Saturday, October 29, 2011

Customer of 1 MW E-CAT Cold Fusion Power Plant Accepts Technology After Their Own Independent Testing

October 28, 2011 was an important day in the world of cold fusion (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) and exotic energy technology.  The currently anonymous customer of Andrea Rossi's 1 MW E-CAT cold fusion power plant sent in their own scientists and engineers to test the device which is comprised of more than 100 E-CAT modules which have been built in to a shipping container.  Journalists were allowed to attend the event, including Peter Svensson, technology writer for the Associated Press.

The following two very timely articles by PESN and NYTeknik go over observations of the 10/28/2011 test and have links to the results and sign-off by the customer's representative giving approval for the functionality of the 1 MW power plant:
  1. 1 MW E-Cat Cold Fusion Device Test Successful, Sterling D. Allen, PESN
  2. Half a megawatt E-cat in Bologna, Mats Lewan, MYTeknik
I really look forwards to the Associated Press article which should come out shortly in the next few days (pending editor approval) because, although PESN and NYTeknik do some excellent work, the AP has broader readership and the ability to speed up public interest and adoption of cold fusion technology.  With an estimated cost of less than 1 cent per kWh compared to all conventional power sources, energy this clean, cheap and portable has the ability to transform (and/or save) economies and create a great deal of wealth and higher standard of living for all human beings.

Below is a chart taken from PesWiki (Pure Energy Systems Wikipedia) showing the cost per kWh of many common energy sources:
[...]

Traditional Power Generation

Lowest price listed first
Method Cents/kW-h Limitations and Externalities
Gas


Currently supplies around 15% of the global electricity demand.
3.9 - 4.4 Cents/kW-h Gas-fired plants and generally quicker and less expensive to build than coal or nuclear, but a relatively high percentage of the cost/KWh is derived from the cost of the fuel. Due to the current (and projected future) upwards trend in gas prices, there is uncertainty around the cost / KWh over the lifetime of plants. Gas burns more cleanly than coal, but the gas itself (largely methane) is a potent greenhouse gas. Some energy conversions to calculate your cost of natural gas per kwh. 100 cubic feet (CCF)~ 1 Therm = 100,000 btu ~ 29.3 kwh.
Coal


Currently supplies around 38% of the global electricity demand.
4.8 - 5.5 Cents/kW-h Increasingly difficult to build new coal plants in the developed world, due to environmental requirements governing the plants. Growing concern about coal fired plants in the developing world (China, for instance, imposes less environmental overhead, and has large supplies of high sulphur content coal). The supply of coal is plentiful, but the coal generation method is perceived to make a larger contribution to air pollution than the rest of the methods combined.
Nuclear


Currently supplies around 24% of the global electricity demand.
11.1 - 14.5 Cents/kW-h Political difficulties in using nuclear in some nations. Risk of widespread (and potentially lethal) contamination upon containment failure. Fuel is plentiful, but problematic. Waste disposal remains a significant problem, and de-commissioning is costly (averaging approximately US $320MM per plant in the US).

Conventional, Renewable Power Generation

Lowest price listed first
Method Cents/kW-h Limitations and Externalities
Wind


Currently supplies approximately 1.4% of the global electricity demand. Wind is considered to be about 30% reliable.
4.0 - 6.0 Cents/kW-h Wind is currently the only cost-effective alternative energy method, but has a number of problems. Wind farms are highly subject to lightning strikes, have high mechanical fatigue failure, are limited in size by hub stress, do not function well, if at all, under conditions of heavy rain, icing conditions or very cold climates, and are noisy and cannot be insulated for sound reduction due to their size and subsequent loss of wind velocity and power.
Geothermal


Currently supplies approximately 0.23% of the global electricity demand. Geothermal is considered 90-95% reliable.
4.5 - 30 Cents/kW-h New low temperature conversion of heat to electricity is likely to make geothermal substantially more plausible (more shallow drilling possible) and less expensive. Generally, the bigger the plant, the less the cost and cost also depends upon the depth to be drilled and the temperature at the depth. The higher the temperature, the lower the cost per kwh. Cost may also be affect by where the drilling is to take place as concerns distance from the grid and another factor may be the permeability of the rock.
Hydro


Currently supplies around 19.9% of the global electricity demand. Hydro is considered to be 60% reliable.
5.1 - 11.3 Cents/kW-h Hydro is currently the only source of renewable energy making substantive contributions to global energy demand. Hydro plants, however, can (obviously) only be built in a limited number of places, and can significantly damage aquatic ecosystems.
Solar


Currently supplies approximately 0.8% of the global electricity demand.
15 - 30 Cents/kW-h Solar power has been expensive, but soon is expected to drop to as low as 3.5 cents/kW-h. Once the silicon shortage is remedied through alternative materials, a solar energy revolution is expected.

Non-Conventional, Available, Renewable Power Generation Technologies

Lowest price listed first
Method Cents/kW-h Limitations and Externalities
Tide

2 - 5 Cents/kW-h Blue Energy's tidal fence, engineered and ready for implementation, would provide a land bridge (road) while also generating electricity. Environmental impact is low. Tides are highly predictable.

Non-Conventional, Emerging, Renewable Power Generation Technologies

Lowest price listed first
Method Cents/kW-h Limitations and Externalities
Atmospheric Cold Megawatts

.03 - 1.0 Cents/kW-h Typical installation requires 1 - 2 pipelines approximately 300km in length. Endpoints are placed to maximize historical atmospheric pressure differentials. After construction is complete, however, maintenance is minimal, no raw materials are required, and no environmental externalities are produced.
Thermal Electric

3 - 15 Cents/kW-h ENECO Chip is a "solid state energy conversion/generation chip" that will convert heat directly into electricity. Is more efficient than solar and substantially cheaper. Can be applied to waste heat as well.
OTEC (Ocean Energy Thermal Conversion)

6 - 25 Cents/kW-h Presently not functioning but two plants are to be built. One (agout 1.3 megawatts) is to be started in Kona next year and the other much larger one (about 13 megawatts) is also to be built somewhere in the state later on for the military. I believe that the military spending guide lines state that there must be a reduction in expenditures for electricity over the next few years. A Breakdown of the technology by OCEES Internation, INC.

[...]
Obviously if companies can get energy that is at least 4-5 times cheaper than conventional sources (as can be garnered from the above chart compared to < $.01 khW) this would allow them to produce cheaper goods and services as well as increase their bottom line.  Also, the E-CAT cold fusion reactor is highly portable and does not require the capital expenditure necessary to build, for example, a large coal or nuclear power plant.  With the ability for each home or automobile to have its own cold fusion reactor powering it, a decentralized power grid is possible.  Utility costs would get very cheap and individuals could even sell back the excess power generated by their cold fusion reactors at home to the big utility companies to generate a revenue stream for themselves.  The possibilities are endless but new technologies such as this take time to adopt (years) and mature.  For example, the 1MW power plant tested on October 28th only produces heat/steam, not electricity.  Ironing out the details such as converting steam in to electricity, creating steam powered automobile engines or even tweaking the cold fusion reaction to produce electricity directly are some examples of the engineering tasks that can take years to fully develop.

Editor's Note:
My hope is that at least the word can be spread fast about this technology so that it creates public interest and demand.  Once CEO's realize they can cut costs with really clean, cheap energy they will definitely want to adopt cold fusion to reduce their overhead.  For technology companies such as Google or Amazon, server farms require a lot of electricity to keep running.  Factories or office buildings can be heated and powered more efficiently with cold fusion heaters or generators as well.  Car companies will want to develop new product lines based on cold fusion powered engines, which consumers would eagerly welcome due to cheaper operating costs and not needing to refuel for 6 months.  SpaceX and Virgin Galactic will want to adopt the cold fusion technology as a power source for their rockets or space planes.  Individuals will want to install reactors inside their homes to reduce utility costs and sell back electricity to power companies at a premium, etc.

ShareThis