interesting free power set up



M O'D:
The responses to his claims make interesting reading ~ none of them appear to support the man's claims

--- Quote ---On December 04, 2012 7:45 PM [GMT-7], Peter Lindemann wrote:
I have to agree with Mark and Jim. If the information you have provided is accurate, and the system is made from commercially available "off the shelf" parts, including an electric motor, automotive alternator, batteries, an inverter, and a battery charger, then there is no reason to believe the system works. The "efficiencies" of these components are well known, and not one of them has an efficiency greater than 90%. With a transfer of energy, from the first bank of batteries to the electric motor, to the alternator, to the second set of batteries, to the inverter, to the battery charger, and back to the first set of batteries, figuring 90% efficiency at each stage (a very generous estimate), the system could not exceed an aggregate efficiency of 54%. The system may be "self-looped", but it will certainly not continue operating longer than the capacity of the batteries allow.
In the absence of any specifically identified "environmental gain" mechanism, I can't imagine why you would entertain the idea that this "might" be a genuine demonstration of a "self-running energy supply". From my cursory analysis, based on the information you have provided, there seems to be no evidence to support such a conclusion.
--- End quote ---


One way this could work (and "Duckman" has claimed success);-

- if the torque generated by a copper wound motor was used to drive an alternator would with silver and/or aluminium, effectively, the generator side of the system would be more efficient than the motor.

Reason? The alternator is using conductors with better conductivity/mass. The torque moves the lighter mass faster, thus generating over parity.

It's not perpetual motion though - the slip rings on every alternator will one day wear out. They have to be replaced.

But, for a 200W bench driver, you should be able to push an 85Amp-100Amp alternator, giving about 600W over unity.

With one proviso - you have to let it run for about 10-15 minutes to regenerate the startup energy prior to adding a load. Or run it for 15 minutes after removing the load.

Technically possible and claimed success... I'm very tempted to have a go at some of these at Hackspace! :)

M O'D:
"Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas"

--- Quote ---
By Sebastian Anthony on May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm

Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.

The device being tested, which is called the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat for short), was created by Andrea Rossi. Rossi has been claiming for the past two years that he had finally cracked cold fusion, but much to the chagrin of the scientific community he hasn’t allowed anyone to independently analyze the device — until now. While it sounds like the scientists had a fairly free rein while testing the E-Cat, we should stress that they still don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the sealed steel cylinder reactor. Still, the seven scientists, all from good European universities, obviously felt confident enough with their findings to publish the research paper.

As for what’s happening inside the cold fusion reactor, Andrea Rossi and his colleague Sergio Focardi have previously said their device works by infusing hydrogen into nickel, transmuting the nickel into copper and releasing a large amount of heat. While Rossi hasn’t provided much in the way of details — he’s a very secretive man, it seems — we can infer some knowledge from NASA’s own research into cold fusion. Basically, hydrogen ions (single protons) are sucked into a nickel lattice (pictured right); the nickel’s electrons are forced into the hydrogen to produce neutrons; the nickel nuclei absorb these neutrons; the neutrons are stripped of their electrons to become protons; and thus the nickel goes up in atomic number from 28 to 29, becoming copper.

This process, like the “conventional” fusion of hydrogen atoms into helium, produces a lot of heat. (See: 500MW from half a gram of hydrogen: The hunt for fusion power heats up.) The main difference, though, is that the cold fusion process (also known as LENR, or low energy nuclear reaction) produces very slow moving neutrons which don’t create ionizing radiation or radioactive waste. Real fusion, on the other hand, produces fast neutrons that decimate everything in their path. In short, LENR is fairly safe — safe enough that NASA dreams of one day putting a cold fusion reactor in every home, car, and plane. Nickel and hydrogen, incidentally, are much cheaper and cleaner fuels than gasoline.

As far as we can tell, the main barrier to cold fusion — as with normal fusion — is producing more energy than you put in. In NASA’s tests, it takes a lot more energy to fuse the nickel and hydrogen than is produced by the reaction. Rossi, it would seem, has discovered a secret sauce that significantly reduces the amount of energy required to start the reaction. As for what the secret sauce is, no one knows — in the research paper, the independent scientists simply refer to it as “unknown additives.” All told, the E-Cat seems to have a power density of 4.4×105 W/kg, and an energy density of 5.1×107 Wh/kg.

If Rossi and Focardi’s cold fusion technology turns out to be real — if the E-Cat really has 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline — then the world will change, very, very quickly. Stay tuned; we’ll let you know when — or if — the E-Cat passes peer review.
--- End quote ---


[0] Message Index

Go to full version