JANUARY 15th EVENT – Prof. Levi, Dr. Bianchini and Prof. Villa reports

Prof. Giuseppe Levi, Dr. David Bianchini and Prof. Mauro Villa  (Bologna University) final reports about January 15th scientific experiment.

Download here
Download the ZIP file

196 comments to JANUARY 15th EVENT – Prof. Levi, Dr. Bianchini and Prof. Villa reports

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Murray Foster,
    There should be undertitles in English.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Fine:

  • Joseph Fine

    Marc Brunner

    Regulators would prefer to license stationary ( LENR – Energy Catalyzer ) power plants over mobile platforms (Trains etc.). If they permit operation without understanding the physical principles. (Worst case failure analysis..)

    Most railroads, especially freight lines, use Diesel-Electric locomotives, not Electricity from overhead power lines. It must be less expensive and more efficient. Passenger subways might include a small catalyzer-generator unit for emergency power. (In case of loss of power due to blackouts etc.)

    GE’s Diesel-Electric locomotives (‘Evolution’ series) generate from 4400 to 6000 HP. (1000 HP = 745.7 KW) And are now used in many countries. These impressive systems are in the 3-4 MW class.


  • DEFKALION Energy Group

    On behalf of Defkalion, we wοuld like to clarify the following:

    The full name of Defkalion comapny is: Defkalion Green Technologies S.A. registered in Athens Greece.

    A photovoltaic comapny by the name Defkalion has no connection with us nor do they know anything on this technology.

    For inquiries please forward your messages only to stsalikoglou@gmail.com or to info@defkalion-energy.com

  • Svein Utne

    Dear Rossi,
    I wonder if any of your 50 witnesses that attended your demo January 14. has reported any radiation sickness or any other sort of problems? The reason I ask is because Mark L. LeClair report of such problems, and he thinks your system might give of similar radiation and something he calls matter waves.
    Mark L. LeClair says:
    “My reactor, which I estimate put out 4kW, caused both of us severe radiation sickness, that included all the classic symptoms, that has left us weak and sore for over a year and in and out of the hospital. Symptoms included diarrhea, vomiting, flu like symptoms, difficulty breathing, hair loss and severe weakness. We both had no control over our body temperature thermoregulation for nearly seven months, with our temperatures swinging back and forth from hypothermia to fever. The Maine Radiation Hazmat team was called in to our lab to be sure there was no residual radioactive contamination, which fortunately there wasn’t. Both of us were sickened again by the experiment in Washington, DC at NRL. We are only now starting to recover from the second exposure. Our radiation exposure was confirmed by blood tests using SKY radiation dosimetry done gratis by McMaster University, showing multiple chromosome breaks and translocations in both Serge and I. As I pointed out in the last post, the August 24-25, 2009 experiments also gave off powerful de Brolie matter waves that I didn’t notice until the experiment was over, but caused unbelievable havoc. I’m sure our sickness was due in part to the matter waves as well. No one could have foreseen either the crystal, it’s behavior our the emission of the powerful matter waves. Melich was present at our NRL experiment and I explained my theory on the underlying mechanism. Melich is now is heavily involved with Rossi. The low level of gamma emmision, 50% above background, is the same gamma emmision behavior we observed, 20-50%, both in August 24-25, 2009 and at NRL on April 12, 2010. Take heed, if the Rossi and Focardi reactor incorporates the same principals I used to trigger fusion and it is scaled to 1 MW, then I predict that everyone who lives nearby will be in grave danger.”
    If you have non of this problems, you are very lucky and your invention looks almost too good to be true. I look forward to hear more about this.
    Svein Utne

  • Murray Foster

    Is an English language transcript available for these videos?

  • Albert Ellul

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510589,00.html This link is about solid results of nuclear reactions at low temperature (cold fusion) in LENR research carried out by the US navy. This gives more and more credibility to claims such as this one by Ing. Rossi and his team. Wish you every success, both scientificslly and financially. You deserve it

  • Dotto Egrasso

    Dr Rossi,
    Still more attention in the most influential weekly technology magazine in Sweden with interviews with you and Prof. Levi. Links below to the English versions of the articles.
    And of course, a reader poll on whether the discovery holds Nobel prize class. 70% yes for the moment (30% maybe did not understand the question 🙂 (for the moment on the first page http://www.nyteknik.se/)

    A question regarding the energy content in 1g Nickel arose in the article. Is it equivalent to 517 kg or 517 ton oil?

    We hope that all goes well and that we can see you shaking hands with our king soon.

    Links to English versions of the articles:

  • […] Bianchini e Villa sulle misure del 14 gennaio (e di un'altro test preliminare) sono disponibili qui sul blog Journal of Nuclear […]

  • giovanni guerrini

    Personalmente non penso che regalare questa invenzione al mondo sia una buona idea.Valutati gli interessi contrari che ci sono in ballo finirebbe che pur potendola fare tutti,non la farebbe nessuno.La cosa più importante ,ora,è che sul mercato si presenti una macchina che funzioni bene in modo incontrovertibile,cosi’ che le persone debbano prendere atto di una realtà.Questo farà capire,spero,alla gente quanta disinformazione e silenzio sia stata perpetrata dai media in questi 20 anni su questa forma di energia.Questa strategia porta giusti guadagni a chi sta dando cosi’ tanto al mondo,vantaggi economici ed ecologici a tutti(se non ho inteso male ammortizzato il costo della macchina l’energia è prodotta a 1cent kW/h)e una spinta al risveglio delle coscienza sopite dal panem et circensem.Inoltre penso che la commercializzazione di questa tecnologia spronerà a tirare fuori il coniglio dal cappello chi lo tiene addormentato nella stiva.(sospetto che altri siano giunti a risultati avanzati magari con metodi diversi).Quindi,diciamo,un effetto domino positivo che se si dessero le perle a chi non le merita,probabilmente non si verificherebbe.
    Mi scuso per lo scrivere in italiano.
    cordiali saluti G.G.

  • Marc Brunner

    Dear Mr. Joseph Fine
    What sense does it go back to steam when the rail network is covered for 80% power lines, just replace the generation of energy from fuels to H-Ni.
    We hope that this will soon become reality

  • Andrea Rossi

    We suggest to read with attention this comment of Prof. Giuseppe Levi (INFN, University of Bologna, Faculty of Physics).
    The Board Of Advisers, Journal Of Nuclear Physics.

  • […] e Villa sulle misure del 14 febbraio (e di un’altro test preliminare) sono disponibili qui sul blog Journal of Nuclear Physics. Dato che sono stato direttamente chiamato in causa e che ho […]

  • Joseph Fine


    It’s a bad idea to use catalyzers in cars, the way some people drive. Buses could use them, but a great choice would be “Steam Engines” for freight and passenger trains. But instead of wood or coal, the “steam locomotive” will consume Nickel. The first use of the catalyzer should be on the famous “Nickel Plate Road”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d550S68EpBw

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Alessandro Bolognasi:
    The start up of the 1 MW plant will sign the beginning of the commercialization of the industrial plants. About the domestic ones, the authorization issue is for me unforeseeable. More precise details will be given about this issue from the Manufacturer.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Jason Le Leivre:
    Please read the answer I gave to Per Kylemark.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Per Kylemark:
    In this world if you want to waste something you have to give it away. You are perfectly right. In past I made this mistake, for other issues. I have been ridiculized. Jesus said:” Do not throw the pearls to …”
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Rothwell:
    In Athens.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Marc Brunner:
    For now it is impossible, even if some of us is studying onthis issue.
    Warm regards,

  • Marc Brunner

    Dear Mr. Rossi.
    first of all, congratulations on your discovery and I wanted to ask if you could suggest a use of the catalyst as a driving force for car or perhaps better for public transportation.
    Thank you and good job
    Marc Brunner

  • You wrote: “The inaccurateness above 60°C is to our disadvantage, since in the energy balance we have not calculated the losses due to heat radiation not accumulated by the water.”

    Yes, your calorimetry is very conservative. That’s good.

    “Regarding the 1 MW plant: it will produce hot water.”

    It will produce a lot of hot water! It must be a large factory.

    Incidentally, the industrial boilers and carpet factories I mentioned are in Rome, Georgia. Not Rome, Italy. Rome, Georgia has mainly carpet factories instead of museums and ancient ruins. The company that makes the boilers is Hydrodynamics, Inc.

    I have an unrelated question. Is Defkalion Energy Group located in Athens, Greece? Or somewhere else in Greece?

    I am sorry to bother you with so many questions.

  • Per

    This invention, when commercialised will inspire people to do better and may change the world in many ways. Don’t ever give away something this valuable for free. You earned it by hard work, believing in yourself when other people did not.

    I congratulate you to this achievement!


  • J Le Leivre

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Mine is a simple question…
    Have you considered just giving up this invention freely to the world?

    I mean, let’s not underestimate the significance of your achievement. If all your claims are substantiated, it would change the world forever.
    So what exactly is your motivation?

    Fame? – Well I’m sure you’d achieve more in fact by being altruistic and spreading your knowledge freely…
    Money? – Prizes, awards, guest appearances… Sure, you’d be richer as a sole patent holder and licensing the technology, but really?

    Sorry to be controversial/borderline antagonistic, but I like many others in this forum don’t what to see the world continue to suffer another day in its current oil dependent stupor whilst someone sits on the solution…

    Regardless of my ranting, please continue to innovate.
    Mr J Le Leivre

  • Alessandro Bolognesi

    Gent. Ing. Rossi

    Prima di tutto i miei più sentiti complimenti per la sua tenacia e per la sua scoperta.

    Lei ha ribadito più volte che in ottobre 2011 sarà attivo il generatore da 1 Mw termico, gentilmente potrebbe fornirci altri punti per avere una “time line” approssimativa che vada dalla sua dimostrazione di Bologna fino ad una commercializzazione per privati di un generatore (mi sembra di aver letto di un generatore da 20 Kw ad uso privato).
    Immagino che la necessità di autorizzazioni per un utilizzo domestico incideranno parecchio sulle tempistiche, ma a suo giudizio da un punto di vista tecnico ed industriale, per quando potremmo aspettarci di vedere un prodotto per la larga distribuzione?

    La ringrazio e saluto cordialmente
    Bolognesi Alessandro

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Rothwell:
    The inaccurateness above 60 °C is to our disadvantage, since in the energy balance we have not calculated the losses due to heat radiation not accumulated by the water.
    Regarding the 1 MW plant: it will produce hot water .
    Warm regards,

  • You wrote: “The steam pipe was not going to a bathroom, but to a sink in the wall besise the test room; the sink was sealed to avoid exit of steam ans, as you said, a collective sauna.”

    Ah, I see. So the steam condensed into the sink and the water ran down the drain.

    “The technique you suggested needs not just a drum with water, it implies a heat exchanger; with a heat exchanger it can work.”

    Actually, it worked pretty well. These were short tests, of 15 to 30 minutes. If you run the test too long of course the water gets too hot. In these tests they let the temperature go from 20 deg C up to around 60 deg C, to capture about 8 million calories (33 MJ).

    Above 60 deg C the steel drum starts to radiate too much heat and the results become inaccurate.

    The water temperature was recorded and the water in the steel drum was mixed with a large piece of wood to ensure a uniform temperature.

    The difficult part is to safely dump the water after the test. They used a fork lift to carry the drum outside and pour it into the parking lot.

    Regarding your upcoming 1 MW reactor. Will that produce steam for a factory (process steam)? Or for an electric generator? If it is for process steam that must be a large factory! In the Georgia carpet factories a 100 kW heater is large.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Paul Snyder:
    Sorry, I can’t give infos concerning the reactor.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm regards,

  • Paul Snyder

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Congratulations on your discovery. I must say you have rekindled my interest in the topic of low temperature reactions.
    As with many others I am trying to ascertain the exact nature of the reaction occurring within your reactor.

    May I ask a question relative to the resistive heating elements? Are they inside the actual reactor chamber, and if so are they insulated from the H-Ni reaction or exposed directly to the reaction?


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Giovanni Guerini,
    Thank you for your question:
    Yes, the maximum generation can be 1 MWh/h, of course we are talking of thermal power.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Rothwell:
    The steam pipe was not going to a bathroom, but to a sink in the wall besise the test room; the sink was sealed to avoid exit of steam ans, as you said, a collective sauna.
    The technique you suggested needs not just a drum with water, it implies a heat exchanger; with a heat exchanger it can work.
    Warm regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • A person who attended the January 14 test told me that the steam hose from the machine went to a bathroom. Was the end of the hose pushed outside of a window? Was it placed underwater in a sink?

    How did you keep the bathroom from becoming a sauna?

    I have seen large steam generators begin tested in a factory in Georgia. They are used in carpet manufacturing. They range from 10 to 100 kW. To test them, the operators put the steam hose into a steel drum filled with 200 L of cold water, to condense the steam. They record the water temperature to measure enthalpy. If you do additional tests, you might want to consider using this technique.

  • giovanni guerrini

    Gent.ing Rossi,avrei da porle una domanda e da profano mi scuso per la mia ignoranza.Ho letto in una intervista che il vs reattore commerciale sarà di 1mw di potenza.Supponendo una resa costante nel tempo,significa che eroga 1mw/h ?
    Ringrazio e la saluto cordialmente.
    Giovanni Guerrini

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Claudio Della Volpe:
    First of all : I AM NOT PROFESSOR.
    About the water:the reactor heat exchanger had to be completely filled up of water, as well as all the system from the input through the output of the reactor, before the start up of the same reactor, to be sure that all the amount water equal to the amount consumed from the reservoir has been vaporized. If the reactor starts not totally full of the water that it can contain, they can suppose that the water consumed from the reservoir has not been vaporized, but has been just stored in the reactor’ s empty volume.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Max Hugoson,
    Nice insight.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr William:
    I estimate October prudentially. Maybe before.
    I have to take my time, because there is no room for disappointment.
    Warm regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr. Davide:
    To get answers regarding commercial issues, please email to:
    Warm Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • Davide C.

    Dear ing. Rossi, congratulations for your amazing device.
    How many Energy Catalyzers do you produce every week?
    And how many modules are ready to use now?

  • William

    Please read all of this message. I am NOT trying to be critical.

    What has made your estimated time table go from 2 to 3 months to October?

    To be blunt, the world needs this technology ASAP. The sooner the 1 MW plant opens the sooner you get the patent, the sooner you share the details of your technology, and the sooner scientists around the world can start studying this technology so it can be used to end the energy crisis.

    If the issue that is delaying the plant is “authorizations” then who can all of us contact and demand they grant you the authorizations?

    If the issue is money then what funds do you need?

    If the issue is some new safety/technical issue do you need scientists who can come out to the University of Bologna, sign the toughest NDA on the planet (if they spill one detail their soul goes strait to hell to burn for all eternity), and help work on the device?

    What can we do to help make this plant open in 2-3 months instead of 8 months?

  • Dear Mr. Rossi:

    I know you are being intentionaly “circumventive” because of your concerns about priority, and (I must add, to be truthful) perhaps not a little bit of a thing known as “Inventor’s Syndrome”.

    But before we “unleash the critic (dogs)” on you, I thought you might find this amusing:

    Scientific American
    Vol. XCIV
    No. 2
    January 13, 1905

    Page 40

    [Article verbatim and in full]

    The Wright Aeroplane and its Fabled Performance
    A Parisian automobile paper recently published a letter from the Wright brothers to Capt. Ferber of the French army, in which statements are made that certainly need some public substantiation from the Wright brothers. In the letter in question it is alleged that on September 26, the Wright motor-driven aeroplane covered a distance of 17.961 kilometers in 18 minutes and 9 seconds, and that its further progress was stopped by lack of gasoline. On September 29 a distance of 19.57 kilometers was covered in 19 minutes and 55 seconds, the gasoline supply again having been exhausted. On September 30 the machine traveled 16 kilometers in 17 minutes and 15 seconds; this time a hot bearing prevented further remarkable progress. Then came some eye-opening records. Here they are:

    October 3: 24.535 kilometers in 25 minutes and 5 seconds. (Cause of Stoppage, hot bearing.)
    October 4: 33.456 kilometers in 33 minutes and 17 seconds. (Cause of stoppage, hot bearing.)
    October 5: 38.956 kilometers in 33 minutes and 3 seconds. (Cause of stoppage, exhaustion of gasoline supply.)

    It seems that these alleged experiments were made at Dayton, Ohio, a fairly large town, and that the newspapers of the United States, alert as they are, allowed these sensational performances to escape their notice. When it is considered that Langley never even successfully launched his man-carrying machine, that Langley’s experimental model never flew more than a mile, and that Wright’s mysterious aeroplane covered a reputed distance of 38 kilometers at the rate of one kilometer a minute, we have the right to exact further information before we place reliance on these French reports. Unfortunately, the Wright brothers are hardly disposed to publish any substantiation or to make public experiments, for reasons best known to themselves.[emphasis added]

    If such sensational and tremendously important experiments are being conducted in a not very remote part of the country, on a subject in which almost everybody feels the most profound interest, is it possible to believe that the enterprising American reporter, who, it is well known, comes down the chimney when the door is locked in his face–even if he has to scale a fifteen-story sky-scraper to do so– would not have ascertained all about them and published them broadcast long ago? Why particularly, as it is further alleged, should the Wrights desire to sell their invention to the French government for a “million” francs. Surely their own is the first to which they would be likely to apply.

    We certainly want more light on the subject.

    Now in 1908, the W.B.’s staged simultaneous demonstrations of their “aeroplane” in the USA and France. With about 600 people at each event. In each case, a Wright “aeroplane” took off from a race track, flew over the crowd and landed.

    At this point we have “incontrovertable evidence” of their claims.

    By October of 1908 Scientific American was (as we say in English coloquialism) “falling all over themselves” to publish details about the Wright aeroplanes. (To the Wright’s credit, they had enough financing and Patent issues by this time, to feel “secure” and they were quite forthcoming about their work.

    One other thought: Like Guiliono Marconi, the Wrights were NOT “academics”. Marconi a “telegraph” engineer, the Wrights “bicycle mechanics”. But in COMMON with Marconi the Wrights didn’t just take things on “authority”, they actually PERFORMED EXPERIMENTS.

    Imagine that!

  • claudio della volpe

    Dear prof. Rossi thanks for your answer; it is not clear to me the exact meaning of the comment in parentheses; was water present before or after the experiment? why?

  • Andrea Rossi

    No, the time doesn’t correspond; the watch, probably, was not right. The hours I got the record of are the ones I wrote you.
    Warm regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Prof. Claudio Della Volpe,
    The weight of the reactor before and after the test ( without water inside) was 18.670 g
    Warm regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • claudio della volpe

    I am physical chemist at University of Trento and I am new to this blog;I have a question for the researchers; I noted that you declared to have checked in the least experiments the mass of the reactor before and after the experiment, but in fact these two data have not been revealed; am I wrong? if not, please, may you indicate to me where to find those data? thanks

  • Haiko Lietz

    Thx, Andrea, just to be sure:

    fig.5 in Levi’s report shows two phases of operation labelled “TEST 1” (01:07-01:45) and “TEST 2” (06:24-07:19). I’m sure “TEST 1” according to fig.5 is not the test from 17 Dec 2010. Did you switch on the system around noon on 14 Jan 2011?


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Jed,
    As I already said, my next public appearence will be to introduce the 1 MW plant, because:

    C = 1/D^2

    C = moles of chattering
    D= Dimensions of the reactors
    Warm regards,
    A = Andrea
    R = Rossi

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Mr Haiko Lietz:
    All I can say is that: the test 1 has been made on the 17th of December 2010 around 5 p.m., closed doors: it has been to make the professors familiar with the reactor and to test instrumentations and so on.
    As for the official test made on the 14th of January 2011, as all the attendants (about fifty persons) know, it respected the timing indicated by Prof. Francesco Celani.
    Warm regards,

  • Haiko Lietz

    Dear all,

    can someone please help me understand the Levi Report:

    Fig. 4 shows that “Test2” was underway at 17:00 o’clock. But Fig. 5 doesn’t show an input signal for 5 pm. Were the clocks not in sync?

    Fig. 5 shows an experiment “Test1” at approx. 1:07 pm (?). Which experiment is this? Obviously not the one reported as done on December 16 2010 by Levi?

    Celani reported: “The experiment started at about 15:30 and ended at about 16:45.” (http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/18/rossi-and-focardi-lenr-device-celani-report/) Is the experiment “Test2” in fig. 5 starting between 6:15 and 6:30 the one demonstrated to the ~50 people on January 14?


  • You wrote: “We will continue the reseach with the University of Bologna to deepen the knowledge under a theoretical point of view.”

    I hope that Celani and others from the ENEA will also take part in these tests.

    There are many good theoreticians at Cambridge U. and in the U.S. as well. If you distribute some other units to other universities, they may discover something that the people at U. Bologna overlook.

    I am sure there is much to be learned, and it will be necessary for thousands of scientists worldwide to test these devices to find out all about them. A small number of people at one university will not be enough. There are thousands of people world-wide researching combustion (fire) even though it is well understood and people have been using it for thousands of years.

    Until you get a patent you will have to have researchers sign non-disclosure agreements (NDA). That should not be a problem.

    I know many people who would be happy to pay for the additional demonstration units, and any other costs associated with them.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Rothwell:
    We will continue the reseach with the University of Bologna to deepen the knowledge under a theoretical point of view. As for the efficiency demonstration, we will make no more of them until we will have in operation, by October , our first p[lant of 1 MW of power. The lab phase is over, now we go for the real market.
    Warmest Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • I am delighted to hear you are continuing your collaboration with U. Bologna.

    I wish you would provide two other demonstration units, to be tested in Cambridge U. in the U.K. and in the U.S. I am sure we can arrange for tests at a leading U.S. laboratory.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>