Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion-the Economist Magazine + CNET ??

2011-06-29 Thread Alan J Fletcher


At 10:09 AM 6/29/2011, Ron Kita wrote:
Cold Fusion  LENR :
I was amazed to find this link:

http://www.economist.com/node/18774834/comments
Also made it to

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20075206-54/a-reality-check-on-nuclear-fusion-at-mit/#comments
  
Not noted by the original author, though.
Only interesting one :
by dumbspammers
(1656
comments) June 29, 2011 11:53 AM PDT
The cost of refining nickel to power the E-CAT system is higher than the
amount of energy (allegedly) generated by the E-CAT. Thus, even given an
infinite supply of nickel ore, the E-CAT has a negative net output of
electricity; that is, it costs more KW to make the nickel powder required
to operate it than the E-CAT can produce from the powdered nickel. And
that's not even considering the energy required to isolate the
hydrogen.
... a couple of posts disputing that
by dumbspammers
(1656
comments) June 29, 2011 4:31 PM PDT
Call any metal refinery and ask them what it costs in KWh to refine 1
gram of 99-and-5-9s pure powdered nickel. Or Google, if you have the
ability.
I am unimpressed with people who believe that snake oil is the solution
to our energy needs.
- - -
Eh? 2.5kW * 24 hrs * 365 days / 2 = 10 MW ?? 




Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion-the Economist Magazine + CNET ??

2011-07-05 Thread mixent
In reply to  Alan J Fletcher's message of Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:23:13 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Based upon conversion of only Ni62 & Ni64 to Cu63 & Cu65 respectively, & an
electrical energy value of 5 cents / kWh (@30% conversion efficiency), I
calculate a Ni value of $2085/kg. The current price of Ni is USD23.1 / kg, or
about 1% of the value of the energy it represents, implying that this use of the
metal would support a Nickel price 100 times higher than the current price.

Two additional points:
1) Less than 5% of the Nickel would actually be used, leaving the rest for
normal uses of the metal.
2) If all our energy were to be obtained form this source, then the demand for
the metal would outstrip current production rates about 3 fold.


>by dumbspammers (1656 comments) June 29, 2011 11:53 AM PDT
>The cost of refining nickel to power the E-CAT system is higher than the 
>amount of energy (allegedly) generated by the E-CAT. Thus, even given an 
>infinite supply of nickel ore, the E-CAT has a negative net output of 
>electricity; that is, it costs more KW to make the nickel powder required to 
>operate it than the E-CAT can produce from the powdered nickel. And that's not 
>even considering the energy required to isolate the hydrogen.
>
>
>... a couple of posts disputing that
>
>
>by dumbspammers (1656 comments) June 29, 2011 4:31 PM PDT
>Call any metal refinery and ask them what it costs in KWh to refine 1 gram of 
>99-and-5-9s pure powdered nickel. Or Google, if you have the ability.
>
>
>I am unimpressed with people who believe that snake oil is the solution to our 
>energy needs.
>
>
>- - -
>
>
>Eh? 2.5kW * 24 hrs * 365 days / 2 = 10 MW ?? 
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html