<mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:

> You do not calculate the energy density of engines. You calculate the
> energy
> density of fuels.
>
> (Unless as Jed mentioned, you are stuck with the Hydrogen in the cathode,
> and it
> is not replaceable - in which case the outlook for CF is far more
> restricted.)
>

I do not think that would be a major problem. It is easy to work around it.

First, a well-established fact: The reaction produces helium. Roughly half
of that comes out of metal, and the other half goes deeper in, and McKubre
points out. That tells us that some gas does get trapped in the metal, and
even the dynamic flux of an active cold fusion cell does not drive it out
automatically. Of course, helium is not hydrogen, but still, it does
indicate there is trapped gas.

Now for some speculation. Suppose that gas loading, electrolysis and other
methods all depend on a "trapped supply" of hydrogen in the metal, as I
suggested. We still know how to drive the hydrogen and helium out, by
various methods. We may have to turn off the reaction while doing that, and
then reload the metal and start it up again. That would be a problem if
entire machine ran with a single metal cathode, or one single discrete
batch of gas loaded powder. But there is not need to make it that way. If
the load/deload duty cycles were about equal, that means you need 10
cathodes to do the work that 5 cathodes could do full time. That is of no
importance, except that it makes the machine a little less compact than it
would be otherwise. You would not grouse about it any more than you would
complain that a 6-cylinder automobile ICE fires only one cylinder at a
time, so it operates at 1/6 of total capacity.

(Actually some early ICEs and Diesel engines had only one cylinder, but I
expect they vibrated like the dickens and made a lot of noise.)

Controlling and keeping track of the load/deload cycles would call for
sophisticated computer controls, but any kind of cold fusion engine will
need this. It will call for multiple independently sealed cell, rather than
a single discrete cell. That will make manufacturing a little more
complicated, but with robotic assembly lines it will hardly affect the
cost. Nowadays, increased complexity does not increase the cost of
machinery much, and it does not reduce reliability. That is why hybrid
automobiles work so well. It is worth the trade-off in complexity, even
though you end up with a machine that can only be assembled by robots, and
that can only be operated with computer controls.

- Jed

Reply via email to