Would you invest in nuclear fusion?

zeupater

cepheus wrote: »

On a more mundane level, I have often wondered if high level nuclear waste (fission products) kept under water could be used for a local heating system. Of course there would be an outcry, but it seems of waste of 'free' heat to vent the heat to the atmosphere as at present. All you would need is a secondary cooling circuit which then is piped around the local towns. The central 'boiler' could be kept at one of the numerous local military installations.

:think: :idea: .... Just had the vision of some spent rods in your bathroom, mind you though, you'd need to make sure that they're not in a plastic bath and the bathroom door remains closed most of the time, heath & safety and all that ....

Z

cepheus

Radium Emanation Bath Salts (ca. 1925)

Described by the manufacturer, the Denver Radium Service, as being good for nervous disorders, insomnia, general debility, arthritis, and rheumatism. The directions read, "Empty contents in a quart of hot water. After a few moments add to regular bath solution. Remain in bath 45 minutes with cover over top of tub. Upon leaving bath relax in bed for one hour."



You see 'cover over top of tub' they thought about H&S even then! I suspect you might be 'relaxing' in the bed for rather longer than a hour.

raider

According to Andrea Rossi, ecat.com is the website of their North Europe commercial Branch.

zeupater

raider wrote: »

According to Andrea Rossi, ecat.com is the website of their North Europe commercial Branch.

Amazing .... the 'calculator' suggests a COP of 6 but allows this to be varied ... free energy ??? .... it's got a calculator so it must be true ! ..... :rotfl::rotfl:

Anyway with a COP shouldn't it really be classified as a FSHP ? :D

Z

whasup

rogerblack wrote: »

Regrettably there have been many people promising free energy devices over the years.
Some have even had credible results, apparantly, till closer investigation occurs.
When an independent source can verify the claims, from a device under their control, that they can verify no external or stored internal power source, then I may start to be less sceptical.
I note that I'm still going ahead with the purchase of an expensive heat-pump in the next couple of months.

Regardless of the physics argument, any purchaser of one of these devices is soon going to notice if it doesn't produce any useful energy. What I can't work out - assuming it is a scam - is how they hope to get away with it?

raider

zeupater wrote: »

Amazing .... the 'calculator' suggests a COP of 6 but allows this to be varied ... free energy ??? .... it's got a calculator so it must be true ! ..... :rotfl::rotfl:

Anyway with a COP shouldn't it really be classified as a FSHP ? :D

Z

Fell free to ask Rossi yourself.

http://faq.ecat.com/latest/

Or on his blog.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/

pete22

Wired magazine (6.11.11), had a good article on this: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-11/06/cold-fusion-heating-up

raider

pete22 wrote: »

Wired magazine (6.11.11), had a good article on this: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-11/06/cold-fusion-heating-up

I believe that's the third article wired have produced on the ecat.

Other recent mainstream reports of the ecat have come from the Daily Mail, Bloomberg (Energy NOW!), MSNBC, Forbes, FoxNews & CNN.

wuthton

There are many technologies in use every day which were mocked by the naysayers when first developed. I for one wish them every success with their endeavour.

That said though I wouldn't invest a tenner at the moment never mind a million, I hope I live to regret that though.

rogerblack

Mainstream reports mean very little other than the reporters find something they think the audience has an interest in.
The amount of knowledge most reporters have on science-based topics is very small, and they usually simply rehash press-releases, with comments from random people they buttonhole that seem like they might know something.
Fact-checking is almost gone.