On 9/16/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Garry Stahl</b> <<a href="mailto:tesral@comcast.net">tesral@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>The are getting more energy out that in, electrical energy in. Ergo the<br>energy is coming from somewhere else. A catalyst is mentioned in<br>there. Another reaction is happening aided by the catalyst and the<br>
electrical input.<br></blockquote></div><br>Right. There is more than one form of energy input here. So there is some chemical energy, which means a catalyst of some sort that will need replacing at certain intervals. Unfortunately, they're keeping the catalyst "closed source", so it's impossible to determine if this "fantastic" new heater that "puts out more energy than it takes in" is actually cost effective, but judging by the wording in the press release (the "we don't even know how it works" line really gets me), this is going to be more hype than breakthrough.
<br><br>... hope I'm wrong.<br><br>-- <br>Wolfger<br><a href="http://wolfger.wordpress.com/">http://wolfger.wordpress.com/</a><br>AOL IM: wolf4coyot<br>Yahoo!Messenger: wolfgersilberbaer<br>Ekiga: wolfger