Is There Enough Nickel? (Pierre)

Here’s a post by Pierre on this thread who is posing a question that might be interesting to readers here.

Not sure if my question was answered, regarding is there enough nickel around to use ecats to replace oil. Would love it to be true through. Need to see the right math.

Seems reasonable that 10 billion people would need 1 billion ecats for all their power needs, and how many grams would these ecats need? We would need to dig it all out of the ground, transport it, etc….I mean, if I need a kilogram to power my lifetime, the. We need 10 billion kilograms, or rather 100 billion to cover several generations?

Nickel is finite and we aren’t going into space to get it.

Is there really 100 billion kilograms of nickel readily available on the planet?

  • Pekka Janhunen

    The Lugano test produced about 5e9 J of energy out of 1 gram of nickel (roughly). Of course, it’s a lower limit since the experiment was still running when it was interrupted. I don’t know how large the mineable reserves of nickel are, but the largest metal asteroid, Psyche, has 2e19 kg of material which is thought to be mostly iron and nickel. If one assumes that 10% of it is nickel, then the mass of Psyche corresponds to at least 1e31 J of energy, which is equivalent to running 100 TW of power for 3 billion years (the present global power consumption is roughly 20 TW).

    • pelgrim108

      Lets hugely underestimate that and say: 1 asteroid can do for the first million years. After that our autonomous robots will mine the rest of the universe.

  • Ged

    Nickel is the fifth most abundant element on Earth. We currently make around two billion kilograms a year because of low demand, globally. It is also very common in asteroids and other rocky bodies, meaning there’s plenty to mine abroad.

  • Warthog

    “Nickel is finite and we aren’t going into space to get it.”

    Why would you think this?? With the additional energy available from “earth-sourced” nickel, easy access to space will drop in cost hugely (economics of continuous thrust vs. “burn hard and coast”).
    For the rest, see “nickel-iron meteorite”.

    • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

      True. There are some initiatives already for mining asteroids. E.g:
      In don’t see any problem with mining asteroids once we have the means to go there and back. We could even bring some asteroids in orbit around the earth / moon. It may sound like science fiction, but in reality we are near in doing so.

      • bachcole

        Only fuel is stopping us from doing this. Even the shielding from cosmic rays is a non-problem once we have the right fuel.

  • Donk970

    Two things to consider here. One is that the nickel isn’t being consumed but rather transmuted into a more stable isotope of nickel or copper. The nickel is still there. The second is that world wide yearly production of nickel is on the order of a billion kg. Nickel is very common and isn’t being destroyed in the reactor.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      According to the MS data, the mass of the nickel even slightly increases (see LENR G’s table at ). Since the isotopic composition is irrelevant for most purposes, the nickel from the ash could be reused by other branches of industry. Therefore, there should be no significant additional demand below the line.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      Yes, I most certainly hope that nickel while an important ingredient is not really being consumed. I mean we purchase a stove made of metal and the “consumable” is natural gas, propane or whatever. One could “argue” that these stoves still represent a consuming of metal, but as such the metal is not a fuel.

      There is some “confusing” as to the recent report that nickel may well be consumed and thus perhaps not able to be re-processed. (Rossi I think is “assuming” such metal can be re-cycled, but I not so sure after looking at the recent report).

      However, I am holding out on the view that nickel is NOT the fuel being consumed until we learn more. I would much prefer the “main” consumable is hydrogen, since then such devices likely could run for years without needing anything more then say hydrogen.

      And while I suspect we have plenty of nickel to go around, it is mined and traded like most major industrial metals. So be it copper, oil or nickel, such products are traded and subject to rather “large” cartels and trading of the substance.

      If the nickel is NOT being consumed, and can be re-cycled, then this is not a worry. If nickel is in fact trans mutated and NOT able to be re-cycled, then we likely have enough, but nickel thus would become the new oil of the future so to speak.
      You might be able to re-cycle the trans mutated nickel, but such a re-cycling process would require the energy that was released in the first place to restore that nickel for use again.

      Albert k

      • Donk970

        In this test Ni58 and Ni60 were transmuted to Ni62. Ni62 is still nickel and perfectly usable for anything that nickel is used for. In other tests that Rossi has done the Ni is being transmuted to Cu which is even more valuable and useful than the nickel. On top of that, the amount of nickel that would be used every year if you were generating all of the worlds electricity is less than what gets thrown away or lost every year. This just isn’t an issue. Separating the nickel from other metals and non-metals is the same chemical process as separating nickel from nickel ore so, no, you would not be using anything remotely as much as the energy released by “burning” the nickel in the reactor.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          Not claiming that separation would cost the same energy, I am claiming that transmuting those nickel isotope back to their original values would cost the same energy (a rather VERY different claim).

          However, several here have pointed out that this nickel while perhaps not re-usable in an e-cat, would MOST certainly be useable for the “general” nickel industry. So in effect, much like how the photography industry re-used silver, we are NOT burning or destroying nickel and as such this nickel can most certainly be returned to the “general” nickel industry.

          However this could suggest that nickel of a particular isotope could be RATHER valuable, and steps to prevent “mixing” or contamination of the general nickel industry with e-cat nickel could over time become a problem. As I stated, it may be too soon to make this conclusion, but the ramifications of this issue are less then perfect. So the fact that you not burning nickel but cannot re-use such nickel in the e-cat really amounts to the same thing for us LENR folks. I don’t care about “general” nickel, but only nickel that works in a e-cat.
          I think this issue is certainly manageable, but still represents a less then ideal situation.

          Albert k.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          >In other tests that Rossi has done the Ni is being transmuted to Cu

          The above is NOT certain and even Rossi admitted that the Cu was likely due to contamination and not transmutation. We need more information on this issue – the latest test did not show Cu. So we have a test and admission by Rossi that Cu is not necessary being produced here.

  • LilyLover

    •Nickel is regenerated per Dr. Rossi.
    •The key to everything seems to be
    nascencey of Hydrogen atoms and their ability to interact with metal
    •Like induction cookers for iron pots are commercially available
    today while the ones for copper pots are in R&D, soon enought, in
    the big picture, we’ll learn to exploit hydorgen’s interaction with any
    other metal.
    •If oil can support x generations, nickel can definitely support 100x to 1000x generations!!
    •If ever asteroid mining had one purpose … (Makes you wonder if the ETs used Battlestar Gallectica to subtley guide human scientists to the right way of thinking…)
    Then again Ni is not the only metal; nor is Ni-H the only type of
    •Mill’s Magic Hydrinos are still like the rainbows – he sees
    it, but cannot capture it to show you.
    The fun has just begun!

  • Omega Z

    “Yeah, What happens when it stalls on the 56th mile. How long before the elevator repairman arrives”, Says the Optimistic Pessimist…

    • mytakeis

      antigrav hover craft, get to you at UFO speed?

      • Omega Z

        Silly Me.

        I should have taken the antigrav hover craft to begin with.
        10,000 times faster.

  • pierre

    won’t ecat lithium have to compete with lithium batteries?

    • Donk970

      The E-Cat just borrows the lithium and then gives it back as a different isotope. Shouldn’t impact any other industry at all.

  • Ophelia Rump

    A nickel, in American usage, is a five-cent coin struck by the United States Mint. Composed of 75% copper and 25% nickel, the piece has been issued since 1866. The silver half dime, equal to five cents, had been issued since the 1790s.

  • Obvious

    E-Cat ash nickels would be worth considerably more. Nearly $100,000.00 each. So if you can find me some for $1.25, I’ll take as many as you can supply…
    If you had a supply of E-Cat ash nickels (by some lucky circumstance), a fun experiment would be to build a mini electrolyser from them, using lithium carbonate in the electrolyte. (Place inside shield designed to hold molten metal, surrounded by boron-rich, thick lead enclosure.)

  • bfast

    Nickel is one of the most abundant of metals. The e-cat uses shockingly little, to match the current energy from all other sources, the consumption of nickel would go up about 3%.

    Lithium? Well, I haven’t looked into lithium too closely. However, the most obvious use for lithium is in batteries. If an e-cat can be made small enough, it’ll replace most batteries.

    • Donk970

      Since the nickel is just transmuted to it’s most stable isotope Ni62 the “spent” nickel will just be extracted out and sold back into industry. So there would not be an increased demand at all. The E-Cat industry would basically borrow nickel in it’s natural form of Ni58 and Ni60 and give it back as Ni62.

  • US_Citizen71

    1 kg of nickel equals approximately 5 $2 rolls of US nickels. Just pick up six from any US bank for $12 and you should be covered in case of slight purity problems. The US produced 1,223,040,000 nickels last year using 6,115,200 kg of nickel.

    • Obvious

      That’s interesting. Those figures add up to 5 g per nickel, but U.S. “nickels” aren’t mostly nickel, they are 75% copper. (I think that the official name is “5 cent coin”. Maybe the other 4 g of nickel per “nickel” gets fed into black projects?…

      • US_Citizen71

        Yep, you are numbers four by a factor of four.

        • Obvious

          I believe the name “nickel” for the 5 cent coin is borrowed from the Canadian 5 cent piece, which was made of 99.9% nickel from 1922 to 1982 (after 1982 it became too costly, more than 5 cents to make, [and during WW2 nickel was reduced due to war needs and shortages, so lesser alloys were used]). Prior to 1945, Canadian “nickels” were 99% Ni, and after the war, they became 99.9% pure Ni.

          So the story goes, the Canadian Mint made coins of high Ni purity to show off the large nickel resources that Canada has. (See the Giant Nickel in Sudbury, Canada, a major nickel mining area). Other Canadian coins, after being debased from high silver content circa 1968, were also gradually reduced to lesser valued alloys as the price to make them relative to their face value increased. The Canadian 25 cent piece was 99.9% Ni from 1968 to 1999. The Canadian 10 cent piece was also 99.9% nickel from 1968 to 1999.

          I don’t know why the name “nickel” became associated with the 5 cent piece, but probably it is due to the fact that a quarter dollar and the disme (derived from Latin for “one tenth”) were names already associated with the other coins, and “5 cent piece” is a mouthful compared to the other names.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    VERY much agree! We just opening this “box” of technology.

    I think research will blow the doors wide open on this, and we likely not even be able to keep up with the mix of “cocktails” that people cook up. So many metals likely will work. We know nickel and palladium works now. Maybe even some forms of ceramic materials will work.

    Research will yield amazing an amazing list of possible metals or substances. I suspect you be able to purchase Eveready batteries at 7-11 that run for several years at a time.

    The “winning” formula may well not even be nickel, iron, aluminum or copper. And even silver or gold is possible if they are proven to last much longer then nickel.

    It simply too soon to pick a winning device and metal based on this technology.
    And with competing metals, the cost of such systems likely remain low and affordable.

    Albert k.

  • Donk970

    Yes, the E-Cat is just an initial glimmer of an underlying physics that will prove to be huge. This is a whole new area of physics that we have only just begun to scrape the surface of.

  • Donk970

    This is assuming that the Ni62 wont work in the E-Cat. That’s a crucial experiment to run – will the reaction go when the substrate is pure Ni62? If yes then you are looking at simply extracting the raw elements out of the ash and reforming them into new fuel substrate. If no then you are looking at selling the Ni62 to be used in industry and using natural nickel as the fuel substrate. Either way you are not loosing any nickel for other purposes.

  • Nicolas Chauvin

    It is actually 1% according to Dennis Bushnell (Chief Scientist of NASA Langley Research Center)

  • Obvious

    I sort of agree. But when the metal (melt) value of a coin exceeds its face value, it generally leads to hoarding and destroying the coins for the metal content, so they do not circulate as much. How many low denomination silver coins are still in circulation? The essentially pure nickel Canadian nickels and dimes are already scarce, and the nickel quarters are disappearing rapidly also. (I spend a lot of time in Canada, and always check my change).