Yikes!!!
From: Brian Ahern [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 11:44 AM To: Jed Rothwell; Vortex Cc: Arik El Boher; Bo Hoistadt; Dagmar Kuhn; David Daggett; doug marker; Dr. Braun Tibor; eCatNews; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian; Gary; Haiko Lietz; jeff aries; Mark Tsirlin; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Peter Bjorkbom; Peter Mobberley; Pierre Clauzon; Roberto Germano; Roy Virgilio; Steve Katinski; Sunwon Park; Valerio Ciampoli; vlad Subject: [Vo]:I calculated his power output from his own data. It is very exciting and he may have something real that he is blundering with. See below. The data sheet is a testament to the engineer's competence and pride. He mixes metric units with English units, such as kg/day for a flow rate instead of grams/second. This shows a lack of training that is not expected from a senior engineer. We can bring some competence to this data. Lets examine one day. I choose April 1 for obvious reasons. Power input = 10.29 Kilowatts The next column is in units of kWHr/day . This is mixing units, but dividing247000 by 24 hours gets us back t 10.29 kW input. The water flow rate is 36000kG/day or 36,000kG x 1,000g/kG x 1 day/84,600 sec/day = 425.5 G/sec The change in temperature is 69.1 C up to 103.9 = a temperature rise of34.8 degrees C. Heat capacity of water = 4.2 joules/gram/C The power needed for this temperature rise at that flow rate is: Flow rate (G/sec ) x Temp. rise (degrees C) x heat capacity of water (4.2 joules/G/degree C) 425.5g/sec x 34.8C x 4.2 Joules/gram/C leaves units of Joules/second = 62,191watts The COP is 62.191/10.29 = 6.04 That is outstanding! It is far from a megawatt output, but it would be worth billions if it could be reproduced. Rossi does not need higher COPs. However, their calculations result in a COP of 82.3. Who knows where that came from? _____ From: Jed Rothwell <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 2:36 PM To: Vortex Cc: Arik El Boher; Bo Hoistadt; Brian Ahern; Dagmar Kuhn; David Daggett; doug marker; Dr. Braun Tibor; eCatNews; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian; Gary; Haiko Lietz; jeff aries; Mark Tsirlin; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Peter Bjorkbom; Peter Mobberley; Pierre Clauzon; Roberto Germano; Roy Virgilio; Steve Katinski; Sunwon Park; Valerio Ciampoli; vlad Subject: Re: [Vo]:asking for short opinion papers Peter Gluck <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: I would publish with great pleasure your opinion papers re the ERV Daily Valuation Report of the 1MW 1 year test. You did not describe what data you mean. It is here, in document 128-01 - Exhibit 1.pdf : https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BzKtdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk This data is complete bullshit. It describes physically impossible phenomena, such as a factory in a perfect vacuum with a pressure 0.0 bar, and water that is exactly the same temperature to the nearest tenth-degree every day for weeks. The instruments used to collect this data were completely wrong for the task, and the configuration made it impossible to use any instruments properly. The major problems were described in Exhibit 5 at the above website: 124-06 - Exhibit 5.pdf This data proves beyond question that the 1-year test was fraud. It was inept fraud, which anyone with a half a brain can see at a glance. People such as Peter Gluck are incapable of seeing it because they are mesmerized by Rossi, and deluded by wishful thinking. - Jed
