Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Validation of Electrical Power Generation by Second - Generation CIHT Technology
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, ^ | N ovember, 2011 _ | K.V. Ramanujachary

Posted on 01/23/2014 12:42:27 PM PST by Kevmo

Validation of Electrical Power Generation by Second - Generation CIHT Technology

Valuator:
K.V. Ramanujachary
Professor
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, 08096

Submitted to the BlackLight Power Corporation

Evaluators Signature:
Date : _ N ovember, 2011 __
2 BLACKLIGHT POWER ( BLP )
CIHT CELL VALIDATION (November 2011)
The present report deals with the studies aimed at validating several second generation CIHT (Catalyst - Induced - Hydrino - Transition) cells that were assembled at the BLP facility. In contrast to th e first generation cells, BLP has identified a novel proprietary electrolyte consisting of earth - abundant and eco - friendly chemicals.

All t ests were performed at BlackLight Power, Inc. at their Cranbury, NJ laboratories . The primary focus of the vali dation is to analyze the net electrical production from proprietary CIHT cells using the hydrogen fuel from water and supply it to the electrochemical reaction .

The electrical output was corrected for highest energy possible for any known conventional e lectrochemical reactions based on the initial and final analysis of the cell contents. The electrical energy balances were performed with multiple state - of - the - art battery testing systems (Arbin BT 2000) that were calibrated to high accuracy (<0.1% error) at the factory and confirmed using a digital oscilloscope at BLP. The net electrical energy gain determined in this manner for many different systems, configurations, and modes of operation were 162%, 340%, 385%, 167%, 195%, 456%, 735%, 182%, 151%, 425% and 186%.

Typically, steady electrical power was continuously measured from the cell for more than a week and up to more than 30 days before the cell was stopped and the cell contents were analyzed by a cascade of characterization tools . These tests wer e necessary for an accurate determination of potential chemical change s . Controls were processed under the same protocol and analyzed using the same analytical instruments in triplicate. Measurements included weight change of the active electrode (anode) and any compositional change of the electrolyte by compositional analysis using ICP, XRF and XRD.

Special systems were run with controlled mass flow to rule out the possibility of hypothetical conventional energy contributions . ‘

“Hydrino” pro duct was identified by the presence of an up field - shifted NMR peak characteristic of reduced - radius (lower - energy) hydrogen. Each CIHT cell comprised a set of metal electrodes and an ionically conductive electrolyte. W ater supplied as vapor to the cell or extracted from air , from which hydrogen was generated by electrolysis , appears to be the source of electric energy output . Due to the electrochemistry occurring in the cell, an electric current flowed through a load of the electrical testing inst rument with an internal ion flow of the electrolyte completing the electric circuit. The mechanism of operation appears to involve specific chemicals of the electrolyte that formed the catalyst and atomic hydrogen during electron and ion flow needed for t he production of electricity. The excess electricity observed was consistent with the electrochemical production of low - energy form of hydrogen providing the energy source.

Indeed, the electrical energy out surpassed by multiples the electricity required to generate the hydrogen fuel from water .

The cell was continuously regenerative and operated at constant power output for extended periods . The mass and energy balance s were performed on each cell. The electrode at which the electrical power was devel oped (anode) was weighed to rule out the possibility of any reaction that could give rise to excess electrical energy observed in the present CIHT cells. The electrolyte was also carefully analyzed by elemental analysis. Controls comprised the same start ing compositions and treatments as the electrical - power - producing anodes and electrolytes.

The cell used nontoxic , earth - abundant commodity chemicals, and the system operating conditions were similar to those of exi s ting technologies such as batte ries and fuel cells . However , the stand - alone generation of electricity from water reported here is truly exceptional . The confirmatory electrical and analytical data and analysis is available upon request.


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: canr; cmns; coldfusion; lenr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 last
To: Toddsterpatriot

Again... thank you SO MUCH for being that way.


81 posted on 02/06/2014 10:27:34 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Did you not respond to posts where I mentioned CHF? LOL!!!! Posterity thanks you SO MUCH!!!


82 posted on 02/06/2014 10:30:07 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

1000 times as much energy as any chemical reaction?
***Uhh... that’s 10Thousand times the Energy Density of Gasoline.

Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3023592/posts
Fri 24 May 2013 06:35:28 PM PDT · by Kevmo · 568 replies
Intrade Gateway via Extreme Tech ^ | May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm | Sebastian Anthony


83 posted on 02/06/2014 10:35:14 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

No mention of control. I never mentioned CHF, that was you.
***Well, that makes you doubly stupid. You’ve been arguing against it this whole time. Using ridiculously stupid things that have no relation to control whatsoever, yet acting as if you KNEW. Well, maybe if you put in the effort, posterity will be kind to you. But, based upon what I have saved from your stupid arguments and how I’ve saved them for posterity... I doubt it. Take comfort in knowing that you have been a wonderful pasquinade.


84 posted on 02/06/2014 10:42:38 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Just as you responded to my post.

Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

You're fighting for posterity?

What a silly man you are.

85 posted on 02/07/2014 6:44:56 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

No sillier than your ridiculous argumentation. Perhaps you’ve been staring at the sun for too long.


86 posted on 02/07/2014 4:34:29 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

You mean that example of fusion creating useful amounts of energy? Took you long enough.


87 posted on 02/07/2014 5:05:58 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Took ME long enough? You STILL don’t get it. Exactly how much of those hundreds of $billions was spent on being able to go outside and look at the sun as proof of CHF?


88 posted on 02/07/2014 5:25:50 PM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Took ME long enough?

Right, because no one has ever seen useful amounts of energy produced by fusion.

19 posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2014 7:56:06 AM by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)

89 posted on 02/07/2014 5:45:56 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson