In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:46:33 -0800: Hi, [snip] >IOW, since Pb is heavy and does not normally have 60% of the energy of coal, >our leap of faith in this example, is that the Bedini style of back-EMF >pulsing on the reactants is able to derive chemical energy in a new way, but >still using only valence electrons - so really we are more concerned on the >bottom line with its actual mass than anything else. As long as net energy >extraction does not exceed normal chemistry as epitomized by hydrocarbon >combustion, then we are technically not invoking overunity, or LENR. > >Coal has about 870 W-hr per pound when combusted. We are thus imagining that >lead when used in this new way has about 522 W-hr per pound. This battery >has about 6 pounds of reactants and if fully extracted, its (hypothetical) >energy would then be about 3.2 kWhrs IF this new method gives us 60% of the >energy of a 6 pound mass of coal. [snip] An atom of Lead is about 17 times heavier than an atom of carbon, so for it to have 60% of the energy density, it would need to produce about 10 times the energy per atom that carbon produces. Since carbon produces about 4 eV / atom, when combined with oxygen to create CO2, the implication is that the lead would need to produce about 40 eV / atom. I think that's a bit of stretch, don't you?
(Coincidentally, this about equal to the first shrinkage level Hydrino energy. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
