short distances Coulomb repulsion.
The lifetime of the excited 4He* nucleus can be considered in the formalism of the usual radioactive decay. In this case,
Here ν is the decay frequency, i.e., the reciprocal of the decay time τ. According to our hypothesis, the decay rate is a function of excitation energy of the compound nucleus E. Approximating with the first two terms of the polynomial expansion, we have:
Here ν° is the decay frequency at asymptotically low excitation energy. According to quantum-mechanical considerations, the wave functions of deuterons do not completely disappear with decreasing energy, as illustrated by the introduction of the term ν°. The second term of the expansion describes the linear dependence of the frequency decay on the excitation energy. The characteristic nuclear frequency is usually about 10ˆ22 sˆ-1. In fusion reaction D+D4He there is a broad resonance at an energy around 8 MeV. Simple estimates by the width of the resonance and the uncertainty relation gives a lifetime of the intermediate state of about 0.810ˆ22 s. The “nuclear” reaction rate falls approximately linearly with decreasing energy. Apparently, a group of McKubre [2] operates in an effective energy range below 2 keV in the c.m.s. Thus, in these experiments, the excitation energy is at least 4×10ˆ3 times less than in the resonance region. We assume that the rate of nuclear decay is that many times smaller. The corresponding lifetime is less than 0.3×10ˆ18 s. This fall in the nuclear reaction rate has little effect on the ratio of output decay channels of the compound nucleus, but down to a certain limit. This limit is about 6 keV. A compound nucleus at this energy is no longer an isolated system, since virtual photons from the 4He* can reach to the nearest electron and carry the excitation energy of the compound nucleus. The total angular momentum carried by the virtual photons can be zero, so this process is not prohibited. For the distance to the nearest electron, we chose the radius of the electrons in the helium atom (3.1×10ˆ11 m). From the uncertainty relations, duration of this process is about 10ˆ-19 seconds. In the case of “metal-crystalline” catalysis the distance to the nearest electrons can be significantly less and the process of dissipation of energy will go faster. It is assumed that after an exchange of multiple virtual photons with the electrons of the environment the relatively small excitation energy of compound nucleus 4He* vanishes, and the frequency of the compound nucleus decaying with the emission of nucleons will be determined only by the term ν°. For convenience, we assume that this value is no more than 10ˆ12-10ˆ14 per second. In this case, the serial exchange of virtual photons with the electrons of the environment in a time of about 10ˆ-16 will lead to the loss of ~4 MeV from the compound nucleus (after which decays with emission of nucleons are energetically forbidden), and then additional exchange will lead to the loss of all of the free energy of the compound nucleus (24 MeV) and finally the nucleus will be in the 4He ground state. The energy dissipation mechanism of the compound nucleus 4He* with virtual photons, discussed above, naturally raises the question of the electromagnetic-nuclear structure of the excited compound nucleus.
Fig. 3. Possible energy diagram of the excited 4He* nucleus is presented.
Figure 3 represents a possible energy structure of the excited 4He* nucleus and changes of its spatial configuration in the process of releasing of excitation energy. Investigation of this process might be useful to study the quark-gluon dynamics and the structure of the nucleus.
Discussion
Perhaps, in this long-standing history of cold fusion, finally the mystery of this curious and enigmatic phenomenon is gradually being opened. Besides possible benefits that the practical application of this discovery will bring, the scientific community should take into account the sociological lessons that we have gained during such a long ordeal of rejection of this brilliant, though largely accidental, scientific discovery. We would like to express the special appreciation to the scientists that actively resisted the negative verdict imposed about twenty years ago on this topic by the vast majority of nuclear physicists.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Prof. S.B. Dabagov, Dr. M. McKubre, Dr. F. Tanzela, Dr. V.A. Kuzmin, Prof. L.N. Bogdanova and Prof. T.V. Tetereva for help and valuable discussions. The author is grateful to Prof. V.G. Kadyshevsky, Prof. V.A. Rubakov, Prof. S.S. Gershtein, Prof. V.V. Belyaev, Prof. N.E. Tyurin, Prof. V.L. Aksenov, Prof. V.M. Samsonov, Prof. I.M. Gramenitsky, Prof. A.G. Olshevsky, Prof. V.G. Baryshevsky for their help and useful advice. I am grateful to Dr. VM. Golovatyuk, Prof. M.D. Bavizhev, Dr. N.I. Zimin, Prof. A.M. Taratin for their continued support. I am also grateful to Prof. A. Tollestrup, Prof. U. Amaldi, Prof. W. Scandale, Prof. A. Seiden, Prof. R. Carrigan, Prof. A. Korol, Prof. J. Hauptmann, Prof. V. Guidi, Prof. F. Sauli, Prof. G. Mitselmakher, Prof. A. Takahashi, and Prof. X. Artru for stimulating feedback. Continued support in this process was provided with my colleagues and the leadership of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, and I am especially grateful to Prof. R. Parkey, Prof. N. Rofsky, Prof. J. Anderson and Prof. G. Arbique. I express special thanks to my wife, N.A. Tsyganova for her stimulating ideas and uncompromising support.
References
1. M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, M. W. Anderson, L. J. Li, M. Hawkins, J. Electro anal. Chem. 287, 293 (1990).
2. M. C. H. McKubre, F. Tanzella, P. Tripodi, and P. Haglestein, In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2000, Lerici (La Spezia), Ed. F. Scaramuzzi, (Italian Physical Society, Bologna, Italy, 2001), p 3; M. C. H. McKubre, In Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: Proceedings Of The 10th International Conference On Cold Fusion; Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 21-29 August, 2003, Ed by P. L. Hagelstein and S. R. Chubb, (World Sci., Singapore, 2006). M. C. H. McKubre, “Review of experimental measurements involving dd reactions”, Presented at the Short Course on LENR for ICCF-10, August 25, 2003.
3. Y. Arata, Y. Zhang, “The special report on research project for creation of new energy”, J. High Temp. Soc. (1) (2008).
4. E. Tsyganov, in Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 1981–1989. Original Russian text published in Yadernaya Fizika, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 2036–2044.
5. E.N. Tsyganov, “The mechanism of DD fusion in crystals”, submitted to IL NUOVO CIMENTO 34 (4-5) (2011), in Proceedings of the International Conference Channeling 2010 in Ferrara, Italy, October 3-8 2010.
6. H.J. Assenbaum, K. Langanke and C. Rolfs, Z. Phys. A – Atomic Nuclei 327, p. 461-468 (1987).
7. C. Rolfs, “Enhanced Electron Screening in Metals: A Plasma of the Poor Man”, Nuclear Physics News, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006.
8. A. Huke, K. Czerski, P. Heide, G. Ruprecht, N. Targosz, and W. Zebrowski, “Enhancement of deuteron-fusion reactions in metals and experimental implications”, PHYSICAL REVIEW C 78, 015803 (2008).
9. L.N. Bogdanova, Proceedings of International Conference on Muon Catalyzed Fusion and Related Topics, Dubna, June 18–21, 2007, published by JINR, E4, 15-2008-70, p. 285-293
10. G.M. Hale, “Nuclear physics of the muon catalyzed d+d reactions”, Muon Catalyzed Fusion 5/6 (1990/91) p. 227-232.
11. F. Raiola (for the LUNA Collaboration), B. Burchard, Z. Fulop, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.31, 1141 (2005); Eur. Phys. J. A 27, s01, 79 (2006).
by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA
Dear Dennis Lynn:
To convince the global community about the fact that we are manufacturing plants which work regularly, producing megawatthours in the industrial applications will be our plants, not our reports. The World demands facts, not papers in this field. Nevertheless, papers have their importance, when they are referred to facts: in our presentation at Zurich we will describe the validation tests which we made in July and in August with our High Temperature E-Cats.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Do you feel that the the report you plan on filing in September 2012 and the additional testing in October 2012, will be sufficent to convince the global community that the technology that you have “unleashed” via your ecat designs is indeed real and capable of shifting the energy paradigm, in the very forseeable future, towards a new, lower carbon era?
Dennis Lynn
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
1- 10 kW x 100 modules
2- Same
3- 30 °C
4- The plant can be attended from remote
Warmest Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi,
The new species of Hot Cats (Feles Calida) are smaller, so their containers can be smaller. Many internal geometries are possible, and you have probably tried several configurations.
If the axis/axes of the cylinder modules are aligned with the container length, two groups of 54 modules (left side/right side) could be arranged as 6 rows by 9 columns and the longest dimension could be from 4 to 5 meters in length (vs. 6 meters). Other dimensions would remain the same since people have to think/work “inside the box”.
If the modules are arranged as 9 rows by 6 columns, the overall length could be reduced by 1/3 and the maximum dimension (length) could be 4 meters or less.
1) What is the yield of each of the modules in the 1 MW Hot Cat (F. Calida)?
(10 or 20 kW)?
2) Do you plan to reduce the maximum length of the container to 4 to 5 meters, or stay with the 6 meter length?
3) What air temperature is maintained inside the E-Cat/Hot Cat container during operation?
4) An operator would probably be placed in a protected area next to the container during operation, as it may be too much to expect a person to be inside the main container. Is that correct? (Otherwise you’ll need a big air conditioner!)
Joseph
Dear Rick, The Plumber:
We know and will remember.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Please don’t forget about me when looking for licensed installers and service providers. I have many references. Most of the work I do now is heating; new construction, repairs and maintenance. I am also able to fabricate anything in steel, stainless and aluminum. I have started gearing up for the demand for e-cats. I want to ” help save the world ” too.
Dear Francesco Toro:
Thank you, same to you!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Beh… today you rest … or not?
For us Italians today is Ferragosto and therefore:
Good 15 August Andrea!
F.T.
@ Luca Coppola: you’ve written:”I’m just wondering… What can you do if European Comission gived you a fraction of the 1,3 BILLION € ( not million, BILLION!) they gave to ITER project just to demonstrate your theory? At what point would you be arrived?”
I’m telling you where it would arrive the friend ing. Rossi? Dear Lucca with 1.3 billion euros allocated only for the research most likely::
1) Today we wouldn’t still here to ask how does the E-Cat !
2)Probably our friend Andrea would be eased from all debts past and future and live peaceful and relaxed, focused on improving his rediscovered;
3)someone would propose for the Nobel Prize!
Instead we are in Italy! That was a great country of great fantasy and art, while today it has become a small village of swindlers, sharks and snakes!
I hate to say it but many gentlemen of our scientific environment (or Scientistic?)They forgot that the various Marconi and Meucci had not impressive titles of chair, But they were highly passionate to the research and when necessary, you engage in without jealousies in the improvement of the knowledge of others! But one thing is certain: many of these gentlemen have forgotten that WE ITALIANS we a dowry that goes beyond that of many other …The dowry of fantasy that leads to genuine creativity.
This dowry is surely the prerogative of Andrea and he has shown widely!
Sincerely
F.T.
Dear Francesco Toro,
Thank you, he,he…lavolale, lavolale!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. Rossi
You have written :
“”we have made validation tests with modules of 10 kW of power with operation temperatures of 1000 Celsius degrees””
thousand °C… THOUSAND DEGREES CELSIUS??? BUT…THIS IS SIMPLY MARVELOUS!!!
With this temperature are almost in a level of metallurgical foundry!
They are at least 12 the fondibilis metals and among these the aluminum, the gold and the silver…All besides the classical white metals as pond and lead
Fantastic! Almost unbelievable!
AND’ A GIGANTIC REVOLUTION!
We all hope soon to burst with laughter at seeing the face of satirical snakes.
Ah! Ah! Ah!
In respect to your fear to fail before reaching the objective you must have trust in yourself. But I think that in this same blog they are so many those that would give you credit and solidarity. Even undersigning a type of loan with reserve of restitution when your job is finished; or some sort of corporate participation. There are so many solutions but one thing is sure…you’ve gotta move on. At all costs … even if I were to put money.
One thing you have to fear
…A can contender that he becomes aware of your work and you can precede the production. This would be a really big deal!
We are all with you Andrea!
Lavolale! Lavolale!
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Italo R.:
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear dr. Rossi:
there are people playing with paper aeroplanes while Jumbo-jet are already flying…
Flying regards
Italo R.
Dear Charlie Sutherland:
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi,
Your last letter to Luca Coppola was great. Can’t wait to see the coming fun.
Charlie
Dear Luca Coppola:
Do not worry, we never waived our capacity to manufacture indipendently our plants, and this is the reason why we have success now: we do not need funding, we are funded by our Customers; should I base our development on “funding” coming from gorillas or governments probably I would be at the point to produce an excess power of 14 watts ( should the Sun shine through the windows…).
As I always said, an inventor without a manufacturing system is like a general without an army, whose will is unavoidably limited by the will of the generals with armies.
We are making enormous progresses in these days, thanks to the fact that we can take fast decisions in our factories, without a single cent of funding from gorillas and governments which could limit our space of action or delay the time terms. It is thanks to this that now LENR is a reality based on solid plants and not, as it has always been before us and still is outside our concern, a laboratory toy where everybody is so happy to produce some watt lightyear far from making real work and without the anxiety of real working plants. You know, when you play the little genius in a lab without any necessity to make real money through real work you can satisfy yourself with 14 watts. If you have to pay installments, you need real plants, and you gotta do them, if you want not to have troubles. I wake up every morning around 5 a.m. with the fear to fail, and this fear to fall is what gives me the strength to fight to survive through our technology, making real work with it. It is not a matter of chatters and conferences, it is matter of life or death. So do not worry: it will be not very easy to stop us: 14 watts do not stop 1 MW.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Eng. Rossi,
Thanks for your reply. Well it seems to me you’ve just given us a brand new piece of news! 1000° C!! I’m looking forward to seeing your first plant unveiled and having a bunch of friends of mine shutting their mouth. 🙂
What bothers me the most is the idea of an Italian mind being compelled to search for money and support in another continent, while in Europe we are in dare need for energy and new ideas! And again we’ll have to pay USA just because they’ve looked further.
I’m just wondering… What can you do if European Comission gived you a fraction of the 1,3 BILLION € ( not million, BILLION!) they gave to ITER project just to demonstrate your theory? At what point would you be arrived?
I restate this: I personally don’t know if your ecat works, I believe it deserves a chance!
Hot regards (1000°C)
Luca Coppola
Dear Luca Coppola:
Thank you for your comment. Actually, we are manufacturing 1 MW plants, we have made validation tests with modules of 10 kW of power with operation temperatures of 1000 Celsius degrees : the market is confirming this, just forget the imbeciles who think that LENRS are still at the “14 watts ” level.
Anyway I am grateful to “Il Sole 24 Ore” and “Il Fatto Quotidiano” : at least they have understood that in Italy we started something important, even if I had to work in the USA to get real results.
Warm Regards,
Andrea Rossi
Ing. Rossi,
scrivo in italiano visto che l’articolo è in italiano:
http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/tecnologie/2012-08-09/fusione-fredda-eredita-martin-180919.shtml?uuid=Abh1E5LG
Il sole24ore la chiama “un ingegnere italiano..” beh è già un passo avanti!
Perché in Italia siamo tutti pronti a seguire qualsiasi chimera, sopratutto se straniera, ed invece lei è dovuto emigrare? Se lo è mai chiesto?
Io non so se lei riuscirà nel suo progetto, glielo auguro e lo auguro a tutti noi, io non ho nemmeno le conoscenze per capire se l’ecat funzionerà e come… Quello che credo è che con tutti i milioni che si buttano per cercare “la polvere tra gli atomi” forse due soldini, per tentare, la Patria poteva pure darglieli anche a rischio di un buco nell’acqua. O forse no… Con tutti i pozzi di petrolio che abbiamo! Mah…
Buon lavoro, aspettiamo tutti le novità che ci ha preannunciato.
Luca Coppola
Dear Alessandro Stupa:
I do not give information about what happens inside the E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi,I read that someone suppose that into the e-cat the hydrogen is transformed into metallic hydrogen at room temperature. Here is the key. Is it true ?
Best Wishes.
Dear: Andrea Rossi and Joseph Fine
“Thanks”
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Francesco Toro:
Happy Birthday !!!!
Glad that you thought to us on this important day for you.
One million of good wishes!
Andrea Rossi
Francesco Toro
Happy Birthday to you and to the great Amedeo Avogadro!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amedeo_Avogadro
Joseph Fine
Andrea,
If Siemens doesn’t object to your using their name, then it is a safe bet that you have something significant.
I know this is not much help, but I could use a couple of the home units right now. The home heating units’ brisk early sales will feed your continuing research, and your manufacturing process could be streamlined as well.
For your intellectual security, your contractors would have to take back the early units. They might also offer some token credit exchange for upgrades. Lots of folks like me would be happy to risk a little bit for being first.
I guess the hold up is still certification.
All the best,
Charlie
Dear ing. Rossi
I am 61 years old and today I realize that i still more for the experience that the good memory. Eh!eh!
Anyway, thanks for your thoughts.
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Francesco Toro:
Maybe you will invent a new application and will start a new enterprise. I think you will.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. Rossi
Allelujah!
Thank you for this ‘pinch’ of good news.
If the Carnot cycle is optimized you’re really on the right road.
Theoretically it would be enough keying on the axis of the turbine (or the machine that only you know) an electrical generator with high efficiency and you would be on horseback!
Now we will have to overcome the energy gap during ‘Not Sustain’. Perhaps you’ve already found a way to overcome this obstacle, using an E-Cat ‘auxiliary’ that works in ‘Auto Sustain’, when the Top E-Cat is “Not ‘Sustain’.
What do you want to make us dear engineer …
I like dreaming and when you give us some good information i dream again. Indeed … I dream to work directly for your project. I am of course aware that thou hast surely one more staff prepared for me and for this ‘Puff””… the dream vanishes immediately. Eh!eh!
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Francesco Toro:
1- not yet
2- now we are ready for the Carnot cycle, soon we will have the electric power. We are working with the Swedish R&D Center of Siemens on this issue. At the same time we are working on the direct conversion, but this is another movie.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Joseph Fine
Unfortunately, we do not know if the ing. Rossi:
1 has actually converted the thermal energy of ECAT2 in electrical power;
2 if it were as to the point 1, which is the global efficiency of conversion obtained;
I tried to ask a pinch of news in my previous post, but nothing escapes our friend ing. Rossi.
Probably we will wait for the month of September or October.
I hope that it will not happen what says Charlie Sutherland.
Best Regards
Dear Charlie Sutherland:
Maybe you are right.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
You’re going to have to branch off research from manufacturing. Your ideas are coming faster and faster. Don’t let anyone beat you to the market while you chase the next idea.
Charlie
Error:
MMRTG is 43 kg.
J.F.
Dear Tim Harrell:
We are already there.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
Thank you for your usual useful info.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Francesco Toro, Andrea Rossi:
The Mars Science Laboratory uses a ‘Multi-Mission’ RTG (MMRTG) with a mass of 47 kg.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMRTG
Design and specifications:
Like the earlier GPHS-RTGs (made by Teledyne) they are powered by Pu-238 dioxide GPHS modules (8 for MMRTG).[5] Initially an MMRTG will generate about 2 kW thermal power.
The GPHS-RTG used SiGe thermoelectric elements but these are no longer in production and the MMRTG will use PbTe/TAGS thermocouples (from Teledyne Energy Systems). The MMRTG is designed to produce 125W electrical power at the start of mission, falling to about 100W after 14 years.[6] With a mass of 43 kg[3] they provide about 2.8 We/kg (just over half of the earlier GPHS-RTG units).
See also Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG).
I do not know the mass of the ASRG.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Stirling_Radioisotope_Generator
Joseph Fine
Dear Andrea,
Have you considered experimenting with E-Cat under various (extreme) pressures? Might auto-ignition and more precision self-regulation be possible using a Tight-Cat/Loose-Cat control, possibly unchaining from electric drive?
Thank you for your continued good work!
Best Regards,
Tim Harrell
Dears A. Rossi & Joseph Fine
I have been watching this interesting dialog about the technological innovations in the field space. Some links are really full of technical news and i was particularly struck by the use of thermocouples for direct production of electricity.
For what i know, the performance of these systems is always ultra low is; in fact 4.7 % is really insignificant in relation to thermal power produced.
I would like to add that, in use aerospace, the ratio of produced electrical power and the weight has some importance.
The weight to consider is not only the fuel, but also that of the device used to create the energy.
In the case of GPHS device, 26 kg of weight of the device produce only 110 W and then ratio 4.2 W/kg. Really pathetic!
Me and friend Joseph Fine is missing a given essential for assessing the usefulness of a E-Cat600 °C to use spatial … The complete weight of electric converter and the electrical power actually obtainable.
Only you, dear Andrea, you know how they are actually things. Give us another pinch of knowledge?
Thanks
F.T.
Dear4 Dr Joseph Fine:
Very interesting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
The Curiosity/Mars Science Laboratory is powered by a Pu-238 Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) (or several smaller RTG’s) which together produce
2 kW-thermal and 110 Watts-electric.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf82.html
Conversion efficiency is about 110/2000 = 5.5% ( or 4.7% if each of 8 GPHS units actually produces 290 W; total power is 8 * 290 watts = 2,320 Watts (2.32 kW).
If a 10 kW E-Cat were landed on Mars and converted electricity with an efficiency of 5%, that would yield 500 Watts. If this 10 kW E-Cat were operated at 20% power, that could produce approximately the same 100 W for 5 times as long (2.5 years versus 6 months.)
When conversion efficiencies of more than 5% are achievable, endurance could be several times as long. (Endurance could also be extended by using an autoloader to replace the fuel/catalyst charge.)
In my opinion, an E-Cat power source (Space-Cat) could be developed that would be less expensive than the power source used in the Curiosity Rover.
Since no Plutonium 238 is now available for RTG’s, Space-Cats may be the only way to power future Space Labs.
1) Have you considered such Space-based applications or ‘declinations’ for this
technology?
Best regards,
Joseph
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
I will always find the time to answer to this blog: for me it is school.
Warm Regards,
A.
Andrea Rossi
A recent Technology Review article describes the German Energy Revolution (i.e. Energiwende) whose goal is to reduce dependence on nonrenewable energy sources (fossil fuels producing CO2) and to also replace nuclear power with renewable energy such as wind, solar, better power grid management etc. A very big ‘et cetera’/(und so weiter).
http://www.technologyreview.com/featured-story/428145/the-great-german-energy-experiment/
German technologists, managers and policy makers may soon think about using the “E-Kat”.
(Energie-Katalysator).
Germany produces about 621 Billion kWh-Elec./year and the E-Cat/(E-Kat) hopefully will soon produce its first kWh. So there is an enormous amount of work that has to be done over the next fifty years, let alone the next 5 to 10 years.
http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/p/pow-gen-ger.htm
What will happen to this blog when you are spending all your time helping manage the energy transformation in Germany, Japan, the United States and other parts of the world? Will you still have any time to answer questions?
Joseph
Dear Joseph Fine:
1- 400° Celsius
2- ultrasonic devices are less efficient: worsen the balance.
Warmest Regards,
A.R.
Dear Joseph Fine:
My condoleances to the Family of Martin Fleischmann.
He and Pons, after the experiments made in Argentina in the fifties under the Peron government, have been the first ones to publish the possibiliry to obtain low nuclear energy reactions.
We all are indebted with them for this inspiration.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Everyone:
Martin Fleischmann has just passed away at the age of 85.
Sorry to share the news.
http://lenrnews.eu/
Dear Andrea Rossi,
What temperature(s) must electric heaters maintain in standard E-Cat operation? (If you can discuss this.)
An alternative to internal electric heating might be the use of high intensity focused ultrasound or ‘HIFU’. HIFU is used in medicine/surgery to treat tumors by applying high temperatures (via focused ultrasound) to a small volume of tissue. The medical definition of high temperature is about 60-80 degrees C, while the E-Cat may need much higher temperatures.
Have you considered use of external ultrasonic transducer arrays to induce enough heat in the E-Cat to replace the electric heaters? You still need electricity to generate ultrasound, but I don’t know how much electricity is needed or if ultrasound can reach the desired temperature. (Or within the materials that are used.)
Other than medical uses, if your readers have experience with focused ultrasound, perhaps they could describe how HIFU are used in industry and what temperatures can be reached.
Ultrasonic regards,
Joseph Fine
Dear Alessandro Stupa:
You are right.
The solution proposed by you is one of the development option we are studying.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Spett. Signor Rossi, ha mai pensato all’ eventualità di inserire all’ interno dell’ e-cat piu’ di una cartuccia di ricarica ? mettendone 2-4 potrebbe portare i tempi i ricarica fino a due anni anzichè sei mesi.
Il sistema necessiterebbe di un caricatore automatico ma l’ utente finale non avrebbe bisogno di chiamare l’ assistenza ogni sei mesi per ricaricare il sistema. Oppure, non è possibile realizzare una cartuccia che duri piu’ a lungo dei canonici 6 mesi ?
Un abbraccio Alessandro
Dear Charlie Sutherland:
I agree.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi,
When I heard that certification of the home unit needed the provision that a licensed contractor was required to change fuel cells of the units, I was delighted. That requirement may not be necessary in the future, but for now, it will help get the units on the market much sooner.
Charlie Sutherland