Blacklight Power Demos 'Semi-continuous' Plasma Generation (Video)

The following post was submitted by ECW reader Optiongeek — the first post published under the new user submission system. Thank you!

Those who watched the Blacklight Power demonstration on January 28th saw heavy theory and measurements, not so much on the BANG factor. However, the most recent videos published by BLP show a much livelier interaction.

These new videos, published over the weekend, document BLP’s initial experiences with a recently acquired seam welder, permitting continuous ignition. Anyone who was convinced that the demo was rigged is unlikely to have their mind changed.

However, what’s clear from the new video is that the process, whatever it is, can be performed on the order on 10Hz or higher. The next important step will be to show regeneration of the “jumping johnny” aliquots via aqueous hydration only and therefore truly continuous operation of a power source based on converting water to highly-explosive plasma. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDUpb0k_h4o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY2RrXbWWMA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_bAUCjmHVA

  • Andre Blum

    I liked the part where they showed us a seam welder.

  • Andre Blum

    I liked the part where they showed us a seam welder.

  • Gerard McEk

    What can I say? It looks like a high current seam welder. Impossible to say whether it really produces a surplus of energy

  • Gerard McEk

    What can I say? It looks like a high current seam welder. Impossible to say whether it really produces a surplus of energy

  • otto1923

    Seam welder. Is General Fusion working with jack hammers? Is rossi working with blow torches? BLP has been working on this for years. When are they going to be getting some proper equipment?

  • who_Shot_JR

    It looks impressive but I wouldnt know if this energy/result would be produced with just the seam welder. I would need tovask an experienced seamwelder professionap wether this was typical. That aside elaborate hoax if not actually producing significant net energy gain..

  • Rui Germano

    Anyone knows where can I start getting knowledge of what I was watching ? I’m not a physicist so this just looked like firecrackers to me 🙂

  • Bob

    I am afraid I do not understand why they posted this.
    1) It does nothing to prove excess energy and truthfully make them look quite silly. The visual display of released energy is not dramatic, and even is small compared to what the seam welder is capable of by itself. This seam welder is capable of producing a continuous electric arc that would be much more energetic than displayed.

    2) It does nothing to show or prove the ability to harness the supposed excess energy in any usable form. The energy is not captured nor converted into any working force or electricity. Simply setting off a charge every few seconds by having them adhered to a turning wheel is quite amateurish. It has no relation to being able to capture repeated discharges of any energy. If repeated energy discharges cannot be captured, their system is virtually worthless.

    3) BLP made the statement that an advanced, working, electrical generator could be made in a couple of weeks using off the shelf parts. It has been more than a couple of weeks since the first demo and this is all they could come up with!

    Again, I wish them the best but I am dumbfounded as to what they are doing or trying to accomplish with these so called demos! In my opinion, they are actually doing more harm to their credibility than good. Can anyone see any true value to this?

    I am either dumbfounded or perhaps they are!

  • Bob

    I am afraid I do not understand why they posted this.
    1) It does nothing to prove excess energy and truthfully make them look quite silly. The visual display of released energy is not dramatic, and even is small compared to what the seam welder is capable of by itself. This seam welder is capable of producing a continuous electric arc that would be much more energetic than displayed.

    2) It does nothing to show or prove the ability to harness the supposed excess energy in any usable form. The energy is not captured nor converted into any working force or electricity. Simply setting off a charge every few seconds by having them adhered to a turning wheel is quite amateurish. It has no relation to being able to capture repeated discharges of any energy. If repeated energy discharges cannot be captured, their system is virtually worthless.

    3) BLP made the statement that an advanced, working, electrical generator could be made in a couple of weeks using off the shelf parts. It has been more than a couple of weeks since the first demo and this is all they could come up with!

    Again, I wish them the best but I am dumbfounded as to what they are doing or trying to accomplish with these so called demos! In my opinion, they are actually doing more harm to their credibility than good. Can anyone see any true value to this?

    I am either dumbfounded or perhaps they are!

    • bachcole

      This “demo” is actually significantly more lame than ANYTHING that I have seen in the new energy realm. The Papp/Rohner machine was positively exciting compared with this absurdity. And Mills has the gall to call ECW a cult.

      • Not that I for one am letting the latter comment influence my opinions of course!

        • bachcole

          You’re a better man than I. I confess that it does influence my opinion and it shouldn’t. But the two demos all by themselves are sufficient.

          But my opinion always open to suggestions and new data.

  • jousterusa

    This discussion below just illustrates the need for Dr. Mills to put up or shut up, as they say. Where is the automobile engine that goes 1,500 miles on a liter of water? I think we were being promised that half a century ago in Popular Science! If this stuff works, put it to work – I think that’s the more polite way to say it.

    • bachcole

      This “demo” was so bad, and the previous one was so bad, that the thought jumped into my head that perhaps Mills is being paid to discredit the new energy movement.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Indeed. I was thinking you’ve got ads and now apparently you have anti-ads. Maryyogo won’t even find him a challenge 🙂

        His theories may be interesting, but his demo’s are abysmal.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    These videos look as if they were just demonstrations of the function of the welder. Apparently, there is neither water nor a catalyst. Thus, the title “Semicontinous Plasma Power” is somewhat irritating.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I assume that the next step will be to connect the welder with the reactor. That’s going to be interesting. A continuous arc would presumably displace most of the water. Therefore, I expect them to use a pulsed arc. If they can generate 10 kJ per shot at a frequency of 10 Hz, the reactor will produce 100 kW. That would be a convincing result, given that the output power of the welder is significantly lower.

      • Fortyniner

        The regenerating aliquots idea is a dead dog – the arc will simply destroy any structures mounted on the electrode wheel. The only possible extension of this setup would be to use a peristaltic lobe pump to continuously deposit blobs of gel ‘fuel’ on the electrode wheel at some point before the arc position – like squirting blobs of toothpaste onto it at a speed matched to the rotation speed (a geared connection is the obvious mechanism).

        Lots of bright light, lots of sparks, noise and spattered mess – and rapidly eroding copper discs. Even if you could get it to work, it would have a lifetime measured in minutes. This might be extended by replacing the copper wheels with tungsten-edged versions, but there would still be no way to collect any excess energy – assuming there is any to collect.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I do not think that they intend to use the copper wheels as electrodes. IMO the wheels are original parts of the welding machine. They will presumably use thick cable connections from the welder to the reactor. But surely the reactor’s electrodes will be heavily stressed. Another problem is the removal of heat. When the reactor gets too hot, all the water will vaporize. Even if the reaction could be maintained, the heat capacity of the chamber’s content would decrease drastically. I’m afraid that they will destroy a lot of equipment before it works.

          • Fortyniner

            They could just build the reactor around the seam drive mechanism to fully enclose it. Their approach seems to be fairly minimal and I imagine they would rather do something like that than build an entirely new drive assembly c/w the raise/lower mechanism. They’ll definitely need tungsten rims on the electrode wheels though, and some kind of semi-continuous ‘blob’ dispensing mechanism.

            Your point about the water gel vapourising when the wheels get hot is a good one – another reason that this setup is almost certainly not viable. There are probably half a dozen others. Mills may be a brilliant theoretician, but he is no engineer.

          • GreenWin

            I agree that this is a clunky-at-best implementation of the BLP SF-CIHT concept. The challenge appears to be to inject the catalyzed water “fuel” into a reactor chamber hot enough to sustain the plasma. Could this be in the form of a dry steam? Will the reaction or… hydrino transition occur in vaporized water & catalyst? A solid does not seem viable to fuel a sustained plasma.

            The BLP team needs engineering that is knowledgeable in gas flow and nano-catalyst materials. Since water is the source of H2 – why not work with high temp nano-catalysts infused with H2? Gotto be a better way!

          • Fortyniner

            I think Mills may have become a little stuck on the concept of continuous recycling his ‘rehydratable’ catalyst, and this may have led him down an over-complicated track. I think he needs to dump this idea as impractical and mqassively simplify things.

            The problem is to get water, the catalyst (which is probably a hygroscopic metal salt) and an HT discharge together – something already apparently solved by Meyer’s ‘EFC’ (http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/stanleymeyer.htm) except that Meyer’s ‘catalyst’ was an HT discharge modulated at a particular frequency.

            Something similar might be tried using water injection into a heavy blind-ended tube resembling a muzzle-loaded cannon with a restriction at the ‘breech’ to contain the reaction briefly. The reaction chamber would contain electrodes plus possibly catalyst on a gauze or as a lining. Plasma would be discharged alonng the ‘bore’ and could be utilised as required.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            If I were Mills I would think about water-cooled electrodes. Distilled water could be pumped through channels inside of each electrode, so that you get two additional, separated cooling circuits.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    These videos look as if they were just demonstrations of the function of the welder. Apparently, there is neither water nor a catalyst. Thus, the title “Semicontinous Plasma Power” is somewhat irritating.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I assume that the next step will be to connect the welder with the reactor. That’s going to be interesting. A continuous arc would presumably displace most of the water. Therefore, I expect them to use a pulsed arc. If they can generate 10 kJ per shot at a frequency of 10 Hz, the reactor will produce 100 kW. That would be a convincing result, given that the output power of the welder is significantly lower.

      • The regenerating aliquots idea is a dead dog – the arc will simply destroy any structures mounted on the electrode wheels. The only possible extension of this setup would be to use a peristaltic lobe pump or reciprocating injector to continuously deposit blobs of gel ‘fuel’ onto the rim of the lower electrode wheel at some point before the arc position – like squirting blobs of toothpaste onto it at a speed matched to the rotation speed (a geared connection is the obvious mechanism).

        Lots of bright light, lots of sparks, noise and spattered mess – and rapidly eroding copper discs. Even if you could get it to work, it would have a lifetime measured in minutes. This might be extended by replacing the copper wheels with tungsten-edged versions, but there would still be no way to collect excess energy – assuming there is any to collect.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I do not think that they intend to use the copper wheels as electrodes. IMO the wheels are original parts of the welding machine. They will presumably use thick cable connections from the welder to the reactor. But surely the reactor’s electrodes will be heavily stressed. Another problem is the removal of heat. When the reactor gets too hot, all the water will vaporize. Even if the reaction could be maintained, the heat capacity of the chamber’s content would decrease drastically. I’m afraid that they will destroy a lot of equipment before it works.

          • The electrode wheels (they are as you say, a part of the seam welder) are rather integral to what Mills is attempting. They could just build the reactor around the seam drive mechanism to fully enclose it. Their approach seems to be fairly minimal and I imagine they would rather do something like that than build an entirely new and separate assembly c/w the raise/lower mechanism.

            It’s possible the drive assembly could be detached in its entirety and fed from extended busbars, which might make enclosing it easier. They’ll definitely need tungsten rims on the electrode wheels though, and some kind of semi-continuous ‘blob’ dispensing mechanism.

            Typical seam welders:
            http://image.made-in-china.com/4f0j00kesEArvdktgJ/Pneumatic-AC-Rolling-Seam-Welding-Machine-Fn-Series-.jpg
            http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/medium/Seam_Welder.jpg

            Your point about the water gel vapourising when the wheels get hot is a good one – another reason that this setup is almost certainly not viable. There are probably half a dozen others. Mills may be a brilliant theoretician, but he is no engineer.

          • optiongeek

            Keep in mind that water vapor – not liquid water – is all that needed, so elevated heat won’t necessarily be a show-stopper. Mills says he needs about 10 uL per pellet – assuming the reaction is about 100x more energetic than gasoline – that’s something like 300J or so per pellet. Mills has explained that up to 90% of this energy will be ejected as a plasma into the MHD, leaving only a few Joules per reaction that can be absorbed by the pellet as heat. The specific heat of Cu is about 390J/Kg/K, therefore a 5g pellet would only see a few degrees K of heat increase at most per reaction.
            I agree that there are *lots* of potential gotchas here. However, I’m guessing Mills’ team has already worked out the most obvious ones.
            Also – it’s not very helpful to consider this demo in isolation. The previous demo (2 hours) provided evidence that each of the reactions shown in this demo is significantly over-unity. In addition, there are numerous validation reports from credible experts that speak to the viability of the reaction. This demo is simply showing how the reaction can be scaled up from the single reaction previously shown.

          • Points taken in general – perhaps Mills will ‘come through’ yet. I’m just not very hopeful if the culmination of years of work and a very large pile of money is a few commercial welders making some very modest bangs. My own arc welder can be just as spectacular if I use a wet rod or accidentally run the arc into a patch of damp rust (LENR?!).

            One point though. Even though heat transfer will be relatively low, without active cooling of the discs, under continuous operation there would be nothing to stop them quickly getting hot enough to flash boil water-based gels coming into contact with them. This would obviously prevent delivery of water to the arc point. IMHO a radical re-think may be required.

          • optiongeek

            Very astute points, I share similar concerns about degradation of the conductive material after repeated reactions. You should see if Mills has thought about these issues. He can be prickly, but he generally gives thoughtful answers to thoughtful questions – check the BLP website for a link to the moderated Yahoo group he hangs out in. I will mention that I raised some similar concerns and he seemed relatively confident about the inter-digitating gear design. Thinking through the J/reaction, it’s starting to make sense why he needs such a low volume of H2O per reaction, and a corresponding high RPM. He’s keeping the reaction small enough to prevent damage to the material at the flashpoint.
            BTW, distilling Mills’ 20 years and $80M to a few commercial welders is a bit of a simplification. Mills is clearly working from a highly detailed map at this point. I think that’s a clear difference between Mills and any of the other players in this space.

          • GreenWin

            I agree that this is a clunky-at-best implementation of the BLP SF-CIHT concept. The challenge appears to be to inject the catalyzed water “fuel” into a reactor chamber hot enough to sustain the plasma. Could this be in the form of a dry steam? Will the reaction or… hydrino transition occur in vaporized water & catalyst? A solid does not seem viable to fuel a sustained plasma.

            The BLP team needs engineering that is knowledgeable in gas flow and nano-catalyst materials. Since water is the source of H2 – why not work with high temp nano-catalysts infused with H2? Gotto be a better way!

          • I think Mills may have become a little stuck on the concept of continuous recycling of his ‘rehydratable’ catalyst, and this might have led him down an over-complicated track. I think he needs to dump this idea as impractical (or at least put it on a back burner for a while) and massively simplify things.

            The problem is to get water, the catalyst (which is probably a hygroscopic metal salt) and an HT discharge together, repeatedly – something already apparently solved by Meyer’s ‘EFC’ (http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/stanleymeyer.htm) except that Meyer’s ‘catalyst’ was an HT discharge modulated at a particular frequency.

            Something similar might be tried using water injection into a heavy blind-ended tube resembling a muzzle-loaded cannon with a restriction at the ‘breech’ to contain the reaction briefly. The reaction chamber behind the restrictor would contain electrodes plus catalyst, possibly on a gauze or as a lining. Plasma would be discharged along the ‘bore’ and could be utilised as required.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            If I were Mills I would think about water-cooled electrodes. Distilled water could be pumped through channels inside of each electrode, so that you get two additional, separated cooling circuits.

  • Fortyniner

    I would agree with the previous commenters – this is a silly and rather pointless ‘demo’ that proves little except that a seam welder can create arc discharges through blobs of conducting material. This is not even the beginning of a viable power system, even if there had been any indication at all of excess energy coming from the process.

    The sparks flying from the intermittant arcs indicate that metal – presumably copper from the wheel electrodes – is being eroded at a significant rate, or that a solid material of some kind in the fuel ‘aliquots’ is being destroyed by the arc. Either way this seems to be a completely impractical solution for providing continuous or semicontinuous feed and ignition of the ‘fuel’.

    • Allan Shura

      The Multiplaz welder has resemblance to some concepts from Stanley Meyer’s prior art.

  • I agree with the previous commenters – this is a silly and rather pointless ‘demo’ that proves little except that a seam welder can create arc discharges through blobs of conductive material. This is not even the beginning of a viable power system, even if there had been any indication at all of excess energy coming from the process, which there wasn’t.

    The sparks flying from the intermittant arcs indicate that either the copper from the wheel electrodes is being eroded at a significant rate, or that a solid material of some kind in the fuel ‘aliquots’ stuck to the rim of the lower wheel is being destroyed by the arc, meaning that there is unlikely to be much left to ‘regenerate’. Either way this seems to be a completely impractical solution for providing continuous or semicontinuous feed and ignition of the fuel.

    If we assume that there is anything at all to Mills’ theories then he needs to move to the HT ‘ignition’ of water injected into a cavity in the presence of catalyst, asap (i.e., as in Stanley Meyer’s ‘water fuel cell’). Minor modifications to commercial welders are not going anywhere, and are rather cringe-worthy in the light of recent claims.

    • Allan Shura

      The Multiplaz welder has resemblance to some concepts from Stanley Meyer’s prior art.

  • jonnyb

    A joke? Rossi, Santilli and the others must be splitting their sides. I just hope that this is a sub-diffuse to hide what Mills is really doing.

    • Fortyniner

      A better subterfuge if you have little to show is just to keep quiet.

      • Jonnyb

        Yes, sorry for my poor English here. How much has Mills spent? Seems little to show, he must have more?

        • Fortyniner

          If he had, I’m sure he would have shown it at the recent investor demo. I think the latest video is just a belated attempt to show something that looks more like the proposed plasma reactor.

      • Fortyniner

        Points taken in general – perhaps Mills will ‘come through’ yet. I’m just not very hopeful if the culmination of years or work and a very large pile of money is a few commercial welders making some very modest bangs. My own arc welder is much more spectacular if I accidentally use a wet rod or try to weld damp rust (LENR?!).

        One point though Even though heat transfer will be relatively low, without active cooling of the discs in continuous operating conditions there would be nothing to stop them quickly getting hot enough to flash boil water-based gels coming into contact with them, so preventing delivery to the arc point. IMHO a radical rethink may be required.

        • optiongeek

          Very astute points, I share similar concerns about degradation of the conductive material after repeated reactions. You should see if Mills has thought about these issues. He can be prickly, but he generally gives thoughtful answers to thoughtful questions – check the BLP website for a link to the moderated Yahoo group he hangs out in. I will mention that I raised some similar concerns and he seemed relatively confident about the inter-digitating gear design. Thinking through the J/reaction, it’s starting to make sense why he needs such a low volume of H2O per reaction, and a corresponding high RPM. He’s keeping the reaction small enough to prevent damage to the material at the flashpoint.
          BTW, distilling Mills’ 20 years and $80M to a few commercial welders is a bit of a simplification. Mills is clearly working from a highly detailed map at this point. I think that’s a clear difference between Mills and any of the other players in this space.

  • jonnyb

    A joke? Rossi, Santilli and the others must be splitting their sides. I just hope that this is a sub-diffuse to hide what Mills is really doing.

    • A better subterfuge if you have little to show is just to keep quiet.

      • Jonnyb

        Yes, sorry for my poor English here. How much has Mills spent? Seems little to show, he must have more?

        • If he had, I’m sure he would have shown it at the recent investor demo. I think the latest video is just a belated attempt to show something that looks a little more like the proposed plasma reactor.

  • Fortyniner

    Not that I for one am letting the latter comment influence my opinions of course!

  • Morgan

    why did they post this? this is better to watch – here is plasma in the air – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS-npfVuY

    • bachcole

      It will never fly. If human beings were supposed to see 3D images, God would have given us eyes. It is an impossibility. They will never make it safe. This is pathological science. This is pseudo-science. When they can heat my cup of entertainment and then heat another cup of entertainment, and I can watch NetFlix with it, then I will believe it.

  • nickec

    To balance other views already expressed, may I offer another perspective? While I cannot vouch for Mills, I am impressed that the computer generated image of the device he claimed could be quickly built, is in part, realized in the videos. Gears turn, fuel appears to set off. This might demonstrate that he and his team will quickly build precisely what the computer generated image depicted. More power to them. Let us hope they succeed.

  • Mark Coffman

    Looks just like welding to me, sparks fly – metal sparks. Needed: Material dimensional stability at extreme power levels.
    …Back to drawing board.

  • Hydrinowatcher

    This demo with the seam welder must be taken in context. It was a quick and dirty video of a quick and dirty experiment with a recently-received piece of equipment, to keep friends and collaborators (contracters) of BLP up to date. It is not meant to prove anything to anyone who does not already understand what is going on. BLP will of course run into speed bumps; this is a totally new industry brewing. What BLP is shooting for is so awesome, that even if they miss by 3 orders of magnitude the outcome will still be impressive. I think Mills is mostly interested in the science. Commercialization would be useful for funding more science and for convincing skeptics that the new science is real. If it is indeed real, then the world is going to change a lot.

  • Allan Shura

    There is always continuous or semi continuous plasma generated in many forms of welding.