On the Use of Iron and Carbon in E-Cat Reactors

This comment was posted by Jamie Sibley in the Always Open thread.

Starting at room temperature, iron will combine with oxygen to form iron oxide, and by the time the reaction gets to LAH breakdown temperature, all the oxygen is bound to the iron.

As hydrogen is released from the LAH, it is absorbed into the nickel without having a change to react with the oxygen that is bound to the iron. As the temperature increases, starting at 350c iron oxide would normally start to be reduced by hydrogen into water and iron but the hydrogen is already absorbed into the nickel and cannot participate in this reaction.

The only remaining reaction possibility, is for iron oxide to be converted into carbon dioxide and iron. The beauty of this proposed reaction pathway is that it keeps oxygen bound away from hydrogen, during the hydrogen production and loading phases.

Iron and Carbon prevent the hydrogen in LAH from forming water inside the e-cat.

  • Ted-X

    There are some mistakes here. In the temperatures over about 400 C, the composition will be determined by the thermodynamic properties. The mixture will consist of Ni-oxide, Fe-oxide, Ni and Fe carbonyls (with various degrees of substitution), hydrides, hydrogen and water (as well as elemental metals) – all in a thermodynamic equilibrium. ASPEN or ChemCAD modeling can reveal the approximate composition.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Dumb question: What would happen if ONLY LiAlH4 were to be heated in the ceramic tube? LiAlH4 alone. No nickel, no iron, or anything else?

  • Mats002

    I do not see any problem testing different compositions of elements, Fe could have some kind of positive effect on the reaction, but at this point in time we need replication based on facts as far we know, and we know Parkhomov not used Fe in fuel, and Rossi has endorced Parkhomov and so far said nothing about Fe what I know of. And we know that the fule/ash analysis was not conclusive, for example it did not catch the gaseous parts of ash.

  • Obvious

    A couple of other quick notes.
    They were using a carbon adhesive sticker, so any report of carbon should be considered with caution.
    There is a huge oxygen spectral peak, without any obvious “host element” in sufficient quantity to belong to it. Clearly they did not analyse a blob of oxygen. So some element is hidden, beyond the 10 keV range shown.

  • Mr. Moho

    See http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/10915998_7

    The decompositionof lithium aluminohydride into Li3AlH6, Al and H2 is observed during prolonged mechanochemical treatment for up to 110 h and is most likely associated with the catalytic effect of a third material, iron,which is introduced into the hydride as a contaminant during mechanical treatment

    And http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925838801015705

    Mechanical processing of polycrystalline LiAlH4 in the presence of titanium- and iron-based catalysts induces the transformation of LiAlH4 into Li3AlH6, Al and H2 at room temperature.

    • Svein Arild Utne

      Or we could ad some aluminum powder that will oxidize at an even lower temp.

    • wpj

      Then why not start with the hexahydride which is a similar price to LAH and is used in hydrogen storage applications?

      As an aside, there is a huge LAH plant that was built funded by SKB in order to supply material for their process to paroxetine. It’s now generic drug and those manufacturers use a different, cheaper process that doesn’t use LAH so there is ample capacity for LENR applications.

  • Obvious

    I think the aluminum will oxidIze in preference to iron.

    • Svein Arild Utne

      That is good, then we need to get the Nitrogen to react and stay solid or liquid at 1400C.

      Nitrogen reacts with elemental lithium. Lithium burns in an atmosphere of N2 to give lithium nitride:[28]

      6 Li + N2 → 2 Li3N This will break up at 850C so we get the Nitrogen gas back.

      Magnesium also burns in nitrogen, forming magnesium nitride.

      3 Mg + N2 → Mg3N2 This will last till 1500C so it might be a way to get the Nitrogen out of the gas face so we can get a vaccume, and lower the boiling point of Lithium.

      • Mr. Moho
        • Svein Arild Utne

          Yes, Aluminum nitride got a melting point at 2200C. That is very good. Then the Nitrogen is out of the way.

          • Mr. Moho

            Aluminium oxynitride (AlON) might be better suited for hydrogen environments, but it’s not easy to synthesize.

            Magnesium could help as a catalyst; this paper here is for Aluminium nitride, but I’ve seen others around mentioning it for AlON synthesis too: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/092150939406511X

      • Obvious

        Perhaps something like silicon nitride. Might explain the Cl, which is used in intermediate steps for lower temperature recipes for Si3N4. This could explain the quartz also.

  • Svein Arild Utne

    When the temperature is low, below 250 degrees the Iron might be affected by the magnetic field and work as a shaker too.

    • Obvious

      Magnetite is stable to around 700 C.

  • Matt Sevrens

    Go back to the lugano report. It actually suggests there was no carbon or iron in the initial fuel. Those were products of the ash. At least thats my understanding anyway.

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

      http://www.elforsk.se/Global/Omv%C3%A4rld_system/filer/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf

      On page 28 in the third paragraph it says:

      “From all combined analysis methods of the fuel we find that there are ***significant quantities*** of Li, Al, ***Fe*** and H in addition to Ni.” Fe = iron

      If I were doing the tests, I would add the purest iron powder I could find. If that didn’t work, I would try a powder made of Grain Oriented Electrical Steel, as one poster suggested. I would make sure the nickel is 99.99% pure if possible. I would first try 55% nickel powder, 39% iron powder (or steel), and 6% lithium aluminum hydride. I would also try both iron powder and carbon dust together and play around with the mixture ratios.

      • Matt Sevrens

        I don’t know what to believe any more

        • Mr. Moho

          What did you previously believe and why?

          • Matt Sevrens

            I’ve heard contradicting claims about the fuel content before and after testing in the Lugano report. Previously I read on this forum that Iron was only in the ash and they provided a source pointing to a fuel analysis. So i claimed that on this thread, but when I actually checked the Lugano report there is only one reference to iron and it seems to be in the fuel. Since I’m not sure what exactly I saw the other day I’m a bit confused.

            • Obvious

              Some quartz too.

            • Mr. Moho

              Ok, now I see. You’re referring to the Edström analysis I recently linked on a different thread. To me it’s still not clear if the “old” powder was actually “used”, only “prepared” for usage, or even just made look “used” by heating. The samples were reportedly given to Sven Kullander by Rossi, so they might have come from anywere. Something might have even been lost (either inadvertently or not) in translation in the process.

              For the sake of your own sanity, my suggestion is to focus on the Lugano report. That still doesn’t 100% rule out Rossi tampering with the samples, depending on how much you trust the testing professors, but chances of that happening are in my opinion slimmer than with earlier analysis.

              • Matt Sevrens

                Yes! Thanks for clarifying.