a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: AA. That is still not enough. What was the actual temperature (just over > 100C doesn't hack it), what was the pressure, was there a steam trap or > other device to take out the condensate? >
I can only say that the answers prove there cannot possibly be 1 MW. Rossi's data and the methods are a mess, so there could be some excess heat. More careful analysis by other methods confirm there is none. > I find it difficult to believe someone as qualified as Penon wouldn't > understand the possibility of water in the steam line. > I expect he does understand that. I expect he and Rossi are engaged in fraud. Either that or they are very, very stupid. Given the fact that they blocked access to the customer, I assume it is fraud. There are other ways to prevent boiling besides pressure, by the way. A little antifreeze will do it. > Also, there were periodic reports to IH: surely they would have spotted > something as basic as that? > When the test ended I.H. announced in no uncertain terms that they did not agree with Rossi's analysis. Later they announced that they were unable to substantiate the heat. So obviously they did spot the problems. Rossi has described only a little about the calorimetry, but you see from what he said that he has no heat. - Jed
