The real value of the Rossi device is not that it will be a viable energy source but that it proves the cold fusion meme and will spark a wild frenzy to produce a really useful energy generation product.
And that product will most certainly NOT use steam. On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Michele Comitini < [email protected]> wrote: > Talking about Rossi device is like talking about first Watt's engine. > I can immagine it could be just the first step, probably steam is just > the first thing Rossi was able to use to have a working prototype. > > 2011/4/28 Axil Axil <[email protected]>: > > You force a reactor design direction by regulation and buying decisions. > If > > the NRC finds the Cat-E to be unsuitable for home use because of its > nuclear > > nature, then the big utilities are in the driver’s seat. > > > > > > > > The use of steam makes centralized large scale power production > economically > > attractive because most of the cost of a reactor is located in the > > turboelectric power generator. > > > > > > > > The heat plant is just a small part of the total cost. Big turbines cost > > less per unit of power produced than small ones. > > > > > > > > The weakness in the Rossi reactor is that it uses steam to produce power. > If > > it used supercritical Co2 or direct heat to power energy conversion, then > > that would be another story. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Like what has been done with fission, the electric utility industry > will > >>> force Rossi into building a 20 Gigawatt Cat-E for “economy of scale” > >>> reasons. > >> > >> How will the electric utility industry "force him" to do anything?! He > >> will be selling reactors and generators to factories and later > >> to individuals. The power companies will have no say in the matter. We > will > >> not need them. They will go out of business, along with gas stations and > >> OPEC. > >> In Japan and the U.S. there is now a tremendous amount of privately > owned > >> generator capacity, mainly natural gas co-generators, for example in > large > >> buildings in Tokyo, and in factory complexes. The power companies cannot > >> stop this. > >> > >> Actually, the power companies buy a significant share of their power > from > >> privately owned excess capacity. They act as brokers. > >> In another forum, Vasudev Godbole has been saying Rossi should only sell > >> huge, centralized generators: > >> > >> "Rossi device makes sense only if it is used to produce electricity. And > >> as I argued earlier - centralized (> 50 or 150 MW Thermal) and not > >> decentralized. Nuclear active devices must be highly localized and > confined > >> to a small well-supervised space and not scattered all over the > landscape. > >> Human beings are generally not reliable in decentralized matters, esp. > >> nuclear. Some central control has proved to be necessary - better do it > >> right from the beginning." > >> > >> I disagree. > >> I discussed this issue in my book. > >> - Jed > > > > > >
