Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Acknowledges Andrea Rossi E-cat

[divvy]

Nickel + Hydrogen = Energy

One of the chief scientists at NASA, Dennis Bushnell recently recognized the potential of the Andrea Rossi energy catalyzer to positively impact the energy field. Although there have already been many demonstrations and the opening of Defkalion Green Technology’s 1 megawatt facility in Greece in October 2011, the scientific community and major media is just beginning to acknowledge the light of E-cat.

“I think this will go forward fairly rapidly now.”

“This is capable of, by itself, completely changing geo-economics, geopolitics of solving quite a bit of energy – Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist of NASA Langley.

Interview of: Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist of NASA Langley

Host: J. William Moore
Transcribed by: Steven B. Krivit

http://nickelenergy.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/chief-scientist-at-nasa-langley-acknowledges-andrea-rossi-e-cat/

[readmoreoften]

1. Where is the electronic cat?

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Or:

[Javaman]

10. It's chasing down the computer mouse. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. This is the first article which has actually said they had a vague idea what's going on

All I've seen up until now is people saying "we don't know what's happening, but it does happen" and whining that they can't take out patents. Now, at last, an article has actually said there is a (speculative) basis to this - that they're inducing beta decay in some substance, and they're not claiming fusion (as an example of how crappy the 'reporting' has been so far, look at the opening seconds of the video at the bottom of that blog entry - it has a headline "Andrea Rossi's energy catalyzer - new energy revolution / cold fusion become reality"). Which means others can help contribute ideas for what's happening, rather than being told "it's a black box, you're not allowed to look inside, just trust us". It's about time. This gives them a bit of credibility.

[SpiralHawk]

5. Beta decay? WTF?

[sendero]

3. This is.

... extremely exciting and could not come at a better time.

[Pab Sungenis]

4. Please don't call this "cold fusion."

This is not nuclear fusion, but just a classic chemical reaction. Calling it cold fusion, which is an impossibility, makes it easier to dismiss.

[TheMadMonk]

6. Except that reacting the amount of hydrogen present with atomic flourine...

...couldn't yeild the energy levels observed.

Whatever is going on here, it's NOT a clasical chemical reaction.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. No, it's neither fusion nor a chemical reaction that they're claiming

Here's a decent explanation: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/35/SR35913widomlarsen.shtml

Whether it's happening is arguable; but it involves the weak nuclear force (inverse beta decay, followed by neutron capture, then beta decay).

[think]

8. Very interesting stuff. Let's hope the claims hold true.

I think I'd love to have one of these in my home?

[divvy]

11. It does seem like the cold fusion idea

While it sounds good at first, there may be other issues with it, we just don't know yet (too early in the game).

This seems like the "cold fusion idea" I read about 22 years ago when 2 experimenters made a splash with their "unexplained" energy from reactions of solid metal (in crystalline lattice work) & hydrogen molecules. However, that was later shown to be not repeatable and people doubted if it was possible at all in the first place. Googling did yield a few interesting articles about more recent work & theories , but I think it is just too early even on the theoretical side.

I think the following concerns, perhaps addressed by some of our own nuclear experts, might need to be fully addressed before getting too excited:

1. The main idea is that crystalline Nickel metal lattice allows hydrogen to be absorbed and there is a small % of hydrogen atoms that can be quantum mechanically within close range of Nickel atoms to consider a cold fusion reaction. Is that true?

2. The fusion is : Ni (Atomic wt 58) plus proton (hydrogen atom without its electron) becomes unstable Copper (At. wt 59), which in a similar reaction continues further on to ultimately become more stable Copper isotopes (at wt 63 & 65). However, these processes must emit some radioactivity - Alpha, Beta or Gamma rays?

3. Even if this was theoretically possible, it may mean that one Nickel atom plus 5 to 7 hydrogen atoms produce the stable copper isotopes. Sounds like an expenisve way to make copper! Where do you get hydrogen from? Either thru water decomposition or via breaking down gas or oil to make hydrogen. To break water, one needs to have a lot of electricity consumption, so what is the "Net" power generation after accounting for hydrogen production either from water or from hydrocarbons? If that is too low, it may remain a scientific curiosity!

[divvy]

12. Interesting bit on Fukushima

[MilesColtrane]

13. Did somebody say something about a free lunch?