by Yeong E. Kim Department of Physics, Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA
ABSTRACT
Generalized theory of Bose-Einstein condensation nuclear fusion (BECNF) is used to carry out theoretical analyses of recent experimental results of Rossi et al. for hydrogen-nickel system. Based on incomplete experimental information currently available, preliminary theoretical explanations of the experimental results are presented in terms of the generalized BECNF theory. Additional accurate experimental data are needed for obtaining more complete theoretical descriptions and predictions, which can be tested by further experiments.
I. Introduction
Over the last two decades, there have been many publications reporting experimental observations of excess heat generation and anomalous nuclear reactions occurring in metals at ultra-low energies, now known as „low-energy nuclear reactions‟ (LENR). Theoretical explanations of the LENR phenomena have been described based on the theory of Bose-Einstein condensation nuclear fusion (BECNF) in micro/nano-scale metal particles [1-3]. The BECNF theory is based on a single basic assumption capable of explaining the observed LENR phenomena; deuterons in metals undergo Bose-Einstein condensation. While the BECNF theory is able to make general qualitative predictions concerning LENR phenomena it is also a quantitative predictive physical theory. Some of the theoretical predictions have been confirmed by experiments reported recently. The BECNF theory was generalized for the case of two species of Bosons [4].
Recently, there were two positive demonstrations (January and March, 2011) of a heat generating device called “Energy Catalyzer” [5]. The Energy Catalyzer is an apparatus built by inventor Andrea Rossi, Italy. The patent application [5] states that the device transforms energy stored in its fuel (hydrogen and nickel) into heat by means of nuclear reaction of the two fuel components, with a consequent observed production of copper [5,6]. According to Rossi‟s patent application [5], heating of the sample is accomplished by an electric resistance heater. Details of March 2011 demonstration were reported by Essen and Kullander [7]. The report [7] also contains references to January 2011 demonstration. In the following, we describe hydrogen-nickel reactions in section II. Other possible reactions are discussed in section III. Conclusions are given in section IV.
II. Hydrogen-Nickel Reactions
The generalized BECNF theory [4] can be applied to the case of hydrogen-nickel fusion reactions observed in Rossi‟s device (the energy catalyzer) [5] under the following two conditions: (1) additives used (not disclosed in the patent application) form Ni alloy and/or Ni metal/alloy oxide in the surface regions of nickel nano-scale particles, so that Ni atoms/nuclei become mobile with a sufficiently large diffusion coefficient and (2) local magnetic field is very weak in the surface regions, providing a suitable environment in which two neighboring protons can couple their spins anti-parallel to form spin-zero singlet state (S=0). Relatively low Curie temperature (nickel has the Curie temperature of 631 oK (~358 oC)) is expected to help to maintain the weak magnetic field in the surface regions. If Rossi‟s device is operated at temperatures greater than the Curie temperature ~358 oC and with hydrogen pressures of up to ~22 bars, the conditions (1) and (2) may have been achieved in Rossi‟s device. The mobility of Ni atoms/nuclei (condition (1)) is enhanced by the use of an electric resistance heater to maintain higher temperatures. This may provide a suitable environment in which more of both Ni atoms/nuclei and protons become mobile, thus creating a favorable environment for the case of two species of Bosons (Ni nuclei and composite Bosons of paired two protons). If the velocities of mobile Ni atoms/nuclei under the condition (1) are sufficiently slow, their de-Broglie wavelengths become sufficiently large and may overlap with neighboring two-proton composite Bosons which are also mobile, thus creating Bose-Einstein condensation of two species of Bosons. The generalized BECNF theory can now be applied to these two-species of Bosons and provides a mechanism for the suppression/cancellation of the Coulomb barrier, as shown in [4]. Once the Coulomb barrier is overcome in the entrance reaction channel, many possible allowed exit reaction channels may become open such as reactions (i) ANi(2p(S=0), p)ˆA+1 Cu, with even A=58, 60, 62 and 64. These reactions will produce radioactive isotopes 59Cu and 61Cu with A = 58 and 60, respectively. 59Cu has a half-life of 81.5 seconds and decays by the electron capture to the 59Ni ground state (58.1%) which has a half-life of 7.6 x 10ˆ4 years and to the 59Ni excited states (41.9%) which in turn decay to the 59Ni ground state by emitting gamma-rays with energies ranging from 310.9 keV to 2682.0 keV [8]. 61Cu has a half-life of 3.333 hours and decays by the electron capture to the stable 61Ni ground state (67%) and to the 61Ni excited states (33%) which in turn decay to the 61Ni ground state by emitting gamma-rays with energies ranging from 67.412 keV to 2123.93 keV [8]. Gamma-rays (and neutrons) have not been observed outside the reactor chamber during the experiment [6]. These gamma-rays may have been present inside the reaction chamber. If no radiations are observed, reactions (i) are ruled out. Focardi and Rossi [6] reported that the experimental results of Rossi et al. indicate the production of stable isotopes 63Cu and 65Cu with an isotopic ratio of 63Cu /65Cu ~ 1.6 (natural abundance is 63Cu/ 65Cu = 2.24). This production of Cu may be due to reactions (i). The production of 63Cu and 65Cu with isotopic ratio of 63Cu /65Cu different from the natural isotopic ratio is expected and can be explained by estimating the reaction rates for 62Ni(2p(S=0), p)63Cu and 64Ni(2p(S=0), p)65Cu. Reaction rates estimates based on transmission probability calculated from a barrier tunneling model similar to the alpha-decay theory indicate that the reaction rates for stable Cu productions, 62Ni(2p(S=0), p)63Cu and 64Ni(2p(S=0), p)65Cu, are expected to be much larger than the reaction rates for production of radioactive Cu, 58Ni(2p(S=0), p)59Cu and 60Ni(2p(S=0), p)61Cu. This leads to the prediction that intensities of the gamma-rays from the decays of 59Cu and 61Cu are expected to be weak and do not commensurate with the observed heat production, which is mostly from stable Cu production reactions 62Ni(2p(S=0), p)63Cu and 64Ni(2p(S=0), p)65Cu. There are other exit reaction channels which are (nearly) radiation-less, such as reactions (ii) ANi(2p(S=0), α)ˆA-2Ni, (even A=58, 60, 62, and 64) [9]. For this case, we expect that the natural isotopic ratio of Ni isotopes will be changed in a particular way, which can be checked from the sample after each experiment. Even though reactions (ii) produce radioactive isotope 56Ni, it can be shown using the alpha-decay theory that its reaction rate is much slower (by many order of magnitudes) than those of other reactions. Other exit reaction channels, ANi(2p(S=0), d)ACu, ANi(2p(S=0), 3He)ˆA-1Ni, and ANi(2p(S=0), t)ˆA-1Cu (all with even A=58, 60, 62, and 64) are ruled out since these reactions all have negative Q-values. There are possibilities of neutron-emission exit reaction channels, such as reactions (iii) ANi(2p(S=0), n)ˆA+1Zn, (even A= 62, and 64; Q is negative for A = 58 and 60). However, reaction rates for reactions (iii) are expected be substantially smaller than those for reaction (i). Reactions (iii) involve emission of a tightly bound neutron (62Ni -> 61Ni + n, Q = -10.597MeV or 64Ni -> 63Ni + n, Q = -9.657MeV) while reactions (i) involve emission of a loosely bound proton from an excited compound nuclear state consisting of ANi (even A) and 2p(S=0). Therefore, the transmission probability of a neutron tunneling through the centrifugal barrier in reactions (iii) is expected to be substantially smaller than that of a proton tunneling through the centrifugal barrier in reactions (i). The branching ratios of reactions (i) and (ii) need to be determined by measurements of gamma-ray energies and changes in isotopic ratios from future Ross-type experiments. Theoretically, the branching ratios can be estimated by calculating transmission probability of an emitted charged particle tunneling through both Coulomb and centrifugal barriers in the exit reaction channel, as done in the alpha-decay theory.
III. Other Possible Reactions
In addition to the above reactions described in II, there are possibilities of reactions involving additives used (not disclosed so far). For an example, if lithium is added as an additive, reaction (iv) 6Li(2p(S=0), p 3He)4He may be possible. As in cases of reactions (i) and (ii), Ni nano-particles would be still playing an important role of providing two-proton singlet composite Bosons for reaction (iv). Reaction (iv) would not change the isotopic ratios of Ni.
VI. Conclusions
In order to explore validity and to test predictions of the generalized BECNF theory for the hydrogen-metal system, it is very important to carry out Rossi-type experiments independently in order to establish what are exact inputs and outputs of each experiment. If the entrance and exit reaction channels are established experimentally, we can investigate selection rules as well as estimates of the reaction rates for different exit reaction channels, based on the generalized BECNF theory [1-4]. Once these experimental results are established, further application of the generalized BECNF theory can be made for the purpose of confirming the theoretical mechanism and making theoretical predictions, which can then be tested experimentally. Basic description of the above theoretical concepts for BECNF in the hydrogen-metal system will be included in an invited talk at a forthcoming nuclear physics conference [10], and will be published in the conference proceedings [10].
References
- Y. E. Kim, “Theory of Bose-Einstein Condensation Mechanism for Deuteron-Induced Nuclear Reactions in Micro/Nano-Scale Metal Grains and Particles”, Naturwissenschaften 96, 803 (2009) and references therein.
- Y. E. Kim, “Bose-Einstein Condensate Theory of Deuteron Fusion in Metal”, J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 4, 188 (2010), Proceedings of Symposium on New Energy Technologies, the 239th National Meeting of American Chemical Society, San Francisco, March 21-26, 2010.
- Y. E. Kim, “Theoretical interpretation of anomalous tritium and neutron productions during Pd/D co-deposition experiments”, Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 52, 31101 (2010).
- Y. E. Kim and A. L. Zubarev, “Mixtures of Charged Bosons Confined in Harmonic Traps and Bose-Einstein Condensation Mechanism for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions and Transmutation Processes in Condensed Matter”, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Proceedings of the 11th International conference on Cold Fusion, Marseilles, France, 31 October – 5 November, 2006, World Scientific Publishing Co., pp. 711-717.
- Andrea Rossi, “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CARRYING OUT NICKEL AND HYDROGEN EXOTHERMAL REACTION”, United States Patent Application Publication (Pub. No.: US 2011/0005506 A1, Pub. Date: Jan. 13, 2011); http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/ja/WO2009125444.
- S. Focardi and A. Rossi, “A new energy source from nuclear fusion”, March 22, 2010. http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3080659.ece/BINARY/Rossi-Forcardi_paper.pdf
https://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=66 , February 2010 - H. Essen and S. Kullander, “Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna, 29 March 2011”, a travel report, April 3, 2011; http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece
- Table of Isotopes, 8th Edition, Volume I: A = 1-150, edited by R. B. Firestone et al., published by John Wiley and Sons, Inc. (1999), pages 270 and 284.
- Reactions (ii) were suggested by T. E. Ward, private communication, May 11, 2011.
- Y. E. Kim, “Deuteron Fusion in Micro/Nano-Scale Metal Particles”, an invited talk to be presented at the Fifth Asia Pacific Conference on Few-Body Problems in Physics 2011(APFB2011), August 22-26, 2011, Seoul, Korea. (http://www.apctp.org/conferences/2011/APFB2011/)
Buonasera Ing Rossi.La ringraziamo per aver partecipato alla nostra conferenza.Il suo intervento telefonico è stato come”la ciliegina sulla torta”Credo che la conferenza sia stata interessante e l’intervento del Prof Celani dettagliato e scientifico.
Mantenere questo tipo di atteggiamento giova senzaltro alla scienza quella con la esse maiuscola.
Le facciamo un imbocca al lupo e in questa corsa che ci ricorda un po quella all’oro speriamo che a vincere sia sopratutto il bene di tutti.
Claudio Puosi Vessy Nikolova
Dear Dr Joseph Fine,
Very good question: yes, it is possible, but the higher we go, the more complicated the system becomes. For this reason we are trying to resolve at lower T. I must say that in these days, thanks to the help of all the Readers who sent comments on this issue, we made enormous progress. Maybe we will be faster than expected.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
Is it possible to increase the output steam (or CO2) temperature and thereby increase electrical power generation efficiency while decreasing the thermal output of a number of E-CATs?
That is, can a given amount of electrical output power (for example 300 KW-e) be produced both safely and more efficiently with a greater number of E-CATs that operate at higher temperature but where each produces a lower thermal output power?
Safety is the primary concern. Might there be a method or a material that could permit a system to maintain its stability when operating at a higher temperature? Can one trade the use of a larger number of lower power E-CATS for a higher operating temperature?
Joseph Fine
Dear Martin,
We will cost about 2 thousand euros per kW. But solar panels work only with sun…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear mr Rossi,
Maybe a difficult question. Will the future prise of an e-cat used for electricity be cheaper then the solarpanels price (as you know this prices are falling very fast.
Best regards,
Martin
Dear Sebastian:
As I already said many times, the R&D work with the University of Bologna is strictly confidential, and is not public. I am not going to release any information on this issue, because this is not a public issue. Future inquiries on this issue will be spammed.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
yesterday I asked a question concerning the R&D contract with the University of Bologna. Maybe it got lost.
Could you please comment on the current status of this contract? When will UniBo receive their first E-Cat for research purposes?
Thank you very much
Sebastian
Dear CURES (Prof. Fioravanti):
Very good suggestions, thank you very, very much.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear John Jan:
Thank you,
Warm regards,
A.R.
La sua augusta invenzione porterà il Mondo verso le nuove impensabili frontiere.
Questo che internet ha fatto per la comunicazione liberando la informazione, lei sta facendo per l’energia. Il progresso tecnologico è dipeso da una successione di scoperte, talvolta fortuite, come la serendipità della penicillina. La sua invenzione spinge il Mondo verso la civiltà di tipo I nella scala di Kardašëv, e cambia radicalmente la geopolitica del Mondo attuale rendendo obsolete le guerre per le risorse petrolifere.
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scala_di_Karda%C5%A1%C3%ABv
Hi, Dott. Rossi
Probabilmente ci ha già pensato, ma glielo suggerisco lo stesso. Ai fini della produzione di energia elettrica, sarebbe meglio dividere il circuito idraulico di asportazione del calore in due circuiti separati. Il primario dovrebbe essere sigillato e contenere olio diatermico (minerale o sintetico) e quello secondario l’acqua. Ciò consente di portare la temperatura del primario fino a circa 300 °C. I dati degli olii minerali li trova nella ISO 6743-12
Il circuito primario dovrebbe avere due carichi termici posti in serie fra di loro. Il primo dovrebbe essere la testa calda di un motore Stirling ed il secondo uno scambiatore di calore con l’acqua del circuito secondario. L’olio riscaldato dal Ecat dovrebbe prima lambire la testa calda di un motore Stirling e poi lo scambiatore di calore con l’acqua del circuito secondario. Con una progettazione anche approssimativa, si può assicurare una temperatura dell’olio all’uscita dello Stirling ancora superiore ai 100 °C in modo tale da permettere la vaporizzazione dell’acqua via radiatore di scambio termico olio-acqua. Sempre che la cosa interessi e non serva solo acqua calda da riscaldamento
Il vantaggio sta nel fatto che un motore Stirling ha come massa termica la temperatura ambiente e quindi una elevata temperatura della testa rispetto all’ambiente assicura un elevato potenziale termico. La parte più difficile, come ha visto, consiste nell’indagine di mercato. Ma non dia retta a chi le ha detto che servono 700°C per avere un alto rendimento. Si può raggiungere una efficienza di conversione calore-> energia cinetica attorno al 50% anche con queste temperature. Il motore Stirling è strutturalmente semplice. E’ più complicato riuscire a ottenere gli stessi risultati con le turbine a vapore
Sconsiglierei di usare sali fusi per il primario perché solidificano a temperature troppo alte e per garantire la si curezza dell’Ecat li si dovrebbe mantenere fusi anche quando è spento in modo tale da permettere l’asportazione immediata del calore alla prima accensione senza attendere che sia lo Ecat a fonderli per consentirne la circolazione
Alla via così dott Rossi, come si dice in Marina
E, se mi permette, non accentri troppo le attività se no rischia di perdersi nei dettagli. Ma questo lo sa già.
Dear Mario Voltaggio:
Maybe you are right,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear James Bowery,
Tyhank you for the help,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Luke Mortensen:
Thank you for the help,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
AR and other forum members,
I listened to Andrea’s comment on temperature (200 degrees C) and scale (300 KW heat input) and did some research. Two conclusions:
1. Siemens has their smallest scale steam turbine model that fits the ecat need nicely: “SST-010”
(If you have the funding, I suggest you buy it and start experimenting.)
Specs:
Output: Up to 110KW of electricity. **(or up to ~400KW of heat input)
Technical data
• Power output up to 110 kW
• Gas pressure up to 70 bar(a) / 1015 psi
• Gas flow rates up to 15,000 m3 /h / 530,000 ft3 /h
• Exhaust gas pressure up to 25 bar(a) / 363 psi
• Turbine wheel diameter 400 mm / 15.75 in
Typical dimensions
Length 1.2 m / 4 ft
Width 0.8 m / 2.6 ft
Height 0.9 m / 3 ft
Source:
http://www.energy.siemens.com/us/pool/hq/power-generation/steam-turbines/downloads/E50001-W4100-A100-X-4A00_Pre-Designed_Steam%20Turbines_E_f_screen.pdf
2. Ecat flexibility with steam generators improves when these parameters are changed
-Efficiency would be much higher if *water temperature* could reach 400 degrees. Very high pressure. Probably difficult with the small e-cats to handle.
-Many more turbine models would work if steam input could get to about 9 MW (3 MW electric output).
I hope this can assist your efforts,
~Luke
I should clarify that when I say the Atmospheric Vortext Engine is “least capital intensive” I mean per installed power (ie: $/W). I’ll show the calculation for two cases where the exhaust temperature is a more conservative -30C and the capital cost is as currently estimated for the ambient heat case of $300/kW (http://vortexengine.ca/PPP/AVEtec_Business_Case.pdf):
1) Ambient temperature of 20C Carnot efficiency:
17% = (293.15Kelvin-243.15Kelvin)/293.15Kelvin
2) E-Cat temperature of 300C Carnot efficiency:
57% = (573.15Kelvin-243.15Kelvin)/573.15Kelvin
less than $100/kW = (17%/57%)*$300/kW
That’s less than 10 cents an installed Watt capitalization.
Nothing else comes close.
In areas with low peak annual winds, the least capital-intensive technology to turn E-Cat heat into baseload electricity is likely to be the Atmospheric Vortex Engine. With an exhaust temperature of nearly -60C, the Carnot efficiency can be very high with virtually no thermal pollution.
P.S.
Lo stesso ragionamento potrebbe applicarsi,con maggior probabilità di successo, al Ni-65 che decade in Cu-65, perchè in questo caso l’energia di rinculo beta sarebbe molto maggiore.
Caro Dr. Andrea Rossi,
non mi rassegno al fatto che non sia possibile misurare un qualche tipo di radiazione nell’e-cat. Se, come ipotizzato da lei e Focardi nel suo lavoro, il Cu-64 decade per emissione beta in Zn-64,quest’ ultimo isotopo stabile dovrebbe avere una certa energia di rinculo beta (anche se variabile a causa dei neutrini) e potrebbe rinvenirsi ad una certa profondità nanometrica in qualche supporto solido resistente al calore che potrebbe essere aggiunto all’interno della cella e che potrebbe essere analizzato per spettrometria di massa successivamente. Insomma una specie di rivelatore passivo per radiazione beta resistente al calore.
Con stima
Mario Voltaggio
Dear Iggy Dalrymple:
Thank you for your help,
Warm regards,
A.R.
Have you investigated Cyclone Power Technology’s steam engine? They claim a thermal efficiency above 30%. They are located near you. http://www.cyclonepower.com/
Dear Weber4YOU:
Impossible, an engine is not a reactor…is like to convert a taxi into a BOEING 727.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Italo,
Thank you for your help,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mario Voltaggio,
The effect depends on the particular technology of the reactor, I do not think it is replicable in other things made differently from the E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Oliver:
To purchase a plant, the way is to contact me (not before November) and I will address the requests to the proper person, depending on the geographical position.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Stephen T.:
Thank you for your help,
Warm Regards,
A.
This morning I sent inquiry to Mr. Mohan Prabhu, Mizun Consultants & Engineers, Dwarka, India, regarding a need for a 300kw steam turbine generator to operate at 200 degrees Celsius input steam temperature with condenser included. His website says he has just what is needed on short lead time. We shall see. I took the liberty to pass on you e-mail. Hope this was acceptable.
Best Wishes,
Stephen T.
Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi
On July 18th, 2011 at 11:21 AM you mentioned about customers with plants. How would one go about to purchase the plants ? Thank you so much for your time. Oliver.
Gentile Dr. Andrea Rossi,
la ringrazio per la risposta data alcuni giorni fa alle mie domande e mi scusi se insisto in alcune osservazioni. La cosa che personalmente mi interessa molto in questa esperienza è l’apparente assenza di radiazione gamma in quantità significativamente più elevata del fondo naturale. E’ evidente che data l’energia di output coinvolta, se il calore è generato dall’interazione dei raggi gamma con la materia,lo schermo di piombo adottato sarebbe insufficiente per ridurre a questi bassi livelli la radiazione gamma sviluppata.
Dobbiamo quindi dedurre che tale radiazione ad alta energia sia trasformata, all’interno della cella, in radiazione gamma a bassa energia e quindi facilmente schermabile dal piombo.
La mia domanda è la seguente: secondo lei, questo fenomeno è, diciamo, “esportabile” in altri contesti per ridurre, in generale, un campo di radiazioni gamma ad alta energia o tale trasformazione è inerente alla particolare trasmutazione nucleare coinvolta? Se la prima alternativa fosse positiva, le implicazioni tecnologiche nel campo nucleare e spaziale sarebbero, è inutile dilungarmi, molto importanti.
Grazie in anticipo per la sua attenzione
Mario Voltaggio
Dear Ing. Rossi, I have had informations about the following site. It seems that they realize a very efficient and simple system usable as steam engine, too. You can try to see if it could fit your needs.
http://angellabsllc.com/index.html
Italo
Dear Mr. Rossi,
you can put the nickel powder in a Stirling engine.
By the periodic pressure changes in the process is better controlled.
Please consider this possibility
We wish you all the best
Dear Koen Vandevwalle:
Nevertheless I am working hard to make electric power. I will get it, do not worry, because I am receiving a tremendous help from our Readers.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Joe Shea:
1- I confirm that in October our 1 MW plant will go in operation: we are on schedule so far
2- Yes, 10 kW
3- The cost of manufacture is our business; the cost to the public will be less than 2,000 Euro/kW
4- totally wrong. The address of my factory is secret
5- we do not need incentives
Thank you for your kind attention and
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi,
Perhaps efficiency is not that important with a low cost energy source. If we analyze the normal household electricity consumption, a huge part (I estimate 75%) is mainly used to produce hot air (for the tumble drier), hot water (for the laundry and dish washer) and a hot surface to cook on. Adsorption cooling could be used for airco and refrigerators.
Even my favourite french frites can be made with 180°C oil and no electricity.
So why do we need all that electricity for ?
If we rediscover common sense in the way we use energy and heat, a carnot-cycle with temperature span of 150°C is not that dramatic.
33% is not that bad. Even 15% could be enough.
With optimized E-cats for the purpose of the high temperature and very good turbines or other devices, centralized electricity production may be better. Let someone else do their efforts too. I believe manufacturers of jet engines or helicopter engines could cooperate with you (maybe after october). Turbines is their (proprietary ?) thing. Could be expensive.
There will be very powerfull, intelligent and also creative people listening to you when you ring your 1MW bell in october. Maybe now there is some doubt or even they have bad advisors who say that there is not enough proof or other blablabla. After all, very few understand how it really works, and complex things are difficult to sell. People need to see and feel.
Manufacturers of household devices could be extremely happy with a new generation of devices. Save money, replace your old electric… with our new hot… ! Some of the devices already exist with hot water inputs. Your first idea is still good enough. Concentrated heat is very important.
Kind Regards.
Koen
Signore, I invite your attention to an article in The American Reporter, “NASA’S DENNIS BUSHNELL READIES COLD FUSION REACTOR.” In it, we discuss your work. I would like to update the article with some new information, if you would be so kind as to reply to his email. Here are my questions:
1. Is the Defcalion October rollout date on track, or will it be indefinitely delayed?
2. Is it true that your workspace is heated (and presumably cooled) by your reactor? If so, what is the input and output of that device?
3. Have any preliminary estimates of the cost of manufacture and the cost to the home-bound end user been calculated? If so, what are they?
4. I understand you have obtained use of an American manufacturing fdacility in Broward County, Fla. Would it be possible to visit you there for a story on your work? I can be reached in Bradenton, Fla., at 941-4562-2616.
5. Moreover, I believe manufacturing incentives of a substantial nature can be obtained from Manatee County, Fla., if bona fides with respect to your work can be conclusively established.
Manatee County will soon be the closest deepwater port to the Panama Canal upon the coming completion of a dredging project there.
I look forward to your response.
Yours very sincerely,
Joe Shea
Editor-in-Chief
The American Reporter
http://www.american-reporter.com
amreporter@aol.com
Dear Mattias Anderson:
Thank you,
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
This kind of Stirling engine might be suitable for the E-Cat:
http://www.cleanergyindustries.com/production.html
Here’s a small extract from an article about it (translated from Swedish with Google translate):
This red morsel is on the production line at Cleanergy of Åmål and, fired by such natural gas, butane or the like, produce between 2 and 9 kW of electrical energy in the connecting three phase generator (behind the engine itself). The engine is currently under construction and the hot piston crown sticking up on the left. The shiny bottle top is the beginning of the combustion chamber and the white plastic bottle is part of the lubrication system. All cabling ends in an electrical box on the right. When it is finished, all the glory to weigh about 450 pounds and then it’s the three phase generator that weighs the most.
As you can see, these are not particularly exotic stuff. The hand on the right is the hot piston. This particular specimen has turned black from having been running for a long time. It is not pretty – the combustion is external – without the piston, which is not even in stainless steel, without carbon steel, has completely been tempered. Temperatures are not so amazing high. Piston rings, the three brown on the bottom of the flask is made of Teflon and can not withstand more than 400 degrees. The seemingly loose ring in the middle of the crankshaft is the seal that isolates the crankcase and the oil from the helium atmosphere as the piston is working in. The cylinder, left, is quite common, cast iron. Or, almost ordinary. The cylinder is split into two, a hot and a cold part. What you see is the cold part, in which Teflon seal runs. On top of this stack to a hot part of the piston crown, outside of what you burn in the heat.
Dear Anders:
1- I do not give info regarding the reactor
2- yes
3- I do not give info regarding the reactor
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Tom Brocket:
I wish you are right, but the Sterling Engine manufactirers I contacted told me what I said. If you know some who has your ideas and manufactures Sterling Engines, please give me the contact.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Elena Oliva Pezzuto:
Please contact us in Novenber, after the start up of our 1 MW plant: only after that we will start our commercial operations and the sales of E-Cats.
Thank you for your very kind expressions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
First thank you for your courage and perseverance. Your work is one of the seldom exciting technological advances of this last decade. Thank you for breaking the oil and gaz boredom.
I have several questions for you:
1- Can you increase the power output of the small e-cat device above 150kW? I have read somewhere that you can generate much more than the standard few kW by playing with the catalyzer (quantity?) but that the reaction is less stable. Why is the reaction less controllable? Could it be somehow related to the size of the e-cat?
2- In your opinion, is this Nickel + H a lucky case? In other words, do you think that there are other metallic elements that could show the same type of reaction with hydrogen (at for example higher temperature)? Did you make any experiments? Can we expect even higher energy density?
3- Did you look into making smaller e-cat (portable e-cats or even pocket e-cat). Today most portable devices suffer from the limited amount of energy the lithium batteries can offer. A portable e-cat will be a killer device (a laptop or smartphone you never need to recharge).
I do not see any fundamental limitation to drastically reduce the size of the e-cat. Creating a very local spot with temperature around 500C is feasible. What you would probably need is try to get the reaction out of water, and replace lead with some thermoelectric material to directly convert radiation into electricity. Are you working in this direction? Or is this impossible for some reason?
4- Does your fusion reaction need to happen in aquous environment? In other words, is water necessary?
5- One of the frustrating things, is that we do not have any way to participate in the e-cat revolution. How can we invest in you work? Do you have any partnership with large corporations? As far as I know, Defkalion is not going to go public in the near term…
Finally, I should tell you that your e-cat device will enable the era of modern robotics. With such compact and high energy density, a lot of machinery can be radically changed.
Many thanks and good luck,
Best regards,
Dzhafer.
Dear Maryyugo:
We are working on this item, but all the manufacturers of Sterling engines I contacted told me they need 700 Celsius to geive good efficiencies.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Fabio Sanzani:
It is normal that revolutionary technologies rise stakes. I am accostomed to this kind of stuff. At the end, working plants shut up winding mouthes.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Ing.Rossi
I’m so surprised and sad for the continuous attacks about your person and your work… for the future world is nothing.. for now is only jealousy for your result (and perhaps for money). You have all my respect and you must be patient. Soon or later water will carry them away… I think…. warm water!
Buon lavoro e carissimi saluti
F.Sanzani
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I don’t understand why a Stirling engine would require 700 degrees C. I’ve seen some toys that run from the heat of a coffee cup. See for example this Youtube video:
http://www.youtube.com/user/TinselKoala#p/search/0/aYovJzmCLdw
Are you sure that a high temperature is required? I know you will need a much larger scale but I believe some comparatively efficient Stirling engines run on solar energy from small reflectors. Perhaps you could modify one of those to run from the E-cat?
VERY Sorry, correct conversion from 550 F is 287.7 deg C. Apologies.
Please excuse error in previous post temperature referenced was 310 degrees C not 355.
http://njchp.rutgers.edu/files/Steam_Turbines.pdf
Table 1 on page 5 is interesting. A very efficient condition for input steam is 355 deg C / 500 psig.
This is on a 500kW back pressure turbine. Total CHP efficiency of 79.6%
Mr. Rossi:
I live in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada, west of Sudbury, Ontario. Winters here are similar to those in Northern Italy, very cold and snowy. (Which is probably why we have a large Italian immigrant community here, including many Rossi families. You’re welcome to join us. 🙂 There’s lots of nickel in Sudbury and a fine underground neutrino laboratory there, a university, as well as a steel plant in the Sault; all the raw material you need, in other words!)
I’m writing to ask when the Rossi E-Cat (home unit) will be available commercially in Canada and what its cost will be to purchase. In addition, what will be the annual cost to have the reactor maintained?
Thank you for your reply and congratulations on your exciting invention.
Regards,
Elena Pezzutto
“Stirling engine needs 700 C.”
With respect, Dr Rossi, I do not believe that is the case. A Stirling engine can be made to run even at a small temperature differential. Indeed, there are toy models that will run on the heat of your hand: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdkG8b3-7gk . You would perhaps not get the power output you would expect from a gas-fired machine at 700C combustion temperature; but a 200C differential from an E-Cat pack would, I am sure, drive a Stirling engine to generate electricity efficiently.
Best regards
Thon Brocket