I believe that the water leaks were at the top seal, and would only have come into play when the E-Cat was effectively overflowing. They would not contribute to net energy loss during the proposed "heat storage" Also, the only measured primary flow before the rate was increased (for quenching) was .91 g/sec, or <3.3 kg/hr.
Jouni Valkonen <jounivalko...@gmail.com> wrote: >Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: >> They weighed it before the warm-up period. >> > >But heating a brick eCat into 100°C takes about 20 MJ energy. And as there >was additional heat loss due to poor insulation some 300-700 watts and also >substantial water leak. These basic heat losses that never even got to the >heat exchanger took some 27-37 MJ energy where as input was only 32 MJ. >Therefore you need to find more clever solutions for an alleged fraud. In >additional to that cool water inflow rate was at least 10 kg/h. Therefore >it is true that there are high uncertainties, but most of the uncertainties >point into direction that there was more heat produced, than what was >observed. Reasonable estimation for total heat production was 100-180 MJ. >There are indeed huge error margins, but not in the lower end. > >—Jouni > >Ps. good to hear you back.
