Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] If I was running things...
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 12:42 AM
Subject: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] If I was running things...
I can't quite believe they're going to be shoveling hundreds of tons
of R-Ni around like coal in the bowels of the Titanic. R-Ni is
extremely expensive and sounds both delicate and volatile. Just using
raw nickel as the substrate in the quantities suggested would cost
In my years as an observer and advocate for Randy and BLP, I have noted that
the current phase, commercialization, may be the most difficult and full of
surprises. This is based on long industrial experience with the transition
from research to manufacture. Your postulated inplementation is one of many
to be considered. Randy has pledged disclosure of progress [as soon as
patent applictions are in] and mentioned regeneration and continuous burn. I
haven't tried to visualize that process because I don't know enough details.
In respose to another question about the number of time the R-Ni can be
reused, Randy noted that such is proprietary. Fair enough, but that
indicates a limit of sorts, which makes R-Ni a consumeable and not an
investment. Such details, the energy of electrolysis and the steam turbine,
influence the viability of the project. There is a finite energy budget and
a *lot* of engineering yet to do.
- Perhaps the process is more similar to the catalytic converter in any car. There was a day when people thought those would be prohibitively expensive due to the materials inside, and as far as I know, they don't have to be stopped/reprocessed/scraped out, etc for them to do their magic.
> Perhaps the process is more similar to the catalytic converter in any car....
> they don't have to be stopped/reprocessed/scraped out, etc for them to do their magic.That is precisely the difference between a reaction catalyst, and a
fully recyclable reactant.