[LINK] Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat)

[TKoltai]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au 
> [mailto:link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au] On Behalf Of Richard Chirgwin
> Sent: Friday, 13 January 2012 9:53 AM
> To: link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat)
> 
> 
> On 13/01/12 9:18 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> >> On 13 January 2012 05:31,<stephen at melbpc.org.au>  wrote:
> >>>   An Italian inventor claims to have developed a machine 
> that can produce
> >>>   large amounts of energy from almost nothing.
> >>>   ...
> >>>   Rossi and Focardi say the device works by infusing 
> heated hydrogen into
> >>>   nickel, transmuting it into copper and producing heat.
> > At 9:06 +1100 13/1/12, jim birch wrote:
> >> Unfortunately it only works in a piece of the multiverse that is 
> >> unreachable from our local universe.
> > Some people are so-o-o-o sceptical.
> >
> > All you need is Dr Rossi's *other* invention, a warp-machine, which 
> > reaches parts of the multiverse that other warp-machines 
> cannot reach.
> >
> >
> > It's Friday.  And the 13th at that.
> >
> >
> > P.S.  Jim, firing off the 'transmuting hydrogen and nickel into 
> > copper' bit, we could also invoke Pratchett's view on alchemists - 
> > which is that they're a self-correcting problem, because they keep 
> > blowing themselves up.
> >
> >
> Regrettable, the self-destruction often comes after investors get 
> fleeced. And the Herald never learns a damn thing: 
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/mullumbimby-helping-to-sa
ve-world-20120112-1pxj2.html

Assuming (for a moment, and disregarrding scientists who don't like "not
invented here" advances in the field), that according to the laws of
physics, the system can and does work as per the filed patent, then the
only people that could economically utilise it are those that have more
nickel than copper. Because;

The London Metals Market current comparison between Nickel and Copper:
Cash               3 Mth     15 Mth     27 Mth      Inventory    Volume

Nickel [1]
Official $8.8791   8.8904    8.9335       8.9018     92,334      274,326
Copper [2]
         $3.6042   3.6111    3.6197       3.5811     358,250
3,343,150  

Comparison is for one pound of each metal. Therefore the heat from the
isotopic conversion would need to generate a minimum of $6.00 worth of
energy for every pound of metal, before the output cost disadvantage is
neutralised. 

The Wikipedia article states "25 kWh from any fuel in a 50 cm3..."
therefore we can assume the container is full at 0.17637 lbs to the 50
cm3 [3].
Ergo, a pound of nickel is capable of creating 141.74 reactions of 25
kWh per reaction. @ 1.6 cents per kHh (heat recovery value) that results
in a positive output of $2.26 per pound plus the output (slag) plus the
green offsets, which I would assume to be the maximum. That appears a
little short. However the reports are sketchy on the exact quantity req.
to maintain a reaction over time.

By the same token, there is 150 times more nickel reserves than copper
at the moment AND Australia has the largest known Nickel reserves in the
world.
Therefore:

Australia should "officially" investigate this technology, and;

This is a great invention (for the near Future) and would be highly
useable in areas like Antarctica, Space and even the bottom of the
Marianna trench.

What price can you place on a non irradiating power plant on the space
station, the moon or your backyard ?

An excellent find Stephen. I like this one a lot better than hot rocks.
This reaction can take place anywhere - i.e.: at the point of
consumption and doesn't need to be sent via transmission lines.

References:

[1]
http://www.metalprices.com/FreeSite/metals/nickelalloy/nickelalloy.asp
[2] http://www.metalprices.com/FreeSite/metals/cu/cu.asp

[3] Volume to Weight Calcs
http://www.aqua-calc.com/calculate/volume-to-weight