FIRST FREE ENERGY DEVICE REACHES MARKET IN OCTOBER -- The Game Changer is Here

[MileHigh]

Loner:

Your comments are very interesting but I have some points for you to consider.

Let's assume that the reactor works and we have a new and essentially unlimited supply of energy.  In a lot of the developed world the power distribution infrastructure is already in place.  So that's where you can envision large power plants being retrofitted or new plants being built from scratch.

In the undeveloped world there is a very good chance that new power distribution will be decentralized with different sized power plants to meet local demand.  The market will determine what is the best fit.  For example, suppose you develop a new housing subdivision with 1000 houses.  Perhaps a new power plant built scaled to the size of the subdivision located within the subdivision itself will make economic sense.  You could then intelligently manage the heat production and do something useful with it, like provide hot water to the houses using an insulated piping system.  That would increase the overall efficiency of the reactor.

I think it's reasonable to assume that a home-sized power plant is possible and some will adopt that technology.  But it will take a few generations of E-Cat systems before the technology becomes perfected and ingrained akin to how people view a refrigerator.  Don't forget the conventional setup is a reactor, a turbine, a transmission, a generator, and 50% waste heat.  That implies every household is radiating heat.  It also is a responsibility, to maintain all of this complicated equipment, or to have an outside service do that for you.

So I think that over 10 years the world will change.  It's such a huge thing that the change can't happen overnight.

Your discussion about going direct and eliminating the step where you generate electricity is possible, but for only select applications.  The way we use electricity is not going to change.

The test is straightforward, meter the electrical power in and measure the flow rate and temperature differential for water that flows through a heat exchanger.  Run that test for a month non-stop and you will have a lot of people convinced.  There really shouldn't be any way to rig the test setup when you do that or for the test to be ambiguous.  That's what I was expecting the first time round.

MileHigh

[WilbyInebriated]

... (snipped the logical fallacies) ... unable to draw a distinction between "sounds like" and "is."


MileHigh

so you meant 'sounds like' and not 'is'... i see. so now you are saying he isn't "just winging it and making up an answer on the spot"... it just sounds like that. interesting contradiction.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Chess,

I am now following your good example and putting up some 'E-cat' news.  From yesterday... I think.

Here's the link
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/05/rossi-says-e-cat-cop-fixed-at-6/

And here's the summary

But again, a COP of 10 or 20 is not needed. A COP of 6 is very high.
It is high enough to produce all of the world’s electricity.
It is high enough to desalinize ocean water.
It is high enough to provide all of the world’s heating.
It is high enough to be incorporated in vehicles.

Which pretty well resolves our ENTIRE global pollution crisis.  It's an interesting article on the e-cat co-efficient of performance.  And I think I'm beginning to understand the significance of that heat signature at 600 degrees.  It was critical.  And then IN CONCLUSION...
It is high enough to end the energy crisis, and end the use of fossil fuels.

Which has got to be a really good thing.  And by the way Loner - to the best of my knowledge there's NOTHING about LENR that conforms to the standard model.  But I'm open to correction.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Nice to see this caliber post.  Are you 'changing sides'?  MileHigh?  Or just 'infected' with a rare 'troll' attribute of an 'open' rather than a vacuous mind.  Either way. I'm possibly still being absurdly optimistic but there are the occasional glimpses of what seems to be some residual reasonableness.  Very nice it is too.

Let's assume that the reactor works and we have a new and essentially unlimited supply of energy.

Very comfortable with this observation.  Indeed.  Let's assume that the reactor works.  We've been given expert advice that this is the case.  So it's an assumption that has the added merit of being proved - which makes it more FACT than ASSUMPTION.  Which is even more comforting.

In a lot of the developed world the power distribution infrastructure is already in place.  So that's where you can envision large power plants being retrofitted or new plants being built from scratch. In the undeveloped world there is a very good chance that new power distribution will be decentralized with different sized power plants to meet local demand.  The market will determine what is the best fit.  For example, suppose you develop a new housing subdivision with 1000 houses.  Perhaps a new power plant built scaled to the size of the subdivision located within the subdivision itself will make economic sense.  You could then intelligently manage the heat production and do something useful with it, like provide hot water to the houses using an insulated piping system.  That would increase the overall efficiency of the reactor.

Wouldn't it be more to the point that those houses in that housing development each have their own E-cat?  Then there would be no dependency on a central supply.  And given the cheapness of each power unit - perhaps that proposal is reasonable. Which is more or less what you argue here...

I think it's reasonable to assume that a home-sized power plant is possible and some will adopt that technology.  But it will take a few generations of E-Cat systems before the technology becomes perfected and ingrained akin to how people view a refrigerator.  Don't forget the conventional setup is a reactor, a turbine, a transmission, a generator, and 50% waste heat.  That implies every household is radiating heat.  It also is a responsibility, to maintain all of this complicated equipment, or to have an outside service do that for you.

Again.  I'm open to correction but I seem to remember that the basic design enables the replacement of a 'disk' type container to replenish the old.  Really user friendly if this is the case.  But presumably there are other 'maintenance' type tasks that may also need some overview.  Hopefully the cost of this would not be too onerous.

So I think that over 10 years the world will change.  It's such a huge thing that the change can't happen overnight.

I tend to agree with this.  But hopefully that 'time' line you've mentioned can be greatly reduced when our media actually engage and tell the world about this new development.  Thus far there's still that BEWILDERING reluctance to discuss what is unquestionably the biggest news event that has hit this planet since the the discovery of penicillin.  And if we all end up radiating too much heat from our houses - then with all that surplus energy we should be able to cool it down before it's actually released.  I hope.  Because this is, indeed, a potential problem that most certainly will need our best attention.  Thus far the argument is that global heating is the direct result of carbon pollution.  What happens when that heating is no longer associated with 'trapped' solar radiation?  Can someone? Loner - Chess - answer this?  Can we simply emit an excess of radiant energy directly out of the stratosphere?  And into space?  Surely there's a potential problem here?   

Your discussion about going direct and eliminating the step where you generate electricity is possible, but for only select applications.  The way we use electricity is not going to change.

I agree with this.  I don't think we're arguing electric energy and it's uses.  But as I understand it that 600 degree bench mark was required to run effective generators?  Chess?  Is that right?

The test is straightforward, meter the electrical power in and measure the flow rate and temperature differential for water that flows through a heat exchanger.  Run that test for a month non-stop and you will have a lot of people convinced.  There really shouldn't be any way to rig the test setup when you do that or for the test to be ambiguous.  That's what I was expecting the first time round.

You really need to get your head around this MileHigh.  The fact is that these tests have been done under expert scrutiny and measured accordingly.  All that's lacking here is our media admission of this.  Again, I'm open to correction but I believe that Rossi ran his own factory on this energy for a couple of years before going public on this. 

Kindest regards MileHigh - all,
Rosemary

[chessnyt]

Hi Chess,

I am now following your good example and putting up some 'E-cat' news.  From yesterday... I think.

Here's the link
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/05/rossi-says-e-cat-cop-fixed-at-6/

@Rosemary:
Thank you Rosemary, for posting some news on this newsworthy topic.  That was the basic premise of starting this thread in the news section in the first place.  The help is VERY appreciated.  I hope that others will continue to contribute their finds as well.
I have grown up around an old philosophy which I believe to this day which is; If you're not part of the solution, then you are automatically part of the problem.  I'm glad people like yourself have decided to be a part of the solution.  It's impossible to be on both sides as a house divided against itself can not stand. 

I love to fix things and I hope even more get involved in some way to usher in this new game changer and assist in making a positive impact on the entire world.

Sincerely,

Chess