It is not a question of more accurate heats of formation. They are accurate to at least three significant figures. It is a question of using the correct ones. That was not done as evidenced the the difference between Rabett’s erroneous calculated nickel hydride decomposition energy of a “Net heat of reaction per mole of H2 generated= 2*240 kJ/mol – 436 kJ/mol – 204 kJ/mol = -160 kJ/mol (an
exothermic reaction)” and the experimental result of +8.8 kJ/mole H2 [B. Baranowski, S. M. Filipek, “45 years of nickel hydride‹history and perspectives”, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 404-406, (2005), pp. 2-6.]. This post should be redacted at each site that it is posted. Presuming Rabett is really a professor, I’m sure such an
obvious and fundamental mistake would not be tolerated.
Mills says BlackLight has operated the reactor continuously for two hours and that it’s investigating a new type of fuel that yields 10 times as much energy per weight as the sodium hydroxide–doped Raney nickel. He insists the company has disclosed the experiment in detail in a paper available on its Web site, only retaining “some know-how in order to maintain our technical lead.” He says BlackLight is “open to host validators” and is “willing to supply the fuel under an academic license or commercial license.” Eventually, he contends, others will be able to make the fuel themselves.
Pilot plants projected for mid- to late 2009.
So the regular chemistry theory would have an every tougher time explaining ten times as much energy by weight as the sodium hydroxide–doped Raney nickel work.
What if Blacklight Power works in 2009 ?