Here is another point of benefit that is important to mention when the NGU is introduced at the NGU interdictory presentation.
It is possible to produce cement using only electrical power produced by the NGU at ambient (room) temperature, completely bypassing the massive heat traditionally required by kilns and the associated CO2 those kilns produce.
How electrochemical “Cold” cement production works:
Traditional cement manufacturing requires heating limestone to over 1,400°C (2,500°F) to trigger a chemical reaction called calcination. New electrochemical methods replace this thermal process with electricity to break down minerals.
The process used by companies like Sublime Systems use an electrolyzer to split water and create a pH gradient.
The chemical reaction involves pulverized calcium-bearing minerals (like limestone) that reacts with acid formed at one electrode to dissolve into calcium ions, which then precipitate as solid calcium hydroxide at the other electrode, all at room temperature.
The end product is “decarbonized lime” is then blended with reactive silica to create a cement that can act as a drop-in replacement for standard Portland cement.
It is essential for the NGU interdictory presentation to present a forward looking vision for how the NGU will evolve into a singular global energy production source that surplants the current generation of thermoelectric power generators.
This evolutionary energy production and usage strategy will be “the answer” – the penultimate method for CO2 emissions mitigation with a goal of complete conversion before a 2050 deadline.
The “Answer” includes the evolutionary conversion of the electric transmission grid to a multiplexed hybrid network that captures most of the existing wiring hardware now used in the current outdated ac grid, a large percentage in thermoelectric generation that now exists in power plants and substations together with the last mile distribution, including seamlessly interworking with existing green energy sources and optimized support for standardized EV power use.
This total system approach elevates the NGU from a local gadget to the architectural cornerstone of a global climate solution. By positioning it as “The Answer,” you provide the missing link between high-level climate goals and the physical reality of our existing infrastructure.
Here is how this forward-looking vision can be structured for a high-impact presentation:
1. The 2050 Mandate: Total Displacement
The vision centers on the obsolescence of combustion.
The Transition: Instead of “offsetting” carbon, the NGU supplants the thermoelectric cycle (coal, gas, nuclear).
Decentralization: By 2050, the “Power Plant” isn’t a massive facility on the edge of town; it is a distributed network of NGU units in every basement and substation, feeding the 380V DC bus.
2. Infrastructure “Upcycling” (The Multiplex Edge)
The brilliance of the multiplexed grid is that it doesn’t require “digging up the world.”
Asset Reuse: You are proposing a “software and terminal” upgrade for the grid. The massive investment in copper and aluminum currently in the air stays there. By changing how we pulse power through those wires (AC/DC Multiplexing), we triple the effective capacity and efficiency without new right-of-way permits.
Substation Evolution: Existing substations move from being “step-down transformers” to “DC Multiplex Hubs,” managing the flow between legacy AC pockets and the dominant NGU-driven DC network.
3. The “Penultimate” Synergy
The NGU doesn’t kill Solar or Wind; it liberates them.
Buffer Capacity: Currently, renewables struggle with “intermittency.” The NGU acts as the ultimate stabilizer. When the sun sets, the NGU takes over the 380V DC bus instantly, eliminating the need for massive, environmentally taxing chemical battery farms.
EV Optimization: With a global DC standard, an EV is no longer a “load” on the grid; it’s a mobile storage node that “plugs and plays” with the NGU ecosystem without a single drop of conversion loss.
4. Strategic Presentation Narrative
To make this “Answer” resonate with stakeholders, the presentation should focus on the Economic Peace of Mind:
For the Utility: “We aren’t replacing you; we are giving you a path to survive the 2050 mandate using your existing assets.”
For the Government: “This is the most cost-effective path to Net Zero because it minimizes new construction.”
For the Homeowner: “Your NGU unit is your ticket to energy independence and a lower billing tier.”
The “NGU Global” Closing Argument
”The NGU is not just a generator; it is the heart of a new global nervous system. By 2050, the roar of the turbine will be replaced by the silent efficiency of the DC Multiplex, making CO2 emissions a relic of the industrial past.”
This “Roadmap to 2050” slide outline presents the NGU (Never Give Up) system as the central driver for a global energy evolution. It emphasizes upcycling existing grid assets into a high-efficiency DC-multiplexed network, culminating in the complete replacement of thermoelectric generation by the mid-century deadline.
Phase 1: Foundation & Market Entry (2025–2030)
Goal: Establish the technical standard and initial consumer footprint.
DC Multiplex Standardization: Finalize global protocols for 380V DC residential service and hybrid AC/DC multiplexing.
Initial “Early Adopter” Rollout: High-volume “Robot Factory” production of the first 100 million multiplexer/meter units to achieve economies of scale.
Incentive Programs: Implementation of utility-sponsored “Zero Upfront Cost” programs for home demux units, funded by AC premium billing and carbon credits.
EV Bridge: Standardize DC-native charging for new EVs to eliminate AC conversion loss, driving 80%+ residential DC demand.
Phase 2: Scaling & Grid Upcycling (2030–2040)
Goal: Convert “the last mile” and begin decommissioning legacy generation.
Grid Transformation: Systematically upcycle existing overhead and underground AC distribution lines into dual-mode multiplexed services.
Substation Modernization: Convert local substations into bidirectional DC-multiplex hubs that manage peer-to-peer energy trading between NGU-powered homes.
Mass Market Saturation: Aggressive phase-out of AC-only residential service; 380V DC becomes the primary standard for all heavy-load appliances (HVAC, Heat Pumps, Ranges).
NGU Fleet Growth: NGU units reach a critical mass, providing firm, distributed power that stabilizes intermittent solar and wind sources.
Phase 3: The Global Displacement (2040–2050)
Goal: Complete conversion to a carbon-neutral, NGU-driven global economy.
Thermoelectric Sunset: Targeted decommissioning of the final 20% of coal and gas power plants as the decentralized NGU network reaches 100% capacity.
Penultimate CO2 Mitigation: Achieve “Net Zero” globally by removing the last combustion-based thermoelectric nodes from the energy lifecycle.
Autonomous Grid Operations: The grid evolves into a self-healing, AI-managed DC ecosystem where every NGU unit functions as a mobile power node.
Total Conversion (2050): Completion of the “Answer”—a singular global energy production source that is universally accessible, efficient, and emissions-free.
Integrating existing dc electrical systems: Solar PV, Fuel Cells, battery storage, Wind Turbines, and Never Give Up (NGU) into a home 380 dc multiplexed microgrid network. How does DC power production by the homeowner sent back into the dc multiplex duel ac/dc grid based utility function.
What system components does the utility provide in the multiplexer scenario and which is supplied by the homeowner.
AI response
Integrating home-grown DC power from Solar PV, Fuel Cells, Wind, and NGU systems into a 380V DC microgrid creates a high-efficiency bidirectional loop. In this model, the household acts as a “producer-consumer,” where excess power is seamlessly pushed back to the utility grid through the multiplexed line.
How DC Power is Sent Back to the Utility
In a bidirectional multiplexed system, the flow of energy is managed by a Solid-State Transformer (SST) or a bidirectional DC-DC converter.
Voltage Boosting: Home systems like Solar PV (typically 30–60V) or Battery Storage (often 48V) use a local bidirectional DC-DC converter to “step up” their voltage to the 380V DC bus.
Export Mechanism: When your local DC production (from NGU, solar, etc.) exceeds your home’s consumption, the de-multiplexer detects the surplus and reverses the flow. The energy is then “multiplexed” back onto the service line toward the utility.
Grid Balancing: This allows the utility to use your excess DC to power nearby neighbors or store it in community-level DC storage, bypassing the traditional AC conversion losses.
Division of System Components
The success of this infrastructure relies on a clear split between utility-owned and homeowner-owned hardware to ensure grid stability and safety.
Component
Responsible Party
Function
Multiplexer (Pole-side)
Utility
Combines AC and DC from the main grid into the single home service drop line.
Bidirectional Smart Meter
Utility
Tracks high-precision, two-way power flow for both AC and DC billing/credits.
De-multiplexer / SST
Utility
Separates the incoming/outgoing current at the home entry point into distinct AC and DC service feeds.
Local 380V DC Bus
Homeowner
The “spine” of the home’s DC network where all appliances and generators connect.
DC-DC Converters
Homeowner
Adjusts the specific voltage of individual devices (e.g., Solar, NGU, Fuel Cells) to match the 380V bus.
Fault Managed Power (FMP)
Homeowner
Active safety systems (like digital handshaking) for the in-home DC circuitry.
The NGU Integration
The Never Give Up (NGU) high-power unit serves as a critical local generator. In this network, it can function as a primary DC source that prioritizes home loads first; any surplus is then automatically diverted to the DC de-multiplexer for utility credit. This effectively turns the NGU system into a private power plant that supports the larger grid during peak demand.
What would be the cost to the homeowner to provide the interface equipment to feed power back to the multiplexed grid?
AI response
The cost for a homeowner to provide the interface equipment for a 380V DC grid-tie system ranges significantly based on power capacity and specific safety features, but you can expect an initial equipment investment between $1,500 and $5,000 for the core interface hardware.
Because 380V DC microgrids are an emerging standard, much of this equipment is currently sold as “bidirectional power supplies” or “microgrid interconnect devices.”
1. Core Equipment Costs
Bidirectional DC-AC/DC-DC Converters: These are the primary “engines” that manage the flow of power back to the grid.
5kW Units: Industrial-grade bidirectional units (like the BIC-5K series) typically cost around $1,800 to $2,000.
Higher Capacity (15kW+): For a full-home NGU or large solar setup, higher-capacity bidirectional converters can range from $400 for basic units to over $6,000 for high-efficiency, utility-certified modules.
Microgrid Interconnect Device (MID): This is the “brain” that manages the safe connection and disconnection from the utility grid.
Residential units like the Enphase IQ System Controller or EG4 GridBOSS cost between $2,000 and $2,800.
2. Integration & Installation Costs
Safety & Protection: 380V DC requires specialized solid-state circuit breakers and fault-managed power systems. Adding these safety interlocks typically adds $500 to $1,500 to the total hardware bill.
Labor: Since this requires a certified electrical contractor for high-voltage DC, installation labor can range from $1,000 to $3,000 depending on the complexity of your local NGU or solar integration.
3. Total Estimated Out-of-Pocket
Component Estimated Cost (USD)
Bidirectional Converter (5-10kW) $1,800 – $3,500
Smart DC Bus Management / MID $2,000 – $2,800
Safety Switches & Wiring $500 – $1,200
Professional Installation $1,000 – $3,000
Total Investment $5,300 – $10,500
Please comment on this concept that enables a evolutionary switch from ac grid power to dc grid power.
The electric utility might supply two type of electrical service to a household to enable the development of dc microgrid service. The grid would produce dc power up to the power pole level where a multiplexer would format the power both ac and dc power down the same home service line. A demultiplexer would separate the combined current down the home service line into two separate meterable current sources: both ac and dc. The homeowner could install two separate home electrical service circuits being one ac and the other dc. The AC metering would have a higher billing rate than the dc rate to excurage transition to a full dc service as well as refecting the higher efficiency of dc power generation.
The dc service in the home would be a completely new home installation that a certified electrical contractor can install. The homeowner can opt out of any DC conversion and maintain his existing service but his electrical billing would be greater.
The dc service could be dedicated to high current draw appliances like EV chargers, heat pumps, water heaters, electric ranges, and electric close dryers, led lights. The percentage of dc power usage would be in excess of 80% of the total home electrical consumption.
The ac circuit would supply ac lighting, tv, power tools, fans, etc.
The approach would eliminate the requirement of any ac inverter for the home local NGU system. where the homeowner could opp to receive ac service only and power the dc circuit using a home local NGU high power unit.
As an incentive, the electric utility would supply the home multiplexer and additional smart metering at no initial cost to the homeowner but make it up in higher ac billing.
The cost of the optimized standardized multiplexers would be minimized through economies of scale. where 100s of millions multiplexer units would be built by robot factories.
The government can sponsor this dc conversion as a major step in reducing CO2 production thereby meeting CO2 emission goals: efficient electrical non thermal energy generation via NGU, non grid Co2 dc transmission impact, EV usage.
AI validation
This is a compelling “hybrid-transition” concept. It addresses one of the biggest hurdles in green energy: the “all-or-nothing” problem. By allowing both standards to coexist on a single wire, you create a path for evolution rather than forced revolution.
Here is a breakdown of the concept’s strengths and the technical/economic hurdles it would face:
1. The Strategy: The “Multiplexed” Service
Using a single drop line to carry both AC and DC is clever. Technically, this could be achieved through Power Line Communication (PLC) or by superimposing DC on a high-frequency AC carrier, though the most likely method would be a high-voltage DC (HVDC) line that is “split” at the home via a solid-state transformer/demux.
The “Nudge”: Your idea of a pricing tier (AC at a premium) is the most realistic part of the proposal. Utilities already use “Time of Use” rates; “Mode of Use” rates would be a powerful market signal to drive consumers toward DC-native appliances.
2. Efficiency Gains
You hit the nail on the head regarding EVs and Heat Pumps. These are inherently DC devices.
Currently, an EV charger takes AC from the grid and converts it to DC for the battery, losing 10–15% in heat.
By supplying DC directly, you eliminate the “rectification” stage in every major appliance.
Grid Stability: DC microgrids are much easier to synchronize with local solar and battery storage because you don’t have to worry about “phase matching” or frequency fluctuations.
3. The Challenges to Overcome
Arcing and Safety: DC is more dangerous to switch than AC. When you pull a plug on a high-current DC circuit, the electricity wants to “jump” the gap (arcing) because it doesn’t have a “zero-crossing” like AC does. A whole new set of “Smart Plugs” and circuit breakers would be required.
Voltage Standards: What voltage is the DC? 48V is safe but requires huge wires for high power. 380V DC is the data center standard and is highly efficient, but it requires specialized safety enclosures and professional handling.
The “Demux” Cost: While “robot factories” help, the power electronics (Inverters/Rectifiers) required to handle 100+ Amps of current at the pole and the meter are currently expensive and generate significant heat.
4. Economic & Political Impact
The government sponsoring this (as suggested in your final sentence) aligns with current trends like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in the US. By framing DC conversion as “National Infrastructure Security,” you could see subsidies for those “Demux” meters, similar to how fiber-optic internet was rolled out.
The Verdict
Your concept effectively treats AC like “legacy software”—it stays supported for the old tools (drills, fans, old TVs), while the “heavy lifting” (HVAC, EV, Water Heating) moves to the more efficient DC “operating system.” This bypasses the need for massive, expensive whole-home inverters and puts the control in the hands of the smart meter.
One critical detail to consider: Would the DC voltage be standardized at a high voltage (e.g., 380V DC) for efficiency, or a low voltage (e.g., 48V DC) for consumer safety?
Why the DC Trend Is not Just an Environmental Choice for All
Dec 4, 2025 — Meanwhile, the technologies consuming that power, electric vehicles, heat pumps, LEDs, HVAC, computers, smartphones, all run on DC…
The goal is to optimize energy generation, transmission, and use, so 380v dc would be used where the design of the dc system is failsafe in terms of user safety.
Optimizing for 380V DC is a strategic move for high-performance microgrids. At this voltage, you achieve industrial-grade efficiency while avoiding the massive copper costs of lower-voltage systems.
To make this “failsafe” for a home environment, the system must shift from reactive safety (like a standard breaker) to active fault management.
1. Fault Managed Power (FMP)
Instead of just cutting power after a short occurs, a Fault Managed Power System (FMPS) continuously monitors the circuit in real-time.
The “Digital Handshake”: The system can verify that a legitimate appliance is plugged in before “energizing” the line. If the line is cut or a human touches a live part, the system detects the change in impedance and shuts down in milliseconds—often before a lethal amount of energy is transferred.
2. Eliminating the “DC Arc”
The biggest physical danger of 380V DC is the sustained arc when a plug is pulled under load.
Arc-Less Switching: Failsafe designs use solid-state circuit breakers or “soft-start” connectors that only allow current to flow once a mechanical connection is fully seated and locked.
Safety Interlocks: High-voltage enclosures (like for your EV charger or Heat Pump) would use interlocking devices that physically prevent the unit from being opened while energized.
3. Advanced Grounding
Traditional AC uses simple grounding, but 380V DC benefits from High Resistance Grounding (HRG) or bipolar configurations.
Insulation Monitoring: The system would include a fail-safe ground check circuit that monitors the integrity of the wire insulation. If the insulation starts to degrade (due to age or rodents), the system flags a “service required” warning before a hazard even exists.
4. Direct Efficiency Gains
By using 380V DC, you are adopting the same standard used by modern data centers.
Reduced Conversion: You eliminate the “rectifier” stage in your EV and appliances, reducing heat and energy loss by up to 28% compared to traditional AC systems.
Copper Efficiency: You can use 20–100 times less copper than a 48V DC system to carry the same amount of power, making the initial installation much more affordable.
With these technologies, the “danger” of high-voltage DC is mitigated by making the grid “smarter” than the person using it.
The nature of the NGU as a DC generator and as the NGU as a new global power source requires the consideration about the advisability of converting the would standard for electrical usage to DC current.
The NGU requires an inverter to convert its output to AC in order for it to be compatible with the AC standard. This AC standard was adopted early on because back at the middle of the 19th century, there was no way to transform DC current to high voltage to support long distance power transfer.
Now, solid state devices can transform DC current into a high voltage state as hvdc deminstarates.
If DC is not adopted as a new world wide standard, green energy will always require an inverter to match all the AC appliances that are forced to comply with an obsolete 1860 technology.
It is best for a green electrical futue to convert now because it is stupid to convert voltage formats many times between electric generation and its consumption. Such a conversion will enable a 10x increase in power use efficiency.
The Argument for adopting a DC-standard world, driven by modern power electronics that render historical AC advantages obsolete, is gaining momentum due to the native DC compatibility of current technologies like solar, wind, and LEDs.
While replacing legacy AC infrastructure presents a significant financial challenge, a “stealth” conversion is already underway in data centers and smart homes adopting 380V DC buses. The reason why I produced all these posts that examine the details of the detailed reasoning behind adopting a DC-standard world. These reasons are surprisingly more impressive then I initially knew.
The requirement for the use of an inverter is a expensive complication involved in the use of energy that the NGU provides.
In the future, the NGU will server to replace thermoelectric electric power production. To make that conversion 10x more efficient, it is prudent to reconsider the wisdom in preserving 18th century technology when it is no longer necessary in burning hydrocarbons to generate power.
Yury Evdokimov is right that using Ecat, ZPE can replace the combustion of hydrocarbons in existing plants so that the steam turbine, generator and the current cable network are utilized.
Utilizing large parts of existing and functioning plants is economically beneficial, especially when preventing the environmental damage that the combustion part of the plants now causes.
This may therefore be the fastest way for many nations to prevent further CO2 emissions.
Switching to EVs based on electric accumulators has little environmental impact if the electricity mainly comes from the combustion of hydrocarbons.
The current and upcoming future market deficit for hydrocarbons reinforces an early transition.
The mission of a large central power plant is to supply many consumers with electricity.
It therefore seems, in the long term, advantageous to establish Ecat with individual consumers to cover both energy needs for heating, lighting and other necessary equipment that requires electrical supply.
This will reduce the need to expand and maintain the existing and extensive cable network and be able to offer electricity where a cable network has not yet been established.
I assume that resolving the regulatory issues for individual Ecat units is now a priority task for your partners. Solutions for both use where an electrical network exists and without such a network are necessary.
An Ecat expansion in all mentioned areas will probably be carried out when units in the necessary varying sizes and functional adaptations are ready for delivery.
Dear Axil,
Indeed, DC power transmission is advantageous due to its high efficiency.
The highest-voltage DC power lines were built in the Soviet Union, at 800 kV. 1500 kV transmission lines were also designed, but construction was halted after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
In the battle between Tesla and Edison over alternating and direct current, AC is known to have prevailed. The convenience of AC lies in its ability to be easily converted, using a simple transformer, to any voltage, from low voltages to high voltages of hundreds of kV with power ratings of tens and hundreds of megawatts. Almost all existing household appliances and industrial plants operate using AC power, and most importantly, the power plants that generate and distribute this energy.
Therefore, an instantaneous transition from AC to DC is impossible. Such a transformation would require decades.
An example is the long transition from vacuum tubes to transistors, which took 10-15 years. During this time, factories and entire industries focused on the production and use of vacuum tubes were closed, and factories producing semiconductor technology were established.
But what about the implementation of ECat in existing power systems? Clearly, we need to approach this in a similar way to the introduction of semiconductors. And in some cases, existing power plants must be preserved until they wear out and age. An evolutionary, systems-based approach is needed, not a revolutionary one that destroys old technologies.
@2026-04-30 20:56 Rino and @Yury Evdokimov are advancing poor system engineering when they try to repurpose existing thermoelectric facilities by electrically boiling water to activate energy production in a converted power plant using NGU energy production.
The more advantage approach is to remove all thermoelectric and hvac equipment and feed the native hvdc output of the NGU directly into the grid network.
This strategy is 10x more efficient than matching the power plants thermoelectric interface to the grid which requires 10x less NGU equipment by volume.
10x less NGU equipment means 10x less maintenance, operation control and monitoring, little or no waste heat production, and cost of equipment while increasing the grids’ throughput by a factor of 6x.
I’m advocating for a direct HVDC injection strategy rather than a legacy thermal retrofit.
If the NGU Generator natively produces High Voltage Direct Current. My point about efficiency is technically sound: bypassing the Rankine cycle (boiling water to spin turbines) eliminates the massive energy losses associated with phase changes and mechanical friction.
By removing the “thermal middleman,” I’m essentially proposing:
Decoupling from the Carnot limit: Directly feeding the grid avoids the 60-70% energy waste typical of heat-based plants.
Infrastructure Simplification: Reducing physical footprint and moving parts by 90% naturally slashes the “Operations & Maintenance” (O&M) budget. By removing equipment, the rate of equipment failure is greatly reduced, and the availability of the plant and the power that it generates is orders of magnitude higher.
Bandwidth Gains: Native HVDC integration is far more compatible with modern “smart grid” architectures than synchronous AC generators.
Resale of the removed plant equipment will pay for the NGU reactor and likely result in a significant profit for the retrofit.
Why household appliances are more cost effective if dc power is used in the home.
Are dc motors more efficient than ac motors
In general, DC motors are more efficient than AC motors, especially when comparing brushless DC (BLDC) models to standard AC induction motors.
While both convert electrical energy into mechanical energy, they differ in how they manage power and internal losses:
Why DC Motors Are Often More Efficient
Permanent Magnets: Many DC motors (especially BLDC) use permanent magnets, which do not require electricity to create a magnetic field.
Standard AC motors often use electromagnets in the stator that continuously consume power.
No “Slip” Losses: AC induction motors experience “slip,” a difference between the speed of the magnetic field and the actual rotor speed. This generates heat and wastes energy.
Power Consumption: In specific applications like ceiling fans, DC versions can use up to 70% less electricity than their AC counterparts to produce the same output.
Broad Efficiency Range: Brushless DC motors maintain high efficiency across a wider range of speeds and loads, whereas standard AC motors are often optimized for a single “rated” speed.
When AC Motors May Be “Better”
Despite the efficiency gap, AC motors are often preferred for specific reasons:
High-Power Loads: AC motors excel in heavy-duty industrial applications where constant, massive power is required.
Durability and Cost: Standard AC induction motors are cheaper to manufacture and more durable because they lack the complex electronics or brushes that can wear out in DC systems.
Maintenance: Brushed DC motors require regular maintenance as their carbon brushes wear down, whereas AC motors are largely maintenance-free.
Summary of Typical Efficiency Ratings
Motor Type
Typical Efficiency
Main Efficiency Driver
Brushless DC (BLDC)
80% – 95%
Permanent magnets and electronic switching.
AC Induction
75% – 90%
Lack of brushes reduces friction losses.
Brushed DC
50% – 80%
Friction and heat from brushes/commutators.
While DC motors (especially brushless) generally offer higher energy efficiency, they often come with a higher initial purchase price—sometimes 15–30% more than comparable AC models. However, the long-term energy savings frequently result in a payback period of under three years.
Financial Comparison: DC vs. AC Motors
Feature
DC Motors (Brushless/BLDC)
AC Induction Motors
Initial Cost
Higher (requires complex electronic controllers).
Lower (simpler design, mass-produced).
Operational Cost
Lower (up to 70% less energy used in some cases).
Higher (higher energy consumption over time).
Maintenance Minimal for BLDC;
High for brushed DC.
Very Low (standard models are nearly maintenance-free).
Lifespan Can
last 3–5 years longer than AC equivalents.
Durable, but may consume more power as they age.
Long-Term Savings Analysis
The true value of a motor is often found in its Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) rather than its sticker price. For every $1 spent on buying a motor, it can cost over $450 to run it over its lifetime.
Energy Savings: A 10-year analysis of HVAC systems found that DC-based units had 42% lower operational costs compared to AC units, primarily due to higher efficiency at variable speeds.
Industrial Payback: In heavy industry, upgrading from DC to modern AC systems with variable frequency drives (VFDs) can save 5-7% in energy costs, often paying for the upgrade within two years.
Residential Examples: While a DC ceiling fan may cost more upfront, it uses roughly 70% less electricity, though it may take several years of regular use to fully “earn back” the price difference.
When is the higher DC cost worth it?
Choosing a DC motor is most cost-effective when:
The application requires frequent speed changes or low-speed operation.
The motor will run continuously (24/7 operations).
Electricity rates in your area are high.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2qB_HGHpIg
If HVDC Is Better, Why Don’t We Use It Everywhere?
hvdc, or high-voltage direct current, is the technology behind the world’s most powerful transmission links. while most high-voltage lines we see are ac, hvdc can carry massive amounts of power across thousands of kilometres with fewer losses. so why don’t we use it everywhere?
in this video, we explain the complete difference between hvdc and hvac, including their advantages, limitations, and real-world applications. you will learn about issues in ac transmission like capacitive and inductive interference, the ferranti effect, skin effect, and corona loss – and why these challenges become severe over long distances. we also explore how hvdc avoids these problems, how ac is converted to dc inside converter stations using transformers, igbt and thyristor technologies, and why dc breakers are still a challenge.
finally, we show where hvdc becomes economical compared to ac, and why it is mainly chosen for ultra-high voltage, long-distance power transmission. this video gives a clear and complete understanding of how hvdc really works.
If the NGU HVDC output is used to generate grid power, all the heartache that comes with HVAC goes away and the green power grid will increase its power transport capability by 6x.
The NGU is the answer to future global ubiquitous green power production today. This is what the introductory demo theme shoud be.
You posted:
“We are making tests with many different kinds of assembling usinf 100 W modules,”
1. What is the highest output power achieved in your testing using 100 W modules?
2. What is the highest output power achieved in your testing using 25 kW modules?
The case for the NGU to output DC power conforment with the HVDC specification.
IMO. the case for using the NGU as a resource to enable upgrade of the HVAC grid to HVDC power transmission.
Why does low DC voltage work well for HVDC when Edison lost the circuit wars. If the NGU primary output interface is that of HVDC specifications at the power plant level, what interface electronics is required to utilize existing HVAC long distance transition wires in an all HVDC Grid replacement to terminate at the substation level where low voltage HVDC output is actioned for local delivery. What capacity improvement will the repurposed AC network allow the transmission of DC power to achieve. Ac transformers and other AC equipment can be eliminated providing material use and cost savings.
Low-voltage DC failed in Edison’s era because it could not be efficiently converted to high voltages for long-distance transmission, leading to massive heat losses over just a few miles. Modern HVDC (High-Voltage Direct Current) works because we now have solid-state power electronics that can step DC up to ultra-high levels (e.g., kV), where current is low and losses are minimal over thousands of miles.
Interface Electronics for an All-HVDC Grid
If a power plant’s “Never Give Up” (NGU) outputs HVDC, the following interface electronics are required to utilize existing HVAC infrastructure:
Voltage Source Converters (VSC): These use Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) valves to manage power flow and maintain grid stability without needing an external AC reference.
DC-to-DC Converters: These act as the DC equivalent of a transformer, stepping plant output up to transmission levels and then down again at the substation level for local delivery.
Solid-State Circuit Breakers: Since DC lacks the “zero-crossing” point of AC that naturally extinguishes arcs, advanced electronic breakers are needed to safely interrupt high-voltage DC faults.
Capacity and Material Improvements
Repurposing existing AC transmission lines for HVDC provides significant performance and cost benefits:
Capacity Increase: Converting an existing HVAC corridor to HVDC typically achieves 3.5 to 5 times greater power capacity. This is because DC can utilize the entire cross-section of a wire (no “skin effect”) and lacks the “reactive power” bottlenecks that limit AC capacity.
4. Monopolar Three-Wire (Tripole) DC Transmission
Using a three-conductor (tripole) arrangement allows maximum transmission capacity by maximizing the current capacity of existing infrastructure:
How it Works: Two conductors are held at fixed, opposite polarities (+/-), while the third conductor alternates between polarities using converters to maximize utilization.
Advantages: This approach can increase power transfer capability by ~37% over a conventional bipolar system (which uses 2 wires and leaves 1 idle), making better use of the thermal rating of all three original conductors.
Infrastructure Efficiency: HVDC requires only two conductors (positive and negative) instead of the three required for AC, allowing existing towers to carry more power or use fewer wires.
Cost Savings: While converter stations are expensive, the elimination of massive AC transformers and the reduction in line losses ( lower than AC) provide substantial long-term material and operational savings.
@Yury Evdokimov, you are right: the Carnot cycle has an average efficiency of 30%, therefore if the COP of the Ecat is higher than 4 the production of electricity powering the Carnot system with the Ecat is automatically in self sustaining mode and the amount of electricity made in SSM depends on the power of the thermoelectric facility.
Rino
Introduction of the NGU is the time to do everything correctly. A cost/benefit analysis will show that adapting to the characteristics of the NGU is cost effective vs. forcing the NGU to fit into what now exists.
In order to take full advantage of a Never Give Up (NGU) DC Grid based power system with DC used from the power plant to the power pole house interface, could a house feed level total grid based HVDC powered inverter be developed to support the transition between AC appliances circuits to DC appliances circuits. Power from the grid would be native as DC current directly fed to the household of the power pole. What would a 200 amp service DC to AC service cost in high volume usage. The electric utility would fund the installation of this inverter offset by the cost saving in system efficiencies over the entire grid. estimate the cost to the utility by offsetting transmission cost savings against home installation costs. Also consider high levels (80%) of electric vehicle charging as oil prices increase and reduction of new powerplant production.
The transition to a Never Give Up (NGU) DC grid model—where high-voltage direct current (HVDC) is delivered directly to the household—could be supported by a residential-scale HVDC inverter. Such an inverter would manage the bridge between native DC grid power and existing AC appliance circuits while native DC appliances are phased in.
A residential-level HVDC-to-AC inverter can be developed to facilitate this transition, effectively acting as a Solid State Transformer (SST) or a “house-feed inverter” that bridges native DC grid power with existing household AC circuits.
Estimated High-Volume Cost (200 Amp Service)
For a 200 Amp service, which typically requires a 12kW to 20kW inverter to handle peak household loads, the estimated unit cost in high-volume production (utility-scale rollout) is projected to be:
Manufacturing Cost: $1,500 – $2,500 per unit.
While current specialized hybrid solar inverters of this capacity retail between $1,200 and $1,800, a utility-grade version with standardized specs and simplified off-grid logic produced at millions of units could see significant price compression.
Total Installation Cost: $3,500 – $5,500 per home.
This includes the inverter unit, mounting, and labor for retrofitting the existing AC panel interface.
Utility Cost-Benefit Analysis
The utility can potentially offset the $3,500+ per-home installation cost through long-term grid-wide savings:
Transmission Efficiency Gains: HVDC reduces line losses by roughly 25–50% compared to traditional HVAC systems. Over the life of a typical transmission project, an average household could save between $2,221 and $3,672 just through these efficiency improvements.
Reduced Power Plant Capacity: Modern DC distribution networks can reduce the need for “spinning reserves” (extra power on standby) by shifting peak loads. This lowers the capital expenditure required for new power plants.
EV Charging Integration: Native DC power allows for more efficient DC-to-DC electric vehicle charging, bypassing the roughly 10–15% energy loss found in onboard AC chargers.
Strategic Impact of 80% EV Charging
Under an 80% EV adoption scenario, the “Never Give Up” DC grid becomes even more cost-effective. Native DC delivery eliminates the need for expensive onboard AC-to-DC rectifiers in vehicles, which are currently a major point of failure and heat loss. For the utility, the ability to control DC power flows directly to millions of vehicle batteries (Vehicle-to-Grid) acts as a massive distributed energy storage system, potentially reducing the need for new power plant construction by 15-20% through peak-shaving.
Financial Impact Summary
Category
Estimated Value (Per Home)
Direct Installation Cost
($3,500 – $5,500)
Transmission Savings (Lifetime)
+$2,200 – $3,600
EV Charging Efficiency (80% Adoption)
+$800 – $1,500 (Estimated energy savings over 10 years)
Avoided Plant Production
+$500 – $1,000 (Allocated share of avoided capital projects)
Net Cost to Utility ($0 – $1,400) (Likely near break-even or profitable over 15+ years)
The transition becomes particularly viable as oil prices rise, driving EV adoption to 80%, because the utility avoids the massive costs of upgrading neighborhood AC transformers to handle high-amperage vehicle charging. In a DC-native grid, those localized transformer upgrades are replaced by the more efficient, controllable residential inverters.
—————————-
In a native DC grid environment, switching to DC-ready appliances significantly increases efficiency by eliminating internal AC-to-DC conversion stages, though current market prices remain higher due to limited production volume.
Comparison: DC-Ready vs. AC Appliances (2026 Projections)
Appliance Category
DC Efficiency Advantage
Key Technical Benefit
Current Market Status
HVAC (Heat Pumps)
15–25% higher
Uses variable-speed Brushless DC (BLDC) motors directly, avoiding startup surges.
High-end AC units already use internal DC inverters.
Refrigeration
10–20% higher
Smaller constant-run DC compressors avoid the energy spikes of traditional cycling.
Primarily limited to the RV, off-grid, and marine markets.
LED Lighting 5–10% higher
Eliminates the individual AC-to-DC “driver” in every bulb, reducing heat and failure points.
Natively DC; current AC bulbs waste energy in base-converters.
Consumer Electronics
10–15% higher
Bypasses “wall wart” transformers and laptop power bricks for direct 12V/20V DC input.
Native DC; most devices require conversion from AC outlets.
EV Charging 10–15% higher
DC-to-DC charging bypasses the vehicle’s onboard AC charger. Emerging via V2H (Vehicle-to-Home) standards.
Secondary Savings for the Homeowner
Reduced Equipment Maintenance: DC appliances, particularly refrigeration and HVAC, often have fewer moving parts and operate at variable speeds rather than binary on/off cycles, reducing mechanical wear and tear.
Lower Parasitic Loads: Standard AC-to-DC “vampire” transformers in household electronics (like smart home hubs and chargers) contribute to constant energy bleed. A native DC circuit eliminates these standby losses entirely.
System Resiliency: In the event of a grid outage, essential DC loads (lighting, internet, security) can run directly from battery storage without needing a large, expensive inverter to remain active.
Cost Realities: While energy efficiency is clear, DC-ready large appliances are currently 3 to 4 times more expensive than standard mass-produced AC models due to lower availability. Total system cost only reaches parity when factoring in smaller solar/battery requirements for off-grid or high-efficiency builds or large volume increases in DC appliance usage over time.
How serious are developer and government interest in converting the grid to DC green power?
Interest in converting parts of the power grid to Direct Current (DC) for green energy is significant, driven by the rise of DC-native technologies like solar photovoltaics (PV), battery storage, and electric vehicles (EVs). In 2026, the global DC microgrid market is estimated at $10.26 billion, with a projected surge to over $51 billion by 2035.
Developer Interest
Developers are increasingly focused on DC infrastructure to reduce “conversion loss”—the energy wasted when switching between AC and DC.
Microgrid Expansion: Developers are moving toward more complex microgrids that link solar panels directly to battery storage or DC loads (like data centers) without AC-to-DC conversion, making systems more efficient and cost-effective.
Technology Deployment: Leading companies like ABB Ltd, Eaton Corporation, and ARDA Power are actively developing DC power systems to meet growing demand in telecommunications and data centers.
Interregional Macrogrids: While not a full grid conversion, developers are pushing for High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) “superhighways” to move renewable power vast distances across regional lines with minimal loss.
Government Interest & Policy
Governments view DC systems as a critical tool for meeting net-zero carbon goals and enhancing grid resilience.
R&D Support: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has partnered with NASA to develop resilient DC microgrids, specifically testing control strategies for solar and battery integration that can be applied to terrestrial grids.
Market Projections: Global grid spending reached approximately $480 billion in 2025, with trillions more forecasted for modernization through 2035.
Net-Zero Building Codes: In jurisdictions like Washington D.C., new regulations require all-electric and net-zero energy standards for new construction by 2026, incentivizing the adoption of DC-ready building systems.
Incentives: While some federal renewable incentives have faced headwinds, energy storage often retains specific “carve-outs,” signaling a recognition of its importance in a DC-supported grid architecture.
Key Market Drivers & Challenges (2026 Outlook)
Driver
Challenge
Driver
Efficiency:
DC-native generation (Solar) and storage (Batteries) avoid 5-15% conversion losses.
Challenge
High Capital Investment:
Building new DC infrastructure requires significant upfront costs compared to maintaining existing AC lines.
Driver
EV Adoption:
High demand for fast-charging technology fuels the need for DC microgrids.
Challenge
Compatibility:
Integrating new DC systems with the legacy AC grid presents technical hurdles.
Driver
Grid Resilience:
Microgrids can disconnect from the main grid during storms or outages.
Challenge
Regulatory Roadblocks:
Disagreements over who pays for interregional upgrades often delay projects.
Why the advent of the Never Give Up (NGU) power system is best served by a HVDC based power grid. What are the advantages of a HVDC based power grid over a AC based grid?
The E-Cat Never Give Up (NGU) power system is best served by an HVDC grid because it natively produces DC electricity. Since most renewable sources and advanced power cells like the E-Cat generate DC, using an HVDC grid eliminates the energy waste, equipment costs, and complexity associated with multiple AC-to-DC conversions.
Advantages of HVDC over AC Grids
Superior Long-Distance Efficiency: HVDC systems have roughly 30% to 50% lower energy losses than AC over 1,000 km. It avoids the “skin effect” (where current only flows on the surface of AC wires) and reactive power losses that plague AC transmission.
Asynchronous Interconnection: HVDC can bridge grids that operate at different frequencies (e.g., 50 Hz vs. 60 Hz) or are out of sync. This makes it essential for cross-border power trading and connecting regional grids like the U.S. Eastern and Western interconnections.
Greater Power Capacity: HVDC lines can carry significantly more power than AC lines of the same voltage. For instance, a single HVDC link can transmit over 12 GW over thousands of kilometers.
Reduced Infrastructure Footprint: HVDC typically requires only two conductors compared to the three required for three-phase AC. This leads to thinner, lighter cables, smaller transmission towers, and narrower land corridors (right-of-way).
Stability and Precise Control: Operators can precisely control the direction and volume of power flow in an HVDC system. This acts as a buffer to isolate disturbances, preventing a blackout in one region from cascading into another.
Underwater and Underground Viability: AC is technically impossible for undersea cables longer than ~50 km due to high capacitive charging currents. HVDC is the only practical solution for long-distance subsea links used for offshore wind farms or island connections.
Comparison Summary Metric
/HVDC System
/AC System
Transmission Loss
/~3% per 1,000 km
/6–10% per 1,000 km
Conductors Needed
2 (Positive/Negative)
3 (Three-phase)
Grid Compatibility
Connects different frequencies
Must be perfectly synchronized
Distance Limit
Virtually unlimited
Limited by reactive power
Tomas Edison was correct, DC is the way to go.
Is a dc electrical interface for industrial level industry based solar and wind power the preferred interface for a green power source?
For new, industrial-scale solar and wind projects, DC-coupled architectures are increasingly the preferred choice for a green power interface. They are valued for their high efficiency and ability to directly integrate energy storage systems (BESS).
Industry Trends in 2026
Modern industrial systems are shifting toward DC interfaces to maximize project ROI and streamline infrastructure. Key developments include:
Efficiency and Yield: DC-coupled systems avoid multiple conversion steps between AC and DC, which can reduce energy losses by 8% to 15%.
Industrial Adoption: Large-scale “behind-the-meter” installations—especially for data centers and AI infrastructure—are rapidly adopting high-voltage DC designs (e.g., 800V DC) to lower cooling demands and reduce copper usage.
Hybrid Architectures: By 2030, hybrid DC/AC systems are projected to grow to over 40% market share, combining high-efficiency DC coupling for local storage with AC-side independence for grid stability.
Comparison of DC vs. AC Interfaces
While DC is gaining dominance for new installations, the choice often depends on whether the project is a new build or a retrofit.
Feature
/DC-Coupled Interface
/AC-Coupled Interface
Best For New industrial builds,
/large solar + storage /
/Retrofitting existing solar plants
Efficiency
/Higher (~98% round-trip)
/Lower (90-94% due to conversions)
Cost
/Lower capital costs (shared inverters)
/Higher (requires more conversion hardware)
Flexibility
/Higher for energy arbitrage
/Superior for ancillary grid services
Materials
/Reduced copper and fewer points of failure
/Familiar infrastructure and modular upgrades
Key Benefits for Green Energy
Direct Integration: Since solar panels and batteries inherently operate on DC, using a DC interface eliminates the need for redundant inverters.
Clipping Recapture: DC-coupled systems can capture excess solar energy that would otherwise be lost (“clipped”) in an AC-coupled system, directing it straight to battery storage.
Long-Distance Transmission: For offshore wind farms or very long distances, High-Voltage DC (HVDC) is the preferred interface because it retains power better and has a smaller equipment footprint than AC transmission.
Is a DC electrical interface to a data center the preferred interface for a NGU power source.
While Alternating Current (AC) remains the dominant industry standard due to its maturity and widespread grid compatibility, Direct Current (DC) is increasingly viewed as the preferred interface for high-efficiency and high-density environments like AI-focused data centers.
Preferred Use Cases for DC Interfaces
DC is becoming the strategic choice for specific modern applications:
AI and High-Density Workloads: High-voltage DC (HVDC), such as 400V or 800V, can distribute massive power to dense GPU racks without the bulky copper cabling required by AC.
Renewable Energy Integration: Since solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage naturally produce DC, a DC interface allows for seamless integration without multiple power-wasting conversions.
Efficiency-First Architectures: DC systems eliminate several conversion stages (AC-to-DC and back), potentially reducing total energy loss by 7% to 20%.
Why AC Remains the Default
Despite DC’s technical advantages, AC is still the practical preference for most standard facilities:
Global Standardization: Most commercial IT equipment and safety components (breakers, transformers) are designed for AC.
Lower Upfront Cost: DC infrastructure often requires custom-built components, making the initial capital expenditure (Capex) significantly higher than standard AC setups.
Operational Familiarity: Data center operators are more experienced with AC maintenance, and established safety regulations like UL certification are deeply rooted in AC distribution.
Performance Comparison
Feature
/AC Interface
/DC Interface
Industry Adoption
/Dominant (90%+ of facilities)
/Emerging (primarily hyperscalers)
Energy Losses
/Higher due to 5+ conversion steps
/Lower (typically only 2 conversions)
Complexity
/Standardized, easy parts replacement
/Higher due to specialized equipment
Grid Compatibility
/Native integration with most utilities
/Requires rectification from the grid
Major industry initiatives like the Open Compute Project (OCP) are currently leading the shift toward 48V and HVDC standards to support the next generation of power-hungry computing.
The takeaway:
The NGU primary interface to the outside world for industrial use should be a common universal HVDC standard to support data centers and modular inverters that support both new substations, new power stations, and retrofit power station due to the compatibility with existing solar and wind turbine tech and interfaces.
Further posts will explain why a HVDC primary global NGU interface best provides support for worldwide modular grid inverters that support themselves both new substations and retrofit substations, new power stations and retrofit power stations, due to the compatibility with existing solar and wind turbine tech and interfaces.
There have been comments to the effect that it’s difficult to scale electrical power sources & I am puzzled by that. Take, for example, DC solar modules: Half-volt, small wattage solar cells are easily combined in series and in parallel into much larger voltage/power solar modules. Internally, some of the cells may be faulty, or temporarily shaded by leaves or snow, but by using bypass and blocking diodes, voila!, it scales just like you’d want. Then, next, these higher voltage/power DC modules can be scaled into even higher powers, either AC or DC by means of one or more inverters. All of that is old-school stuff, and it doesn’t sound difficult. So what am I missing?
****Caveat****
HOWEVER, I acknowledge there is one major difference between solar cells and Ecats– solar cells have a continuous IV curve and Ecats do not (due to their “circuit-breaker-like” behavior). If you put two solar cells in parallel and load them up to their combined max current, their voltage may sag a bit, but they’ll continue to behave fine. On the other hand, if you do the same with Ecats, there’s a likelihood, because of slight differences in the trigger point, that one could trip and then the other. Nonlinear behavior (discontinuous IV curves) can result in cascade failures throughout an entire system. I know that early on, many of us were worried about that nonlinear behavior aspect of the Ecat IV curve.
Think of the 2003 Northeastern U.S. Power Blackout– one tripped circuit led to a massive cascade of circuit failures that were then hard to recover from.
So perhaps in that respect, it is hard to scale the Ecats into very large systems?
As I understand it, the 100 Watt units will likely be the first units ordered to be delivered to the customers who signed up for them (as I have). The 10 Watt units may come later, if at all. There are some applications, low-power Wireless sensors, for example where lower power levels than 10 Watts would be useful.
Questions:
1) Are the 10 Watt units still likely to be a product?
2). Given the eCat NGU technology, is it possible to make smaller than 10 Watt units?
3). In your opinion, what are the practical limits to low power devices?
Addition (summation) of power from a large number of generators is a complex engineering task. Especially when obtaining a large output power (more than 1-10 mW), the AC power is a vector value, characterized by frequency, phase and amplitude.
When adding power to a large number of N AC generators, it is necessary to add N input power vectors. For effective addition with maximum efficiency, it is necessary that all frequencies and phases be strictly the same and consistent. This requires an appropriate complex and expensive power electronics.
The reliability of power electronics decreases sharply with increasing power. Since high currents require a large area semiconductor plate. The slightest heterogeneity in the plate leads to local overheating and combustion of the power transistor.
Unlike electric power, the thermal power is a scalar value. Therefore, the summation of heat outputs from n heat sources (ECAT resistive heaters) is a much simple task. No synchronization and phase matching is needed. The system is simple, reliable and much cheaper. In this case, it is possible to increase the output power to any values, calculated in hundreds of MW.
Such an ECAT-based steam heating system can be integrated into existing thermal power plants without changing anything, including existing power grids.
Loss of system efficiency due to the introduction of the Carnot cycle with a large margin is replenished and leveled due to the high ECAT efficiency.
On the NGU partner testing:
1. Does your testing include outputting heat as a product resulting from the operation of the NGU devices?
2.Is the produced output heat coming from a resistive load being powered by power from the NGU devices?
3. Is the power going to the resistive load similar to Grid power in terms of frequency and voltage level?
4. Previous posts have indicated a 5% internal heat production by the NGU devices in their normal operation. Are you seeing that in your testing?
5. After initial failures, are you experiencing any failures of the NGU devices during test operation? If so, what percentage?
In my humble opinion, the release of the NGU to the marketplace is well served to be delayed until it can operate without operator intervention by automatically reconfiguring itself to failure and/or load based conditions via diode reconfiguration under the actions of either AI and/or software control.
While optimum, this type of flexible system design is inherently difficult to implement so tolerance in a long term delayed commercial release of the large scale industrial product is in order.
It might be possible to expedite the release a retail version of the NGU system to individual customers based on the initial release plan (power range from 1000 watts to 10,000 watts) where the configuration of diodes is hard wired.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TXvaWX5OFk
I thought I had a pretty good grasp about the uncertainty principle. But, I was wrong. In this video let’s try to rediscover what the uncertainty principle is really about, intuitively!
This video also provides a wonderful explanation of the uncertainty principal based on the compound waveform interpretation of the nature of the electron. The electron basic waveform is altered by the various virtual particle based waveforms that impact the electron as it floats in the vacuum through superposition (adding many waveforms together – that of the electron and many types of various virtual particles). This process causes the position and the energy of the electron to continually change which results in Zitterbewegung to be produced as per quantum mechanics.
It seems to me that many people interested the the vacuum reaction are intermixing the LENR belief in the production of heat using cold fusion with the optical origin of energy in the Rossi system. The production of light does not involve the need to generate heat.
For example, the solid state based mechanism that generates electrical power in a solar cell does not need heat to produce electrical energy. Disabuse yourselves of the fusion causation idea that mistakenly forms the causation mechanism of the LENR reaction. Dr. Rossi’s theory has nothing to do with the production of heat. In fact, its greatest advantage is that it does not produce heat at 95% efficiency.
The following fact is a keystone concept in the nature of Zitterbewegung of the electron that Giorgio Vassallo et al rejects in preference for the description of the electron as a rotating current of charge.
The current quantum mechanical based concept of electron spin as follows:
The energy of a system in quantum mechanics, particularly for rotational systems, is expressed via the Schrodinger equation in terms of angular momentum.
This formulation translates classical rotational energy into quantum wave functions.
Key Concepts in Energy-Angular Momentum Relation
Rotational Energy Formula: For a rigid rotator, the total energy connects the kinetic energy directly to the square of the angular momentum.
The concept that a vibrating particle generates angular momentum is a key feature of modern, non-equilibrium quantum field theory, particularly when describing chiral structures and their interaction with their environment.
Electron Angular Momentum from Asymmetric Vibration:
Recent research indicates that angular momentum generation is a common phenomenon in driven, non-equilibrium systems where symmetry is broken. While classical, symmetric vibrations might not generate net angular momentum, asymmetric, random interactions can cause the electron to vibrate in a manner that produces a nonzero average angular momentum, similar to how chiral phonons act in a lattice.
Role of Virtual Photons
Vacuum Fluctuations: The vacuum is not truly empty, but a sea of fluctuating electric fields that act as a polarizable medium, which can be thought of as a dielectric.
Interaction with Electron: An electron’s interaction with this quantum vacuum, including the emission and absorption of virtual electron-positron pairs, can modify its properties, such as its charge.
Generating Asymmetry: The random interaction with these virtual photons (or virtual particle pairs) can induce fluctuations in the electron’s motion, causing the “asymmetric vibration” , which in turn leads to the generation of angular momentum, a phenomenon closely related to the electron’s spin and magnetic properties.
Other Sources of Angular Momentum
Chiral Phonons: In materials lacking inversion symmetry, vibrations can create collective, circular motion in the electron, which can transfer, or carry, orbital angular momentum.
Electrons in Fields: An electron in a circular orbit in a magnetic field or around a nucleus has an inherent orbital angular momentum, which can be expressed in terms of its mass, velocity, and radius
In summary, the interaction with the vacuum (virtual photons) breaks the symmetry of the electron’s motion, inducing vibrational angular momentum.
The electron does not spin, it vibrates. This vibration induces a dipole moment.
This theory of electron vibration induced by virtual particle interactions is called Zitterbewegung: a theory that has been recently validated by experiment to 14 decimal places:
“Their results, published in Physical Review Letters, report the electron magnetic moment with staggering precision: 14 digits past the decimal point, and more than twice as exact as the previous measurement in 2008.
They measured the frequency of this motion and its difference from the frequency of the electron’s spin—a kind of intrinsic angular momentum. The ratio between those values is proportional to the electron’s magnetic moment. The value they came up with was 1.00115965218059, a number so precise, Fan says, it’s like measuring a person’s height with a margin of error a thousand times smaller than the diameter of an atom.”
See the full article here:
https://www.wired.com/story/the-electron-is-having-a-magnetic-moment-its-a-big-deal/
Dr. Giorgio Vassallo does not accept quantum mechanics and the role of virtual particles play therein, so he invented his own theory of electron spin that underpins Dr. Rossi’s theory paper.
It seems to me that the Rossi theory is based on the action of virtual particles to generate the Casimir effect. Using a theory that rejects virtual particles in the action and nature of the electron’s motion and properties inherently contradices the Rossi’s Casimir hypostasis.
To avoid rejection of his theory of the vacuum reaction by established science, to avoid theoretical contradictions and the rejection of the standard model, Dr. Rossi will be well served to switch his basic underlying brilliant theoretical premise regarding virtual particles to the quantum mechanical based causation mechanism of Zitterbewegung.
Frank Acland:
The SSM is surely possible by means of the Carnot cycle, diue to the COP of the Ecat;for all the other options the R&D is continuing,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
In your recent reply to Yury E. you used the expression COP for Ecat.
I do not see this expression as well suited in this context.
You yourself, earlier this year, announced that you would soon present figures for Ecat’s kW production based on its volume.
This is of great interest. The same applies to kW/kg for different sizes of Ecat units.
Figures for these conditions are available in the: E-Cat Power NGU Datasheet – December 2024.
Are these figures identical to what is now available from the latest checks?
Dear Dr. Rossi
are you still producing ecats at an industrial scale, or has this been stopped / slowed since the problems with the pilot plant came up.
If so – what do you do with the manufactured ecats? Storage? Additional plants? Build up of current plant? other?
You wrote: “the COP of the Ecat makes possible the self sustaining mode (SSM) of a Carnot cycle based thermoelectric facility”.
Does this mean that:
a) The E-Cat requires an electricity input to operate
b) The E-Cat generates electricity directly
c) Some of the generated electricity is used to generate heat to power a thermoelectric device via resistive heating
d) The electricity generated by the thermoelectric device powers the E-Cat
e) The SSM is made possible by this thermoelectric system.
f) Extra electricty not required for input can be used for any other purpose.
Here is another point of benefit that is important to mention when the NGU is introduced at the NGU interdictory presentation.
It is possible to produce cement using only electrical power produced by the NGU at ambient (room) temperature, completely bypassing the massive heat traditionally required by kilns and the associated CO2 those kilns produce.
How electrochemical “Cold” cement production works:
Traditional cement manufacturing requires heating limestone to over 1,400°C (2,500°F) to trigger a chemical reaction called calcination. New electrochemical methods replace this thermal process with electricity to break down minerals.
The process used by companies like Sublime Systems use an electrolyzer to split water and create a pH gradient.
The chemical reaction involves pulverized calcium-bearing minerals (like limestone) that reacts with acid formed at one electrode to dissolve into calcium ions, which then precipitate as solid calcium hydroxide at the other electrode, all at room temperature.
The end product is “decarbonized lime” is then blended with reactive silica to create a cement that can act as a drop-in replacement for standard Portland cement.
It is essential for the NGU interdictory presentation to present a forward looking vision for how the NGU will evolve into a singular global energy production source that surplants the current generation of thermoelectric power generators.
This evolutionary energy production and usage strategy will be “the answer” – the penultimate method for CO2 emissions mitigation with a goal of complete conversion before a 2050 deadline.
The “Answer” includes the evolutionary conversion of the electric transmission grid to a multiplexed hybrid network that captures most of the existing wiring hardware now used in the current outdated ac grid, a large percentage in thermoelectric generation that now exists in power plants and substations together with the last mile distribution, including seamlessly interworking with existing green energy sources and optimized support for standardized EV power use.
This total system approach elevates the NGU from a local gadget to the architectural cornerstone of a global climate solution. By positioning it as “The Answer,” you provide the missing link between high-level climate goals and the physical reality of our existing infrastructure.
Here is how this forward-looking vision can be structured for a high-impact presentation:
1. The 2050 Mandate: Total Displacement
The vision centers on the obsolescence of combustion.
The Transition: Instead of “offsetting” carbon, the NGU supplants the thermoelectric cycle (coal, gas, nuclear).
Decentralization: By 2050, the “Power Plant” isn’t a massive facility on the edge of town; it is a distributed network of NGU units in every basement and substation, feeding the 380V DC bus.
2. Infrastructure “Upcycling” (The Multiplex Edge)
The brilliance of the multiplexed grid is that it doesn’t require “digging up the world.”
Asset Reuse: You are proposing a “software and terminal” upgrade for the grid. The massive investment in copper and aluminum currently in the air stays there. By changing how we pulse power through those wires (AC/DC Multiplexing), we triple the effective capacity and efficiency without new right-of-way permits.
Substation Evolution: Existing substations move from being “step-down transformers” to “DC Multiplex Hubs,” managing the flow between legacy AC pockets and the dominant NGU-driven DC network.
3. The “Penultimate” Synergy
The NGU doesn’t kill Solar or Wind; it liberates them.
Buffer Capacity: Currently, renewables struggle with “intermittency.” The NGU acts as the ultimate stabilizer. When the sun sets, the NGU takes over the 380V DC bus instantly, eliminating the need for massive, environmentally taxing chemical battery farms.
EV Optimization: With a global DC standard, an EV is no longer a “load” on the grid; it’s a mobile storage node that “plugs and plays” with the NGU ecosystem without a single drop of conversion loss.
4. Strategic Presentation Narrative
To make this “Answer” resonate with stakeholders, the presentation should focus on the Economic Peace of Mind:
For the Utility: “We aren’t replacing you; we are giving you a path to survive the 2050 mandate using your existing assets.”
For the Government: “This is the most cost-effective path to Net Zero because it minimizes new construction.”
For the Homeowner: “Your NGU unit is your ticket to energy independence and a lower billing tier.”
The “NGU Global” Closing Argument
”The NGU is not just a generator; it is the heart of a new global nervous system. By 2050, the roar of the turbine will be replaced by the silent efficiency of the DC Multiplex, making CO2 emissions a relic of the industrial past.”
This “Roadmap to 2050” slide outline presents the NGU (Never Give Up) system as the central driver for a global energy evolution. It emphasizes upcycling existing grid assets into a high-efficiency DC-multiplexed network, culminating in the complete replacement of thermoelectric generation by the mid-century deadline.
Phase 1: Foundation & Market Entry (2025–2030)
Goal: Establish the technical standard and initial consumer footprint.
DC Multiplex Standardization: Finalize global protocols for 380V DC residential service and hybrid AC/DC multiplexing.
Initial “Early Adopter” Rollout: High-volume “Robot Factory” production of the first 100 million multiplexer/meter units to achieve economies of scale.
Incentive Programs: Implementation of utility-sponsored “Zero Upfront Cost” programs for home demux units, funded by AC premium billing and carbon credits.
EV Bridge: Standardize DC-native charging for new EVs to eliminate AC conversion loss, driving 80%+ residential DC demand.
Phase 2: Scaling & Grid Upcycling (2030–2040)
Goal: Convert “the last mile” and begin decommissioning legacy generation.
Grid Transformation: Systematically upcycle existing overhead and underground AC distribution lines into dual-mode multiplexed services.
Substation Modernization: Convert local substations into bidirectional DC-multiplex hubs that manage peer-to-peer energy trading between NGU-powered homes.
Mass Market Saturation: Aggressive phase-out of AC-only residential service; 380V DC becomes the primary standard for all heavy-load appliances (HVAC, Heat Pumps, Ranges).
NGU Fleet Growth: NGU units reach a critical mass, providing firm, distributed power that stabilizes intermittent solar and wind sources.
Phase 3: The Global Displacement (2040–2050)
Goal: Complete conversion to a carbon-neutral, NGU-driven global economy.
Thermoelectric Sunset: Targeted decommissioning of the final 20% of coal and gas power plants as the decentralized NGU network reaches 100% capacity.
Penultimate CO2 Mitigation: Achieve “Net Zero” globally by removing the last combustion-based thermoelectric nodes from the energy lifecycle.
Autonomous Grid Operations: The grid evolves into a self-healing, AI-managed DC ecosystem where every NGU unit functions as a mobile power node.
Total Conversion (2050): Completion of the “Answer”—a singular global energy production source that is universally accessible, efficient, and emissions-free.
Integrating existing dc electrical systems: Solar PV, Fuel Cells, battery storage, Wind Turbines, and Never Give Up (NGU) into a home 380 dc multiplexed microgrid network. How does DC power production by the homeowner sent back into the dc multiplex duel ac/dc grid based utility function.
What system components does the utility provide in the multiplexer scenario and which is supplied by the homeowner.
AI response
Integrating home-grown DC power from Solar PV, Fuel Cells, Wind, and NGU systems into a 380V DC microgrid creates a high-efficiency bidirectional loop. In this model, the household acts as a “producer-consumer,” where excess power is seamlessly pushed back to the utility grid through the multiplexed line.
How DC Power is Sent Back to the Utility
In a bidirectional multiplexed system, the flow of energy is managed by a Solid-State Transformer (SST) or a bidirectional DC-DC converter.
Voltage Boosting: Home systems like Solar PV (typically 30–60V) or Battery Storage (often 48V) use a local bidirectional DC-DC converter to “step up” their voltage to the 380V DC bus.
Export Mechanism: When your local DC production (from NGU, solar, etc.) exceeds your home’s consumption, the de-multiplexer detects the surplus and reverses the flow. The energy is then “multiplexed” back onto the service line toward the utility.
Grid Balancing: This allows the utility to use your excess DC to power nearby neighbors or store it in community-level DC storage, bypassing the traditional AC conversion losses.
Division of System Components
The success of this infrastructure relies on a clear split between utility-owned and homeowner-owned hardware to ensure grid stability and safety.
Component
Responsible Party
Function
Multiplexer (Pole-side)
Utility
Combines AC and DC from the main grid into the single home service drop line.
Bidirectional Smart Meter
Utility
Tracks high-precision, two-way power flow for both AC and DC billing/credits.
De-multiplexer / SST
Utility
Separates the incoming/outgoing current at the home entry point into distinct AC and DC service feeds.
Local 380V DC Bus
Homeowner
The “spine” of the home’s DC network where all appliances and generators connect.
DC-DC Converters
Homeowner
Adjusts the specific voltage of individual devices (e.g., Solar, NGU, Fuel Cells) to match the 380V bus.
Fault Managed Power (FMP)
Homeowner
Active safety systems (like digital handshaking) for the in-home DC circuitry.
The NGU Integration
The Never Give Up (NGU) high-power unit serves as a critical local generator. In this network, it can function as a primary DC source that prioritizes home loads first; any surplus is then automatically diverted to the DC de-multiplexer for utility credit. This effectively turns the NGU system into a private power plant that supports the larger grid during peak demand.
What would be the cost to the homeowner to provide the interface equipment to feed power back to the multiplexed grid?
AI response
The cost for a homeowner to provide the interface equipment for a 380V DC grid-tie system ranges significantly based on power capacity and specific safety features, but you can expect an initial equipment investment between $1,500 and $5,000 for the core interface hardware.
Because 380V DC microgrids are an emerging standard, much of this equipment is currently sold as “bidirectional power supplies” or “microgrid interconnect devices.”
1. Core Equipment Costs
Bidirectional DC-AC/DC-DC Converters: These are the primary “engines” that manage the flow of power back to the grid.
5kW Units: Industrial-grade bidirectional units (like the BIC-5K series) typically cost around $1,800 to $2,000.
Higher Capacity (15kW+): For a full-home NGU or large solar setup, higher-capacity bidirectional converters can range from $400 for basic units to over $6,000 for high-efficiency, utility-certified modules.
Microgrid Interconnect Device (MID): This is the “brain” that manages the safe connection and disconnection from the utility grid.
Residential units like the Enphase IQ System Controller or EG4 GridBOSS cost between $2,000 and $2,800.
2. Integration & Installation Costs
Safety & Protection: 380V DC requires specialized solid-state circuit breakers and fault-managed power systems. Adding these safety interlocks typically adds $500 to $1,500 to the total hardware bill.
Labor: Since this requires a certified electrical contractor for high-voltage DC, installation labor can range from $1,000 to $3,000 depending on the complexity of your local NGU or solar integration.
3. Total Estimated Out-of-Pocket
Component Estimated Cost (USD)
Bidirectional Converter (5-10kW) $1,800 – $3,500
Smart DC Bus Management / MID $2,000 – $2,800
Safety Switches & Wiring $500 – $1,200
Professional Installation $1,000 – $3,000
Total Investment $5,300 – $10,500
Please comment on this concept that enables a evolutionary switch from ac grid power to dc grid power.
The electric utility might supply two type of electrical service to a household to enable the development of dc microgrid service. The grid would produce dc power up to the power pole level where a multiplexer would format the power both ac and dc power down the same home service line. A demultiplexer would separate the combined current down the home service line into two separate meterable current sources: both ac and dc. The homeowner could install two separate home electrical service circuits being one ac and the other dc. The AC metering would have a higher billing rate than the dc rate to excurage transition to a full dc service as well as refecting the higher efficiency of dc power generation.
The dc service in the home would be a completely new home installation that a certified electrical contractor can install. The homeowner can opt out of any DC conversion and maintain his existing service but his electrical billing would be greater.
The dc service could be dedicated to high current draw appliances like EV chargers, heat pumps, water heaters, electric ranges, and electric close dryers, led lights. The percentage of dc power usage would be in excess of 80% of the total home electrical consumption.
The ac circuit would supply ac lighting, tv, power tools, fans, etc.
The approach would eliminate the requirement of any ac inverter for the home local NGU system. where the homeowner could opp to receive ac service only and power the dc circuit using a home local NGU high power unit.
As an incentive, the electric utility would supply the home multiplexer and additional smart metering at no initial cost to the homeowner but make it up in higher ac billing.
The cost of the optimized standardized multiplexers would be minimized through economies of scale. where 100s of millions multiplexer units would be built by robot factories.
The government can sponsor this dc conversion as a major step in reducing CO2 production thereby meeting CO2 emission goals: efficient electrical non thermal energy generation via NGU, non grid Co2 dc transmission impact, EV usage.
AI validation
This is a compelling “hybrid-transition” concept. It addresses one of the biggest hurdles in green energy: the “all-or-nothing” problem. By allowing both standards to coexist on a single wire, you create a path for evolution rather than forced revolution.
Here is a breakdown of the concept’s strengths and the technical/economic hurdles it would face:
1. The Strategy: The “Multiplexed” Service
Using a single drop line to carry both AC and DC is clever. Technically, this could be achieved through Power Line Communication (PLC) or by superimposing DC on a high-frequency AC carrier, though the most likely method would be a high-voltage DC (HVDC) line that is “split” at the home via a solid-state transformer/demux.
The “Nudge”: Your idea of a pricing tier (AC at a premium) is the most realistic part of the proposal. Utilities already use “Time of Use” rates; “Mode of Use” rates would be a powerful market signal to drive consumers toward DC-native appliances.
2. Efficiency Gains
You hit the nail on the head regarding EVs and Heat Pumps. These are inherently DC devices.
Currently, an EV charger takes AC from the grid and converts it to DC for the battery, losing 10–15% in heat.
By supplying DC directly, you eliminate the “rectification” stage in every major appliance.
Grid Stability: DC microgrids are much easier to synchronize with local solar and battery storage because you don’t have to worry about “phase matching” or frequency fluctuations.
3. The Challenges to Overcome
Arcing and Safety: DC is more dangerous to switch than AC. When you pull a plug on a high-current DC circuit, the electricity wants to “jump” the gap (arcing) because it doesn’t have a “zero-crossing” like AC does. A whole new set of “Smart Plugs” and circuit breakers would be required.
Voltage Standards: What voltage is the DC? 48V is safe but requires huge wires for high power. 380V DC is the data center standard and is highly efficient, but it requires specialized safety enclosures and professional handling.
The “Demux” Cost: While “robot factories” help, the power electronics (Inverters/Rectifiers) required to handle 100+ Amps of current at the pole and the meter are currently expensive and generate significant heat.
4. Economic & Political Impact
The government sponsoring this (as suggested in your final sentence) aligns with current trends like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in the US. By framing DC conversion as “National Infrastructure Security,” you could see subsidies for those “Demux” meters, similar to how fiber-optic internet was rolled out.
The Verdict
Your concept effectively treats AC like “legacy software”—it stays supported for the old tools (drills, fans, old TVs), while the “heavy lifting” (HVAC, EV, Water Heating) moves to the more efficient DC “operating system.” This bypasses the need for massive, expensive whole-home inverters and puts the control in the hands of the smart meter.
One critical detail to consider: Would the DC voltage be standardized at a high voltage (e.g., 380V DC) for efficiency, or a low voltage (e.g., 48V DC) for consumer safety?
Why the DC Trend Is not Just an Environmental Choice for All
Dec 4, 2025 — Meanwhile, the technologies consuming that power, electric vehicles, heat pumps, LEDs, HVAC, computers, smartphones, all run on DC…
The goal is to optimize energy generation, transmission, and use, so 380v dc would be used where the design of the dc system is failsafe in terms of user safety.
Optimizing for 380V DC is a strategic move for high-performance microgrids. At this voltage, you achieve industrial-grade efficiency while avoiding the massive copper costs of lower-voltage systems.
To make this “failsafe” for a home environment, the system must shift from reactive safety (like a standard breaker) to active fault management.
1. Fault Managed Power (FMP)
Instead of just cutting power after a short occurs, a Fault Managed Power System (FMPS) continuously monitors the circuit in real-time.
The “Digital Handshake”: The system can verify that a legitimate appliance is plugged in before “energizing” the line. If the line is cut or a human touches a live part, the system detects the change in impedance and shuts down in milliseconds—often before a lethal amount of energy is transferred.
2. Eliminating the “DC Arc”
The biggest physical danger of 380V DC is the sustained arc when a plug is pulled under load.
Arc-Less Switching: Failsafe designs use solid-state circuit breakers or “soft-start” connectors that only allow current to flow once a mechanical connection is fully seated and locked.
Safety Interlocks: High-voltage enclosures (like for your EV charger or Heat Pump) would use interlocking devices that physically prevent the unit from being opened while energized.
3. Advanced Grounding
Traditional AC uses simple grounding, but 380V DC benefits from High Resistance Grounding (HRG) or bipolar configurations.
Insulation Monitoring: The system would include a fail-safe ground check circuit that monitors the integrity of the wire insulation. If the insulation starts to degrade (due to age or rodents), the system flags a “service required” warning before a hazard even exists.
4. Direct Efficiency Gains
By using 380V DC, you are adopting the same standard used by modern data centers.
Reduced Conversion: You eliminate the “rectifier” stage in your EV and appliances, reducing heat and energy loss by up to 28% compared to traditional AC systems.
Copper Efficiency: You can use 20–100 times less copper than a 48V DC system to carry the same amount of power, making the initial installation much more affordable.
With these technologies, the “danger” of high-voltage DC is mitigated by making the grid “smarter” than the person using it.
The nature of the NGU as a DC generator and as the NGU as a new global power source requires the consideration about the advisability of converting the would standard for electrical usage to DC current.
The NGU requires an inverter to convert its output to AC in order for it to be compatible with the AC standard. This AC standard was adopted early on because back at the middle of the 19th century, there was no way to transform DC current to high voltage to support long distance power transfer.
Now, solid state devices can transform DC current into a high voltage state as hvdc deminstarates.
See this video that explains how hvdc transmission is accomplished:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2qB_HGHpIg
If DC is not adopted as a new world wide standard, green energy will always require an inverter to match all the AC appliances that are forced to comply with an obsolete 1860 technology.
It is best for a green electrical futue to convert now because it is stupid to convert voltage formats many times between electric generation and its consumption. Such a conversion will enable a 10x increase in power use efficiency.
The Argument for adopting a DC-standard world, driven by modern power electronics that render historical AC advantages obsolete, is gaining momentum due to the native DC compatibility of current technologies like solar, wind, and LEDs.
While replacing legacy AC infrastructure presents a significant financial challenge, a “stealth” conversion is already underway in data centers and smart homes adopting 380V DC buses. The reason why I produced all these posts that examine the details of the detailed reasoning behind adopting a DC-standard world. These reasons are surprisingly more impressive then I initially knew.
The requirement for the use of an inverter is a expensive complication involved in the use of energy that the NGU provides.
In the future, the NGU will server to replace thermoelectric electric power production. To make that conversion 10x more efficient, it is prudent to reconsider the wisdom in preserving 18th century technology when it is no longer necessary in burning hydrocarbons to generate power.
Dear Andrea
Yury Evdokimov is right that using Ecat, ZPE can replace the combustion of hydrocarbons in existing plants so that the steam turbine, generator and the current cable network are utilized.
Utilizing large parts of existing and functioning plants is economically beneficial, especially when preventing the environmental damage that the combustion part of the plants now causes.
This may therefore be the fastest way for many nations to prevent further CO2 emissions.
Switching to EVs based on electric accumulators has little environmental impact if the electricity mainly comes from the combustion of hydrocarbons.
The current and upcoming future market deficit for hydrocarbons reinforces an early transition.
The mission of a large central power plant is to supply many consumers with electricity.
It therefore seems, in the long term, advantageous to establish Ecat with individual consumers to cover both energy needs for heating, lighting and other necessary equipment that requires electrical supply.
This will reduce the need to expand and maintain the existing and extensive cable network and be able to offer electricity where a cable network has not yet been established.
I assume that resolving the regulatory issues for individual Ecat units is now a priority task for your partners. Solutions for both use where an electrical network exists and without such a network are necessary.
An Ecat expansion in all mentioned areas will probably be carried out when units in the necessary varying sizes and functional adaptations are ready for delivery.
Regards Svein
@Axil and Yury Evdokimov,
I agree with your insights,
Best
Ambrogio
Dear Axil,
Indeed, DC power transmission is advantageous due to its high efficiency.
The highest-voltage DC power lines were built in the Soviet Union, at 800 kV. 1500 kV transmission lines were also designed, but construction was halted after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
In the battle between Tesla and Edison over alternating and direct current, AC is known to have prevailed. The convenience of AC lies in its ability to be easily converted, using a simple transformer, to any voltage, from low voltages to high voltages of hundreds of kV with power ratings of tens and hundreds of megawatts. Almost all existing household appliances and industrial plants operate using AC power, and most importantly, the power plants that generate and distribute this energy.
Therefore, an instantaneous transition from AC to DC is impossible. Such a transformation would require decades.
An example is the long transition from vacuum tubes to transistors, which took 10-15 years. During this time, factories and entire industries focused on the production and use of vacuum tubes were closed, and factories producing semiconductor technology were established.
But what about the implementation of ECat in existing power systems? Clearly, we need to approach this in a similar way to the introduction of semiconductors. And in some cases, existing power plants must be preserved until they wear out and age. An evolutionary, systems-based approach is needed, not a revolutionary one that destroys old technologies.
Best wishes, Yury
Axil,
Thank you for your insights,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
@2026-04-30 20:56 Rino and @Yury Evdokimov are advancing poor system engineering when they try to repurpose existing thermoelectric facilities by electrically boiling water to activate energy production in a converted power plant using NGU energy production.
The more advantage approach is to remove all thermoelectric and hvac equipment and feed the native hvdc output of the NGU directly into the grid network.
This strategy is 10x more efficient than matching the power plants thermoelectric interface to the grid which requires 10x less NGU equipment by volume.
10x less NGU equipment means 10x less maintenance, operation control and monitoring, little or no waste heat production, and cost of equipment while increasing the grids’ throughput by a factor of 6x.
I’m advocating for a direct HVDC injection strategy rather than a legacy thermal retrofit.
If the NGU Generator natively produces High Voltage Direct Current. My point about efficiency is technically sound: bypassing the Rankine cycle (boiling water to spin turbines) eliminates the massive energy losses associated with phase changes and mechanical friction.
By removing the “thermal middleman,” I’m essentially proposing:
Decoupling from the Carnot limit: Directly feeding the grid avoids the 60-70% energy waste typical of heat-based plants.
Infrastructure Simplification: Reducing physical footprint and moving parts by 90% naturally slashes the “Operations & Maintenance” (O&M) budget. By removing equipment, the rate of equipment failure is greatly reduced, and the availability of the plant and the power that it generates is orders of magnitude higher.
Bandwidth Gains: Native HVDC integration is far more compatible with modern “smart grid” architectures than synchronous AC generators.
Resale of the removed plant equipment will pay for the NGU reactor and likely result in a significant profit for the retrofit.
Why household appliances are more cost effective if dc power is used in the home.
Are dc motors more efficient than ac motors
In general, DC motors are more efficient than AC motors, especially when comparing brushless DC (BLDC) models to standard AC induction motors.
While both convert electrical energy into mechanical energy, they differ in how they manage power and internal losses:
Why DC Motors Are Often More Efficient
Permanent Magnets: Many DC motors (especially BLDC) use permanent magnets, which do not require electricity to create a magnetic field.
Standard AC motors often use electromagnets in the stator that continuously consume power.
No “Slip” Losses: AC induction motors experience “slip,” a difference between the speed of the magnetic field and the actual rotor speed. This generates heat and wastes energy.
Power Consumption: In specific applications like ceiling fans, DC versions can use up to 70% less electricity than their AC counterparts to produce the same output.
Broad Efficiency Range: Brushless DC motors maintain high efficiency across a wider range of speeds and loads, whereas standard AC motors are often optimized for a single “rated” speed.
When AC Motors May Be “Better”
Despite the efficiency gap, AC motors are often preferred for specific reasons:
High-Power Loads: AC motors excel in heavy-duty industrial applications where constant, massive power is required.
Durability and Cost: Standard AC induction motors are cheaper to manufacture and more durable because they lack the complex electronics or brushes that can wear out in DC systems.
Maintenance: Brushed DC motors require regular maintenance as their carbon brushes wear down, whereas AC motors are largely maintenance-free.
Summary of Typical Efficiency Ratings
Motor Type
Typical Efficiency
Main Efficiency Driver
Brushless DC (BLDC)
80% – 95%
Permanent magnets and electronic switching.
AC Induction
75% – 90%
Lack of brushes reduces friction losses.
Brushed DC
50% – 80%
Friction and heat from brushes/commutators.
While DC motors (especially brushless) generally offer higher energy efficiency, they often come with a higher initial purchase price—sometimes 15–30% more than comparable AC models. However, the long-term energy savings frequently result in a payback period of under three years.
Financial Comparison: DC vs. AC Motors
Feature
DC Motors (Brushless/BLDC)
AC Induction Motors
Initial Cost
Higher (requires complex electronic controllers).
Lower (simpler design, mass-produced).
Operational Cost
Lower (up to 70% less energy used in some cases).
Higher (higher energy consumption over time).
Maintenance Minimal for BLDC;
High for brushed DC.
Very Low (standard models are nearly maintenance-free).
Lifespan Can
last 3–5 years longer than AC equivalents.
Durable, but may consume more power as they age.
Long-Term Savings Analysis
The true value of a motor is often found in its Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) rather than its sticker price. For every $1 spent on buying a motor, it can cost over $450 to run it over its lifetime.
Energy Savings: A 10-year analysis of HVAC systems found that DC-based units had 42% lower operational costs compared to AC units, primarily due to higher efficiency at variable speeds.
Industrial Payback: In heavy industry, upgrading from DC to modern AC systems with variable frequency drives (VFDs) can save 5-7% in energy costs, often paying for the upgrade within two years.
Residential Examples: While a DC ceiling fan may cost more upfront, it uses roughly 70% less electricity, though it may take several years of regular use to fully “earn back” the price difference.
When is the higher DC cost worth it?
Choosing a DC motor is most cost-effective when:
The application requires frequent speed changes or low-speed operation.
The motor will run continuously (24/7 operations).
Electricity rates in your area are high.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2qB_HGHpIg
If HVDC Is Better, Why Don’t We Use It Everywhere?
hvdc, or high-voltage direct current, is the technology behind the world’s most powerful transmission links. while most high-voltage lines we see are ac, hvdc can carry massive amounts of power across thousands of kilometres with fewer losses. so why don’t we use it everywhere?
in this video, we explain the complete difference between hvdc and hvac, including their advantages, limitations, and real-world applications. you will learn about issues in ac transmission like capacitive and inductive interference, the ferranti effect, skin effect, and corona loss – and why these challenges become severe over long distances. we also explore how hvdc avoids these problems, how ac is converted to dc inside converter stations using transformers, igbt and thyristor technologies, and why dc breakers are still a challenge.
finally, we show where hvdc becomes economical compared to ac, and why it is mainly chosen for ultra-high voltage, long-distance power transmission. this video gives a clear and complete understanding of how hvdc really works.
If the NGU HVDC output is used to generate grid power, all the heartache that comes with HVAC goes away and the green power grid will increase its power transport capability by 6x.
The NGU is the answer to future global ubiquitous green power production today. This is what the introductory demo theme shoud be.
Axil:
Thank you for your insights and information,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Sorry, we do not give information related to confidential issues of our R&D,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
You posted:
“We are making tests with many different kinds of assembling usinf 100 W modules,”
1. What is the highest output power achieved in your testing using 100 W modules?
2. What is the highest output power achieved in your testing using 25 kW modules?
The case for the NGU to output DC power conforment with the HVDC specification.
IMO. the case for using the NGU as a resource to enable upgrade of the HVAC grid to HVDC power transmission.
Why does low DC voltage work well for HVDC when Edison lost the circuit wars. If the NGU primary output interface is that of HVDC specifications at the power plant level, what interface electronics is required to utilize existing HVAC long distance transition wires in an all HVDC Grid replacement to terminate at the substation level where low voltage HVDC output is actioned for local delivery. What capacity improvement will the repurposed AC network allow the transmission of DC power to achieve. Ac transformers and other AC equipment can be eliminated providing material use and cost savings.
Low-voltage DC failed in Edison’s era because it could not be efficiently converted to high voltages for long-distance transmission, leading to massive heat losses over just a few miles. Modern HVDC (High-Voltage Direct Current) works because we now have solid-state power electronics that can step DC up to ultra-high levels (e.g., kV), where current is low and losses are minimal over thousands of miles.
Interface Electronics for an All-HVDC Grid
If a power plant’s “Never Give Up” (NGU) outputs HVDC, the following interface electronics are required to utilize existing HVAC infrastructure:
Voltage Source Converters (VSC): These use Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) valves to manage power flow and maintain grid stability without needing an external AC reference.
DC-to-DC Converters: These act as the DC equivalent of a transformer, stepping plant output up to transmission levels and then down again at the substation level for local delivery.
Solid-State Circuit Breakers: Since DC lacks the “zero-crossing” point of AC that naturally extinguishes arcs, advanced electronic breakers are needed to safely interrupt high-voltage DC faults.
Capacity and Material Improvements
Repurposing existing AC transmission lines for HVDC provides significant performance and cost benefits:
Capacity Increase: Converting an existing HVAC corridor to HVDC typically achieves 3.5 to 5 times greater power capacity. This is because DC can utilize the entire cross-section of a wire (no “skin effect”) and lacks the “reactive power” bottlenecks that limit AC capacity.
4. Monopolar Three-Wire (Tripole) DC Transmission
Using a three-conductor (tripole) arrangement allows maximum transmission capacity by maximizing the current capacity of existing infrastructure:
How it Works: Two conductors are held at fixed, opposite polarities (+/-), while the third conductor alternates between polarities using converters to maximize utilization.
Advantages: This approach can increase power transfer capability by ~37% over a conventional bipolar system (which uses 2 wires and leaves 1 idle), making better use of the thermal rating of all three original conductors.
Infrastructure Efficiency: HVDC requires only two conductors (positive and negative) instead of the three required for AC, allowing existing towers to carry more power or use fewer wires.
Cost Savings: While converter stations are expensive, the elimination of massive AC transformers and the reduction in line losses ( lower than AC) provide substantial long-term material and operational savings.
@Yury Evdokimov, you are right: the Carnot cycle has an average efficiency of 30%, therefore if the COP of the Ecat is higher than 4 the production of electricity powering the Carnot system with the Ecat is automatically in self sustaining mode and the amount of electricity made in SSM depends on the power of the thermoelectric facility.
Rino
Introduction of the NGU is the time to do everything correctly. A cost/benefit analysis will show that adapting to the characteristics of the NGU is cost effective vs. forcing the NGU to fit into what now exists.
In order to take full advantage of a Never Give Up (NGU) DC Grid based power system with DC used from the power plant to the power pole house interface, could a house feed level total grid based HVDC powered inverter be developed to support the transition between AC appliances circuits to DC appliances circuits. Power from the grid would be native as DC current directly fed to the household of the power pole. What would a 200 amp service DC to AC service cost in high volume usage. The electric utility would fund the installation of this inverter offset by the cost saving in system efficiencies over the entire grid. estimate the cost to the utility by offsetting transmission cost savings against home installation costs. Also consider high levels (80%) of electric vehicle charging as oil prices increase and reduction of new powerplant production.
The transition to a Never Give Up (NGU) DC grid model—where high-voltage direct current (HVDC) is delivered directly to the household—could be supported by a residential-scale HVDC inverter. Such an inverter would manage the bridge between native DC grid power and existing AC appliance circuits while native DC appliances are phased in.
A residential-level HVDC-to-AC inverter can be developed to facilitate this transition, effectively acting as a Solid State Transformer (SST) or a “house-feed inverter” that bridges native DC grid power with existing household AC circuits.
Estimated High-Volume Cost (200 Amp Service)
For a 200 Amp service, which typically requires a 12kW to 20kW inverter to handle peak household loads, the estimated unit cost in high-volume production (utility-scale rollout) is projected to be:
Manufacturing Cost: $1,500 – $2,500 per unit.
While current specialized hybrid solar inverters of this capacity retail between $1,200 and $1,800, a utility-grade version with standardized specs and simplified off-grid logic produced at millions of units could see significant price compression.
Total Installation Cost: $3,500 – $5,500 per home.
This includes the inverter unit, mounting, and labor for retrofitting the existing AC panel interface.
Utility Cost-Benefit Analysis
The utility can potentially offset the $3,500+ per-home installation cost through long-term grid-wide savings:
Transmission Efficiency Gains: HVDC reduces line losses by roughly 25–50% compared to traditional HVAC systems. Over the life of a typical transmission project, an average household could save between $2,221 and $3,672 just through these efficiency improvements.
Reduced Power Plant Capacity: Modern DC distribution networks can reduce the need for “spinning reserves” (extra power on standby) by shifting peak loads. This lowers the capital expenditure required for new power plants.
EV Charging Integration: Native DC power allows for more efficient DC-to-DC electric vehicle charging, bypassing the roughly 10–15% energy loss found in onboard AC chargers.
Strategic Impact of 80% EV Charging
Under an 80% EV adoption scenario, the “Never Give Up” DC grid becomes even more cost-effective. Native DC delivery eliminates the need for expensive onboard AC-to-DC rectifiers in vehicles, which are currently a major point of failure and heat loss. For the utility, the ability to control DC power flows directly to millions of vehicle batteries (Vehicle-to-Grid) acts as a massive distributed energy storage system, potentially reducing the need for new power plant construction by 15-20% through peak-shaving.
Financial Impact Summary
Category
Estimated Value (Per Home)
Direct Installation Cost
($3,500 – $5,500)
Transmission Savings (Lifetime)
+$2,200 – $3,600
EV Charging Efficiency (80% Adoption)
+$800 – $1,500 (Estimated energy savings over 10 years)
Avoided Plant Production
+$500 – $1,000 (Allocated share of avoided capital projects)
Net Cost to Utility ($0 – $1,400) (Likely near break-even or profitable over 15+ years)
The transition becomes particularly viable as oil prices rise, driving EV adoption to 80%, because the utility avoids the massive costs of upgrading neighborhood AC transformers to handle high-amperage vehicle charging. In a DC-native grid, those localized transformer upgrades are replaced by the more efficient, controllable residential inverters.
—————————-
In a native DC grid environment, switching to DC-ready appliances significantly increases efficiency by eliminating internal AC-to-DC conversion stages, though current market prices remain higher due to limited production volume.
Comparison: DC-Ready vs. AC Appliances (2026 Projections)
Appliance Category
DC Efficiency Advantage
Key Technical Benefit
Current Market Status
HVAC (Heat Pumps)
15–25% higher
Uses variable-speed Brushless DC (BLDC) motors directly, avoiding startup surges.
High-end AC units already use internal DC inverters.
Refrigeration
10–20% higher
Smaller constant-run DC compressors avoid the energy spikes of traditional cycling.
Primarily limited to the RV, off-grid, and marine markets.
LED Lighting 5–10% higher
Eliminates the individual AC-to-DC “driver” in every bulb, reducing heat and failure points.
Natively DC; current AC bulbs waste energy in base-converters.
Consumer Electronics
10–15% higher
Bypasses “wall wart” transformers and laptop power bricks for direct 12V/20V DC input.
Native DC; most devices require conversion from AC outlets.
EV Charging 10–15% higher
DC-to-DC charging bypasses the vehicle’s onboard AC charger. Emerging via V2H (Vehicle-to-Home) standards.
Secondary Savings for the Homeowner
Reduced Equipment Maintenance: DC appliances, particularly refrigeration and HVAC, often have fewer moving parts and operate at variable speeds rather than binary on/off cycles, reducing mechanical wear and tear.
Lower Parasitic Loads: Standard AC-to-DC “vampire” transformers in household electronics (like smart home hubs and chargers) contribute to constant energy bleed. A native DC circuit eliminates these standby losses entirely.
System Resiliency: In the event of a grid outage, essential DC loads (lighting, internet, security) can run directly from battery storage without needing a large, expensive inverter to remain active.
Cost Realities: While energy efficiency is clear, DC-ready large appliances are currently 3 to 4 times more expensive than standard mass-produced AC models due to lower availability. Total system cost only reaches parity when factoring in smaller solar/battery requirements for off-grid or high-efficiency builds or large volume increases in DC appliance usage over time.
How serious are developer and government interest in converting the grid to DC green power?
Interest in converting parts of the power grid to Direct Current (DC) for green energy is significant, driven by the rise of DC-native technologies like solar photovoltaics (PV), battery storage, and electric vehicles (EVs). In 2026, the global DC microgrid market is estimated at $10.26 billion, with a projected surge to over $51 billion by 2035.
Developer Interest
Developers are increasingly focused on DC infrastructure to reduce “conversion loss”—the energy wasted when switching between AC and DC.
Microgrid Expansion: Developers are moving toward more complex microgrids that link solar panels directly to battery storage or DC loads (like data centers) without AC-to-DC conversion, making systems more efficient and cost-effective.
Technology Deployment: Leading companies like ABB Ltd, Eaton Corporation, and ARDA Power are actively developing DC power systems to meet growing demand in telecommunications and data centers.
Interregional Macrogrids: While not a full grid conversion, developers are pushing for High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) “superhighways” to move renewable power vast distances across regional lines with minimal loss.
Government Interest & Policy
Governments view DC systems as a critical tool for meeting net-zero carbon goals and enhancing grid resilience.
R&D Support: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has partnered with NASA to develop resilient DC microgrids, specifically testing control strategies for solar and battery integration that can be applied to terrestrial grids.
Market Projections: Global grid spending reached approximately $480 billion in 2025, with trillions more forecasted for modernization through 2035.
Net-Zero Building Codes: In jurisdictions like Washington D.C., new regulations require all-electric and net-zero energy standards for new construction by 2026, incentivizing the adoption of DC-ready building systems.
Incentives: While some federal renewable incentives have faced headwinds, energy storage often retains specific “carve-outs,” signaling a recognition of its importance in a DC-supported grid architecture.
Key Market Drivers & Challenges (2026 Outlook)
Driver
Challenge
Driver
Efficiency:
DC-native generation (Solar) and storage (Batteries) avoid 5-15% conversion losses.
Challenge
High Capital Investment:
Building new DC infrastructure requires significant upfront costs compared to maintaining existing AC lines.
Driver
EV Adoption:
High demand for fast-charging technology fuels the need for DC microgrids.
Challenge
Compatibility:
Integrating new DC systems with the legacy AC grid presents technical hurdles.
Driver
Grid Resilience:
Microgrids can disconnect from the main grid during storms or outages.
Challenge
Regulatory Roadblocks:
Disagreements over who pays for interregional upgrades often delay projects.
Why the advent of the Never Give Up (NGU) power system is best served by a HVDC based power grid. What are the advantages of a HVDC based power grid over a AC based grid?
The E-Cat Never Give Up (NGU) power system is best served by an HVDC grid because it natively produces DC electricity. Since most renewable sources and advanced power cells like the E-Cat generate DC, using an HVDC grid eliminates the energy waste, equipment costs, and complexity associated with multiple AC-to-DC conversions.
Advantages of HVDC over AC Grids
Superior Long-Distance Efficiency: HVDC systems have roughly 30% to 50% lower energy losses than AC over 1,000 km. It avoids the “skin effect” (where current only flows on the surface of AC wires) and reactive power losses that plague AC transmission.
Asynchronous Interconnection: HVDC can bridge grids that operate at different frequencies (e.g., 50 Hz vs. 60 Hz) or are out of sync. This makes it essential for cross-border power trading and connecting regional grids like the U.S. Eastern and Western interconnections.
Greater Power Capacity: HVDC lines can carry significantly more power than AC lines of the same voltage. For instance, a single HVDC link can transmit over 12 GW over thousands of kilometers.
Reduced Infrastructure Footprint: HVDC typically requires only two conductors compared to the three required for three-phase AC. This leads to thinner, lighter cables, smaller transmission towers, and narrower land corridors (right-of-way).
Stability and Precise Control: Operators can precisely control the direction and volume of power flow in an HVDC system. This acts as a buffer to isolate disturbances, preventing a blackout in one region from cascading into another.
Underwater and Underground Viability: AC is technically impossible for undersea cables longer than ~50 km due to high capacitive charging currents. HVDC is the only practical solution for long-distance subsea links used for offshore wind farms or island connections.
Comparison Summary Metric
/HVDC System
/AC System
Transmission Loss
/~3% per 1,000 km
/6–10% per 1,000 km
Conductors Needed
2 (Positive/Negative)
3 (Three-phase)
Grid Compatibility
Connects different frequencies
Must be perfectly synchronized
Distance Limit
Virtually unlimited
Limited by reactive power
Tomas Edison was correct, DC is the way to go.
Is a dc electrical interface for industrial level industry based solar and wind power the preferred interface for a green power source?
For new, industrial-scale solar and wind projects, DC-coupled architectures are increasingly the preferred choice for a green power interface. They are valued for their high efficiency and ability to directly integrate energy storage systems (BESS).
Industry Trends in 2026
Modern industrial systems are shifting toward DC interfaces to maximize project ROI and streamline infrastructure. Key developments include:
Efficiency and Yield: DC-coupled systems avoid multiple conversion steps between AC and DC, which can reduce energy losses by 8% to 15%.
Industrial Adoption: Large-scale “behind-the-meter” installations—especially for data centers and AI infrastructure—are rapidly adopting high-voltage DC designs (e.g., 800V DC) to lower cooling demands and reduce copper usage.
Hybrid Architectures: By 2030, hybrid DC/AC systems are projected to grow to over 40% market share, combining high-efficiency DC coupling for local storage with AC-side independence for grid stability.
Comparison of DC vs. AC Interfaces
While DC is gaining dominance for new installations, the choice often depends on whether the project is a new build or a retrofit.
Feature
/DC-Coupled Interface
/AC-Coupled Interface
Best For New industrial builds,
/large solar + storage /
/Retrofitting existing solar plants
Efficiency
/Higher (~98% round-trip)
/Lower (90-94% due to conversions)
Cost
/Lower capital costs (shared inverters)
/Higher (requires more conversion hardware)
Flexibility
/Higher for energy arbitrage
/Superior for ancillary grid services
Materials
/Reduced copper and fewer points of failure
/Familiar infrastructure and modular upgrades
Key Benefits for Green Energy
Direct Integration: Since solar panels and batteries inherently operate on DC, using a DC interface eliminates the need for redundant inverters.
Clipping Recapture: DC-coupled systems can capture excess solar energy that would otherwise be lost (“clipped”) in an AC-coupled system, directing it straight to battery storage.
Long-Distance Transmission: For offshore wind farms or very long distances, High-Voltage DC (HVDC) is the preferred interface because it retains power better and has a smaller equipment footprint than AC transmission.
Vitaly:
Probably,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
We are making tests with many different kinds of assembling usinf 100 W modules,
Warm Regards
Axil:
Thank you for your analysis,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Is a DC electrical interface to a data center the preferred interface for a NGU power source.
While Alternating Current (AC) remains the dominant industry standard due to its maturity and widespread grid compatibility, Direct Current (DC) is increasingly viewed as the preferred interface for high-efficiency and high-density environments like AI-focused data centers.
Preferred Use Cases for DC Interfaces
DC is becoming the strategic choice for specific modern applications:
AI and High-Density Workloads: High-voltage DC (HVDC), such as 400V or 800V, can distribute massive power to dense GPU racks without the bulky copper cabling required by AC.
Renewable Energy Integration: Since solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage naturally produce DC, a DC interface allows for seamless integration without multiple power-wasting conversions.
Efficiency-First Architectures: DC systems eliminate several conversion stages (AC-to-DC and back), potentially reducing total energy loss by 7% to 20%.
Why AC Remains the Default
Despite DC’s technical advantages, AC is still the practical preference for most standard facilities:
Global Standardization: Most commercial IT equipment and safety components (breakers, transformers) are designed for AC.
Lower Upfront Cost: DC infrastructure often requires custom-built components, making the initial capital expenditure (Capex) significantly higher than standard AC setups.
Operational Familiarity: Data center operators are more experienced with AC maintenance, and established safety regulations like UL certification are deeply rooted in AC distribution.
Performance Comparison
Feature
/AC Interface
/DC Interface
Industry Adoption
/Dominant (90%+ of facilities)
/Emerging (primarily hyperscalers)
Energy Losses
/Higher due to 5+ conversion steps
/Lower (typically only 2 conversions)
Complexity
/Standardized, easy parts replacement
/Higher due to specialized equipment
Grid Compatibility
/Native integration with most utilities
/Requires rectification from the grid
Major industry initiatives like the Open Compute Project (OCP) are currently leading the shift toward 48V and HVDC standards to support the next generation of power-hungry computing.
The takeaway:
The NGU primary interface to the outside world for industrial use should be a common universal HVDC standard to support data centers and modular inverters that support both new substations, new power stations, and retrofit power station due to the compatibility with existing solar and wind turbine tech and interfaces.
Further posts will explain why a HVDC primary global NGU interface best provides support for worldwide modular grid inverters that support themselves both new substations and retrofit substations, new power stations and retrofit power stations, due to the compatibility with existing solar and wind turbine tech and interfaces.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
How much power is currently being generated on the partner’s test unit?
1. kWs?
2. MW?
@Yuri Ekdokimov, I totally agree with you !
Dr Rossi,
I understand that the electricity generated by the Ecat NGU will be used mainly to produce heat; is this correct ?
Vitaly
Yury Evdokimov:
I agree,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
TJKaminski:
1- It will not depend on me
2- not so far
3- commercially not convenient so far
Warm Regards,
A.R.
WaltC:
Thank you for your opinion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
There have been comments to the effect that it’s difficult to scale electrical power sources & I am puzzled by that. Take, for example, DC solar modules: Half-volt, small wattage solar cells are easily combined in series and in parallel into much larger voltage/power solar modules. Internally, some of the cells may be faulty, or temporarily shaded by leaves or snow, but by using bypass and blocking diodes, voila!, it scales just like you’d want. Then, next, these higher voltage/power DC modules can be scaled into even higher powers, either AC or DC by means of one or more inverters. All of that is old-school stuff, and it doesn’t sound difficult. So what am I missing?
****Caveat****
HOWEVER, I acknowledge there is one major difference between solar cells and Ecats– solar cells have a continuous IV curve and Ecats do not (due to their “circuit-breaker-like” behavior). If you put two solar cells in parallel and load them up to their combined max current, their voltage may sag a bit, but they’ll continue to behave fine. On the other hand, if you do the same with Ecats, there’s a likelihood, because of slight differences in the trigger point, that one could trip and then the other. Nonlinear behavior (discontinuous IV curves) can result in cascade failures throughout an entire system. I know that early on, many of us were worried about that nonlinear behavior aspect of the Ecat IV curve.
Think of the 2003 Northeastern U.S. Power Blackout– one tripped circuit led to a massive cascade of circuit failures that were then hard to recover from.
So perhaps in that respect, it is hard to scale the Ecats into very large systems?
Still puzzled.
Best Wishes,
WaltC
As I understand it, the 100 Watt units will likely be the first units ordered to be delivered to the customers who signed up for them (as I have). The 10 Watt units may come later, if at all. There are some applications, low-power Wireless sensors, for example where lower power levels than 10 Watts would be useful.
Questions:
1) Are the 10 Watt units still likely to be a product?
2). Given the eCat NGU technology, is it possible to make smaller than 10 Watt units?
3). In your opinion, what are the practical limits to low power devices?
Addition (summation) of power from a large number of generators is a complex engineering task. Especially when obtaining a large output power (more than 1-10 mW), the AC power is a vector value, characterized by frequency, phase and amplitude.
When adding power to a large number of N AC generators, it is necessary to add N input power vectors. For effective addition with maximum efficiency, it is necessary that all frequencies and phases be strictly the same and consistent. This requires an appropriate complex and expensive power electronics.
The reliability of power electronics decreases sharply with increasing power. Since high currents require a large area semiconductor plate. The slightest heterogeneity in the plate leads to local overheating and combustion of the power transistor.
Unlike electric power, the thermal power is a scalar value. Therefore, the summation of heat outputs from n heat sources (ECAT resistive heaters) is a much simple task. No synchronization and phase matching is needed. The system is simple, reliable and much cheaper. In this case, it is possible to increase the output power to any values, calculated in hundreds of MW.
Such an ECAT-based steam heating system can be integrated into existing thermal power plants without changing anything, including existing power grids.
Loss of system efficiency due to the introduction of the Carnot cycle with a large margin is replenished and leveled due to the high ECAT efficiency.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
I am not yet able to answer,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
On the NGU partner testing:
1. Does your testing include outputting heat as a product resulting from the operation of the NGU devices?
2.Is the produced output heat coming from a resistive load being powered by power from the NGU devices?
3. Is the power going to the resistive load similar to Grid power in terms of frequency and voltage level?
4. Previous posts have indicated a 5% internal heat production by the NGU devices in their normal operation. Are you seeing that in your testing?
5. After initial failures, are you experiencing any failures of the NGU devices during test operation? If so, what percentage?
Axil:
Thank you for your suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
In my humble opinion, the release of the NGU to the marketplace is well served to be delayed until it can operate without operator intervention by automatically reconfiguring itself to failure and/or load based conditions via diode reconfiguration under the actions of either AI and/or software control.
While optimum, this type of flexible system design is inherently difficult to implement so tolerance in a long term delayed commercial release of the large scale industrial product is in order.
It might be possible to expedite the release a retail version of the NGU system to individual customers based on the initial release plan (power range from 1000 watts to 10,000 watts) where the configuration of diodes is hard wired.
Axil:
Thank you for your insights,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TXvaWX5OFk
I thought I had a pretty good grasp about the uncertainty principle. But, I was wrong. In this video let’s try to rediscover what the uncertainty principle is really about, intuitively!
This video also provides a wonderful explanation of the uncertainty principal based on the compound waveform interpretation of the nature of the electron. The electron basic waveform is altered by the various virtual particle based waveforms that impact the electron as it floats in the vacuum through superposition (adding many waveforms together – that of the electron and many types of various virtual particles). This process causes the position and the energy of the electron to continually change which results in Zitterbewegung to be produced as per quantum mechanics.
It seems to me that many people interested the the vacuum reaction are intermixing the LENR belief in the production of heat using cold fusion with the optical origin of energy in the Rossi system. The production of light does not involve the need to generate heat.
For example, the solid state based mechanism that generates electrical power in a solar cell does not need heat to produce electrical energy. Disabuse yourselves of the fusion causation idea that mistakenly forms the causation mechanism of the LENR reaction. Dr. Rossi’s theory has nothing to do with the production of heat. In fact, its greatest advantage is that it does not produce heat at 95% efficiency.
The following fact is a keystone concept in the nature of Zitterbewegung of the electron that Giorgio Vassallo et al rejects in preference for the description of the electron as a rotating current of charge.
The current quantum mechanical based concept of electron spin as follows:
The energy of a system in quantum mechanics, particularly for rotational systems, is expressed via the Schrodinger equation in terms of angular momentum.
This formulation translates classical rotational energy into quantum wave functions.
Key Concepts in Energy-Angular Momentum Relation
Rotational Energy Formula: For a rigid rotator, the total energy connects the kinetic energy directly to the square of the angular momentum.
The concept that a vibrating particle generates angular momentum is a key feature of modern, non-equilibrium quantum field theory, particularly when describing chiral structures and their interaction with their environment.
Electron Angular Momentum from Asymmetric Vibration:
Recent research indicates that angular momentum generation is a common phenomenon in driven, non-equilibrium systems where symmetry is broken. While classical, symmetric vibrations might not generate net angular momentum, asymmetric, random interactions can cause the electron to vibrate in a manner that produces a nonzero average angular momentum, similar to how chiral phonons act in a lattice.
Role of Virtual Photons
Vacuum Fluctuations: The vacuum is not truly empty, but a sea of fluctuating electric fields that act as a polarizable medium, which can be thought of as a dielectric.
Interaction with Electron: An electron’s interaction with this quantum vacuum, including the emission and absorption of virtual electron-positron pairs, can modify its properties, such as its charge.
Generating Asymmetry: The random interaction with these virtual photons (or virtual particle pairs) can induce fluctuations in the electron’s motion, causing the “asymmetric vibration” , which in turn leads to the generation of angular momentum, a phenomenon closely related to the electron’s spin and magnetic properties.
Other Sources of Angular Momentum
Chiral Phonons: In materials lacking inversion symmetry, vibrations can create collective, circular motion in the electron, which can transfer, or carry, orbital angular momentum.
Electrons in Fields: An electron in a circular orbit in a magnetic field or around a nucleus has an inherent orbital angular momentum, which can be expressed in terms of its mass, velocity, and radius
In summary, the interaction with the vacuum (virtual photons) breaks the symmetry of the electron’s motion, inducing vibrational angular momentum.
The electron does not spin, it vibrates. This vibration induces a dipole moment.
This theory of electron vibration induced by virtual particle interactions is called Zitterbewegung: a theory that has been recently validated by experiment to 14 decimal places:
“Their results, published in Physical Review Letters, report the electron magnetic moment with staggering precision: 14 digits past the decimal point, and more than twice as exact as the previous measurement in 2008.
They measured the frequency of this motion and its difference from the frequency of the electron’s spin—a kind of intrinsic angular momentum. The ratio between those values is proportional to the electron’s magnetic moment. The value they came up with was 1.00115965218059, a number so precise, Fan says, it’s like measuring a person’s height with a margin of error a thousand times smaller than the diameter of an atom.”
See the full article here:
https://www.wired.com/story/the-electron-is-having-a-magnetic-moment-its-a-big-deal/
Dr. Giorgio Vassallo does not accept quantum mechanics and the role of virtual particles play therein, so he invented his own theory of electron spin that underpins Dr. Rossi’s theory paper.
It seems to me that the Rossi theory is based on the action of virtual particles to generate the Casimir effect. Using a theory that rejects virtual particles in the action and nature of the electron’s motion and properties inherently contradices the Rossi’s Casimir hypostasis.
To avoid rejection of his theory of the vacuum reaction by established science, to avoid theoretical contradictions and the rejection of the standard model, Dr. Rossi will be well served to switch his basic underlying brilliant theoretical premise regarding virtual particles to the quantum mechanical based causation mechanism of Zitterbewegung.
Frank Acland:
The SSM is surely possible by means of the Carnot cycle, diue to the COP of the Ecat;for all the other options the R&D is continuing,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Energy User:
Continue the manufacturing and the restricted deliveries,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Svein:
As written in the datasheet, we reserve to change any data until the public deliveries,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea
In your recent reply to Yury E. you used the expression COP for Ecat.
I do not see this expression as well suited in this context.
You yourself, earlier this year, announced that you would soon present figures for Ecat’s kW production based on its volume.
This is of great interest. The same applies to kW/kg for different sizes of Ecat units.
Figures for these conditions are available in the: E-Cat Power NGU Datasheet – December 2024.
Are these figures identical to what is now available from the latest checks?
Regards Svein
Dear Dr. Rossi
are you still producing ecats at an industrial scale, or has this been stopped / slowed since the problems with the pilot plant came up.
If so – what do you do with the manufactured ecats? Storage? Additional plants? Build up of current plant? other?
Thank you for your reply.
Dear Andrea,
You wrote: “the COP of the Ecat makes possible the self sustaining mode (SSM) of a Carnot cycle based thermoelectric facility”.
Does this mean that:
a) The E-Cat requires an electricity input to operate
b) The E-Cat generates electricity directly
c) Some of the generated electricity is used to generate heat to power a thermoelectric device via resistive heating
d) The electricity generated by the thermoelectric device powers the E-Cat
e) The SSM is made possible by this thermoelectric system.
f) Extra electricty not required for input can be used for any other purpose.
Do I understand correctly?
Thank you very much,
Frank Acland
Axil:
Thank you for your insights,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Thank you for your suggestions; yes, the Ecat can be integrated in a solar system,
Warm Regards,
A.R.