posted on Oct, 28 2011 @ 09:32 PM
reply to post by eywadevotee
According to "sources", they produced 2635kWh in the so called "sustained phase" where that power is turned off, (respective only a very small amount
of power is required to keep the reaction going).
For "igniting" the reactor, according to that source, they needed 320kWh. Which would STILL mean that the reactor produced a LOT more energy than was
put in in total.
So..the whole "idea" would be that the reactor needs to be ignited, but can then be quasi-shut off and produces energy for months....until the nickle
is used up.
The problem here is:
Those are all CLAIMS and nothing of this is independently verified. The tests in the past all had some flaws or reasons for skepticism (eg. location
of sensors etc.)...and in those 11 past tests INCLUDING the test today he did not manage to convince that the claims are legit.
So..where are we standing today? Someone making extraordinary claims (even used the words "overunity" etc)..throwing around some numbers and releasing
some rather OMINOUS piece of paper which supposedly should prove something? Problem is... you don't do science like this...not if you want to be
Another good argument, read it somewhere....today in the test the total of "generated" 2636kWH average to 470ish kWh....which is about the heat which
fivethousand 100W light bulbs generate.
According to the PESN site, 1 MW powers "750-1000" homes...so we could say that the 470kW produced today are supposed to power 350-500 homes.. CORRECT
ME IF I AM WRONG