Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Power

1 MW Cold Fusion Plant Supposedly To Come Online 828

Posted by samzenpus
from the free-enegy-time dept.
First time accepted submitter Jherico writes "Andrea Rossi (covered here a few times before) is scheduled to bring his 1MW plant online Oct. 28th. This will likely either be the point where 'unexpected technical difficulties' unmask this for the scam it is, or the presence of an actual 1MW plant with no chemical fuel source will silence a lot of skeptics. What would you do if it were real?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

1 MW Cold Fusion Plant Supposedly To Come Online

Comments Filter:
  • Oblig xkcd (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 28, 2011 @05:48AM (#37866326)

    Oblig xkcd:

    http://xkcd.com/955/

  • by MagusSlurpy (592575) on Friday October 28, 2011 @05:51AM (#37866340) Homepage

    I guess I'd have to start paying attention to self-published papers after they were rejected by peer review.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      That's a load of nonsense. If there's anything to the claims, and if the writer isn't completely incompetent explaining them, there's no reason a paper shouldn't pass peer review. Peer review isn't some kind of insurmountable obstacle to getting radical ideas published. It's more challenging than if something is more conventional (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence), but, sheesh, we just had research published that makes the audacious claim that neutrinos might be traveling faster than t

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by foobsr (693224)

        there's no reason a paper shouldn't pass peer review

        Right.

        ""Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity"

        CC.

    • by eggstasy (458692)

      Well, I'm a researcher, one of my colleagues got a PhD grant solely on the merits of his self-published papers, and everyone here has had plenty of stuff rejected after peer-review. That's why any normal person only publishes 2 or 3 times per year after applying to a dozen places. Regardless, one should always be wary of extraordinary claims, such as future cities being built to accomodate the Segway :)

  • Blah, I've followed a blogger who seemed to have a good grasp of how things works, and then he publishing something gushy about free energy I felt sad for him.. Now my standards for slashdot must be much lower, this doesn't surprise me I'm just disappointed. Ignore them. Please.

    • by dintech (998802)

      Why didn't you just wait 24 hour before publishing

      Because there's still time to rip people off?

  • Big Copper will probably kill it off.
    • by JazzLad (935151)
      We call it 'Big Coppa' these days, gotta change the spelling of what you're putting 'Big' in front of.
  • I guess I'd use it to wirelessly power my flying electric car.

  • Better link (Score:5, Informative)

    by Sockatume (732728) on Friday October 28, 2011 @05:56AM (#37866368)

    The discussion for events happening today has been moved onto its own thread:

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/10/e-day-thread-rossis-1-mw-e-cat-plant-tested-by-first-customer/ [e-catworld.com]

    PES Network is going to be tweeting about it:

    https://twitter.com/#!/PESNetwork [twitter.com]

    Prepare for some real-time cognative dissonance from Rossi et al.

    • Re:Better link (Score:5, Informative)

      by Sockatume (732728) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:06AM (#37866432)

      So, now the Twitter feed says they've been asked not to report until the test concludes. Which is midnight. Allegedly that's also when the video of the test will be released but I'm going to have to assume that we won't hear anything at all until they come up with an excuse and get their story straight.

      With any luck the AP will write something informative about it, but maybe they'll be kicked out.

      • by Sockatume (732728)

        Rossi has been turning the press away. Only an AP writer he personally trusts has been allowed in. No-one is allowed to publish photos or videos of the site, ostensibly to protect the organisation doing the testing. Allegedly self-sustaining now but we have no reason to believe it at all.

        Surprise surprise, the big public test isn't public and probably isn't a test.

    • by alphatel (1450715) *
      This will certainly mark the most important day without conclusion. Enormous investors will have enthusiasm which will not be unbridled as a new dawn is heralded by the coming of the next chapter in these events. Surely those that did not believe will come to the crucible and be altered before God with unsavory tenderness!
  • Seriously? Next you'll be posting about water-powered cars, or over unity devices...

    Can we stick to real life please?

    • by Sockatume (732728) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:09AM (#37866444)

      Entertaining scams about pseudoscience are still "news for nerds", IMO. I realised more about the importance of being a good scientist from watching bad ones than anything else.

      • I see it as a nice way to get some extra money. I'd be interrested in the guy's exit strategy.
        Perhaps he stored some radioactive material to show an temperature increase for a while. There will not be 1 MW, so he can claim he needs to optimise his design (and get some more funding).
        How the hell did he convince anyone to fund a cold fusion reactor anyways?
        • by Sockatume (732728) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:20AM (#37866498)

          There are a lot of people with money who either have too much ego to defer to expertise, or too little intelligence to even think of doing so.

          • by Dunbal (464142) *
            And don't forget human greed. People with too much easy money thinking "oh, I'll give this guy venture capital for a 90% cut and if it pans out, I'll be a gazillionaire".
        • by paiute (550198)

          How the hell did he convince anyone to fund a cold fusion reactor anyways?

          Why do people buy Powerball tickets? Similar chance of success: both round to zero.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          How the hell did he convince anyone to fund a cold fusion reactor anyways? ...(and get some more funding)

          He convinced himself. Its entirely self-funded. He ONLY makes money if his 1MW reactor works. Period. If he needs more funding, its coming out of his own pocket. If he's to make any money off this, he must get the 1MW reactor online. Otherwise, he's out of pocket the entire cost of the project. In fact, it was previously publicized that he's turned down funding from others to the public dismay of those would wanted to invest.

          Your post is extremely uninformed and ignorant. That's not to say I've bought into

    • by black_lbi (1107229) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:09AM (#37866448)
      Sometimes it's desirable to put these scams under a spotlight, don't you think?
  • open up the shorts (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DarkOx (621550) on Friday October 28, 2011 @05:57AM (#37866384) Journal

    take short positions in oil and gas?

  • It's a scam (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tibit (1762298) on Friday October 28, 2011 @05:58AM (#37866388)

    This will not work. There's absolutely no reason not to publish such stuff in respected journals -- if it really works, it will pass the muster. The guy is a scam artist with a long history, it's irresponsible to expect anything else from him without a lot of due diligence. Since he doesn't let anyone do their due diligence, I say it's still a scam.

    • This will not work. There's absolutely no reason not to publish such stuff in respected journals -- if it really works, it will pass the muster. The guy is a scam artist with a long history, it's irresponsible to expect anything else from him without a lot of due diligence. Since he doesn't let anyone do their due diligence, I say it's still a scam.

      He did let people do their due diligence (i.e. peer review), and his papers didn't pass muster. That's why he had to start his own journal, so he could get "published" anyway.

    • Re:It's a scam (Score:5, Interesting)

      by craznar (710808) on Friday October 28, 2011 @10:36AM (#37868680) Homepage

      I have a computational linguistics invention ...and have had for around 15 years now.

      I'm NOT ALLOWED to publish as I don't hold qualifications, nor do I have the wealth to patent it.

      Believe me - getting ideas to the public is way more complicated than you may imagine if you don't have money.

      • by rjstanford (69735)

        No its not. Create a website. Put an eBook on Amazon. There are any number of ways to get ideas to the public.

        Getting ideas to the public while at the same time keeping them trade-secrets is hard... but if you're looking for peer review, making them public is a really, really good start. Advertise them. Someone will read it and, if there's anything there, will share it, and you'll find a publication willing to take it.

        Or you can just whine loudly about how nobody will listen to that thing you're not act

  • Have a party (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Dr_Barnowl (709838) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:13AM (#37866462)

    If it works? Have a party of epic proportions. Or possibly just epic intensity with a few select friends.

    Given the history of the man, I don't hold out MUCH hope. But the prize is so great that I can't help but hope a little.

    If it works, the future for my daughter will be more likely to be safe and secure. We might even have a stab at world peace.

    If it doesn't work... well, it's a shame. It gives the people who are really trying a bad name, and fewer chances at funding.

    • Re:Have a party (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dcollins (135727) on Friday October 28, 2011 @07:05AM (#37866716) Homepage

      "But the prize is so great that I can't help but hope a little."

      And that is how a truly great scam works. "They more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie," as it says in Mein Kampf. And likewise how religion benefits from Pascal's Wager.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by eepok (545733)

        That's also how science works. Every a lab lights up a CERN lights up the merry-go-round, they know the likelihood of finding the Higgs is incredibly small, but they hope... and they try.

        So "the hope" isn't really a great way to peg a scam. Instead, you just have to wait for proof. Tonight's the night... so just wait and see.

  • by queazocotal (915608) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:15AM (#37866468)

    /me strokes evil white pussy.

    And it's not quite true that 'he would have published if it was real'.
    If you have sufficiently ridiculous claims, journals may not accept your paper.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman [wikipedia.org] - as one example of work ridiculed at the time that went on to win a Nobel prize.

    Unfortunately, for example, there are also people that write letters like this: http://www.snopes.com/humor/letters/smithsonian.asp [snopes.com]

    If it is true, I would send the guy my heartfelt thanks, and not buy the expensive heatpump for this winter.

    • by Rogerborg (306625)

      Unfortunately, for example, there are also people that write letters like this: http://www.snopes.com/humor/letters/smithsonian.asp [snopes.com]

      Can you point at someone who actually writes letters like that? I ask since the Snopes page that you linked to says that it's a hoax.

    • by Sockatume (732728)

      Shechtman got published. And people were able to replicate his research.

    • And it's not quite true that 'he would have published if it was real'.
      If you have sufficiently ridiculous claims, journals may not accept your paper.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman [wikipedia.org] - as one example of work ridiculed at the time that went on to win a Nobel prize.

      Except that 1, Shechtman was already an established scientist, unlike Rossi; 2, Shechtman was proposing something totally new, not something that has been the focus of several hoaxes over the last few decades; and 3, it only took two years for Shechtman to get his controversial paper published. Many non-controversial papers take longer to get published, just from minor editing and additional research requirements from the peer reviewers. Hell, he won a prize from the APS five years after he first wrote th

    • They laughed... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by alispguru (72689) <bane@gs[ ]om ['t.c' in gap]> on Friday October 28, 2011 @07:36AM (#37866894) Journal

      They laughed at Galileo.
      They laughed at Einstein.

      They also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

    • /me strokes evil white pussy.

      Note to self: Always read the title of the thread first. Now I am off to clear this terrible mental image.

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:29AM (#37866548) Homepage

    It will work for a short amount of time....

    and then slowly drop in output and fail.

    Because all the AA batteries that are hidden inside all the equipment will have been drained.

    • You're describing a classic "salt" con - You buy an abandoned mine, salt it with uncut gemstones or precious metal ores, and let the investor "discover" that the old mine isn't played out after all. You can then sell him a worthless hole in the ground for millions.

      A variation of the scheme is the "counterfeiter machine" - You sell the mark a machine that takes ordinary newspaper, and prints perfect counterfeit 100 bills! It even "distresses" them to make them look like real circulated money! It pops out a n

  • “Grams/Power for a 180 days charge
    Hydrogen: 18000 g
    Nickel: 10000 g”

    According to my calculations this would compute to:

    100 g of hydrogen, and about 56 g of nickel per day to run a 1 MW plant; OR
    4.17 g of hydrogen, and 2.3 g of nickel per hour.

    Fuel use would be 0.00417 g of hydrogen, and 0.0023 g of nickel per kWh.

    How nice and neat that 1MWh power generation for 1 day = 100grams of Hydrogen used. nice clean round numbers that come out after all the losses have been accounted for.

    even for laymen

  • Eat it. No, seriously.
  • So the question is legit: how would efficient fusion change our lives?
    Personally I don't think it would be good, as a cheap, clean and seemingly endless source would trigger an exponential growth in energy consumption, and when fusion fuel runs out there will be no other source to satisfy those needs. With our current consumption we still have a chance to switch to renewable before fossile fuel runs out, using nuclear as an intermediate solution until we re ready to do it.

    • by ledow (319597)

      If you have exponential growths in available energy, that leads to exponential growths in:

      - Spaceflight potential (hell, it suddenly becomes a cinch to take a entire power station to the Moon or Mars and back - and while you're there look for fuel, etc.).

      - Food, water, heat, light, etc. for humans, which leads to many more productive, educated, "worryless" humans (i.e. we have 7bn productive people learning science instead of most of them trying to scrape a living to earn enough to eat for most of their da

  • "Until some hour ago I felt a strong pressure, now, at the eve of the battle, as usual, I am recovering all my coldness and calm. We are ready."

    If that doesn't describe the thought process of a sociopath, then I don't know what does.

  • Sadly its not real (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hAckz0r (989977) on Friday October 28, 2011 @07:27AM (#37866830)
    I work at a physics lab, and I can assure you that the cold fusion effect is very real, but nobody can explain yet why it works, ...sometimes. It is difficult to reproduce and with varying degrees of energy production. The biggest problem is that nobody will touch the technology with a ten foot pole as far as funding just because the original researchers did such a poor job of their documentation, and others were completely unable to produce anything. Trying to find out why it works, sometimes, is tantamount to committing career suicide. You will loose your funding, even on your other research projects, and most likely your job as well. You are better off researching this technology in your basement if you want a good respectable career.
    .

    That being said, this one is obviously a scam. Why do I say so? Dig back through the previous stories and you will see a picture of a shipping container full of little black plastic buckets in racks, which is supposed to be a 1MW reactor. Excuse me? You but 1MW of thermal energy in a confined space like that and it will heat up so much that all the liquid would evaporate and the steam would kill anyone attempting to maintain it. The reaction produces heat energy, and plastic buckets aren't going to last very long. These CF reactions have been known to scorch the tables that the apparatus were sitting on. A plastic container is just plain stupid and this photo only demonstrates a man with a limited intelligence at work. Also, where is the generator? The reaction does not create electricity, it produces thermal heat. You need a generator my friend, and preferably a brain containing half a conscience would not hurt either..

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      >> I work at a physics lab, and I can assure you that the cold fusion effect is very real, but nobody can explain yet why it works, ...sometimes

      I doubt this. You don't even realize that 1 MW is not a measure of energy.

      • by wembley fraggle (78346) on Friday October 28, 2011 @09:58AM (#37868164) Homepage

        Imagine a hundred-watt light bulb.

        Now imagine ten thousand of them, crammed together. Toss a few more in for good measure, since a 100W bulb produces about 98W of heat (2W of light, which is why we're trying to phase them out).

        Now consider what that would do to the plastic bucket. And stop nitpicking on Joules vs Joules/sec. Shorthanding watts into "energy production" makes sense, because having a measure of total energy produced is kind of meaningless (a 1MJ plant that took a thousand years to produce that MJ wouldn't be that interesting).

        So yeah, seems unlikely.

    • by Baldrson (78598) * on Friday October 28, 2011 @08:50AM (#37867432) Homepage Journal
      hAckz0r writes:

      The biggest problem is that nobody will touch the technology with a ten foot pole as far as funding just because the original researchers did such a poor job of their documentation, and others were completely unable to produce anything.

      A commonly held myth among apologists for the scientific establishment.

      The reality is that CalTech, MIT and Harwell all attempted to replicate P&F's results nearly a year prior to P&F's experimental protocol being published, and P&F were restricted, by University of Utah legal counsel, from making any disclosures beyond their "preliminary notes" issued along with the press conference.

      It is generally recognized, even by the pseudo-skeptic "authorities" such as the DoE's chair of its cold fusion panel, Huizenga, that for all practical purposes, the prestigious institutions' failure to produce "nuclear products" (even though P&F IN THE ORIGINAL PRESS CONFERENCE said that neutrons were a factor of a billion too small to be explained by conventional nuclear fusion) closed out the entire affair WITHIN FIVE WEEKS of the press conference.

      The claim that these ridiculous "experiments" (using speculative protocols), conducted to ridiculous expectations (totally ignoring evidence of excess heat), somehow "falsified" P&F's experiments is triply corrupt:

      1. You can't claim to attempt to replicate an experiment for which you don't even know the protocol.
      2. You can't "falsify" in the P-pperian sense, an experiment with another experiment. P-pperian falsification applies only to theories being falsified by experiment.
      3. Looking for a phenomenon that is a factor of a billion smaller than another, clearly measurable (not to mention practically valuable) phenomenon -- HEAT -- while ignoring that other phenomenon, smacks of precisely the kind of "pathological science" that the pseudo-skeptics accused P&F of promoting.

      There is simply no excuse for the scientific establishment's handling of this affair.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 28, 2011 @08:51AM (#37867436)

      If you want to know what's really going to happen, it's pretty simple. First tomorrow their will be a lot of heat but not near 1 MW. However, real Scientists will take a look at the device and figure out how it works sometime before Thanks Giving. One these scientists will get a little over ambitious and build large a more efficient device. It will fire up on December 12, 2012. However, the cold fusion will produce a lot more heat and huge magnetic field that will fuse the moisture(Hydrogen) and co2 (carbon) in the air this will spread out in about 2.5 seconds across the globe. The reaction will be so intensive that earth will covert into a star for around 10 minutes. The spiral of the star earths magnetic field which is such that it causes sub-atomic particles to vibrate in the electromagnetic plan (or dimension if you prefer). When this happens atoms exposed to this field will fuse because of a loss of magnetic repulsion causing the atoms to collide and fuse. This BTW is how cold fuse works because when the hydrogen is exposed to the electromagnetic forces it's proton vibrates on in the electromagnetic plan. But what people won't know is that when it fuses it create a never before seen spiral magnetic field that cause other atoms to be vibrate in the same dimensional plane. The Sun will follow suit burning a large amount of it's own fuel in about 16 minutes. The other plants will also follow suit. This will create a HUGE magnetic spiral that might chain react across the universe transforming it. Over trillions of years the subatomic particles no longer repelled by electromagnetism will continue to fuse and grow ever large masses this will lead to the next big bang. Anyway, that's what the Mayans were saying would happen.

  • Baloney (Score:3, Funny)

    by jonc77 (2492708) on Friday October 28, 2011 @08:42AM (#37867370)
    Really, this is going to happen in Bologna... Isn't that a bit ironic?
  • by JSBiff (87824) on Friday October 28, 2011 @09:35AM (#37867866) Journal

    I'd keep getting up in the morning, going to work, and paying my electric and heat bill. Perhaps when I'm an old man, my energy bills will be lower or about the same as they are now (instead of rising with inflation).

  • by Paul Fernhout (109597) on Friday October 28, 2011 @10:59AM (#37868936) Homepage

    https://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/93edc128d5cd0054 [google.com]

    Essentially, whenever a system does not seem to obey the second law of thermodynamics, we just invent new science.

    And here is another essay by me sent to Andrea Rossi on why cold fusion information be made freely available because of a paradigm shift in economics from scarcity towards abundance: http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Economic_Transformation [peswiki.com]

  • by RogueWarrior65 (678876) on Friday October 28, 2011 @11:44AM (#37869504)

    If this technology works, why bother with a 1 megawatt plant? Why wouldn't you build the equivalent of Bloom boxes and sell them to homeowners? Get rid of the grid entirely.

  • by Shompol (1690084) on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:44PM (#37874896)
    Dogbert invented it first [dilbert.com], followed by this press conference [dilbert.com] announcement.

"Gotcha, you snot-necked weenies!" -- Post Bros. Comics

Working...