Categories

Peer Review

All the articles published on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics are Peer Reviewed. The Peer Review of every paper is made by at least one University Physics Professor.

Cold nuclear fusion

by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA

Direct Download

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.

PACS.: 25.45 – deuterium induced reactions
Submitted to Physics of Atomic Nuclei/Yadernaya Fizika in Russian

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

Direct Download

3,443 comments to Cold nuclear fusion

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Lars Lindberg:
    Your English is surely better than mine.
    No, our Customers will have to respect the instructions that have been written under the direction of the certifier. This is a matter of safety, which is a pillar of our policy.
    Warmest Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • Hughd

    Dear Guru

    You are right. I stand corrected, approximately 2 million fuel rods would be required and the estimated US$600 millon is a much better figure for contemplating the 8 power plant conversions.

    I think to convert or not convert these power plants is an open question. Getting approval to convert should be relatively easy compared to getting approval to replace 8,336 MWe on a decentralized power production basis no matter what source of energy is used.

    Germany has 9 more power plants using the same technology. Conversion should be considered here as well.

    Best regards,
    Hughd

  • Lars Lindberg

    Dear mr Rossi,
    sorry I am Swedish so my english mess up sometimes. I mean if it is not possible for you to make an electric e-cat selfsustainable due to the certification, will it still be legale for a user to after starting it with power from the grid, loop it in to self sustain mode and get of the grid?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Lars Lindberg:
    Sorry, I do not understand the question: can you rephrase it?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Guru

    Dr. Hugh D. wrote: “…the 8 plants could use 1.5 to 2 billion fuel rods, probably all identical. At US$300 a HE-cat that would be a US$600 billion dollar order…”
    ………………………..
    Dear Dr. Hugh D. allow me to adjust some numbers:
    These 8 nuclear plants had power output (sum) 8336 MWe.
    This idea is limited by installed turbines and generators, so it is logical to potentially use 18-20.000 MWt heating with 2 millions basic small units (rods) E-Cats.
    From this imply it is no need of 2 billions rods, only 2 millions rods at cost 600 millions USD (i.e. not 600 billions USD) plus some overheads etc.
    I see future 8-12 years) as decentralized power production. So these costs to enlive these zombificated monsters are not effective investment.

  • Lars Lindberg

    Dear Mr Rossi
    I heard linsence is not for selfsustain mode, but when the electric e-cat model is in the market, will it be league for the user to loop it after start ?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Lars Lindberg:
    Yes, absolutely with priority.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Lars Lindberg

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    so is the barell honey-comb type mainly designed for the future convert to electricity?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Alessandro Stupa:
    Yes, I agree. About the safety of our plants: we are perfectly aware of our safety issues and our industrial plants have been safety- certified by specialists. Obviously our competitors, after trying to say that our reactors do not work, now that they cannot say this anymore are trying to stop us saying we are not safe: this is why we are certifying everything we make. I personally am working with my reactors since years, helped in all the safety issues by Prof. Sergio Focardi ( to make a Focardi you need 200 or more guys of the value of the one you talked about), and all our experiments are strictly controlled by specialists in safety. Nothing, in thousands of tests, has raised any worry regarding the safety issues.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Lars Lindberg:
    Not for the low temperature needs.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hughd:
    I think we can integrate out reactors in power plants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hughd

    Germany has shut down 4 PWR and 4 BWR plants. This should be an ideal market for using the Hot E-cat to retrofit the reactor heat source. The size, temperature and configuration of the HE-cat fit the need almost exactly.

    At 15kWh per HE-cat the 8 plants could use 1.5 to 2 billion fuel rods, probably all identical. At US$300 a HE-cat that would be a US$600 billion dollar order.

    Do you see any potential here?

    Best regards,
    Hughd

  • Lars Lindberg

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    will your deliveries of 1 MW from now on be of the barell honey-comb type?

  • Alessandro Stupa

    Antonio, for me the best solution is to buy an electric car and recharge it elettrically. When we’ll could buy the hot-cat and produce our own electricity, we’ll could recharge our eletric cars. Look at the market, there are more solution for electrical mobility, in expansion.
    ….and the future car will be…the E-CAR, do you agree mr Rossi ?

    Buona Giornata

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Antonio:
    Applications to cars are far away.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Antonio

    A series of hot-cats could power a car (since a barrel is 1 MW… a car need less)?
    If they could, when in the future (months, years…) you estimate for such an application to take place?

    Best regards,
    Antonio

  • Francesco Toro

    Dear ing. Rossi
    I apologize to you and the readers of the newspaper but to a ‘lapsus’ i said Portovesme Euroallumina, has previously but i wanted to report to Portovesme Alcoa. In fact, Euroallumina previously has already been closed in the past and this does not change the substance.
    Best Regards
    F.T.

  • Francesco Toro

    Dear ing. Rossi
    Sardinia turns dramatically to the closing of the very few existing factories, that for economic reasons and politicians are not innovate, but closed in spite of workers who have given a life for the production.
    One of these examples is the Portovesme Euroallumina .

    It closes because, in Sardinia, the electrical energy for the production process is too expensive.

    If in the process Bayer of extraction of the aluminum, imagine that you have under the bottom of the crucible, in intimate contact or have already been incorporated, the core of many Cat to 1050 °C, maybe we could save as many jobs and could also help to reduce pollution.
    I think that this operation would be possible and you?
    Thank You
    Warm Regards
    F.T.
    F.T.

  • Francesco Toro

    “”paulc August 31st, 2012 at 3:23 PM. Congratulations once again, ecc…”"

    Yesssssss… but they continue to ignore our Andrea Rossi who is preparing to put on the market its E-Cat…
    Will we see some nice dear Paulc … I prepare to laugh of snakes and sharks that become purple from shame. Ah! ah!

  • paulc

    Congratulations once again, main stream media The Guardian in the UK has acknowledged you as they honored Martin Fleischmann > saying: progress seems to be occurring towards the application of cold fusion as a practical energy source.

    It may well transpire that, in the words of one cold fusion entrepreneur: “The market will decide.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/aug/31/martin-fleischmann?newsfeed=true

  • Joseph Fine

    Errata:

    A.R.

    Circumference is in centimeters, not square centimeters.

    Sentence should read…: “So with two cylindrical surfaces producing heat, the circumference of each module only has to be slightly more than 15 cm. ”

    I apologize for any misinterpretations.

    Joseph Fine

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Prof. Joseph Fine:
    Delighting: thanks to Matt Robinson!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Dear Ing. Andrea Rossi:

    I just received a new limerick:

    ” In the meantime…” by Matt Robinson

    In October from Zurich we’ll know
    If the E-cat is able to show
    That Focardi and Rossi
    Are ahead of the posse
    And Cold Fusion is here, Ho, Ho!

    Martin Fleischmann, and Pons, and more
    Tried to show us the line to the shore.
    But the waters were muddied
    Full proofs never studied
    Perhaps Rossi’s just opened the door.

    If the E-Cat at last is revealed
    Not like when ‘Cures’ had squealed
    The snakes and gorillas
    Will don their mantillas
    To keep all their faces concealed.

    (Should ‘October’ be replaced by ‘September’? J.F. )

  • Mr Fine,

    I believe congratulations are in order. It seems you are closing in on some of the design configurations. Mr Rossi has got to be having a great time with this as well. I wonder how he keeps from dancing.

    This is going to be fun for all of us.

    Thanks,

    Charlie

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Prof. Joseph Fine:
    Yes, it is.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Martin Aubrey, Andrea Rossi,

    Possible configurations:

    If each module has a surface area of 1200 sq. cm. and the container length is 40 cm, the circumference of each cylinder should be slightly more than 30 cm. (It has to be slightly more than 30 cm., since all the modules must fit into the container.)

    I then realized the inner and outer surfaces of the cylinder both produce heat. So with two cylindrical surfaces producing heat, the circumference of each module only has to be slightly more than 15 sq. cm.

    Dividing by pi, the diameter of the cylinder is about 4.77 cm or approximately 48 mm.

    If 100 or more cylinders are arranged in a hexagonal bundle or honey-comb, the container diameter (120 cm) permits a large variety of configurations.

    Configuration 1:

    A single layer of 18, 24, 30 and 36 cylinders (108 total, of which 100 are used)
    There is no central element or outer rings of 6 and 12 cylinders.

    Configuration 2:

    Two layers of 12, 18 and 24 cylinders. (Total 108 in 2 layers of 54)
    Each layer is half the length of those in configuration 1. Each layer is less complex, but there are two layers. This seems to be a reasonable configuration as there are only three rings. (But two layers.)

    Configuration 3:

    Three layers of 6, 12 and 18 cylinders. (Total 108 in 3 layers of 36)
    Probably too much trouble since the middle layer is inaccessible.

    Of course, since there is enough room, the individual cylinders do not have to be (tangent to) touching each other. So there are many variations of this idea.

    I wonder if these configurations are similar to the actual design?

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Martyn Aubrey:
    Very nice:” Hot Honeycomb” !!!
    I will use this!
    About the price: our costs are not proportional to the weight of the steel we use, unfortunately…costs will lower with economy scale, though.
    Warm Regards, and again Thank You!
    A.R.

  • Martyn Aubrey

    Dear Ing Rossi

    Many congratulations on the current building of the new Hot E-Cat 1 MW plant. This is excellent news!

    The new much smaller unit will be far easier to fit to new and existing industrial heating systems and power generators.

    With the multitude of cells it could be thought of as a “Hot Honeycomb” E-Cat!!

    Will the new compact design enable you to lower the cost of manufacture for the customer in the market?

    Very best regards,
    Martyn Aubrey

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Lars Lindberg:
    1- yes
    2- outside
    3- no
    4- no
    5- not in a short term: costs are not in the quantity of steel
    6- with high temperatures the efficiency is enough: as for the pay back time, let us see in operation one prototype.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Lars Lindberg

    If the efficiency is 50 % of 1MW and it takes average 125 kW to run it you get 375 kW out.  If you get 375 kW extra electricity electricity out
    for the cost of 1,5 million dollars, how many hours do you have to run it to pay let’s say 15 cents US per kWh? 1,5 million dollars/375 kW/0.15 dollars= 27 000 h. Say you run it for 10 000 h per year your invested money is giving profit after 3 years. Is that calculation right?

  • Lars Lindberg

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    do you mean a reactor has a volume of 1.2 liter and the drum has the volume of 600 liters? Will the refilling be from the inside or outside of the drum? Will all reactors be refilled at the same time? Will all the reactors be shut down while refilling? Now with the more efficient hot cats in drum will the price go downt? If you calculate with converting to electricity and 50 % efficiency, will it ever be good for electricity? Thanks :)

  • [...] for the 1 MW plants, for hot temperature, Rossi say the dimensions will be those of a cylinder with a diameter of 1.2 m and a lencth od 0.4 [...]

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hank Mills:
    1- Either el. pwr or gas
    2- AISI 310
    3- the Carnot cycle gets more space
    4- both
    5- high efficiency insulation
    6- not yet
    7- no, only parallels ( the T is so high that series are useless)
    8- 250 kWh/h of energy
    9- certification in course
    10- right in construction now
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Marco:
    Yes,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Marco

    Dear Andrea,
    With 100 modules so tightly packed, how can be done the cartrige swap every six months without shutting down the whole reactor?
    Are you planning to construct it in indipendent sections that could be shut down and extracted to change the charge without shutting down the whole reactor?

  • Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    I thought that the one megawatt “hot cat” plant would be small, but my guess was wrong. In reality, the plant is even more miniscule — very exciting!

    1) Is the 1.2 x .4 “hot cat” plant designed to utilize either an electric drive OR a natural gas drive, or only one of the two?

    2) What type of steel is being considered for the actual production unit? To allow the plant to have a very long service life (20 years for example), is a high temperature alloy such as inconel being considered?

    3) Due to the small size of the “hot cat” drum, will both the drum and the steam turbine be capable of fitting inside a single, standard shipping container?

    4) Will the water pumped into the “drum” be flowing over the outer surface, the inner surface, or both surfaces of the high temperature E-Cats?

    5) To minimize heat loss I think that the outside of the drum will need to be insulated. Have you considered using one of the new high tech, thermal insulating materials like aerogel? If not, what material do you expect to use?

    6) Has Siemens or another company suggested a particular model of turbine generator that would be most compatible with the steam flow rate, temperatures, and pressures of the one megawatt “hot cat” plant? If so, do you have a model number you could share?

    7) Is it possible to connect two or more of the “hot cat” drums in series, and increase the flow rate of water to get a production of power beyond one megawatt?

    8) What is the expected peak electrical input required for the one megawatt plant?

    9) Do the certificator’s have any opposition to the one megawatt “hot cat” plant — not only the prototypes — utilizing one hour periods of self sustain mode?

    10) How long do you think it will be until the first one megawatt hot plant (for internal testing) utilizing the 1.2 x .4 “drum” design is constructed and tested?

    Thank you.

    Sincerely,
    Hank Mills

  • Dear Andrea Rossi,
    From the parameters it sounds that you are building airworthy stuff. If a Hot-Cat volume is 2 liters and its mean density is (for example) 3 g/cm3, then its mass is 6 kg. Then (with 10 kW power) it produces the same energy (270 MJ) as the same mass of kerosene in 7.5 hours. Since this time is clearly shorter than the flight time of long-distance airplanes, it suggests that the power density of Hot-Cats is in principle enough to power such airplanes. It may sound surprising because the Hot-Cats at multimegawatt scale are heavy, but so is the kerosene needed for a long distance flight.
    regards, pekka

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Franco:
    Attention: the dimensions 1.2 x 0.4 is not the surface of the surface of the reactors! Inside this drum of 1.2 x 0.4 m there are 100 reactors , each of one having about 1 200 cm^2 of surface !
    I talked of the dimensions of the external container, not of the heat exchange surface !
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Ecco Liberation:
    The final version will weight about 4 500 grams
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Ecco Liberation

    Dott. Rossi,

    Could you tell how much does each cylindrical Hot-Cat weight in grams?

    Ecco

  • Franco

    Dear Josheph Fine and Andrea Rossi,

    talking about “big Hot-Cat”, considering the cylinder dimensions of:
    diameter 1.2 m
    length 0.4 m

    the radiating surface is 3.77 square meters.

    Performing calculation, using the Stefen-Boltzmann law, with an high Emissivity factor of 0.95, in the hypothesis that the temperature of the all surface of the cylinder is 800°C, the radiating power obtained is only 267 kW.

    Only in the hypothesis that the temperature of the all surface of the cylinder is 1200°C, the radiating power corresponds to 954 kW.

    Do You agree with my calculation?

    Kind Regards

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    You are perfectly right: in fact we are designing the new 1 MW plants, for hot temperature, and the dimensions will be those of a cylinder with a diameter of 1.2 m and a lencth od 0.4 m.
    Is shocking, I myself are surprised, but it is so.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    For the listed Hot-Cat (“Cattus calidi”) dimensions, with an outer diameter of 90 mm and length of 330 mm, I calculated a volume of 0.0021 cubic meters. With a 10 kW power output, that means power per unit volume is 4763.33 kW / cubic meter.

    Of course, other equipment is also needed. But even allowing for a factor of at least 20 brings this down to 238 kW/ cu. meter. “Cattus calidi, indeedi.” (Hot cat, indeed.)

    Joseph

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear K.D.:
    …and for all a rubber puppet snake as a cotillon!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • K. D.

    Dear Alessandro Stupa:
    As Eng. Rossi said. Our Customers do what they want.

    I suggest to you, to make some business on it. Borrow some money and buy Mega E-Cat plant. Because there are so many don’t believers, you might after signing necessary NDA, make good money on it.
    For example.
    1. Ticket for entering the plant $1000.00
    2. Picture taken with you ……..$100.00
    3. Picture taken with E-Cat…….$200.00
    With keeping the rights to publish and sell the copy of the pictures in any stores all over the world.
    What do you thing about this kind of way of spreading news about the E-Cats.:)

    And still sale energy from the E-Cat plant:)

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Alessandro Stupa:
    Our Customers do what they want.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Alessandro Stupa

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    Do you think that after the Zurich conference, one or more of your customers of the 1mw plant will reveal his identity ?

    Thank you.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Alessandro Stupa:
    1- Yes
    2- Both
    3- Yes
    4- No, because he is not third party.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Alessandro Stupa

    Dear Mr Rossi, is it true that in these days your E-cat is tested by an important university ?
    You gave them the 10 kw e-cat or the Hot-cat for their test ?
    They will publish their results to public ?
    Mr.Focardi works with them ?

    Thank You, I hope great success !

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Francesco Toro:
    Yes, you are right. We are working also upon high temperature fluids, but it is not that easy to pump them with reliability: they gave a lot of troubles in the Archimede plant. We have to make plants for Customers who want to have reliable operation, they need to make energy, not R&D. Good ideas your ones, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>