Robin, you ignore the main problem associated with this phenomena. The
NAE is unique and delicate. If the electrolyte is circulated, it will
pick up impurities that will accelerate destruction of the cathode. If
the gas is circulated, it also will pick up impurities that will react
with the hot NAE causing its destruction. These impurities would have
to be removed, thereby adding complexity and expense. On the other
hand, heat can be removed by simple conduction through the walls of the
container and into thermoelectric converters. The whole apparatus can
be sealed with no moving parts. Doesn't this sound better?
Regards,
Ed
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Jan 2006 14:11:30
-0700:
Hi,
The only reason to use the electrolytic approach at this time is because
this method creates the NAE on occasion. The other methods require the
NAE to be created on purpose, which a few people have done without
knowing how. However, once the NAE can be created in large amounts, what
would be the point of using messy electrolysis? You only need to heat
the NAE in D2 gas and the assembly will stay hot forever, as the small
amount of D2 is replaced and the He removed.
Regards,
Ed
[snip]
In that case, it may just be a matter of convenience. At some
point the heat has to be converted to electricity. That implies
heating a working fluid which passes through a turbine. The
working fluid may be the fuel gas itself in the method you
describe, or it may be steam from an electrolysis cell.
I imagine that both methods will find application.
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.
