Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
At last we are seeing some real money! $20 million is great. However, the planned use of the money is preposterous: Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary agreement to acquire at least one “stranded asset” conventional fuel source small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouin’s hot tube NHB™, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then riding on the horses to get where you want to go. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:49:58 -0400: Hi Jed, [snip] >At last we are seeing some real money! $20 million is great. However, the >planned use of the money is preposterous: > > Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary >agreement to acquire at least one stranded asset conventional fuel source >small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen >equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouins >hot tube NHB, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or >steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility > >This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then >riding on the horses to get where you want to go. > >- Jed ..if you end up replacing a fossil fuel burner with LENR heat, then I wouldn't call that "riding on the horses to get where you want to go". It's a first (and obvious) step. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
wrote: Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary > >agreement to acquire at least one “stranded asset” conventional fuel > source > >small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen > >equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouin’s > >hot tube NHB™, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or > >steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility > > > >This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then > >riding on the horses to get where you want to go. > I meant that using it in a 50 MW power plant connected to the grid is too circuitous. Just use the energy directly for some application. I do not see much future in 50 MW electric power generators once cold fusion becomes common. You might as well start with the configuration that is likely to become common. They are imposing the restrictions of present-day technology on a future technology which works fine without those restrictions. People often do this, as I described in my book. Perhaps a better analogy would be inventing internal combustion engines, which allow a vehicle such as a Model T Ford to go anywhere, and then using these engines only to power replacements for horsedrawn and electric trolley cars, which must run on a fixed track. If you can get rid of the track, why keep it? If you can power things directly from a home generator, why fool around with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW unit, such as one might use in a shopping mall. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
I wrote: > If you can power things directly from a home generator, why fool around > with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW unit, such as > one might use in a shopping mall. > I realize there will be a market for 50 MW replacement power generators for a long time, as well as 1 MW reactors for shopping malls, hospitals, and other large installations. But I think you should start by going after the meat of the market. First go after the market segment with the biggest potential profit. Then gradually work your way into smaller markets, and obsolete, dying market segments such as 50 MW power reactors. I am assuming that it will take as much effort to get licensing and approval for a 50 MW reactor as for a 20 kW home generator. I could be wrong about that. If it is much easier to license the big generator I can see the wisdom of starting with that. It would make zero sense to develop a cold fusion replacement for gigawatt-scale generators such as the ones at nuclear power plants. By the time something like that could be approved and built the power companies will be on the last legs and they will not pay their invoices. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:39:28 -0400: Hi, [snip] > wrote: > >Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary >> >agreement to acquire at least one stranded asset conventional fuel >> source >> >small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen >> >equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouins >> >hot tube NHB, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or >> >steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility >> > >> >This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then >> >riding on the horses to get where you want to go. >> > >I meant that using it in a 50 MW power plant connected to the grid is too >circuitous. Just use the energy directly for some application. I do not see >much future in 50 MW electric power generators once cold fusion becomes >common. You might as well start with the configuration that is likely to >become common. > >They are imposing the restrictions of present-day technology on a future >technology which works fine without those restrictions. People often do >this, as I described in my book. > >Perhaps a better analogy would be inventing internal combustion engines, >which allow a vehicle such as a Model T Ford to go anywhere, and then using >these engines only to power replacements for horsedrawn and electric >trolley cars, which must run on a fixed track. If you can get rid of the >track, why keep it? If you can power things directly from a home generator, >why fool around with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW >unit, such as one might use in a shopping mall. I think the latter is actually close to what they intend. Note that the article mentioned a cogen unit. Such units are usually dedicated industrial units, that are very economical because little energy is wasted. Furthermore that market has the advantage that licencing is simpler (as Rossi points out). Once the technology has proven itself safe and viable in a commercial setting and established itself in the eyes of the public, then they can work toward smaller distributed units. > >- Jed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:47:01 -0400: Hi, [snip] Once again I post before reading the entire thread :( . >I wrote: > > >> If you can power things directly from a home generator, why fool around >> with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW unit, such as >> one might use in a shopping mall. >> > >I realize there will be a market for 50 MW replacement power generators for >a long time, as well as 1 MW reactors for shopping malls, hospitals, and >other large installations. But I think you should start by going after the >meat of the market. First go after the market segment with the biggest >potential profit. Then gradually work your way into smaller markets, and >obsolete, dying market segments such as 50 MW power reactors. > >I am assuming that it will take as much effort to get licensing and >approval for a 50 MW reactor as for a 20 kW home generator. I could be >wrong about that. If it is much easier to license the big generator I can >see the wisdom of starting with that. > >It would make zero sense to develop a cold fusion replacement for >gigawatt-scale generators such as the ones at nuclear power plants. By the >time something like that could be approved and built the power companies >will be on the last legs and they will not pay their invoices. > >- Jed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
Normally, safety guidelines are more stringent for consumer/home devices than industrial devices because the industrial operators are expected to be "trained users". For example, the electromagnetic SAR limits for consumer devices are much lower than for industrial users (think cellphones vs. portable public safety 2-way radios). On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I am assuming that it will take as much effort to get licensing and > approval for a 50 MW reactor as for a 20 kW home generator. I could be > wrong about that. If it is much easier to license the big generator I can > see the wisdom of starting with that. > > It would make zero sense to develop a cold fusion replacement for > gigawatt-scale generators such as the ones at nuclear power plants. By the > time something like that could be approved and built the power companies > will be on the last legs and they will not pay their invoices. > > - Jed > > -- Regards, Bob Higgins
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
wrote: > Furthermore that market has > the advantage that licencing is simpler (as Rossi points out). > As I said: may-bee. I wonder if Rossi knows what he is talking about here. He has, shall we say, a creative approach to business strategy. He comes up with one-of-a-kind strategies. >From what I have seen, large installations require as much licensing and safety testing a small ones. In any case extensive testing will be needed. $20 million will hardly begin to pay for it. I expect development, testing and licensing costs will be similar to those of the Toyota Prius; i.e. ~$1 billion before you can sell the first gadget. Venture capitalists who are not thinking on that scale, or who are incapable of investing on that scale, are probably wasting their time. In my ICCF17 presentation I supposed the R&D budget will be something like the present a budget for semiconductors; $48 billion a year. That would mean 50 products introduced every year; one per week. When I say products I mean an SUV one week, a line of home generators the next. The budget might be $300 billion a year for all I can predict. It will not be $20 million. That's absurd. $300 billion may seem like a lot but it is $1000 per capita for everyone in the U.S. I am sure we will soon be spending a lot more than that for cold fusion powered products. Think of how much we spend on food, cars, or electronics, per capita. That's the scale of spending on cold fusion we can expect. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
Bob Higgins wrote: > Normally, safety guidelines are more stringent for consumer/home devices > than industrial devices because the industrial operators are expected to be > "trained users". Ah. Okay. So Rossi is not making that up. Still, the installation and test manuals for industrial boilers that I have seen look rigorous to me. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding
Jed sez: > They are imposing the restrictions of present-day technology on a future > technology which works fine without those restrictions. People often do > this, as I described in my book. Of course they are doing this, just as you say so in your book. Isn't that often the case when a new paradigm changing technology makes an unscheduled intrusion? Too many of us lack vision. First we try to ram the round pegs of a new technology down into the square holes of an old technological paradigm - sometimes obnoxiously so. Eventually, we wise up. This reminds me of the old Gopher (Pre-Mosaic) days when one particular gopher designer tried to create a more "friendly" looking gopher app by mimicking the look and feel of a three ring binder. For some stupid reason they thought that if their app were to mimic the look and feel of a three ring binder it would not alienate the user. Of course, it didn't go anywhere. Gopher was quickly eclipsed by Mosaic, and then by Netscape, and then by... Actually as far as turning pages goes, we are still doing mimicking the look and feel of flipping paper on many tablets. Old habits die hard. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
