10KW LENR Demonstrator?

[DancingFool]

Having read the Defkalion press release, I have to wonder that _anybody_ takes Rossi seriously. And I quote:

Out of the CE standards, Hyperion products (kW or MW range) have to pass all tests described the Greek and EU laws according to their industrial code classification.The Authorities responsible for tests and certifications are:
•The Ministry of Regional Development and Industry
•The Ministry of Environment and Energy

Has it not occurred to y'all that the E-Cat is a nuclear reactor? That it gives off alpha and beta particles, along with gamma radiation? Any permitting process for Defkalion must include the GAEC. Now look at it from the GAEC's perspective (assuming that the E-Cat works as advertised):

The E-Cat utilizes a previously unknown nucleide sequence, and there is no accepted theory to explain the underlying process. As a result, there is no way to perform failure or risk analysis. Unless Rossi is far more forthcoming with the GAEC than he has been with anybody else, there is no possiblity of a meaningful design review. Defkalion proposes to produce tens of thousands of these untried, untested, uncharacterised reactors and disperse them throughout the country.

From the GAECs perspective, does it make the faintest sense to allow this?

No. Actually, Hell no.

Even if we grant that Rossi has fully disclosed what he knows to the GAEC, he can't have done this more than about 2 years ago. And it beggars the imagination to suggest that a bureaucracy would approve such a proposal in only 2 years. Not with nukes on the table, and not with no theoretical basis.

And if Defkalion is a real company, how could they possibly not know this?

So put me down for a big, fat, enthusiastic call of BS on Rossi.

Oh yes, and if we assume that the E-Cat DOES work, has anybody thought about what you could do with it?

Consider a naked E-Cat: no shielding and no cooling. The reactor is smaller than a 1-liter soda bottle, and can be brought to life with a battery about the size of a laptop. Until it melts the nickel, it is clearly a potent gamma source.

Does the phrase "radiological terror weapon" strike a chord? How about "cheap, readily available radiological terror weapon"?

[Axil]

Consider a naked E-Cat: no shielding and no cooling. The reactor is smaller than a 1-liter soda bottle, and can be brought to life with a battery about the size of a laptop. Until it melts the nickel, it is clearly a potent gamma source.

If this abuse of the cat-e technology becomes a problem, it can be totally prevented through a failsafe materials engineering solution if tungsten is used as the reaction vessel shell to replace stainless steel.

Tungsten will not melt down or in any way fail at high temperatures. Without exception, tungsten will block any hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation from escaping the inside of the reaction vessel.

[Joseph Chikva]

If this abuse of the cat-e technology becomes a problem, it can be totally prevented through a failsafe materials engineering solution if tungsten is used as the reaction vessel shell to replace stainless steel.

Tungsten will not melt down or in any way fail at high temperatures. Without exception, tungsten will block any hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation from escaping the inside of the reaction vessel.

There is no any "e-cat technology". There is e-cat fraud.
Who investigated tungsten as universal protective material against "hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation"?
500 C degrees and hydrogen atmosphere is typical for austenitic stainless steel usage.
E.g. hydrocracking's parameters are 450-500 C, pressure - up to 20 MPa.
For what are you proposing tungsten? What advantage can it provide?

[Carl White]

I must say that these guys appear to have done a lot of engineering on the E-Cat to incorporate the reactor technology into viable commercial systems. It could just be a false front I guess, but the tone and content of their answers does not seem to comport with the rather amaturish demos conducted by Rossi.

This seems like a fairly compelling argument, to me. The degree of collective idiocy required to establish and build a $200 million manufacturing facility without having tested beforehand whether the proposed product actually works would just have to be beyond the ludicrous. Who ever would do such a thing?

[ScottL]

As far as we know, said plant doesn't exist yet. It's all speculation so far...and maybe someone's apartment.

[Axil]

If this abuse of the cat-e technology becomes a problem, it can be totally prevented through a failsafe materials engineering solution if tungsten is used as the reaction vessel shell to replace stainless steel.

Tungsten will not melt down or in any way fail at high temperatures. Without exception, tungsten will block any hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation from escaping the inside of the reaction vessel.

There is no any "e-cat technology". There is e-cat fraud.
Who investigated tungsten as universal protective material against "hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation"?
500 C degrees and hydrogen atmosphere is typical for austenitic stainless steel usage.
E.g. hydrocracking's parameters are 450-500 C, pressure - up to 20 MPa.
For what are you proposing tungsten? What advantage can it provide?

http://www.tungsten-alloy.com/en/alloy07.htm

Advantages of tungsten alloy radiation shielding

Experts find that radiation exposure could be reduced by maxing shielding. The density of a material is related to its radiation stopping ability. Higher density means better stopping power and shielding. Due to a higher density, tungsten alloy radiation shielding has a much higher stopping power than lead. Its greater linear attenuation of gamma radiations means that less is required for equal shielding. Alternatively equal amounts of tungsten shielding provide diminished exposure risks than equivalent lead shielding.

Tungsten heavy alloy is a suitable raw material for radiation protection, as its combination of radiographic density (more than 60% denser than lead), machinability, good corrosion resistance, high radiation absorption (superior to lead), simplified life cycle and high strength.

It can provide the same degree of protection as lead whilst significantly reducing the overall volume and thickness of shields and containers. Besides, compared with lead or depleted uranium in the past, tungsten heavy alloy radiation shielding is more acceptable in this case, for they are non-toxic.

Being a expert is fusion reactors, you should know this.

[DancingFool]

Consider a naked E-Cat: no shielding and no cooling. The reactor is smaller than a 1-liter soda bottle, and can be brought to life with a battery about the size of a laptop. Until it melts the nickel, it is clearly a potent gamma source.

If this abuse of the cat-e technology becomes a problem, it can be totally prevented through a failsafe materials engineering solution if tungsten is used as the reaction vessel shell to replace stainless steel.

Nice try. "If this ... becomes a probem"? Oh, really? You mean, after several hundred units have disappeared and been stockpiled, changing the reactor material will solve the problem?

Tungsten will not melt down or in any way fail at high temperatures. Without exception, tungsten will block any hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation from escaping the inside of the reaction vessel.

No. We're talking about tungsten, not unobtainium.

1) Tungsten has a half value about half of lead, so you need reactor walls a centimeter thick to match the current 2 cm external shielding. (note that HVL values vary with gamma energy, and Rossi consistently refuses to talk about E-Cat values). Doable, certainly, but it would probably require complete E-Cat replacement. Expensive as well as embarrasing. And ungodly expensive, too.

2) Failure at temperature is not a problem. Typical stainless melting points are only slightly higher than pure nickel, but in a WMD scenario, the nickel will melt first, regardless of jacket material. Anyways, you _want_ the jacket to fail at lower temperature, to terminate the reaction.

[TallDave]

I agree about BLP, but the point is not that "respectable" (and even highly-intellegent) people cannot be wrong about bets on new technology. It's that an intentional scammer would probably not include such folks as marks.

Au contraire, they are precisely the people such a scammer needs in order to entice others.

[Ivy Matt]

Like I said, this story is not ending anytime soon. I predict > 500 pages.

I really hope much before that... I wouldn't mind to go back and discuss some polywell plasma data sooner or later

If we get any, I'm sure that all of us would. I think we will continue to get Focus Fusion grist for the mill for sure.

I don't know, things appear to be rather slow at the moment. Maybe there will be more developments now that they're done with ICOPS 2011. I'll be glad when I've heard the FF-1 overhaul is complete, but right now I think it's a toss-up between LPP and EMC2 (via Recovery.gov) in terms of where the next bit of news will come from. 25 days and counting....

[Joseph Chikva]

Being a expert is fusion reactors, you should know this.

I am not a big expert of fusion reactors.
But whether you heard about hydrogen fragility? The reactor containing hydrogen can blow up. Who tested tungsten for hydrogen?
Best wall for hydrogen as mentioned – austenitic stainless steel.

It is excellent if one Chinese company promotes tungsten as anti-radiation shielding material. But I doubt that they only produce tungsten and propose for this application. Who uses is a just another issue.
As I have never heard.

Nobody considers tungsten as first wall material, stainless steel - yes, aluminum - yes, niobium - may be, molybdenum - may be, etc.
First wall should be as transparent as possible for neutrons. Then neutrons should be stopped by blanket. Then magnets layer. And only then protective wall (shield). Tungsten? Too expensive I think. Lead, concrete, may be tungsten - has not a big matter.

[KitemanSA]

This seems like a fairly compelling argument, to me. The degree of collective idiocy required to establish and build a $200 million manufacturing facility without having tested beforehand whether the proposed product actually works would just have to be beyond the ludicrous. Who ever would do such a thing?

Someone who SAYS they are setting up a $200M facility while taking in $400M in pre-orders?

[Baslim]

I've eliminated the 3 outcome categories I could think of.

1)It is a scam. This seems highly unlikely because the energy output is so high that any potential investor could easily see that it is not working to spec with cheap off the shelf testers and a modicum of engineering or scientific knowledge. I think most recent high school graduates in the top 10% of their math/science class could come up with experiments costing under $10,000 using this blog as there only reference could figure out if the e-cat were producing as claimed if they could get their hands on one or two for a couple of weeks. Ponzi schemes, steorn, and blacklight power all make more sense as scams because they don't have hundred of easily testable production models. If it is a scan then many people need to be involved including all of the current investors (Rossi and Delphiki and the American company with licence in America) and how are they going to make money with these easily verifiable claims.

2) It is scientific error. This means it is not a fraud or a scam and Rossi and others have been measuring the heat output incorrectly. There have been claims of 6 to 20 times the input power. There have been multiple experiments by rossi internally, rossi infront of scientists with credibility, engineering companies that are investing, I'll stating that there appears to be stupendous results. I don't see how you can miss that your office wasn't really being heated for the entire winter.

3) It works as designed. If a person have developed a miracle of energy production, how can you complete 3 botched experiments that don't satisfy most people. Why don't you tell the university that is about to do 3rd party testing that they should send out a preliminary report that says that it is producing about X times the amount of power used over a 2 week period and we have exhausted most of the alternative we can think of through the following black box experiments. Staying secretive makes sense, but this is one of the worst public relations tries I have ever seen if you have working miraculous prototypes.

[Axil]

Consider a naked E-Cat: no shielding and no cooling. The reactor is smaller than a 1-liter soda bottle, and can be brought to life with a battery about the size of a laptop. Until it melts the nickel, it is clearly a potent gamma source.

If this abuse of the cat-e technology becomes a problem, it can be totally prevented through a failsafe materials engineering solution if tungsten is used as the reaction vessel shell to replace stainless steel.

Nice try. "If this ... becomes a probem"? Oh, really? You mean, after several hundred units have disappeared and been stockpiled, changing the reactor material will solve the problem?

Tungsten will not melt down or in any way fail at high temperatures. Without exception, tungsten will block any hydrogen, alpha, beta and gamma radiation from escaping the inside of the reaction vessel.

No. We're talking about tungsten, not unobtainium.

1) Tungsten has a half value about half of lead, so you need reactor walls a centimeter thick to match the current 2 cm external shielding. (note that HVL values vary with gamma energy, and Rossi consistently refuses to talk about E-Cat values). Doable, certainly, but it would probably require complete E-Cat replacement. Expensive as well as embarrasing. And ungodly expensive, too.

2) Failure at temperature is not a problem. Typical stainless melting points are only slightly higher than pure nickel, but in a WMD scenario, the nickel will melt first, regardless of jacket material. Anyways, you _want_ the jacket to fail at lower temperature, to terminate the reaction.

I agree, Defkalion should use tungsten right from the start.

Paradoxically, the use of tungsten will make for a more cost effective reactor product. Tungsten will eliminated the need for large hydrogen storage feed tanks. This will make the Rossi reactor safer and cheaper to build, field, license, inspect, and maintain.

Anyways, you _want_ the jacket to fail at lower temperature, to terminate the reaction.

No, you want the nano-powder to melt before the shell.

In a tungsten walled Rossi reactor, the nano-powder will melt before the tungsten shell; ergo a safe exposition resistant configuration.

[Ivy Matt]

This seems like a fairly compelling argument, to me. The degree of collective idiocy required to establish and build a $200 million manufacturing facility without having tested beforehand whether the proposed product actually works would just have to be beyond the ludicrous. Who ever would do such a thing?

Defkalion is claiming to have tested the technology well beyond what Rossi has done in his demos. Check out this thread on vortex-l, started by Jed Rothwell. I didn't think it was likely that Christos Stremmenos and Defkalion were being duped by Rossi. Focardi and Levi, perhaps, but not the principals of Defkalion. If there is a scam, Defkalion is heavily involved in it.

[Ivy Matt]

I've eliminated the 3 outcome categories I could think of.

So what's left?