a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: Rossi answered the question n his blog, saying the the customer used the > heat in an endothermic process. >
That is impossible. There are endothermic industrial processes, but they use only a tiny faction of the heat. The rest is waste heat. Textbooks often list baking bread as a typical endothermic process. Most of heat comes out of the oven, which is why a bakery is hot. Frankly, I am astounded that anyone would take this statement by Rossi at face value. It is even more preposterous than his usual oeuvre. > I also gather the revised response showing photos of the customer's space > conveniently left out showing the ventilation system. > That is incorrect. The photos in Exhibit 26 clearly show the ventilation system. If that is the customer site in the enclosed area, then the entire 1 MW of heat would be released in this suite, which is 100% absolutely utterly COMPLETELY ridiculous. The text accompanying Exhibit 25 is a little unclear to me. It says: 82. Indeed, when Murray eventually gained access to the Plant in February 2016 and examined the Plant, the methodology being used to operate the Plant, and the methodology being used to measure those operations, he immediately recognized that those methodologies were fatally flawed. Some of the flaws that he was quickly able to identify are explained in Exhibit 5. Murray also recognized that the building in which the Plant was located had no method to ventilate the heat that would be produced by the Plant were it producing the amount of steam claimed by Rossi, Leonardo, and Penon such that persons would not have been able to work in the building if the Rossi/Leonardo/Penon claims were true. This conflicted with the claims of individuals who had been in the building when the Plant was operating, all of whom claimed the temperature in the building was near or not much greater than the outside temperature. Photographs of the building ceiling from the inside are attached hereto as Exhibit 26. - Jed
