Electricity generated from water: BlackLight Power announces validation of its scientific breakthrou

Electricity generated from water: BlackLight Power announces validation of its scientific breakthrough in energy production

www.marketwatch.com

CRANBURY, N.J., May 22, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Leading academic and industry experts have validated BlackLight's new process that directly produces electric energy from the conversion of water vapor to a new, more stable form of Hydrogen.

Experts agree that BlackLight's "Hydrino theory" represents a fundamental breakthrough in clean energy technology.

BlackLight Power, Inc. (BLP) today announced a major breakthrough in clean energy technology, which experts agree holds tremendous promise for a wide range of commercial applications. The announcement comes on the heels of Blac

(visit the link for the full news article)

Most new advanced energy systems get bought out or suppressed.. Black light has been around for a while. It just announced energy from water.. What is unusal is that WSJ market watch picked up the press release... they are claiming that Hydrogen can change into a state of matter called a hydrino.. Interesting ... and well done.

www.marketwatch.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Notice this is off a PR newswire:

BlackLight has raised a total of $75 M for the development and commercialization of its breakthrough energy technology

Which has been going on about 20 years...

Okay but what about the leading people in the field...

...leading scientists from academia and industry with PhDs from prestigious universities including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the California Institute of Technology, confirm that BlackLight has achieved a technological breakthrough....

Oh wow?

Dr. K.V. Ramanujachary, Rowan University Meritorious Professor....

Mills paid Rowan for research and it wasn't independent... But I read something about more than one:

W. Henry Weinberg, who was a professor of Chemical Engineering, Chemistry and Applied Physics at California Institute of Technology

Who was a professor?

Dr. Terry Copeland, former manager of product development for several electrochemical and energy companies including DuPont Company and Duracell

Former manager?

While there is a lot of hype, there are no referenced papers that are mentioned, which might have been nice.

A 100 W unit is planned for completion by the end of 2012, and a 1.5 kiloWatt (kW) pilot unit that can serve the residential power market, as an initial target commercial application, is expected to be operational by 2013

So Mills believes powering a lightbulb is going to earn him a few more million.

reply to post by boncho


Stop being such a freaking pessimist all the time.

This is AMAZING news and the source is solid.

This thread should be on the front page.

Nice find OP.

Found a "confidential" report from Weinberg. You can get it off of Mill's site Here. In PDF format.

Which makes me wonder, if it is confidential, why is Mills posting it. And how is that considered validation?

reply to post by R_Clark


This is awesome news!! Let's hope that this becomes an actual household commodity, and not suppressed by the competitors in the same market...

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by boncho

 

Stop being such a freaking pessimist all the time.

This is AMAZING news and the source is solid.

This thread should be on the front page.

Nice find OP.

I'm not a pessimist I'm a realist.

There are many ways to go about things, and in Mill's case, he likes PR disclosures. For one, they are cheap, they get attention and they bring investor money.

It took me about 5 minutes of searching to pull the report from Weinberg who is cited in the PR drop. However, I found no scientific paper, just a supposedly "confidential" report that is posted on Mill's company's webpage. Which makes me wonder... Isn't that strange?

reply to post by R_Clark


THIS!!! Is a great find my friend!

Imagine the possibilities now. small Hydrogenerators fro home use, Hydroengines for an alternative fuel source.
That is, if tptb don't begin to charge to just breathe the air with gasoline out of the way.

reply to post by R_Clark


I have one major concern with this process, It involves dismantling water vapour, IE taking oxygen and hydrogen apart. The results will be potential water shortages, how ever if this process does in fact prove useful, facilities to produce water will be needed to balance the consumption. Perhaps, we can create a " Generator " To produce more electricity that burns a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen to produce water, the results would be clean fresh water and electricity. Two things we need so desperately in this world, fresh water and a source of clean energy. If I'm not mistaken, the use of such fuel produces an ENORMOUS amount of energy, so if a device were constructed I imagine the electrical output would be tremendous and the coupling of these devices would be a key to limitless energy, even more so if the two could be put together. Use this process, Hydrogen oxygen burning turbine produces water, that water is used to cool the generator, that in turn produces steam(water vapour) the water vapour is used by black lights tech to make hydrino and O2 burn the hydrogen and O2 produce more water. Feedback loop, limitless energy. I imagine the Hydrogen O2 generator would produce more water than Blacklights device so it could be offset. One H+O combustion generator, as many black light devices needed to produce equilibrium.

Originally posted by PsyMike91
reply to post by R_Clark

 

THIS!!! Is a great find my friend!

Imagine the possibilities now. small Hydrogenerators fro home use, Hydroengines for an alternative fuel source.
That is, if tptb don't begin to charge to just breathe the air with gasoline out of the way.

Sadly that will probably happen lol. However the other by-product is that this releases oxygen into the air, not carbon monoxide, and other pollutants. I would rather spend $50 for a "tank of water" to power my vehicle than conventional gas. Imagine what smog ridden cities would look like with clean clear air!

*argh*

Me as an engineer, I am looking at these "cheap, unlimited energy for everyone!"-machines with a laughing and a weeping eye.

It would be FUNFACKINGTASTIC if they were for real.
It will be a desaster and a money drain like oh so many of these before. That is not a pessimistic view of live, but an engineering view. Let it happen - even if I can't imagine a way this thing should work. There are just too many physical, chemical and electrical obstacles or worse: impossibilities. Yeah, I know: "We don't know everything about nature, don't be such a blockhead!"

Sorry, but I was taught a lot about physics to do my job, and I can't imagine hydrinos in any feasable way. Are they barionics? Neutrinos? Some "special" water fluid but somehow less energetic (as the energy was taken from it during the conversion from water to hydrino).

Usually a more stable form of a molecule means that there was external energy needed to rearrange the molecules themselves, think "coal to diamond" (pressure and heat required). Therefore no discharge but charge of energy into the system. That means a negative balance of energy, a drain but a source.

Validation Reports | BLP
BLP Publications

All the information one could want...

Is it good news though ? Where's all the water going to come from to power these devices, which would eventually number in the billions ? What effect would it have on water globally ? How does a tree pay for commodified water ?

reply to post by ManFromEurope

That is not a pessimistic view of live, but an engineering view.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at what you just said. It's as if anything which generates efficient energy (NOT free or infinite) is some type of scientific blasphemy to you people (unless of course it produces a lot of radiation then it's cool coz there's a bad side to it). You are pessimistic, because you immediately think anything which can help humanity must be a "scam", and you base that on the fact you can't "imagine" how it would work. If you don't understand the theory about hydrinos then why don't you try reading some of the publications (I just provided the link) which attempt to explain the theory... god I am so sick of this world.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Validation Reports | BLP
BLP Publications

All the information one could want...

No actually it's not. You can read Mill's theory of everything which is a few thousand pages if I remember correctly, to which people even in the LENR field will say it's full of hot air, bad math and some major problems.

But these "reports" are not validation. They are endorsements at best.

NASA reproduced on of his tests with his equipment and found anomalous heat, which has been found in thousands of experiments and either left unexplained, or with a mundane explanation.

I understand it's easy to get your hopes high when you read a headline. But don't get your hopes high... Seriously..

reply to post by boncho

But don't get your hopes high... Seriously..

I think I'll decide who to trust and who to believe... seriously...

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

You are pessimistic, because you immediately think anything which can help humanity must be a "scam", and you base that on the fact you can't "imagine" how it would work.

Actually no, you are presenting the behavior that anything that can help humanity must be real.

If you don't understand the theory about hydrinos then why don't you try reading some of the publication (I just provided the link) which attempt to explain the theory... god I am so sick of this world.

Here is a peer reviewed journal that took a look at hydrinos, you can read that:

In this paper, we have considered the theoretical foundations of the hydrino hypothesis, both within the theoretical framework of CQM, in which hydrinos were originally suggested, and within standard quantum mechanics. We found that CQM is inconsistent and has several serious deficiencies. Amongst these are the failure to reproduce the energy levels of the excited states of the hydrogen atom, and the absence of Lorentz invariance. Most importantly, we found that CQM does not predict the existence of hydrino states! Also, standard quantum mechanics cannot encompass hydrino states, with the properties currently attributed to them. Hence there remains no theoretical support of the hydrino hypothesis. This strongly suggests that the experimental evidence put forward in favour of the existence of hydrinos should be reconsidered for interpretation in terms of conventional physics. This reconsideration of the experimental data is beyond the scope of the current paper. Also, to understand properly the experimental results presented by Mills et al , it would be helpful if these were independently reproduced by some other experimental groups.

Source

Energy from water is NOT a solution to the world's energy problems. Most of the world doesn't have access to decent drinking water as it is and our fresh water supply is not getting replenished as fast as it is getting used. Turning water into an energy source will cause the price of water to skyrocket. We need water to survive and it should not be allowed to be profited on!

reply to post by boncho

Actually no, you are presenting the behavior that anything that can help humanity must be real.

Actually no, I am one of the last people to believe this sort of thing at first glance. What I do tend believe however, is the multiple scientists and other professionals who are verifying and backing this work, especially when a respectable source does a high quality report on it. I have never seen anything that looked so promising out of the near hundreds of threads like this.

Here is a peer reviewed journal that took a look at hydrinos, you can read that:

That is an evaluation of the theory, not an evaluation of the working machine. Not to mention the theory is completely new and outside of our currently accepted knowledge, so it's absolutely no surprise what so ever they wouldn't agree with it.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by boncho

 

But don't get your hopes high... Seriously..

I think I'll decide who to trust and who to believe... seriously...

You believe someone who has taken close to 80 million from investors since 1991 while promising a workable technology in the mean time.

While this was all going down however, there have been a number of scientists that looks at mills work, and his "theory on everything" and found nothing of interest. Not because it went against the mainstream but because it didn't make sense and there were basic math errors..