Infinite Energy Device Update
Published in IE Volume 4, Issue #22
Conducted by Ed Wall and Gene Mallove
At our New Energy Research Laboratory (NERL) work
has proceeded on testing the Kinetic Furnace cavitation reactor (see
cover story, IE No. 19). Results continue to be disappointing
in Bow, NHnominally measured COP in the range 1.0 to 1.15, inadequate
to call the performance here definitively over-unity. Work is proceeding
to alter the rotation speed of the cavitation rotor, first only slightly
by several tens of rpm from the baseline 3,450, by altering the line
voltage with transformers.
Interesting trends are beginning to be observed.
Later NERL plans to achieve more drastic fractional changes in rotor
speed by replacing the single-phase electric motor with a three-phase
The aluminum fillet that gives much better heat transfer from
the immersion heater than the tubular hot finger heater. (Shown
inserted into dewar reactor in other figures.)
We regret to report the very sad news that Eugene
Perkins, one of the co-inventors of the Kinetic Furnace, died suddenly
in mid-September from a vascular-related problem. He will be missed
deeply, both as an outstanding, creative human being and as a key
participant in this project. Ralph Pope, his friend and co-inventor,
has assured us that he is committed to seeing the Kinetic Furnace
achieve the consistent results that we all hope for, which will
lead to commercialization in the water heating market.
Very big news on the testing front has occurred
outside NERL. Dr. Les Case of Fusion Power, Inc. in New Hampshire
(see IE No. 19) has had one catalytic fusion cell sustain for
two months (and continuing!) a temperature elevation with deuterium
gas that is 35 °C above the baseline reached with ordinary hydrogen.
Operating temperature is holding steady at 215 °C. Case has fashioned
a much larger unit in a stainless steel dewar cell that he believes
will reach the desired goal of self-sustainment soon. It can contain
as much as a kilogram of activated palladium-carbon catalyst.
This is the new reactor vessel a modified large stainless
steel dewar. It is pressure tight enough for testing.
Catalytic fusion by Dr. Case has prompted serious
involvement by SRI International, after Russ George (now of Saturna
Technologies, Inc.) replicated the Case process in a cell that he
fashioned at SRI International. He measured over 10 ppm helium-4
in an active cell, which built up over time from virtually zero
background He-4. The blank control cell containing ordinary hydrogen
apparently showed no helium-4 build up and no temperature elevation.
Please note the thermal analysis report in this issue
(p. 50) by Don Slack of Aqua Environment, Inc. This suggests that
the high temperature elevations being seen in Case cell experiments
cannot be explained by thermal heat transfer differences between
deuterium gas and ordinary hydrogen.
Russ Georges first attempt to run a Case
cell resulted in a failure at SRI. Colleague Akira Kawasaki reports
that the cell "was isotropically configured like EarthTech's
cell" that failed to show evidence of excess heat. George replicated
the experiment with a catalyst configuration closer to the Case cells
geometry, i.e. a non-isotropic cell. This is the configuration
that ultimately worked. Further replication efforts, using Russ Georges
cells, are now underway at SRI International and soon at Pacific Northwest
Laboratoriesa DoE lab that will perform replication studies
to measure helium, under contract to Saturna Technologies, Inc. as
well as at NERL.
The new reactor vessel covered with fiberglass insulation. When
the vessel is at working temperature, the outside gets hot and
needs additional insulation.
The NERL/Case experiment set-up that we began in late
October is as follows: A heater pad is at the bottom of a large
Dewar. The cell sits on the heater. The goal is to calibrate the
Dewar when the Case cell empty, to have a reference allowing us
to make calorimetric determinations. This provides a means of determining
the energy output of the catalyst/protium cell. We can defeat the
mundane heat conduction/thermometry explanation for the higher temperature
of the catalyst/deuterium cell by having a thermocouple in the space
in the Dewar alongside the cell to run a comparison between the
temperature vs. power curves for the two isotopes of hydrogen. If
the airspace in the Dewar is considerably warmer for the deuterium,
my conclusion would be that more heat is being generated, because
the conduction medium (air) for the thermocouples is identical in
both situations. We are monitoring temperature near the outside
of the Dewar at two points to deflect the possibility that heat
transfer from it to the environment is strongly affected by the
surrounding air temperature changes.
Ohmori-Mizuno cells (see IE No. 20) continue
to provoke interesting testing results elsewhere. One negative report
on such a "plasma-electrolysis" cell comes from David
Marett, a colleague of Dr. Paulo Correa.. Marett presented his paper
at our Cold Fusion and New Energy Symposium on October 11. We reproduce
his report in full in this issue (pages 20-21). When shown this
report, Dr. Mizuno took exception to it, stating that it was not
a faithful replication. Here is what Dr. Mizuno wrote to us concerning
a huge number of experiments they have undertakenover 50!:
Summary of Recent Ohmori Arc Discharge
Division of Quantum Energy Engineering,
Research group of Nuclear System Engineering,
Laboratory of Nuclear Material System,
Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University
Larger excess heat generation has been observed with
the tungsten/light water system during arc discharge electrolysis.
The arc discharge begins when electrolyte temperature reaches 75
~ 80 degrees C. A few minutes after the discharge begins, the fluid
begins rapid boiling. Excess heat measurements commence when the
arc forms and continues for 30 minutes.
A variety of electrolytes have been tested including
solutions of 0.25 ~ 0.5M Na2SO4, K2SO4,
K2CO3, Rb2CO3, Cs2CO3,
and 0.1M BaOH. Electrolysis voltage is set at 160V with a constant
voltage power supply. Input is 75 ~ 120 watts.
With 120 watts, excess heat as high as 122 W (202%)
has been observed. The lowest excess heat percent observed over
the course of a 30-minute run was 138%. During this measurement
period, excess heat did not decline. No such trend was observed,
so it is assumed that heat generation would continue for a long
time at a steady state. Three representative test results are shown
The following formula is used to determine excess
(H) = Wvap + Wsol + Wcell + Wwall-
Where: Wvap: the amount of
heat needed to vaporize the water; determined by measuring the mass
electrolyte before and after the experiment; Wsol: heat
required to raise the electrolyte solution in the cell to boiling,
determined from the mass and specific heat of the electrolyte; Wcell:
heat required to raise the container temperature to 100 degrees
C, the boiling temperature of electrolyte. This is based on the
specific heat of the quartz glass container (0.3 calories/gram)
times the mass of the container. [Editor's note: apparently the
container weighs 3.5 kg.]; Wwall: heat losses over 30
minutes from the electrolysis cell wall to the outside; determined
by observing the cooling curves starting at various temperatures,
taking a minimum value from the curve; Wout: total output
heat; Win: electrolysis electric power consumption; current
and voltage are continuously monitored and recorded, power is determined
from these instantaneous values.
0.5M K2CO3 - H2O 100 cc,
average electric input = 0.48 amps
Wwall = 104 KJ Wvap = 112.8 KJ Wsol
= 17.8 KJ Wcell = 4.4 KJ Wout
= 239 KJ Win = 138 KJ
Wout/Win = 1.73
[Editor's note: there was an arithmetic error in the
0.25M Rb2CO3 - H2O 100
cc, average electric input = 0.59 amps
Wwall = 104 KJ Wvap = 218 KJ
Wsol = 17.8 KJ Wcell = 4.4 KJ
Wout = 344.2 KJ Win = 170 KJ
Wout/Win = 2.02
0.5M K2CO3 - H2O 100 cc,
average electric input = 0.54 amps
Wwall = 104 KJ Wvap = 159 K J
Wsol = 17.8 K J Wcell = 4.4 KJ
Wout = 285.2 KJ Win = 155 KJ
Wout/Win = 1.84
Similar results were obtained in
more than 50 other runs.
Regarding the paper by David Marett you sent: I have difficulty
judging this because the measurement techniques are not described
in detail, but let me speculate about some potential problems:
1. There are a number of critical differences in
materials and conditions. First of all, electrolysis temperature
is too low. Cathode materials are different (Al versus W). The
solution and geometry (size of container, shape, positioning of
electrodes) and other factors are different. In particular, we
have used a variety of electrodes; however, as of this time we
have only observed continuous excess heat when using tungsten
2. One cannot make sweeping generalizations, but
it appears these factors prevent excess heat.
3. In Marett's experiment, during the first phase
of electrolysis apparent 142% excess heat is observed. This is
ascribed to increased insulation caused by bubbles in the cell.
I have doubts about this hypothesis.
4. According to the paper, the cell is calibrated
with heater input. However, during electrolysis heat is carried
off by the evolving hydrogen gas, so I have doubts about the validity
of this calibration method.
Based on the differences listed above, in my judgment
Marett is not measuring under the same conditions we do. I would
not expect to see excess heat evolution in his experiment. If he
could contact me directly I would be happy to discuss the experiment
in greater detail.
Further adding to the mix of results, we received
a highly positive paper from Dr. Phyllip Kanarev in Russia, in which
he runs the electrolyte continuously through an active cell that
appears to be like Ohmori-Mizuno, but which uses a cathode of molybdenum
and an anode of titanium. He gets consistent excess power results
(see report, translated by Dr. Peter Gluck on page 31. COP's of
1.42 and 1.82 were measured. The report is endorsed by a committee
of the faculty of Kuban State University.