Solar Hydrogen Trends Update

Thanks to Christopher Calder for posting the following regarding Solar Hydrogen Trends:

An article on the kochari.info web site states that the operations of the company have moved from a garage/back yard into a 2000 square foot industrial facility (pictures at the post).

The article also reports about a test performed by a company called Horizon Air Measurement Services, Inc. on one of SHT’s Symphony 7A hydrogen reactors, and the test results are made available in the document below:

SHTreport

The article states, “The Symphony 7A-M1 showed hydrogen flow rate of 86.7 acfm, compared to 50 acfm (AirKinetcs) and 127 acfm (TRC) results from 2014 for Symphony 7A. This flow rate at 417 watts of input and hydrogen purity of 92.5% translates to COP of 900 (900 times more energy output than is inputted to the system).”

I haven’t seen any details posted about how the Solar Hydrogen Trends reactor works, so there are naturally many questions that need answering to get a full understanding of what might be going on here. The full report by Horizon Air Measurement Services is not posted on this site (just the summary). I wonder whether the reactor includes catalysts that are consumed in the reaction process? It is stated that this reactor ran for 8 hours for the test reported on here, so I wonder what the limitations are.

  • Omega Z

    Hydrogen production is an issue.
    On the 1 hand, this would be easy to loop with a couple batteries for automotive purposes for hydrogen production as needed. No storage tank to speak of. On the other, do you really want easy access to some of the whack jobs in the world.

  • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

    They claim they discovered the phenomena by accident. If they had said they tried to do it on purpose, I would have said that they were nuts. I agree with you, but I believe new discoveries are possible that change the way we look at matter.

    • bachcole

      I’d say that we would have to look at physical life in a new way. (:->)

      I sure hope that it works. I also see no reason why they can’t eventually become absurdly rich if it works, even if no one believes them.

  • Vincent

    I’m a LENR enthusiast I’ve been following LENR for 3 years, and SHT news for well over six months now with great interest. I wanted to believe at first but now, even I have to admit : such claims are difficult to accept, since there is no replication. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proofs. With three reports of hydrogen analysis made by well reputed companies, we don’t want to know what comes out and at what purity, we already know this ; we want to know if it can propel a device or if it can be replicated by another. Only then will it have some credibility. Best of luck to SHT, and hope to have new developments in the near future. Until then, I will remain open-minded, but sceptic.

  • MontagueWithnail

    Generally I don’t. For the most part I am happy to leave them all alone, and if one day they turn out to be right – well life is full of surprises.

    My issue is this. A few months ago I googled LENR and the second result that came up was this:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/22/transmutation_claims_us_lenr_company/

    For those of us who want to see LENR properly investigated by mainstream science and hopefully commercialised as well before too long, allowing LENR to be unnecessarily attached to claims that are certain to be utterly rejected by mainstream science (at least without experimental evidence that is on a totally different dimension to what is being put forward today) is entirely contrary to what we’re trying to do.

    • bachcole

      You already won me over, but this confirms my position.

  • Axil Axil

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wRSGFOdRmI

    It looks like the Russian is using a high voltage low current electric arc to generate solid water based nanoparticles as identified by LeClair. The solution of nanoparticles are captured and is exposed to a magnetic field that generates the hydrogen and oxygen.

    A more energy efficient way to generated the nanoparticles might be to use cavitation to produce the nanoparticle solution using a pump as LeClair does or a ultrasonic transducer. The pump or transducer will not heat the water to a boil thus saving substantial power.

    All these nanoparticle based technologies invented by Papp, Santilli, LeClair, HHO, and now the Russian Kanarev preprocess a liquid to produce a solution of nanoparticles to be used in a final energy generation stage.

    It looks like Kanarev is producing HHO and producing hydrogen using a magnetic field.

    This video shows the same thing but uses cavitation to produce the nanoparticles that are activated by a magnetic field.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S939PNEhne4

    Could Solar Hydrogen Trends be using nanoparticles to catalyze the creation of hydrogen?

  • Fyodor

    I have seen it suggested that the inputs may have included hydrides or other expensive and high energy chemical that could break down easily into hydrogen gas. To my knowledge the validation reports haven’t included much about what is going into the system. It would be nice to have this addressed in one of their validations (they might have done so) or at least get some sort of high level explanation of what SHT thinks is happening.

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    All of you state sensible problems.

    About SHT I’m on the Mary Yugo side, with the difference that I just wait for evidences.
    It is good for us to understand what others feel about LENR.
    Most are undeducated in material science and imagine that LENR is impossible as for me it is impossible to convert O into H producing energy (my bet is that if it is real it can only be it is not what happen, which is possible).

    The 3rd party report is only a hearsay.
    When someone like Elforsk will publish that report and the boss will defend the report in public, I will take SHT seriously.

    When they will work seriously with people like Focardi, McKubre, Biberian, and even with MFMP, I will start to be more doubting they have nothing real.

  • LuFong

    The problem with this test is that it ran for a very short time (unspecified but less than 8 hours) and we do not know the configuration including the possible size of the reactor. This means we cannot rule out classical chemical reactants embedded in the device. The actual measurements are probably accurate but the question is what is being measured. Once SHT discloses more information about there device and these sources of energy ruled out then these results can be taken seriously. The authors of the E-Cat test reports did as much.

    • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

      According to Sterling Allen’s conversation with them, “they have been working very hard, and are not taking people up on their invitations to travel to meet with them. Their investors prefer that they not give updates, but they wanted to let people know some of the milestones they have achieved.”

      I would assume that any large investor would demand to know what is inside the box before handing over large sums of money. If they publicly revealed their secret formula, others would try to replicate the technology before they had full patent protection. Even patent protection is only worth so much. An independent 30 day continuous test is required to make a full assessment of the technology if you do not know the secret ingredients. Investors could make a decision with shorter tests only if they know exactly what is in the box. Do they use nickel powder? I believe that they do use iron as one of the important ingredients, as does Rossi. I believe that they also use hypersound as a driver. If you devised a simple trick with hydrides, you would not need hypersound or iron, and what would happen to you after your scheme is inevitably uncovered? Will you run off to Cuba with a bag full of money? The professional profile of these people does not match with a silly immature scam like that. A basement full of pot smoking teenagers might think of such a ridiculous thing for a few good laughs, but even they would realize that you cannot fool the US military and major corporations.

      • LuFong

        I don’t really understand why their investors want to let people know of some of the milestones they have achieved. Usually you go public like this to attract investors. It doesn’t really matter. The test really doesn’t mean much for the reasons I mentioned. Still its worth keeping an eye on should it ever pan out.

        • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

          The investors didn’t want them to say anything. That is the whole point. It was the company staff that felt obligated to say something as so many people are interested and they had previously indicated that they would have news in March or April.

          • LuFong

            OK, but they have a long way to go as they’ve only run it for 8 hours with next step at 24-48 I think. But these tests are really meaningless as they don’t tell you anything about the viability of the device.

            • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

              I agree that they have to have long term performance testing to make a viable commercial product, and that is what they say they are working on. I would classify the company as a wild card in the LENR industry. I hope the technology works and quickly gets to large scale sales of usable products. If I could actually know the future, I would be a stock market billionaire. Hope and knowing are two different things.

  • Gerard McEk

    I am surprised about your remark. There are more ways for doing this than just buying equipment. I am sure that if they offer Toyota a cooperation for their Mirai car (running on hydrogen) they will be inerested. But there are other routes as US_Citizen71 below already mentions. Drive a motor with H2 (is relatively simple) and generate electricity and drive your Symphony 7 with it. Yes, you will need money to prove it. Like Rossi you have to invest and take risks, but if the risk is small (and you are the only one to know) than you would do it.
    Randall Mills (BLP) was able to raise millions of USD and he has not yet proven that he is able to generate enegry in usuable quantities. I do not know how long he can go on with that, but he is a good speaker and have some interesting theories. Obviously SHT is not able to do this, but because SHT can so easily prove that what they claim really works, than they should have done it with their first Symphony, instead of first making others. A self sustaining energy source is undenyable, it is the best proof for a new energy source.

    If they do not want to show the details of their process (which I can understand) than the method above can be used. It must for instance be excluded that H2 is generated by any chemical reaction. ( e.g. You can generate H2 by making AlO3 from Aluminium using an acid).

  • SteveW

    If this process actually converts oxygen into hydrogen (I don’t believe it) then this technology would really scare me. The company claims that it is using water as a fuel. But in reality, mostly oxygen is being converted to hydrogen. Once this oxygen is converted to hydrogen it is burned using oxygen from the atmosphere producing a larger amount of water than the original source of water that was used for “fuel”. So in reality, it is converting atmospheric oxygen into water and depleting atmospheric oxygen.

    I know there is a huge amount of oxygen in the atmosphere and it would probably take centuries at our present energy consumption rate to make any measurable difference in atmospheric oxygen levels, but we would also use much more energy if it became that cheap. With this technology it might become cost effective to do some ridiculous things. What if someone decided it would become cost effective using this technology to atmospherically heat a cold climate area to create a tropical resort area with a simulated climate of Miami say 50 miles from New York city. What if cities around the entire world started doing this?
    What would this do to atmospheric oxygen levels then?

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      As you I don’t believe that Oxygen is fissioned into Hydrogen as it would consume energy.

      My heuristic is “conservation of miracle”, which mean that SHT does LENR…

      My second heuristic is that when you don’t understand how it could work in theory, first ask what really is happening…
      Not only it can be a magnetic motor-like affair( 8 16H or 8D, but maybe it is Ni -> X+H…

      basically someone shoulc check what really happen, and should replicate…
      we shoudl do what all skeptic ask us in LENR, and that have been done in 1990…
      replicate, publish…

      theory and industrial application will came later.

      • Obvious

        The funny thing is that when representatives of SHT are asked about how it works, they turn the questions around and ask you questions instead.

        • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

          this gives bad impression, but really one shoudl ignore theory discussion.
          it is mostly used to fool the reader, either to make him ignore evidences, or to make him ignore the absence of evidence.

          here we miss serious evidence.

  • MontagueWithnail

    What I understood from comments made by an associate of SHT on the Linked-in group is that they are claiming to produce more hydrogen from water than there is hydrogen in water. I further understood that they were somehow claiming to be disassociating oxygen into protium.

    For all sorts of obvious reasons this claim is many orders of magnitude less credible than LENR, requiring as it does a complete break with some of the most fundamental principles that modern physics is built upon such as E=mc2.

    It cannot be stated enough that LENR does not require any fundamental break with central tenets of modern physics. I think it is really important to keep saying this, and for LENR to avoid association with radical claims to the contrary.

    • georgehants

      MontagueWithnail, could you please explain why you think these things have to comply with ”
      the most fundamental principles that modern physics is built upon”, that would seem to what is known as Dogma, science knows virtually nothing regarding this reality and you seem to be implying that we should stay with Newtonian gravity because Relativity was beyond known knowledge?

      • MontagueWithnail

        Yes I can. The conservation of mass/energy is one of the central foundations of modern physics. It has led to numerous predictions that have later been confirmed to be correct by experiment. It can be observed in action every day all over the universe and in every nuclear laboratory, power plant and weapons test. It has faced the burden of proof and triumphed time and time again. It has never credibly been shown to be false. LENR experiments VALIDATE mass-energy equivalence – by producing amounts of helium that, adjusted for the mass defect, are consistent with the excess heat.

        Any claim that involves a repudiation of mass-energy equivalence has nothing whatsoever to do with LENR, and therefore it is appropriate that an absolutely clear distinction is made.

        • georgehants

          MontagueWithnail, you seem to have had to endure an establishment classical scientific education.
          Let us try and understand your thinking —–
          Can you or science state Factually that the Energy being witnessed in Cold Fusion and the above does not come from tapping into another Dimension or from an unknown source beyond known science?

          • MontagueWithnail

            I can state that to the best of my knowledge cold-fusion/LENR experiments are consistent with mass-energy equivalence and that if I had any reason at all to doubt that then I would find something better to do with my time.

            • georgehants

              Let us try and understand your thinking —–
              Can you or science
              state Factually that the Energy being witnessed in Cold Fusion and the
              above does not come from tapping into another Dimension or from an
              unknown source beyond known science?

              • MontagueWithnail

                I cannot factually disprove the existance of god, fairies, witchcraft, that Elvis is still alive or SHT. That doesn’t mean they all have the right to be attached to LENR.

                • georgehants

                  Thank you for your honest answer and of course scientifically and logically it means neither you nor science can rationally deny any of your above examples.
                  Scientifically of course every possible theory has “the right” to be attached to Cold Fusion or any subject and it would be incompetent to exclude any theory.
                  I am sure you would agree.
                  Please remember I an only talking Facts and in no way pointless opinion.

                • MontagueWithnail

                  Clearly I don’t

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Producing hydrogen by fission of oxygen (which appears to be what SHT claim) would indeed require huge amounts of energy. However, that energy would equal only a tiny amount of mass. What if it were possible to add this mass directly? That sounds admittedly exotic, but in this way you would not have to violate the mass/energy conservation law.

          • MontagueWithnail

            Fair enough, I don’t know to what extent an argument could be made for that, but it would in any case still require far more completely new and fantastically surprising physics than would be implied by LENR. I still believe in keeping a rigorous distinction.

        • bachcole

          I very reluctantly agree. I was trying to think how perhaps SHT was converting hydrinos back into hydrogen, but if they were, that would steal energy, not create it. To be honest, my only source of information about SHT is here at e-catworld.com. I am just being selfish. Perhaps we should separate the two. Let the zero-point people have their bandwidth, just not overlapping on e-catworld.coms bandwidth.

  • georgehants

    Cold Fusion Now
    Open Power Newsletter and Report #12 Spring, the first day
    http://coldfusionnow.org/open-power-newsletter-and-report-12-spring-the-first-day/

  • georgehants

    Cold Fusion Now
    Fusion in All Its Forms Cold Fusion, ITER, Alchemy, Biological Transmutations now in English
    http://coldfusionnow.org/fusion-in-all-its-forms-cold-fusion-iter-alchemy-biological-transmutations-now-in-english/

  • Agaricus

    I think we should be wary of lumping Rossi’s 1MW plant together with unproven devices like BLP’s ‘Suncell’ and the SHT H2 generator. The ‘If’ in ‘If just these three companies’ is a very large one and there are plenty of other groups working in the LENR (nanoscale!) field with much greater credibility.

    • georgehants

      Morning Peter, hope you are well and trawling the canals.
      If this technology is genuine you will be able to achieve a hundred knots down the grand union.
      Best

      • Agaricus

        Morning George. Walking pace is fast enough for me. Besides, I’d miss the slow thump and the smell of diesel (although I’d happily install a hydrogen-fired steam engine). Off to the boat next month – if it ever warms up.

  • Gerrit

    Last year August SHT visited SRI. Mike McKubre spoke with SHT, but could not test the device, he was quoted saying: “What they propose seems far more sensible at this point. Run a
    downscaled (or throttled) unit into a fuel cell and quantify the
    electricity out. This would immediately demonstrate practicality.”

    I would like to know when they will execute their proposal. They should consider using the generated electricity to run the system.

    I have not looked into this topic at all. It gives me a fishy, too good to be true, feeling. This is the same feeling people have when we tell them cold fusion is real. Enjoy the feeling, now you understand them better.

    It does not mean that anything that you distrust at first glance is worthwhile to investigate, but don’t let yourself be guided by your feeling, see what bit of evidence is there and what you need further to understand what to really make of it.

    I also don’t like this topic on this site, but it is valuable for all of us to understand how difficult it is for other people to open up for LENR. And therefore I think this should be on this site.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    What is missing in the ‘COP’ calculation is the chemical energy of the reactants and the non-gaseous reaction products. At least, all components should have been weighed before and after the test. It seems that we have again a ‘black box problem’, but in a more distinctive form than in Rossi’s E-Cat.

  • steve high

    Don’t you get it? SHT is The Onion of free energy. This is performance art for Zero Point dreamers. These are the same guys who dress up in tux and top hats then go out and lay tender traps for Billionaires. I say let the song and dance have its day! Very entertaining and I am thrilled to cast aside my shrouds of ennui and despair to listen. Wait, I think I hear a Symphony…….

    • steve high

      I also find them to be an excellent antidote for Lust Addiction.

      • bachcole

        I take it that you believe that SHT is full of SHT? I refuse to make a decision until I have to, either because they are at my door asking me for money or they have compelling evidence. I have, what we might call, a studied and deliberate open mind that only closes for good reason, something like monetary solicitation or Mike McKubre jumping ship to SHT.

  • Irritated

    Yea, if you want this SHT on this site Frank you should get your own site… oops, this is your site!

    • ecatworld

      lol — I bring SHT up here just because they’ve been discussed here before and I thought it would be interesting to some readers to keep up with what they are saying.

      • Irritated

        : )

      • georgehants

        Admin, the people who are debunking this technology without total proof of wrong doing are exactly the same as those who have and do deny Cold Fusion etc.
        Only open-minds are rational on every topic.
        If good open-minded fair scientists etc. are to feel free to comment on your site then all debunkers and deniers must be moderated away, I think.
        Only time will tell and any abuse is moving toward the mentality of ECN.

    • bachcole

      I completely understand the opponents of having SHiT here. I am just interested in how it is going to resolve itself.

      • Irritated

        When life gives you SHT, make cowpies!

        Sorry, couldn’t resist : )

  • Nicholas Chandler-Yates

    please don’t report on SHT again…

    • Agaricus

      It may be ‘impossible’, but there is apparently good data here (the third party test reports) and to reject this out of hand would be premature. However, until it can be established that no trickery or hidden consumables are involved, there doesn’t seem to be much reason to get too excited — yet.

      Admin, please continue to post any further information as and when it becomes available.

  • John

    I hope this website and Frank stay sticked to the ECAT/LENr subject, all other subjects like this SHT bullshit will transform this web in another free energy portal ( and all kind of “news” and scams ) So let’s pay attention to Andrea Rossi and Parkhomov and MFMP. It’s my suggestion as a matter of caution

    • http://kochari.info/ mind2matter2reality

      A typical narrow-minded remark! Clearly shows that even in alternative energy community there are people who suffer from phobias. In this case Heliophobia, Neophobia, and possibly Xenophobia.

      • bachcole

        I don’t think that John’s comment is so far out of line. It is obvious to the most casual observer that we have a credibility problem. It doesn’t help if we have a bunch of comments and articles looking at free energy things and other crazy ideas.

      • Ophelia Rump

        I agree completely with his typical narrow-minded remark.

        New category required, dumbcrapophobia, and it’s antithisis, fallforanyBSomania.

    • Gerard McEk

      I do not think it is wrong to publish SHT on this site as it is maybe related to LENR. As you will see it will get not a lot of positive support, similar to Randall Mills of BLP, because I think we are all back to earth and have a good feeling of what may be right or wrong from a scientific point of view.

  • Gerard McEk

    Their claim is increadably, so I asked them to connect it to a fuelcell, which can make the electrical power to drive it. Then it should be possible to make it completely self sustaining. That should prove that they really have something. I hope they react on my suggestion. If it is ignored or dismissed of being too expensive, than I will conclude their Symphony plays a wrong tone and is not real.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      yes it seems very different from our classic LENR.
      anyway not sure it is not related, like with neutron spallation or alike…

      Need good evidence, but not yet there.

    • US_Citizen71

      They don’t even need to use a fuel cell. Internal combustion engines can burn hydrogen. They could simply modify a small genset to run on hydrogen it won’t last for years due to the heat but it should make days to weeks if they add a cooling system to one. But it is more likely a chemical reaction, toilet bowl cleaner and aluminum foil make hydrogen just fine, but it is not an overunity reaction. If they truly have what they say every NG electrical plant operator should be beating down their door, switching from NG to H would be a trivial change to a plant. Beyond the money they would make in fuel savings the operator could claim they are carbon free in the generating, which would make them look very good and save themselves money in places with carbon taxes. I won’t say they are frauds at this point but their lack of information about how it works makes Rossi look like an open book.