Hydrofusion 1 MW E-Cat Sales Brochure

Hydrofusion, the UK-based company which has been given the rights by Leonardo Corporation to resell E-Cat products in Northern Europe has published a sales brochure marketing the 1 MW E-Cat plant. It provides an overview of the 1 MW plant and quotes from Swedish professors Essen and Kullander who have made public comments about E-Cat technology. The document also contains quotes from NASA Chief Scientist, Dennis Bushnell, about the potential of LENR power, but from the context of the quote it could appear that he has endorsed the E-Cat, which he has not.

The document says of the E-Cat, “Power density in the small reactor reaches a full 100 kW/l. The energy density is so high that the E-Cat modules only needs to be loaded two times a year. On these occasions, the overall management of the reaction products and the residual products is managed by certified service personnel.”

A pdf file of the brochure can be viewed here

  • Pingback: Hydrofusion 1 MW E-Cat Sales Brochure | ColdFusionBlog.net()

  • londo

    Why is there so there so little talk about gamma radiation and shielding. A 6MeV is hard to stop, even with lead. As long aw this is unanswered, how can anybody believe the claims.

    • Lagwin

      AS far as i have read and watched on the videos other than the initial spike of gamma radiation on start up the emissions were background level radiation…not really hear much since though

  • Robert Mockan

    That 100 KW thermal power output per liter is a questionable number. I do not believe that is self-sustaining output. Without more data it is impossible to calculate what usable electrical power output that 100 KW might equate to after conversion, if some of the output needs to return to the reactor to power it. Could be at high thermal power out it needs input and functions as an amplifier of thermal power, but not enough gain to cover the conversion efficiency to electricity, in which case it would need external electricity to power the reactor. I suppose unless Rossi provides specification data we might still only be talking about a hot water heater at the 100 KW per liter rating. If it only puts out a hundred watts per liter thermal power in self sustaining mode (for example), that can still be converted to electricity, but would result in a very heavy reactor for any house or vehicle application. That was the essential problem with the original Piantelli designs in the early 90s. Lots of buzz, but no bang for electrical applications. Would make a nice swimming pool heater, anyway.

  • http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/10/the-critical-need-for-e-cat-technology-for-food-production-and-affordability/ praos

    Well, new thermovoltaic elements could reach efficiencies of 20+ pc — surf the net! And if primary task of eCat is producing of heat, with some electricity on the side, then conversion efficiency is not so important. Think about home space and water heaters reducing utility bills, not in terms of big game powerplants. First step is home heater, then home heater with some electricity generation capability, then conversion of old nukes, then conversion of coal-fired plants, and finaly power plants with probably CO2 or air-Brighton cycle. With parallel development of boat, railroad and car propulsion. This revolution could be finished in ten years.

    • http://www.lepost.fr/perso/sophareth Sophareth Camsonne

      The Brayton cycle is a thermodynamic cycle that describes the workings of the gas turbine engine, basis of the airbreathing jet engine and others. It is named after George Brayton (1830–1892), the American engineer .

  • Lagwin

    Am i the only one imagining that if the E-Cat dose work it could see the return of the steam engine?

    • daniel maris

      No, you’re not the only one. Clean steam. I read up that steam cars have really good torque.

      • http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/How-To-Petition-Government-Online.htm Alex

        Could use the steam engine to drive compressed air pneumatic engines.

  • ICE

    Is it just me, or is this terribly badly worded?

  • daniel maris

    What about the following exchange? Doesn’t this imply that much higher efficiencies are possible – might your engine not produce 700Kws?

    November 25th, 2011 at 4:44 AM
    If the e-Cat right now is able to produce steam at 450 Celsius is really a great breakthrough!
    This means that the current thermoelectric plants could be converted in order to use e-Cat as heat generator with big investment saving.
    Actually, in thermoelectric plant, the steam is heated up to about 540 Celsius. With a lower temperature the efficiency would be a little less but even up to 35% and maybe higher.
    This is really great!
    Dear ing. Rossi, when do you think we will see the first e-Cat based thermoelectric plant ?!!

    Andrea Rossi
    November 25th, 2011 at 8:45 AM
    Dear Massimo:
    I hope within 1 year, maybe sooner.
    Warm Regards,

    • Robert Mockan

      The thermoelectric converter has a typical efficiency of 5%, at any scale. There are applications where the relative simplicity is desirable, but presently the cost per watt is greater than other heat engines. Other heat engines coupled to generators, using the Brayton or Rankine cycle, have a nonlinear scale factor where the electric power needed to operate auxiliary equipment (fans, pumps, motors) becomes a lesser percentage of total electric power generated. This is why 5% thermoelectric conversion might compete with (net) 5% conversion using a Rankine cycle at small scale, but can not compete when one goes to megawatt, or even kilowatt, power conversion. The Rankine cycle converter gets better the larger it is, limited only by ultimate Carnot efficiency, while any given thermoelectric converter will remain at its intrinsic conversion efficiency. Many other factors come into play at large scale, most having to do with fluid dynamics (that is, less power lost moving fluids around at large scale), and that also contributes to greater net efficiency. I notice often when Rossi answers questions he is noncommittal about issues of application and practicality, and generally lets people believe their assumptions. This is not to say that a small tube of fuel powder in an insulated container with a thermoelectric module can not have a market. I can think of several useful applications myself. Only that the concept does not scale well to powering a house or vehicle.

  • Robert Mockan

    I can see a market for light aircraft. Definitely a Brayton cycle, possibly using scroll expander and scroll compressor with hydrogen. The propellers shaft driven. 6 months unlimited range under reactor power before refueling. Fixed wing and helicopters. No question about it. Rossi has rubbed the magic lantern, and the genie is back. If that 100 KW per liter thermal power at 450 C is confirmed, it will only get better with progress. But we need much higher temperature, and higher power density, for jet aircraft and rocket propulsion.

  • PersonFromPorlock

    A sales brochure that uses a quote in a clearly misleading way is, um, unfortunate.

    • Robert Mockan

      Yes. Especially when they could have used quotes with permission from scientists who actually do work, and are not just figure heads for the public relations department of well known agencies like NASA. Bushnell gets quoted a lot, but where was he 20 years ago when even I was investigating the Piantelli nickel hydrogen energy source? I suppose better late than never.

  • Robert Mockan

    100 KW per liter of fuel load? And using compressed hydrogen for heat exchange they can operate near the maximum temperature nickel can withstand before the lattice structure is damaged? That has been said elsewhere to be about 450 C. A reactor core the size of a 55 gallon drum has a volume about 208 liters. That would mean over 20 Megawatts thermal power.
    If we assume 1/10 that to allow for space for compressed hydrogen to circulate to keep the core reacting near 450 C that is 2 Megawatts thermal power. And IF having a net 5% conversion of thermal power to electrical power that means 100 KW electrical. Enough for about 130 horsepower electric motor. A bit large and heavy for an electric vehicle, but a game changer for marine applications.
    These numbers are getting fascinating.

  • arian