Apparently you don't understand LCOE (Levelized Cost Of Energy)? May I
suggest you do some googling. ALL of the ways we generate energy have an
infinite COP if you take away the energy content of the fuel that you
need to supply to the generator. With some generators such as wind,
solar, tidal, wave, geothermal, hydro, etc there is no fuel cost
embodied into the input energy. Others such as coal, uranium, gas, oil,
nickel, etc the fuel must be won from the earth and then processed. The
fuel then has an embodied energy cost which is passed on to the energy
generator owner as part of the cost of the fuel. LCOE sorts all this out
and allows across the board comparisons of Gen A to Gen B to Gen C, etc
on the basis of the LCOE of the delivered energy.
On 12/16/2011 9:49 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com
<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Aussie Guy E-Cat <aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:
For the E-Cat or any other LENR generator to make inroads into
the global energy generation market, the LCOE per kWh of
delivered energy must be lower than from any other comparable
energy sources or there is simply no market for it.
Yup. That's a key point.
You mean a market for the device as a practical source of energy.
A person could sell eCats as experimental devices. You could sell
thousands at a premium price to laboratories worldwide. Later you
might even sell them as a novelty item, similar to today's
high-end electric cars. Toys for rich people. Early automobiles
and microcomputers were novelty items.
The top of the LCOE scale probably starts as a drop it in a
remote site (could be in outer space) somewhere and generate
heat and electricity. For that market the acceptable LCOE of
the delivered energy is very high.
Yup again. Other examples of critical power that people will pay a
premium for include: pacemaker batteries, heart assist pumps
(Ventricular Assist Device), hearing aid batteries, watch
batteries, remote telephone repeaters, cell phone
batteries, aviation, and highway sensors (now served by solar panels).
The technology has to be developed to a high state of reliability
before such applications can be served. The same goes for military
applications, as you pointed out.
For domestic situations the max acceptable LCOE drops quite a
bit and for on grid electricity generation the required LCOE
hits rock bottom.
Yup. Because of that, this is may be the last market you want to
approach.
See Christensen, "The Innovator's Dilemma" for ideas about good
markets to begin with. This book introduces the concepts of
disruptive versus sustaining technology. These terms have become
widely used clichés in modern business, but people often
misunderstand the original concept. I discussed this book in
chapter 7 of my book. I highly recommend reading the original.
Christensen came out with a follow-up book which was also
interesting. It needs editing.
I don't understand any of that in the slightest. The device as it is
supposed to be would immediately and without any changes be an
excellent heat source. That's what makes the famous photo of Rossi,
Levi and Focardi (was it?) huddled around the E-cat in huge winter
coats so comical! Even as primitive a device as the early E-cats
would be completely welcome as a space heater and hot water source in
any cold environment. Imagine an isolated ski cabin in the Alps with
no electricity. You wouldn't need to gather wood any more to keep
warm all winter long. Same for cooking.
But this is very silly conjecture. If the device worked, which is
very doubtful at this point, it would be researched and rapidly
improved and developed into much higher temperature regimes. That
would make it suitable for propulsion and as a source of electricity.
It would within a very few years have myriads of applications. And
simply routing a bit of the output back to the input through a
regulator would make it self sustaining. Of course all of that is
just fanciful thinking and wishing.
