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 ing. Rossi
Is it true that water vapor, although overheated, rarely exceeds 600 °C. But i thought that you had found other fluids with boiling temperature much higher than the water. For example, like the ones designed by Rubia for concentrated solar, correct with additives to elevate still said temperature. But from what i understand, only now, the temperature of 1000 °C that you’ve reported and then referring to the core of the reactor. Well, as you will see i am a stubborn and insist to find a solution. I try to shoot another blockbuster:
Seen that seem impossible to transport the heat necessary to another E-Cat toward the E-Cat main, would not possible to create an E-Cat dual core? (Or trial-core?)That is, with the respective cores metal intimately connected, working alternately one for driving and the other for production?
Not that by doing so the two E-Cat will chase their queue? Eh, he!
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Francesco Toro:
1- Confidential
2- Confidential
3- hot steam at 1 000 C is not possible
4- see #3: we can reach 600 C with steam.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ing. Rossi
Some questions:
1)Can I at least know the effective temperature to trigger the reaction?
2)I would like to know the temperature range for the maintenance of the reaction?
3) I am sorry to insist, but when you have answered my question on the use of hot fluids, thou hast said that the fluid does not disturb the core.
We are sure that it is not possible to address the hot steam to 1000 °C in another E-Cat on the core of the principal, which could cause overheating inside a tube with the gas flame or with an electric heater?
4)In a few words: if the vapor has already reached 1000 °C would suffice a jump for minimum temperature to reach the level of heating required for the reaction, but with a yield much higher, in fact, with another E-Cat used as drive?
Thank you for the possible response.
P.S. there are electrical resistances hollow cylindrical in shape …
But maybe it’s you already know.
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Pekka Janhunen:
Thank you for your considerations, always useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Some more thoughts. There are at least three kinds of heating: 1) maintenance of high temperature of the fuel, 2) maintenance of heat flux through the fuel, 3) maintaining some endothermal reaction in the fuel. If one needs to heat the core for one hour, it helps to know which type of heating is required in which phase of the process. For example (1) needs only low power, if cooling is turned off at the same time. Also, (3) needs certain energy, but not necessarily high temperature. Only (2) might need both high energy input at high temperature simultaneously. If the core doesn’t need (2) all the time, a solution might be to use a resistor for phase (2), but use milder heat from other reactor cores for (1) and (3).
(I’m not asking how the core works. These are just general considerations.)
regards, pekka
Dear Charlie Sutherland,
Very interesting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Luca Coppola,
Thank you for your suggestion an tua ka too to your girlfriend,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro,
LaserShare have a too low efficiency to’ be’ useful nere.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro,
I understand…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Giuseppe Vimercati,
Tank you, but we have not space for that.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gentile Dr. Rossi, questa notizia mi ricorda qualcosa, e a lei?
http://wwww.ansa.it/web/notizie/canali/energiaeambiente/energietradizionali/2012/08/20/Energia-Usa-rifiuti-benzina-40-centesimi-litro_7360077.html
Tutte le cose buone vengono riconosciute (prima o poi) e premiate.
Kind regards,
Italo R.
To focus the energy in a narrow space, I think the best thing is to use lenses or mirrors, as Pitagora did so many years ago. Not too bad to use a technology of the past for the energy of the future
Dear Andrea Rossi, you had the temerity to ask for suggestions to focus energy in a very narrow space . So, I think that the old pitagoric method of burning mirrors or lenses cold be useful. The maximum would be, in My opinion,To use the solar light focused with lenses, but obviously that will be not possible at all Times. Perhaps it would be possible and convenient for your technicians to focus in the same way the light produced by a bulb or a gas burner.
I ask your pardon for Wasting your precious time
Warmest regards
Giuseppe Vimercati
Dear ing Rossi
I’m wrong than Red I just wrote for the Laser. He can work on surfaces of mm2 and non-cm2. I had a ‘ slip ‘ and I apologize … it was the middle of the night …
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear ing. Rossi
The only source that offers such a high concentration of energy on 1 cm2 I think is the Laser. Of course for optimal performance should be aimed at a black body. But we need to figure out if the energy efficiency, i.e. the ratio of the energy converted into heat and pulsed laser, is higher than that of traditional heating resistances.
Another system (again electric), might be to electromagnetic induction. But this one always worth consideration is made for the Laser.
I would say again that we need to know the temperature and heat capacity of effective mass to be heated, aimed at the effective heat flux calculation to be administered to trigger the reaction.
Hei! … you have given us a nice theme to play … he,he,he … i hope that it gets ideas advantageous to go forward.
Warm Regards
F.T.
Eng. Rossi,
thanks for confirming that my former post wasn’t completely out of topic. As a matter of fact it wasn’t my theory but my girlfriend one. She’s a chemical engineer with a Master in pyrotechnics. About the temperature, with the proper mixture thousands of Celsius degrees can be reached and energy can be concentrated with a specific charge geometry. It all depends on your needs.
By the way I still owe an answer to you and Francesco Toro: I agree with both of your answers and I see your point when you say that public funding bounds any researcher. Nevertheless I believe that our governors should be more courageous and support people like you that have an innovating idea. It’s a question of backing up your citizens instead of letting them run away abroad. No pain no gain, no risk no advantage!
Regards
Luca Coppola
Dear Mr. Rossi,
It is fun to read the chatter between you and your ardent fans. Some even offer useful advice. I’m very interested in your progress but lack the skills to offer technical advice. However, I can suggest that the need for your device may be urgent beyond the need to replace fossil fuels in the distant future.
My interest in solar cycle theory over the last few years has convinced me that we are indeed heading quickly into a cooling period. There is plenty of available data that can confirm this. The present solar cycle 24 is even less active than cycle 5 which was the least active for some 200 years. The data and history strongly suggests that that low activity was most likely responsible for the last mini ice age. So, if these latest data indeed suggest an even greater cooling of the earth, we really are going to need your e-cats.
Waiting for certification may not be an option.
Dear Pekka Janhunen:
Your suggestion is coherent with what we are doing with gas.
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Herb Gillis:
Thank you for the suggestion, we will study it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Concerning “Let me know the maximum T you can reach in 1 cm^2”. I think that the answer is probably rather close to active core temperature, whatever it is (1050?). Whereas with methane/air flame it is 1957 C. However, the flame gas probably cannot give much of its heat energy to a small surface such as 1 cm^2, which means that significant part of the flame energy gets wasted as far as the to-be-heated core is concerned. With air or other fluid circulated from active reactors as Toro, Gillis et al. have suggested, this wasting would not take place.
You would then need a piping system which connects together the reactors. Perhaps a ring plus two loops for each reactor: input and output loop. The output loop would be opened by valves into the ring when the reactor is hot (self-sustaining). The input loop would be opened in the startup/heating phase. The ring and the loops would be mostly insulated. At the 1 cm^2 where heating is needed the input loop would be bare, and likewise the output loop when it runs (e.g.) through the 3 cm central tunnel of the reactor. Resistors could be placed somewhere along the ring for starting up and for supplying extra heating in case the reactors go out of sync with each other.
My main point is this: Gas burner output is hot gas (1957 C). Your reactors also produce hot gas, not quite 1957, but 1050 or whatever. It doesn’t sound like an impossibly big difference. Especially taking into account the abovementioned inefficiency in the burner case, where the remaining heat of the exhaust gas is effectively wasted for the core.
The type of fluid to use is probably not magical. Maybe just air, or perhaps nitrogen for reduced oxidation stress.
regards, /pekka
Dear Andrea Rossi:
Regarding heat transfer fluids:
I suggest you consider the inorganic nitrate mixtures disclosed in US Pat. No. 7,588,694 [to Sandia Corp.], which are claimed to be usable at temperatures above 500 degress C. You might want to talk to Sandia Corp. about the upper limit (not clear). These were developed for solar-thermal applications. Other more obvious possibilities include sodium and its alloys with potassium, which have been used as coolants in experimental nuclear reactors. Sodium boils at 883 degrees C, which would appear to be its maximum use temperature (unless pressurized). If these suggestions are not adequate I can look further.
Dear Herb Gills:
No, let me say this: Let me know the maximum T you can reach in 1 cm^2.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
Not so far.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Prof. Joseph Fine, Dear Matt Robinson:
All I can say is:
Wonderful, thank you.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Joseph Fine,
Yes, I agree. The primary goal is to make electric power to self sustain the E-Cat, and then get infinite heat energy. With the Hot Cats this road is open.
Warm Regards, dear Prof!
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro:
1- yes
2- no
3- no
Thank you for your help,
Warm ( 1050°C) Regards,
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro:
1- yes
2- no
3- no
Thank you for your help,
Warm ( 1050°C) Regards,
A.R.
Dear Luca Coppola,
Yes, we are working on it,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
If the heating time is not too long you could think to some pyrotechnic device. With the proper shape you can concentrate the energy in a single point.
Dear Ing. Rossi
You made a good question:
“Specific suggestions?”
Well … I really appreciate it!
To help us understand and be able to really help I just get you three simple questions:
1) The heat concentration to be administered must be at the level of the dart of the flame of a gas burner?;
2) transport and heat concentration by means of a carrier fluid that interacts with the venue to be heated can disturb the reaction priming?;
3) if the carrier fluid is a disorder, it is necessary to heat by irradiation light (or infrared)?
I think the answer is not too demanding for the secrecy of the invention
Thanks for possible reply.
Warm (1200°C)Regards
F.T.
A.R.
I meant that the hot side would be in direct contact with the exterior wall, not beneath the exterior wall.
J.F.
Andrea Rossi,
Please see: http://www.powerchips.gi/technology/pcalc.shtml
Power Chips consist of an array of nano vacuum tubes/thermal diodes. They are thermionic and not thermovoltaic devices.
If Hot-Cat modules can be designed to use PowerChips – with some hardware both above the exterior surface of the outer cylinder wall (“cold” side) and beneath the exterior surface of the outer cylinder (hot side) and a gap between them, then PowerChips might be able to drive electrical heaters in each of the modules. The “cold” side, of course, can not be in direct contact with the exterior wall.
Unfortunately, Power Chips have a rectangular/(cubical) geometry not a cylindrical one.
But perhaps someone can work this out.
Permit me to speculate wildly, or maybe practically.
For the sake of argument, and I’m not arguing but presenting an idea, let us say that thermionic conversion can yield 40% efficiency. This can happen if the temperature difference were 500 degrees C. (Cold side 100, hot side 600.) The 40% factor is 70% of Carnot efficiency.
On average, each 10 kW module requires 1.66 kW of heat, so 100 modules require 166 kW.
40% of 1 MW is 400 kW, and requires 166 kW of electric/(gas) heating.
(This assumes 50% of modules are in Self Sustain Mode and the others use 3.33 kW.)
Instead of 166 kW of electric or gas heat to yield 1 MW of heat with an output of 400 kW-electric, only 1.66 kW of electric or gas heat energy is needed to produce a net 400-166.66 kW = 233.3 kW of electrical energy. (For a conversion factor of 45%, there could (?) be a net of 283.3 kW.
That’s a factor of 233.33/1.66 = 140 vs. a factor of 6. Possibly, infinite once the startup drive can be put in standby. And that’s for electricity. Heat is still available as part of a Combined Heat & Power scenario (CHP).
PowerChips (TM) are not quite ready to patch onto Hot-Cats, but this may happen in the near future.
Maybe.
I am amazed this may be possible.
Best regards,
Joseph
Andrea Rossi, Dear Readers:
I received this from Matt Robinson via Facebook.
He has given me permission to share it.
Ode to an E-Cat
Rossi’s got an e-cat
I’m all agog to see
The little cat a-purring
And cuddling up to me
The oil and gas have almost gone
Their price is far too high
When Rossi frees his E-cat
‘t will fill us all with joy
The E-cat will in time appear
And change the world, we’re told
‘til governments decide a way
To make it pay, when sold!
They’ll tax the nickel and the tube
They’ll even tax the steam
They’ll tax the E-Cat owner
And so destroy the dream
So don’t believe in all you read.
This cat won’t change the game.
Just like today, we’ll have to pay,
‘All things remain the same’
They have to pay the armies,
The policemen and the schools
The Judges and their secretaries-
It’s them that make the rules.
But don’t despair there is some hope
I’ll tell you how quite soon
I’m making plans, behind the scenes
To save us all from ruin
While waiting for the E-Cat launch
If you’ve been rightly smitten
Just head on down to the local pound
And fetch yourself a kitten.
Poetic regards.
Joseph Fine
Mr. Rossi: As you probably know I am intensely interested in your E-Cat technology. I think it is going to change many things in our world. You have said in the past that your company Leonardo is probably not the right investment for a small investor, and I understand you reasoning and agree. However, your licensees might be a good investment for a small investor. Do you agree? Are any of your licensees public companies and will you be giving out information about who your licensees are?
Andrea Rossi:
Can you share with us the temperature that needs to be achieved within the narrow space?
Dear Pekka Janhunen:
Delighted to hear you again.
Yes, Herb Gill, Francesco Toro and you have a point to work upon, but with the use of gas we resolved big part of the problem, mainly in the USA, where gas is very cheap. The issue, foundamentally, is to focus the energy in a very narrow space. Specific suggestions?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Regarding your reply to Herb Gill: I strongly think that pumped liquid could localise heat equally well as a gas flame, which is also a type of fluid (gaseous fluid). It doesn’t look to me as categorically impossible to do so. And even if not, why not try and provide partial heating by this method and do the rest by resistive heating, so that electricity consumption would be reduced.
regards, pekka
Dear Herb Gillis:
An E-Cat is driven by the resistance inside it, or, now, also by a gas burner, not “by itself”.
The drive must be very focused, this is why the heat from an E-Cat, which is transported by a fluid which has not the necessary energy density, cannot drive another E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Martyn Aubrey:
The orientation of the E-Cat does not affect its efficiency. Our thermodynamics experts are designing the best possible configurations to have the maximum efficiency in the heat exchangers.
About the media: sincerely, I do not think our convention of Zurich will raise any interest: as I always said, what counts are not chatters, what counts are working plants.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ing Rossi,
I have a question for you, and a suggestion if it is useful.
The question – Does the physical orientation of the E-Cat affect its operation?
For example, as the Hot Cat is now cylindrical can it operate correctly if set up vertically, or will it only work properly when horizontal as shown in the test photograph released by Cures?
If the E-Cats can be operated vertically this may allow you to arrange them in rows to conserve space. This could be in the same manner as the pipes of a medieval cathedral organ. This configuration may be more suited to electrical resistive heating rather than heating with gas due to access for the burners.
The suggestion – A possible method to retain and increase the heat within a single E-Cat module.
As the Hot Cat is now a cylinder, have you considered tightly arranging some modules around a central module to concentrate the heat and reduce losses to the outside of the units?
This could be in a horizontally stacked arrangement of one row of 2 modules, placed on 1 row of 3 modules, placed on one row of a further 2 modules.
The shape of the 7 combined units would form a hexagon when viewed from one end, with one module at the centre.
This would have the effect that any heat being lost from the shell of the central cylinder would reinforce the heat in the outer 6 cylinders and the excess heat from the outer ring of cylinders give more heat to the central cylinder.
The complete multi-E-Cat unit could be contained within a single larger cylinder or casing and the empty spaces between the tightly packed modules filled with a heat conducting filler medium to allow conduction and even dispersal of the heat between the individual E-Cats.
The thermal coating or jacket normally applied to each individual E-Cat module would be applied to the complete device to contain the heat energy as a whole.
The overall unit would still retain separate pipes for extracting the heat from the individual E-Cats (i.e. 7 pipes) for either steam or heat transfer fluid in the usual manner as your stand-alone E-Cat module.
I hope you may find some useful ideas here.
I am very much looking forward to September and hope your conference in Zurich will bring the E-Cat to the greater attention of the World’s media.
Many thanks for reading my musing,
Martyn Aubrey
Andrea Rossi:
In following your discussion with Dr. Toro there is something I can’t understand. You seem to be saying that one Ecat cannot be used to drive another, which implies that one Ecat cannot drive itself. If this is so, then how can one produce power for external use? A few weeks ago, when the hot-cat first came out, there was much discussion of how an electrically driven hot-cat could produce enough power to run itself and make power for external use. The key (now achieved) was to get high quality heat so that electric power can be made efficiently. You seem to be saying to Dr. Toro that this is NOT possible with a thermally driven ecat. This I find confusing. Why could one not use a hot-cat to produce heat, store the heat in an external medium, and then use some of that heat to drive the hot-cat? Likewise; why would it not be possible to use a system of “n” hot-cats to produce heat for the heat reservoir and then draw on the heat from the reservior to drive the collective system of hot-Ecats? It seems to me this is exactly analogous to an Ecat (or system of Ecats) making electric energy, and drawing on a portion of that electric power for “drive”. Could you please explain? Sorry if I misunderstood your explanation to Dr. Toro, but it looks to me like a contradiction. Thank you.
Dear ing. Rossi
Your answer number 3:
“”3- no (he,he,he…)””:
But…he,he,he… or… Ah,ah,ah?
The difference is subtle.
I think:
Ah,ah,ah!
Best regard
F.T.
Dear Francesco Toro:
1- yes
2- some tens of watthour/h
3- no (he,he,he…)
4- I think he got the info here!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro:
As I said, we need a drive focused in a particular part.
Now we can use gas instead of electric power. The solution you thought of should be the best, but it is not possible. I cannot explain why, because I should explain exactly how the reactor works.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. Rossi
from as far as I can see you’re still not managed to release the stage not support from other energy sources, such as electricity or gas.
In fact, from what i understand, you need a simple heating and controlled the reactor provided that there is a source of energy to heat in the pure state. I said this, you would like to say (i insist! ):
1)it seems to me impossible that we will not be able to make fully autonomous the step of not support by means of another E-Cat with a cycle of time shifted with respect to the main generator;
2) this is Cat ‘auxiliary’ with its heat ‘controlled’ should compensate for the step of not sustain.
3) If there was a difficulty of character ‘time-availability heat’ this could be a redundancy of 3 E-Cat suitably shifted over time;
I can help you understand why we cannot do it?
Thank you for the eventual answer.
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear ing. A. Rossi
In the previous dialog with Stephen you wrote:
“”The good new is that we have now engineered our E-Cats to let them work with gas instead of with electricity, so that now we do not need electric kWh to produce thermic kWh.””
This good news for me is new and constitutes another ring of the knowledge of your product. For me, is then spontaneously try to get you a few questions:
1)The residue of electrical energy to consume will be exclusively used for the auxiliary circuits’?
2)a E-Cat home how many W/h electric will consume?
3)The frequency generator, apparently used in the tests AND Cat of 10 Kw, it was a bluff for diverting the snakes?
4) From what I read it seems that you use other channels to give certain news. In fact, the friend Joseph already knew the use of gas.
I’m jealous! He! He!
Warm Regards
F.T.
Dear Stefano:
Our industrial E-Cats are already in the market. As for the domestic I think that the Certificarors will need enough experience with the industrial application to certify also the domestic ones. The good new is that we have now engineered our E-Cats to let them work with gas instead of with electricity, so that now we do not need electric kWh to produce thermic kWh.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gentile Andrea Rossi,siamo in trepidante attesa dell’arrivo dell’e-cat domestico,non ne possiamo più delle bollette delle compagnie del gas,che continuano a turlupinare gli italiani ogni anno,inventandoci la scusa della crisi,per aumentare i costi fino a dissanguarci.
Sto pensando seriamente di fare a meno del metano,vorrei sapere più o meno quando arriverà la sua invenzione sul mercato italiano, e se varrà la preiscrizione,sul sito e-cat.com,i 1500 dollari se necessario verrò volentieri a portarglieli di persona 🙂 .
Ce ne fossero di italiani come lei in questo paese,la sua cautela è più che giusta,visto il paese in cui viviamo,se non fosse per quella parte di italiani onesti e intelligenti come lei che per mia fortuna ho incontrato durante il mio cammino,era da un po’ che me ne ero fuggito all’estero.
Anche perchè ogni giorno ne vengono fuori delle belle nel nostro paese e chissà perchè ogni giorno mi rendo conto che il sistema è anche peggio di come me lo immaginavo :-).
Poi ci dicono che noi italiani ci lamentiamo sempre,ma perchè allora ogni paese europeo che ho visitato garantisce ai suoi cittadini almeno i servizi di base necessari per vivere e invece da noi è tutto un arrampicarsi continuo sperando di arrivare a fine mese?
Un motivo ci deve essere e risiede nell’onestà e nella cutura di base,è vero che le persone buone e meno buone si trovano ovunque,ma da noi le meno buone lo sono almeno due volte in più degli stranieri,mi duole dirlo ,ma è così,a questo punto sarà come per i gamberi della Louisiana,nei nostri fiumi hanno distrutto la fauna acquifera e non si riusciva a capire come debellarli,è stato uno studente italiano che per caso,facendo una tesi sul tema,si era dimenticato due esemplari nel giardino di casa dentro un recipiente,li ha trovati ambedue morti,si erano mangiati fra di loro.
Lo stesso vale per quegli italiani che ogni giorno non facendo il loro dovere pesano sugli altri che invece lo fanno,arrivati alla fine,si mangeranno fra di loro.
Che si mangino alla svelta però,perchè qua ci siamo già stufati da un po’.
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
1- The gas will be appliable also to the domestic version
2- yes
3- yes
Warmest Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Does the home E-Cat have the capability to be driven entirely by heat from natural gas, or is that capability limited to the industrial version?
Is it possible to develop a ‘hybrid’ home E-Cat (part electrical and part thermal drive) that would reduce electrical power demand? (This would reduce operating costs since gas is cheaper than electricity).
When the electrical generating capability of the Industrial E-Cat is developed, do you plan to be one of the first customers and use it in your production lines? This would reduce energy costs significantly, since manufacturing uses a large amount of energy (electricity) and you have to plan for meeting a very high (and increasing) demand.
Increasing regards,
Joseph Fine