Annual production is it tons/yr.
Also, thanks to Ruby for clarification on relative abundance of Ni in earth's crust. It's 5th most abundant when one includes the *entire* earth since the core is Ni-Fe. As far as the crust is concerned, Ni=90ppm by weight, which is about 0.008%. -Mark From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 3:20 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion posts useful information about nickel Global Ni use/production was discussed many months ago here, but I think it's a little over a million pounds/year.. no, I think it was a million+ tons/year! Someone also calc'd that it would take about 25% of that to supply domestic e-cats globally... obviously a LOT of wiggle-room on those numbers but at least a reasonable try. Ni is also the 5th most abundant element in the earth's crust. don't think it's a concern at all. but having some estimates when approaching policy-makers is always a good idea. And ramping up mining and production will take a few years. but so will manufacturing of Ni-H devices. Should all work out. of course the price of Ni is going to double or worse when this becomes a reality! Get ready to buy some futures contracts on bulk Ni. -m From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 3:06 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion posts useful information about nickel Mary Yugo <maryyu...@gmail.com> wrote: Does anyone seriously think that in the foreseeable future, the limiting feature of making energy by nickel-hydrogen fusion is going to be the supply of nickel? No, we do not think that, because we understand something about the reaction. Again, you are ignoring what I wrote. You are missing the point, because you are so caught up in making cynical, stupid attacks and snide comments. Please shut up and listen. Let me repeat: When you contact important people in industry and government, the first thing they ask is often: "Is there enough nickel to do this?" That is a legitimate question from someone who knows nothing at all about cold fusion. So, we need to have the numbers on this. We need a good answer. The first thing they asked about the Fleischmann-Pons experiments was: "Is there enough palladium to do this?" Fleischmann answered: "No, there isn't." He said that at MIT and many other places. I think he was right, as I said in my book. Are there not *vastly* more important issues they could address? No, there are not. This is a central issue. It comes up all the time. I have been dealing with cold fusion for most of its history, and this has always been front and center in people's minds. - Jed
