Save $50 billion a year!

Wow

 

I think this was posted on another thread as well. I'll repeat here what I said there: I am extremely skeptical of their assertion that there has been no way until now to effeciently produce power from waste heat between 300 and 800 degrees.

I also suspect that there are other working fluids, much less explosive than propane, with similar thermal properties.

In fact, there are so many alternative energy sources available that OPEC would be in deep trouble if we just made up our minds to develop those resources.

 

From someone who knows what they are talking about:

As usual, I'm reluctant to base anything other than general impressions on marketing material.

The general concept of using volatile liquids in this way has been well-known for a long time, but generally due to the low quality of the heat the efficiency is very low.

The claims for efficiency and power increase made by the company just seem...words fail me. 150-600% more power? Ummm...hm.

There is so much marketing gibberish on each page of their Powerpoint Presentations that I could make a paragraph of criticism about many of the slides. And that worries me - I shouldn't be able to find at least one incorrect generalization, mis-statement, or meaningless marketing phrase per slide, like I am with this.

I hate to dismiss the claims in general without seeing any actual study results or real technical papers. I will only say these things:

1) Don't be fooled by attractive websites that talk about presentations to the DoE, World Bank, etc. It's meaningless - I've known the DoE to see more than a few perpetual motion machine presentations, and I've been at two "impossible tech" presentations to other government agencies, both here and in the US.

2) Where's the pilot scale tests with independent verification? Typically, that's where the claims end.


Brian